(G.R. No. 97906. May 21, 1992.) REPUBLI Cofte P Ilippines, Court of Appeals A!" Ma#Imo $ong, Ponente% Regala&O, Facts%
(G.R. No. 97906. May 21, 1992.) REPUBLI Cofte P Ilippines, Court of Appeals A!" Ma#Imo $ong, Ponente% Regala&O, Facts%
(G.R. No. 97906. May 21, 1992.) REPUBLI Cofte P Ilippines, Court of Appeals A!" Ma#Imo $ong, Ponente% Regala&O, Facts%
May 21,
1992.]REPUBLI
C OF TE
PILIPPINES,
petitioner, vs.
COURT OF
APPEALS a!"
MA#IMO $ONG,
respondents.
PONENTE%
REGALA&O,
J.:
FACTS%
Maximo Wong
petitioned for the
change of his
name to Maximo
lcala, Jr. !hich !
as his name prior
to his adoption by
"oong Wong and
#oncepcion $y
Wong.
Maximo Wong is
the legitimate son
of Maximo
lcala, %r. and
%eg&ndina '.
lcala.
%iblings
Maximo lcala,
Jr. () * years old+
and Margaret
lcala ( years
old+ !ere adopted
by "oong Wong
and #oncepcion
$y Wong
(nat&rali-ed
ilipino citiens+ !ith the
consent of their
parents.
school teacher.
$hey decided to
adopt the
children as they
remained
childless after
/fteen years of
marriage.
$he co&ple sho!
ered their
adopted
children !ith
parental love and
reared them as
their o!n
children.
Maximo Wong
()) years old+
then married and
a 0&nior
ngineering
st&dent at Notre
Dame 2niversity,
#otabato #ity,
/led a petition to
change his name
to Maximo
lcala, Jr.
isolated him
from his relatives
and friends, as
the same
s&ggests a
#hinese
ancestry !hen in
tr&th and in fact
he is a M&slim
ilipino residing
in a M&slim
comm&nity,
3t !as averred
that his &se of
the s&rname
Wong
embarrassed and
he !ants to erase
any implication !
hatsoever of
alien nationality4
o
that he is being
ridic&led for
carrying a
#hinese
s&rname, th&s
hampering his
b&siness and
social life4
o
5$# 5&ling:
5&led in the
35M$3
6 (having
complied !ith the
necessary
re7&isites+
8%9 appealed
the decision
# 5&ling:
35MD
5$# decision in
f&ll
8%9s
#ontentions:
o
Maximo;s
allegations of
ridic&le and<or
isolation from
family and
friends !ere
&ns&bstantiated
and cannot
0&stify the
petition for
change of name.
o
or Maximo to
cast aside the
name of his
adoptive father is
crass ingratit&de
to the memory of
the latter and his
adoptive
mother !ho is still
$he reversion of
Maximo Wong to
his old name
violates rticles
=>1 and =?@ of
the #ivil #ode, !
hich re7&ires an
adoptive child to
&se the s&rname
of the adopter,
and !o&ld
identify him !ith
his parents by
nat&re, th&s
giving the
impression that
he has severed
his relationship !
ith his adoptive
parents.
Maximo ref&tes
these saying:
o
Aeing already
emancipated, he
can no! decide !
"is adoptive
mother, being a!
are of his
predicament,
3f his adoptive
mother does not
taCe oBense nor
feel any
resentment,
abhorrence or
insec&rity abo&t
his desire to
change his name,
Maximo avers
that there can be
no possible
pre0&dice on
her, m&ch less
the %tate.
ISSUE%
Whether or not
Maximo Wong
may legally
change his name
to Maximo
lcala, Jr.
EL&%
'%. Maximo
Wong may
legally change
his name to
Maximo lcala,
Jr.
RATIO
&ECI&EN&I%
#hange of name
is a privilege,
given the proper
or reasonable
ca&se or
compelling
reason.
%#: We are
g&ided by the
0&rispr&dential
dict&m that the
%tate has an
interest in the
names borne by
individ&als and
entities for the
p&rpose of
identi/cation, and
a change of name
is not a matter of
right b&t of
so&nd 0&dicial
discretion, to be
exercised in the
light of reasons
add&ced and the
conse7&ences
that !ill liCely
follo!4
'( ') a *+''-/
' 3ay 4
/+a!("o!-y 5*o!
a )o'!/ o a
*+o*+ o+
+a)o!a4-
a5) o+
o3*--'!/
+a)o!
(+o+.
%#: We /nd
&nacceptable the
assertion of the
%ol9en that
Maximo;s
allegationof
ridic&le and
embarrassment
d&e to the &se
of his present
s&rname is
&ns&bstantiated.
mong the
gro&nds for
change of name !
hich have been
held valid are:
contin&o&sly
&sed and been
Cno!n since
childhood by a
ilipino name,
&na!are of her
alien parentage4
(e+ sincere
desire to adopt a
ilipino name to
erase signs of
former alienage,
all in good faith
and !itho&t
pre0&dicing
anybody4 and
$!
( )5+!a3
a5)) 34a+
+a))3!( a!"
(+ ') !o )
o'!/
(a( (
")'+"
a!/ o !
a3 a) o+ a
+a5"5-!
( *5+*o) o+
(a( (
a!/ o !
a3 o5-"
*+5"'
*54-' '!
(+)(.
While it is tr&e
that the stat&tory
/at &nder
rticle =?@ of
the #ivil #ode is
to the eBect that
an adopted child
shall bear the
s&rname of the
adopter, it
m&stnevertheles
s be borne in
mind that the
change of the
s&rname of the
adopted child is
more an incident
rather than the
ob0ect of
adoption
proceedings.
RULING%
# 5&ling is
35MD
in toto