RULE 108 CANCELLATION OR CORRECTION OF ENTRIES IN THE CIVIL REGISTRY What is a Civil Register?

The Civil Register refers to the books and all documents relating thereto wherein all acts, events and judicial decrees concerning the civil status of a person are recorded. Coverage of Rule 108: Rule 108 of the Rules of Court Governs the judicial or court proceedings for the cancellation or correction of entries in the civil register. RA 9048 Now governs the corrections of clerical and typographical errors in the civil register without need of a judicial order. Sec. 1. Who may file petition. - Any person interested in any act, event, order or decree concerning the civil status of persons which has been recorded in the civil register, may file a verified petition for the cancellation or correction of any entry relating thereto, with the Court of First Instance of the province where the corresponding civil registry is located. Who may file petition: Any person interested in any act, event, order or decree concerning the civil status of persons which has been recorded in the civil register, may file a verified petition for the cancellation or correction of any entry relating thereto. Jurisdiction and Venue: RTC of the city or province where the corresponding civil registry is located. Sec. 2. Entries subject to cancellation or correction. - Upon good and valid grounds, the following entries in the civil register may be cancelled or corrected: (a) births; (b) marriages; (c) deaths; (d) legal separations; (e) judgments of annulments of marriage; (f) judgments declaring marriages void from the beginning; (g) legitimations; (h) adoptions; (i) acknowledgments of natural children; (j) naturalization (k) election, loss or recovery of citizenship (l) civil interdiction; (m) judicial determination of filiation; (n) voluntary emancipation of a minor; and (o) changes of name. Section 2 is similar to article 408 of the Civil Code. It simply enumerates the entries which may be the subject of cancellation or correction. Old rule: The rule is that only clerical or typographical errors or mistakes or errors of a harmless and innocuous nature in the entries in the civil register may be corrected. If it refers to a substantial change, which affects the status or citizenship of a party, the matter should be threshed out in a proper action depending upon the nature of the issue involved. This opinion is predicated upon the theory that the procedure contemplated in Article 412 is summary in nature which cannot cover cases involving controversial issues (Republic v. Medina, 119 SCRA 270, 1982). Rule 108 of the Revised Rules of Court now provides for such a procedure which should be limited solely to the implementation of Article 412, the substantive law on the matter of correcting entries in the civil register (Republic v. Medina, 119 SCRA 270, 1982). A clerical error is one which is visible to the eyes or obvious to the understanding; error made by a clerk or transcriber; mistake in copying or writing; or some harmless and innocuous change such as a correction of name that is clearly misspelled or misstatement of the occupation of the parents. Current rule: The case of Republic v. Valencia abandoned the old rule that only clerical or typographical errors or mistakes or errors of a harmless and innocuous nature in the entries in

the civil register may be corrected. The Supreme Court ruled that the procedure under Rule 108 is either summary or adversary. What is meant by "appropriate adversary proceeding?" Black's Law Dictionary defines "adversary proceeding as follows: One having opposing parties; contested, as distinguished from an ex parte application, one of which the party seeking relief has given legal warning to the other party, and afforded the latter an opportunity to contest it. Excludes an adoption proceeding. The Courts Ruling: It is undoubtedly true that if the subject matter of a petition is not for the correction of clerical errors of a harmless and innocuous nature, but one involving nationality or citizenship, which is indisputably substantial as well as controverted, affirmative relief cannot be granted in a proceeding summary in nature. However, it is also true that a right in law may be enforced and a wrong may be remedied as long as the appropriate remedy is used. This Court adheres to the principle that even substantial errors in a civil registry may be corrected and the true facts established provided the parties aggrieved by the error avail themselves of the appropriate adversary proceeding. Thus, the persons who must be made parties to a proceeding concerning the cancellation or correction of an entry in the civil register are-(1) the civil registrar, and (2) all persons who have or claim any interest which would be affected thereby. Upon the filing of the petition, it becomes the duty of the court to-(l) issue an order fixing the time and place for the hearing of the petition, and (2) cause the order for hearing to be published once a week for three (3) consecutive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation in the province. The following are likewise entitled to oppose the petition: (I) the civil registrar, and (2) any person having or claiming any interest under the entry whose cancellation or correction is sought. If all these procedural requirements have been followed, a petition for correction and/or cancellation of entries in the record of birth even if filed and conducted under Rule 108 of the Revised Rules of Court can no longer be described as "summary". There can be no doubt that when an opposition to the petition is filed either by the Civil Registrar or any person having or claiming any interest in the entries sought to be cancelled and/or corrected and the opposition is actively prosecuted, the proceedings thereon become adversary proceedings. Entries which may be corrected: 1. Purely Clerical Errors Grouped under this category are harmless change and innocuous changes, such as correction of name that is clearly misspelled, misstatement of the occupation of the parents, or one that is visible to the eyes or obvious to the understanding. If the change or correction refers to mere correction of mistakes that are clerical in nature, the same may be done under SUMMARY PROCEEDING pursuant to Article 412 of the Civil Code. (Note: 9048 RA 9048 Now governs the clerical and typographical errors in the civil register without need of a judicial order.) 2. Errors involving Substantial Changes Grouped under this category are those which affect the civil status or citizenship or nationality of a party. If it refers to a substantial change which affect the civil status or citizenship or nationality of a party, the matter should be threshed out in an APPROPRIATE ADVERSARY PROCEEDING initiated in accordance with the procedural requirements of Rule 108 of the Rules of Court. Lee vs CA. Strengthened the ruling in the Valencia case

Thus, we find no reason to depart from our ruling in Republic vs. Valencia, that Rule 108, when all the procedural requirements thereunder are followed, is the appropriate adversary proceeding to effect substantial corrections and changes in entries of the civil register. The interpretation that Article 412 pertains only to clerical errors of a harmless or innocuous nature, effectively excluding from its domain, and the scope of its implementing rule, substantial changes that may affect nationality, status, filiation and the like, proceeded from a wrong premise. The provision neither qualifies as to the kind of entry to be changed or corrected nor does it distinguish on the basis of the effect that the correction or change may have. Hence, it is proper to conclude that all entries in the civil register may be changed or corrected under Article 412. It may be very well said that Republic Act No. 9048 is Congress response to the confusion brought by the failure to delineate as to what exactly is that so-called summary procedure for changes or corrections of a harmless or innocuous nature as distinguished from that appropriate adversary proceeding for changes or corrections of a substantial kind. For we must admit that though we have constantly referred to an appropriate adversary proceeding, we have failed to categorically state just what that procedure is. Republic Act No. 9048 now embodies that summary procedure while Rule 108 is that appropriate adversary proceeding. Be that as it may, the case at bar cannot be decided on the basis of Republic Act No. 9048 which has prospective application. Distinctions between Rule 103 and Rule 108 (Republic v Merlyn Mercadera G.R. No. 186027 December 8, 2010): The "change of name" contemplated under Article 376 and Rule 103 must not be confused with Article 412 and Rule 108 Change of Name under Rule 103: 1. A change of ones name under Rule 103 can be granted, only on grounds provided by law. 2. In change of name, to assess the sufficiency of the grounds invoked therefor, there must be adversarial proceedings. 3. To change means to replace something with something else of the same kind or with something that serves as a substitute. Change of name under Rule 108: 1. Change of name enumerated under Section 2 of Rule 108, contemplates PATENTLY MISSPELLED NAME. 2. In Rule 108, the correction of clerical errors in civil registry entries is by way of a summary proceeding. 3. To correct simply means "to make or set a right; to remove the faults or error from." From the allegations in her petition, Mercadera clearly prayed for the lower court "to remove the faults or error" from her registered given name "MARILYN," and "to make or set aright" the same to conform to the one she grew up to, "MERLYN." Braza vs. Titular, Dec. 4, 2009 Issue: WON in a special proceeding for correction of entry, the court, which is not acting as a family court under the Family Code, has jurisdiction over an action to annul the marriage, impugn the legitimacy of a child, and order a DNA test of such child. Held: The trial court has no jurisdiction to nullify marriages and rule on legitimacy and filiation. Petitioners position does not lie. Their cause of action is actually to seek the declaration of Pablo and Lucilles marriage as void for being bigamous and impugn Patricks legitimacy. It is well to emphasize that, doctrinally, validity of marriages as well as legitimacy and filiation can be questioned only in a direct action seasonably filed by the proper party, and not through collateral attack such as the petition filed before the court a quo. Is sex reassignment covered under Rule 108?

In Silverio vs. CA, Oct. 22, 2007, petitioner underwent sex reassignment surgery. While petitioner may have succeeded in altering his body and appearance through the intervention of modern surgery, no law authorizes the change of entry as to sex in the civil registry for that reason. Thus, there is no legal basis for his petition for the correction or change of the entries in his birth certificate. However, in the case of Republic vs. Cagandahan, September 12, 2008 Respondent was diagnosed to have Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia (CAH) which is a condition where persons thus afflicted possess both male and female characteristics. In deciding this case, we consider the compassionate calls for recognition of the various degrees of intersex as variations which should not be subject to outright denial. Ultimately, we are of the view that where the person is biologically or naturally intersex the determining factor in his gender classification would be what the individual, like respondent, having reached the age of majority, with goodreason thinks of his/her sex.