Facts:
After the dissolution of her marriage by divorce under the Code of Muslim Law of the Philippines, petitioner Yasin filed a petition to resume the use of maiden name before the Shari'a District Court. The respondent court denied the petition on the ground that the petition is substantially for change of name and that compliance with the provisions of Rule 103 Rules of Court on change of name is necessary if the position is to be granted.
After the dissolution of her marriage by divorce under the Code of Muslim Law of the Philippines, petitioner Yasin filed a petition to resume the use of maiden name before the Shari'a District Court. The respondent court denied the petition on the ground that the petition is substantially for change of name and that compliance with the provisions of Rule 103 Rules of Court on change of name is necessary if the position is to be granted.
Issue:
1. Does petitioner seek to change her registered name?
2. In case the marriage ties no longer exist (as in the case of death, divorce, annulment), does women need to seek judicial confirmation of the change in their civil status in order to revert to their maiden name?
2. In case the marriage ties no longer exist (as in the case of death, divorce, annulment), does women need to seek judicial confirmation of the change in their civil status in order to revert to their maiden name?
Held:
1. The true and real name of a person is that given to him and entered in the civil register. While it is true that under Article 376 of the Civil Code, no person can change his name or surname without judicial authority, nonetheless, the only name that may be changed is the true and official name recorded in the Civil Register. In the instant petition, petitioner does not seek to change her registered maiden name but, instead, prays that she be allowed to resume the use of her maiden name in view of the dissolution of her marriage, by virtue of a decree of divorce granted in accordance with Muslim law.
2. No. When a woman marries a man, she need not apply and/or seek judicial authority to use her husband's name by prefixing the word "Mrs." before her husband's full name or by adding her husband's surname to her maiden first name. The law grants her such right (Art. 370, Civil Code). Similarly, when the marriage ties or vinculum no longer exists as in the case of death of the husband or divorce as authorized by the Muslim Code, the widow or divorcee need not seek judicial confirmation of the change in her civil status in order to revert to her maiden name as the use of her former husband's name is optional and not obligatory for her. When petitioner married her husband, she did not change her name but only her civil status. Neither was she required to secure judicial authority to use the surname of her husband after the marriage, as no law requires it. The use of the husband's surname during the marriage, after annulment of the marriage and after the death of the husband is permissive and not obligatory except in case of legal separation.
The court finds the petition to resume the use of maiden name filed by petitioner before the respondent court a superfluity and unnecessary proceeding since the law requires her to do so as her former husband is already married to another woman after obtaining a decree of divorce from her in accordance with Muslim laws. (Yasin vs. Judge Shari'a District Court, G.R. No. 94986 February 23, 1995)
2. No. When a woman marries a man, she need not apply and/or seek judicial authority to use her husband's name by prefixing the word "Mrs." before her husband's full name or by adding her husband's surname to her maiden first name. The law grants her such right (Art. 370, Civil Code). Similarly, when the marriage ties or vinculum no longer exists as in the case of death of the husband or divorce as authorized by the Muslim Code, the widow or divorcee need not seek judicial confirmation of the change in her civil status in order to revert to her maiden name as the use of her former husband's name is optional and not obligatory for her. When petitioner married her husband, she did not change her name but only her civil status. Neither was she required to secure judicial authority to use the surname of her husband after the marriage, as no law requires it. The use of the husband's surname during the marriage, after annulment of the marriage and after the death of the husband is permissive and not obligatory except in case of legal separation.
The court finds the petition to resume the use of maiden name filed by petitioner before the respondent court a superfluity and unnecessary proceeding since the law requires her to do so as her former husband is already married to another woman after obtaining a decree of divorce from her in accordance with Muslim laws. (Yasin vs. Judge Shari'a District Court, G.R. No. 94986 February 23, 1995)
0 Comments
Post a Comment