Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Monday, October 11, 2010
Republic Act 9048
to Correct a Clerical or Typographical Error
in an Entry and/or Change of First Name
or Nickname in the Civil Register
Without Need of a Judicial
Order
WHAT IS REPUBLIC ACT 9048?
Republic Act (RA) 9048 authorizes the city or municipal civil registrar or the consul general to correct a clerical or typographical error in an entry and/or change the first name or nickname in the civil register without need of a judicial order.
RA 9048 amends Articles 376 and 412 of the Civil Code of the Philippines, which prohibit the change of name or surname of a person, or any correction or change of entry in a civil register without a judicial order.
President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo approved the act on 22 March 2001. With the law taking effect on 22 April 2001, the Civil Registrar-General promulgated Administrative Order No. 1 Series of 2001, which was published in the newspaper in August that year.
WHAT CORRECTIONS CAN BE MADE BY RA 9048?
RA 9048 allows these corrections:
(A clerical or typographical error refers to an obvious mistake committed in clerical work, either in writing, copying, transcribing, or typing an entry in the civil register that is harmless and innocuous, such as a misspelled name or misspelled place of birth and the like, and can be corrected or changed only by reference to other existing record or records.)
WHAT ARE THE CONDITIONS UNDER RA 9048 THAT THE PETITIONER NEEDS TO COMPLY WITH?
(1) The petitioner finds the first name or nickname to be ridiculous, tainted with dishonor or extremely difficult to write or pronounce;
(2) The new first name or nickname has been habitually and continuously used by the petitioner and he has been publicly known by that first name or nickname in the community; or,
(3) The change will avoid confusion.
WHO MAY FILE THE PETITION?
Whether it is for correction of clerical or typographical error, or for change of first name, the petition may be filed by a person of legal age who must have a direct and personal interest in the correction of the error or in the change of first name in the civil register.
A person is considered of legal age when he is eighteen years old and above. Thus, a minor (less than eighteen years old) cannot by himself file a petition, either for correction of clerical or typographical error or for change of his first name.
Only the following persons are considered to have a direct and personal interest in the correction of clerical error or change of first name:
- Owner of the record that contains the error to be corrected or first name to be changed
- Owner's spouse, children, parents, brothers, sisters, grandparents, guardian, or any other person duly authorized by law or by the owner of the document sought to be corrected.
WHAT SHOULD BE THE FORM AND CONTENT OF THE PETITION?
The petition, whether it is for correction of clerical error or for a change of first name, should be accomplished properly and in the prescribed form. Section 5 of RA 9048 and Rule 8 of Administrative Order No. 1, S. 2001 require that the petition should be in the form of an affidavit, hence, it should be subscribed and sworn to before a person authorized to administer oath.
Basically, the petition must contain the following facts or information:
- Merits of the petition
- Competency of the petitioner
- Erroneous entry to be corrected and proposed correction; first name to be changed and the proposed new first name
WHAT SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS ARE REQUIRED FOR CORRECTING A CLERICAL OR TYPOGRAPHICAL ERROR IN A CIVIL REGISTRY DOCUMENT?
The petition shall not be processed unless the petitioner supports it with the required documents. The supporting documents should be authentic and genuine, otherwise, the petition shall be denied or disapproved pursuant to Rule 5.8 of Administrative Order No. 1, S. 2001. The following supporting documents are admissible as basic requirements:
- Certified machine copy of the certificate containing the alleged erroneous entry or entries
- Not less than 2 public or private documents upon which the correction shall be based. Examples of these documents are the following: baptismal certificate, voter's affidavit, employment record, GSIS/SSS record, medical record, school record, business record, driver's license, insurance, land titles, certificate of land transfer, bank passbook, NBI/police clearance, civil registry records of ascendants, and others.
- Notice and Certificate of Posting
- Certified machine copy of the Official Receipt of the filing fee
- Other documents as may be required by the City/Municipal Civil Registrar (C/MCR)
WHAT ARE THE SUPPORTING PAPERS FOR CHANGE OF FIRST NAME?
As in the case of correction of clerical error, no petition for change of first name shall be accepted unless the petitioner submits the required supporting papers, as follows:
- All the documents required of the petitioner for the correction of clerical error shall also be required of the petitioner for change of first name.
- Clearance from authorities such as clearance from employer, if employed; the National Bureau of Investigation; the Philippine National Police; and other clearances as may be required by the concerned C/MCR.
- Proof of Publication. An affidavit of publication from the publisher and copy of the newspaper clippings should be attached.
HOW MUCH IS THE FEE IN FILING A PETITION?
The C/MCR and the District/Circuit Registrar (D/CR) are authorized to collect from every petitioner the following rates of filing fees:
- One thousand pesos (P1,000.00) for the correction of clerical error
- Three thousand pesos (P3,000.00) for the change of first name
In the case of a petition filed with the Consul General (CG), the fees are the same for all Philippine Consulates. The fees are the following:
- Fifty U.S. dollars ($50.00) for the correction of clerical or typographical error
- One hundred fifty U.S. dollars ($150.00) for the change of first name
A migrant petitioner shall pay an additional service fee to the Petition Receiving Civil Registrar (PRCR).
This service fee shall accrue to the local treasury of the PRCR.
- Five hundred pesos (P500.00) for correction of clerical or typographical error
- One thousand pesos (P1,000.00) for change of first name
WHERE SHOULD THE PETITION BE FILED?
The general rule is that petition shall be filed with the Local Civil Registry Office (LCRO) where the record containing the clerical error to be corrected or first name to be changed is kept. Included in this general rule is the case of the Office of the Clerk of Shari'a Court where records of divorces, revocations of divorces, conversions to Islam are kept and where some Muslim marriages are registered.
However, in case the petitioner is a migrant within or outside the Philippines, meaning his present residence or domicile is different from where his civil registry record or records are registered, he may file the petition in the nearest LCRO in his area. His petition will be treated as a migrant petition.
Monday, October 4, 2010
What is the maximum amount of coins to be considered as legal tender?
- One thousand pesos (P1,000.00) for denominations of 1-Piso, 5-Piso and 10-Piso coins; and
- One hundred pesos (P100.00) for denominations of 1-sentimo, 5-sentimo, 10-sentimo, and 25-sentimo coins.
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Bar Matter No. 1922: MCLE Compliance
Supreme Court
Manila
"Bar Matter No. 1922 - Re: Recommendation of the Mandatory Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) Board to Indicate in All Pleadings Filed with the Courts the Counsel's MCLE Certificate of Compliance or Certificate of Exemption. - The Court Resolved to NOTE the Letter, dated May 2, 2008, of Associate Justice Antonio Eduardo B. Nachura, Chairperson, Commitee on Legal Education and Bar Matters, informing the Court of the diminishing interest of the members of the Bar in the MCLE requirement program.
The Court further Resolved, upon the recommendation of the Committee on Legal Education and Bar Matters, to REQUIRE practicing members of the bar to INDICATE in all pleadings filed before the courts of quasi-judicial bodies, the number and date of issue of their MCLE Certificate of Compliance or Certificate of Exemption, as may be applicable, for the immediately preceding compliance period. Failure to disclose the required information would cause the dismissal of the case and the expunction of the pleadings from the records.
The New Rule shall take effect sixty (60) days after its publication in a newspaper of general circulation."
Carpio-Morales, Velasco, Jr., Nachura, JJ., on official leave.
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
Can a husband and wife agree in writing to end their marital relationship?
Ruling: "The contract acknowledged by the respondent is indubitably illegal and immoral. Its covenants are contrary to laws, morals, and good customs, and tend to subvert the vital foundation of the legitimate family. The ratification of a contract of this type, executed by a notary public who is a practicing attorney at the same time, constitutes malpractice, and as a disciplinary measure, this court may impose even disbarment (Biton vs. Momongon, 62 Phil. 7, Per Rec. No. L-2555, September 3, 1935).
Monday, July 12, 2010
Can a wife legally compel her husband to live with her in consortium?
Can a person successfully petition for a change of name and sex after a sex change operation?
Friday, July 9, 2010
When is venue exclusive?
May the surety be held liable when the cardholder renewed the credit card without his consent?
May a married woman revert to use of maiden name in passport during subsistence of marriage
Should a credit cardholder be liable for purchases made through his lost card?
Thursday, July 8, 2010
Should the case be dismissed if the summons was improperly served?
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
Impossible crime
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Three-Term Limit Not Interrupted by Preventive Suspension
By Anna Katrina M. Martinez |
The preventive suspension of public officials does not interrupt their term for purposes of the three-term limit rule under the Constitution and the Local Government Code (RA 7160). Thus held the Supreme Court in a 20-page En Banc decision penned by Justice Arturo D. Brion. Ruling the candidacy of Lucena City Councilor Wilfredo F. Asilo for a fourth term in the 2007 elections was in contravention of the three-term limit rule of Art. X, sec. 8 of the Constitution since his 2004-2007 term was not interrupted by the preventive suspension imposed on him, the SC granted the petition of Simon B. Aldovino, Danilo B. Faller, and Ferdinand N. Talabong seeking Asilo’s disqualification. “Preventive suspension, by its nature, does not involve an effective interruption of service within a term and should therefore not be a reason to avoid the three-term limitation,” held the Court. It noted that preventive suspension can pose as a threat “more potent” than the voluntary renunciation that the Constitution itself disallows to evade the three-term limit as it is easier to undertake and merely requires an easily fabricated administrative charge that can be dismissed soon after a preventive suspension has been imposed. Lucena City councilor Wilfredo F. Asilo was elected to the said office for three consecutive terms: 1998-2001, 2001-2004, and 2004-2007. In September 2005, during his third term of office, the Sandiganbayan issued an order of 90-day preventive suspension against him in relation to a criminal case. The said suspension order was subsequently lifted by the Court, and Asilo resumed the performance of the functions of his office. Asilo then filed his certificate of candidacy for the same position in 2007. His disqualification was sought by herein petitioners on the ground that he had been elected and had served for three consecutive terms, in violation of the three-term Constitutional limit. (GR No. 184836, Aldovino, Jr. v. COMELEC, December 23, 2009) |