DELA CRUZ v GRACIA ISSUE: W/N the unsigned handwritten statement of deceased father can be

considered as recognition of paternity in a private handwritten instrument.

Entries in the Civil Register (NCC 407-413) (YES)

PONENTE: Carpio Morales, J. HELD:

(1) Pursuant to Art. 176 FC, a father who acknowledges paternity of a
DOCTRINE: child through a written instrument must affix his signature. A.O.
No. 1, Rule 2, par. 2.2 merely articulated such requirement, not
RULING FORMAT: RTC- Denied. SC- Reversed. expand.

FACTS: (2) However, in the present case, special circumstances exist to hold
(1) For several months in 2005, petitioner Jenie De la Cruz and Dominiques Autobiography, though unsigned by him,
deceased Christian Dominique lived together as common-law substantially satisfies the requirement of law.
[Link] resided in the house of Dominiques parents. - First, Dominique died 2 months prior to the childs birth.
- Second, the relevant matters in the Autobiography,
(2) In Sept. 2005, Dominique died. 2 months later, Jenie, who unquestionably handwritten by Dominque, correspond to the
continued living with Dominiques parents, gave birth to herein co- facts in Jenies testimonial evident.
petitioner. - Third, Jenies testimony is corroborated by the Affidavit of
Acknowledgment by Domiques father and testimony by his
(3) Jenie applied for registration of the childs birth using Dominiques brother, whose hereditary rights could be affected.
surname at the Civil Registrar. In support, she submitted the
Certificate of Live Birth, Affidavit to Use the Surname of the The said circumstances warrant Dominiques statements in the
Father (AUSF) and an Affidavit of Acknowledgment executed by Autobiography stating that Jenie is his wife and that she was
Dominiques father. Both affidavits attested that during the lifetime pregnant. Coupled with the relevant facts, such as Jenie and
of Dominique, he had continuously acknowledged his unborn Dominique were living together in his parents house and that
child, and paternity was never questioned. Dominiques lone Jenie gave birth 2 months after his death, it has been sufficiently
brother, Joseph, also testified corroborating Jenies declarations. established that the child is Dominiques.

(4) Jenie also attached an Autobiography the deceased wrote in Therefore, the Court adopts the following rules in proving filiation:
handwriting during his lifetime. (1) Where the private handwritten instrument is the lone piece of
evidence, said instrument must be signed by the
(5) The Civil Registrar denied Jenies application for registration of acknowledging parent.
childs name, stating that the child was born out of wedlock and (2) Where private handwritten instrument is accompanied by
the father died prior to the birth, thus, cannot acknowledge the other relevant and competent evidence, it is sufficient that
paternity of the child. such instrument is merely corroborative of other evidence.

(6) The RTC denied petition, stating that even if Dominique was the FALLO: Child may adopt the fathers surname and have it entered
author of the handwritten Autobiography, the same does not it in his birth certificate.
contain any express recognition of paternity.
BRAZA v THE REGISTRAR HELD:

Entries in the Civil Register (NCC 407-413) (1) Rule 108 of the Rules of Court vs. Art. 412 of the CC charts the
Rule 108 procedure by which an entry in the civil registry may be cancelled
or corrected. The proceeding therein may generally be used only to
PONENTE: Carpio Morales, J. correct clerical, spelling, typographical and other innocuous
errors in the civil registry.
DOCTRINE: Check Held #1
A clerical error is one which is visible to the eyes or obvious to the
RULING FORMAT: RTC- Denied. SC- Denied. understanding; an error made by a clerk or a transcriber; a mistake
in copying or writing or a harmless change such as a correction of
FACTS: name that is clearly misspelled or of a misstatement of the
(1) Petitioner Maria Christina and deceased Pablo Braza were married occupation of the parent.
and had 3 children. However, Pablo died in a vehicular accident in
Indonesia. During the wake, respondent Lucille Titular began Substantial or contentious alterations may be allowed only in
introducing co-respondent Patrick Braza as her and Pablos son. adversarial proceedings, in which all interested parties are
impleaded and due process is properly observed.
(2) Petitioner obtained Patricks birth certificate from the Civil
Registrar, wherein it was annotated that deceased had (2) In the present case, petitioners sought the declaration of Pablo and
acknowledged the child as his own and he was legitimized by Lucilles marriage as void for being bigamous and impugn Patricks
virtue of a subsequent marriage of his parents. Thus, petitioner also legitimacy, which causes of action are not governed by Rule 108,
claimed a copy of the marriage contract between Pablo and but by A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC and Art. 171 of the FC.
petitioner.
Furthermore, validity of marriages as well as legitimacy and
(3) Petitioner filed a petition to correct entries in the birth record of filiation can be questioned only in a direct action seasonably filed
Patrick in the Local Civil Register; stating that Patrick was not by the proper party, and not through collateral attack.
legitimized because supposed marriage was bigamous. She
likewise prayed for the submission of Patrick to DNA testing. FALLO: Petition should be filed in a Family Court as expreslly
provided in said applicable code.
(4) RTC dismissed petition for lack of jurisdiction, holding that in a
special proceeding for correction of entry, the court, which is not a
family court, has no jurisdiction over an action to annul marriage
(of respondent and Pablo), impugn the legitimacy of Patrick, and
order Patrick to be subjected to a DNA test.

ISSUE: W/N said court may pass upon the validity of marriage and
questions on legitimacy even in an action to correct entries in the civil
registrar. (NO)