A.M. NO. 03-02-05-SC Sec. 4. Grounds of petition.
- The grounds for the
[MAY 01, 2003]
RE: PROPOSED RULE ON GUARDIANSHIP OF
MINORS
RESOLUTION
Acting on the letter of the Chairman of the Committee on
Revision of the Rules of Court submitting for this Court’s
consideration and approval the Proposed Rule on
Guardianship of Minors, the Court Resolved to APPROVE
the same.
The Rule shall take effect on May 1, 2003 following its
publication in a newspaper of general circulation not later
than April 15, 2003.
April 1, 2003.
Davide, Jr. C.J., Bellosillo, Puno, Vitug, Mendoza,
Panganiban, Quisumbing, Ynares-Santiago,
Sandoval-Gutierrez, Carpio, Austria-Martinez, Corona,
Carpio-Moralez,Callejo Sr., Azcuna, JJ., concur
RULE ON GUARDIANSHIP OF MINORS
Section 1. Applicability of the Rule. – This Rule shall apply
to petitions for guardianship over the person or property,
or both, of a minor.
The father and the mother shall jointly exercise legal
guardianship over the person and property of their
unemancipated common child without the necessity of a
court appointment. In such case, this Rule shall be
suppletory to the provisions of the Family Code on
guardianship.
Sec. 2. Who may petition for appointment of guardian. –
On grounds authorized by law, any relative or other
person on behalf of a minor, or the minor himself if
fourteen years of age or over, may petition the Family
Court for the appointment of a general guardian over the
person or property, or both, of such minor. The petition
may also be filed by the Secretary of Social Welfare and
Development and by the Secretary of Health in the case
of an insane minor who needs to be hospitalized.
Sec. 3. Where to file petition. – A petition for
guardianship over the person or property, or both, of a
minor may be filed in the Family Court of the province or
city where the minor actually resides. If he resides in a
foreign country, the petition shall be flied with the Family
Court of the province or city where his property or any
part thereof is situated.
appointment of a guardian over the person or property,
or both, of a minor are the following:
(a) death, continued absence, or
incapacity of his parents;
(b) suspension, deprivation or
termination of parental authority;
(c) remarriage of his surviving parent, if
the latter Is found unsuitable to exercise
parental authority; or
(d) when the best interests of the minor
so require.
Sec. 5. Qualifications of guardians. – In appointing a
guardian, the court shall consider the guardian’s:
(a) moral character; chan robles virtual
law library
(b) physical, mental and psychological
condition;
(c) financial status;
(d) relationship of trust with the
minor; chan robles virtual law library
(e) availability to exercise the powers
and duties of a guardian for the full
period of the guardianship;
(f) lack of conflict of interest with the
minor; and
(g) ability to manage the property of the
minor.
Sec. 6. Who may be appointed guardian of the person or
property, or both, of a minor. – In default of parents or a
court-appointed guardian, the court may appoint a
guardian of the person or property, or both, of a minor,
observing as far as practicable, the following order of
preference:
(a) the surviving grandparent and In
case several grandparents survive, the
court shall select any of them taking Into
account all relevant considerations;
(b) the oldest brother or sister of the
minor over twenty-one years of age,
unless unfit or disqualified;
(c) the actual custodian of the minor
over twenty-one years of age, unless
unfit or disqualified; and
(d) any other person, who in the sound
discretion of the court, would serve the
best interests of the minor.
Sec. 7. Contents of petition. – A petition for the
appointment of a general guardian must allege the
following:
(a) The jurisdictional facts;
(b) The name, age and residence of the
prospective ward;
(c) The ground rendering the
appointment necessary or convenient;
(d) The death of the parents of the
minor or the termination, deprivation or
suspension of their parental authority;
(e) The remarriage of the minor’s
surviving parent;
(f) The names, ages, and residences of
relatives within the 4th civil degree of
the minor, and of persons having him in
their care and custody;
(g) The probable value, character and
location of the property of the minor;
and
(h) The name, age and residence of the
person for whom letters of guardianship
are prayed.
The petition shall be verified and accompanied by a
certification against forum shopping. However, no defect
in the petition or verification shall render void the
issuance of letters of guardianship.
Sec. 8. Time and notice of hearing. – When a petition for
the appointment of a general guardian is filed, the court
shall fix a time and place for its hearing, and shall cause
reasonable notice to be given to the persons mentioned
in the petition, including the minor if he is fourteen years
of age or over, and may direct other general or special
notice to be given.
Sec. 9. Case study report. – The court shall order a social
worker to conduct a case study of the minor and all the
prospective guardians and submit his report and
recommendation to the court for its guidance before the
scheduled hearing. The social worker may intervene on
behalf of the minor if he finds that the petition for
guardianship should be denied.
Sec. 10. Opposition to petition. – Any interested person
may contest the petition by filing a written opposition
based on such grounds as the majority of the minor or
the unsuitability of the person for whom letters are
prayed, and pray that the petition be denied, or that
letters of guardianship issue to himself, or to any suitable
person named in the opposition.
Sec. 11. Hearing and order for letters to issue. – At the
hearing of the petition, it must be shown that the
requirement of notice has been complied with. The
prospective ward shall be presented to the court. The
court shall hear the evidence of the parties in support of
their respective allegations. If warranted, the court shall
appoint a suitable guardian of the person or property, or
both, of the minor.
At the discretion of the court, the hearing on
guardianship may be closed to the public and the records
of the case shall not be released without its approval.
Sec. 12. When and how a guardian of the property for
non-resident minor is appointed; notice. – When the
minor resides outside the Philippines but has property in
the Philippines, any relative or friend of such minor, or
any one interested in his property, in expectancy or
otherwise, may petition the Family Court for the
appointment of a guardian over the property.
Notice of hearing of the petition shall be given to the
minor by publication or any other means as the court
may deem proper. The court may dispense with the
presence of the non-resident minor.
If after hearing the court is satisfied that such
non-resident is a minor and a guardian is necessary or
convenient, it may appoint a guardian over his
property.chan robles virtual law library.
Sec. 13. Service of final and executory judgment or order.
– The final and executory judgment or order shall be
served upon the Local Civil Registrar of the municipality
or city where the minor resides and the Register of Deeds
of the place where his property or part thereof is situated
shall annotate the same in the corresponding title, and
report to the court his compliance within fifteen days
from receipt of the order.
Sec. 14. Bond of guardian; amount; conditions. - Before
he enters upon the execution of his trust, or letters of
guardianship issue, an appointed guardian may be
required to post a bond in such sum as the court shall
determine and conditioned as follows:
(a) To make and return to the court,
within three months after the issuance
of his letters of guardianship, a true and
complete Inventory of all the property,
real and personal, of his ward which
shall come to his possession or
knowledge or to the possession or
 knowledge of any other person in his
behalf;
(b) To faithfully execute the duties of
his trust, to manage and dispose of the
property according to this rule for the
best interests of the ward, and to
provide for his proper care, custody and
education;
(c) To render a true and Just account
of all the property of the ward in his
hands, and of all proceeds or interest
derived therefrom, and of the
management and disposition of the
same, at the time designated by this rule
and such other times as the court directs;
and at the expiration of his trust, to
settle his accounts with the court and
deliver and pay over all the property,
effects, and monies remaining in his
hands, or due from him on such
settlement, to the person lawfully
entitled thereto; and
(d) To perform all orders of the court
and such other duties as may be
required by law.
Sec. 15. Where to file the bond; action thereon. – The
bond posted by a guardian shall be filed in the Family
Court and, In case of breach of any of its conditions, the
guardian may be prosecuted in the same proceeding for
the benefit of the ward or of any other person legally
interested in the property.
Whenever necessary, the court may require the guardian
to post a new bond and may discharge from further
liability the sureties on the old bond after due notice to
interested persons, if no injury may result therefrom to
those interested in the property.
Sec. 16. Bond of parents as guardians of property of
minor. – If the market value of the property or the annual
Income of the child exceeds P50,000.00, the parent
concerned shall furnish a bond In such amount as the
court may determine, but in no case less than ten per
centurn of the value of such property or annual income,
to guarantee the performance of the obligations
prescribed for general guardians.
A verified petition for approval of the bond shall be flied
in the Family Court of the place where the child resides or,
if the child resides in a foreign country, in the Family
Court of the place where the property or any part thereof
is situated.
The petition shall be docketed as a summary special
proceeding In which all incidents and issues regarding
the performance of the obligations of a general guardian
shall be heard and resolved.
Sec. 17. General duties of guardian. – A guardian shall
have the care and custody of the person of his ward and
the management of his property, or only the
management of his property. The guardian of the
property of a nonresident minor shall have the
management of all his property within the Philippines.
A guardian shall perform the following duties:
(a) To pay the just debts of the ward out
of the personal property and the income
of the real property of the ward, If the
same is sufficient; otherwise, out of the
real property of the ward upon obtaining
an order for its sale or encumbrance;
(b) To settle all accounts of his ward,
and demand, sue for, receive all debts
due him, or may, with the approval of
the court, compound for the same and
give discharges to the debtor on
receiving a fair and just dividend of the
property and effects; and to appear for
and represent the ward in all actions and
special proceedings, unless another
person is appointed for that purpose;
(c) To manage the property of the ward
frugally and without waste, and apply
the income and profits thereon, insofar
as may be necessary, to the comfortable
and suitable maintenance of the ward;
and if such income and profits be
insufficient for that purpose, to sell or
encumber the real or personal property,
upon being authorized by the court to do
so;
(d) To consent to a partition of real or
personal property owned by the ward
jointly or in common with others upon
authority granted by the court after
hearing, notice to relatives of the ward,
and a careful investigation as to the
necessity and propriety of the proposed
action;
(e) To submit to the court a verified
inventory of the property of his ward
within three months after his
appointment, and annually thereafter,
the rendition of which may be required
 upon the application of an interested
person;
(f) To report to the court any property of
the ward not included in the inventory
which is discovered, or succeeded to, or
acquired by the ward within three
months after such discovery, succession,
or acquisition; and
(g) To render to the court for its
approval an accounting of the property
one year from his appointment, and
every year thereafter or as often as may
be required.
Sec. 18. Power and duty of the court – The court may:
(a) Request the assistance of one or
more commissioners in the appraisal of
the property of the ward reported in the
initial and subsequent inventories;
(b) Authorize reimbursement to the
guardian, other than a parent, of
reasonable expenses incurred in the
execution of his trust, and allow
payment of compensation for
services as the court may deem just, not
exceeding ten per centum of the net
income of the ward, if any; otherwise, in
such amount the court determines to be
a reasonable compensation for his
services; and
(c) Upon complaint of the guardian or
ward, or of any person having actual or
prospective interest in the property at
the ward, require any person suspected
of having embezzled, concealed, or
disposed of any money, goods or
interest, or a written instrument
belonging to the ward or his property to
appear for examination concerning any
thereof and issue such orders as would
secure the property against such
embezzlement, concealment
conveyance.
Sec. 19. Petition to sell or encumber property. - When
the income of a property under guardianship is
insufficient to maintain and educate the ward, or when it
is for his benefit that his personal or real property or any
part thereof be sold, mortgaged or
encumbered, and the proceeds invested in safe and
productive security, or in the improvement or security of
other real property, the guardian may file a verified
petition setting forth such facts, and praying that an
order issue authorizing the sale or encumbrance of the
property.
Sec. 20. Order to show cause. – If the sale or
encumbrance is necessary or would be beneficial to the
ward, the court shall order his next of kin and all
person/s interested in the property to appear at a
reasonable time and place therein specified and show
cause why the petition should not be granted.
Sec. 21. Hearing on return of order; costs. – At the time
and place designated in the order to show cause, the
court shall hear the allegations and evidence of the
petitioner and next of kin, and other persons interested,
together with their witnesses, and grant or deny the
petition as the best interests of the ward may require.
Sec. 22. Contents of order for sale or encumbrance and
its duration; bond. – If, after full examination, it is
necessary, or would be beneficial to the ward, to sell or
encumber the property, or some portion of it, the court
his shall order such sale or encumbrance the proceeds of
which shall be expended for the maintenance or the
education of the ward, or invested as the circumstances
may require. The order shall specify the grounds for the
sale or encumbrance and may direct that the property
ordered sold be disposed of at public sale, subject to
such conditions as to the time and manner of payment,
and security where a part of the payment is deferred.
The original bond of the guardian shall stand as security
for the proper appropriation of the proceeds of the sale
or encumbrance, but the court may, if deemed expedient,
require an additional bond as a condition for the sale or
encumbrance. The authority to sell or encumber shall not
extend beyond one year, unless renewed by the court.
Sec. 23. Court may order investment of proceeds and
direct management of property. – The court may
authorize and require the guardian to invest the proceeds
or of sales or encumbrances, and any other money of his
ward in his hands, in real or personal property, for the
best interests of the ward, and may make such other
orders for the management, investment, and disposition
of the property and effects, as circumstances may
warrant.
otherwise Sec. 24. Grounds for removal or resignation of guardian.
– When a guardian becomes insane or otherwise
incapable of discharging his trust or is found thereafter to
be unsuitable, or has wasted or mismanaged the
property of the ward, or has failed to render an account
or make a return for thirty days after it is due, the court
may, upon reasonable notice to the guardian, remove
him as such and require him to surrender the property of
the ward to the person found to be lawfully entitled
thereto.
The court may allow the guardian to resign for justifiable
causes.
Upon the removal or resignation of the guardian, the
court shall appoint a new one.
No motion for removal or resignation shall be granted
unless the guardian has submitted the proper accounting
of the property of the ward and the court has approved
the same.

Sec. 25. Ground for termination of guardianship. – The

court motu proprio or upon verified motion of any person
allowed to file a petition for guardianship may terminate
the guardianship on the ground that the ward has come
of age or has died. The guardian shall notify the court of
such fact within ten days of its occurrence.

Sec. 26. Service of final and executory judgment or order.

– The final and executory judgment or order shall be
served upon the Local Civil Registrar of the municipality
or city where the minor resides and the Register of Deeds
of the province or city where his property or any part
thereof is situated. Both the Local Civil Registrar and’ the
Register of Deeds shall enter the final and executory
judgment or order in the appropriate books in their
offices.

Sec. 27. Effect of the rule. – This Rule amends Rules 92

to 97 inclusive of the Rules of Court on guardianship of
minors. Guardianship of incompetents who are not
minors shall continue to be under the jurisdiction of the
regular courts and governed by the Rules of Court.

Sec. 28. Effectivity. - This Rule shall take effect on May

1, 2003 following its publication in a newspaper of
general circulation not later than April 15, 2003.

Republic Act No. 8552 February 25,
1998
AN ACT ESTABLISHING THE RULES AND
POLICIES ON THE DOMESTIC ADOPTION OF
FILIPINO CHILDREN AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of
Representatives of the Philippines in Congress
assembled::
ARTICLE I
GENERAL PROVISIONS
Section 1. Short Title. – This Act shall be known as the
"Domestic Adoption Act of 1998."
Section 2. Declaration of Policies. – (a) It is hereby
declared the policy of the State to ensure that every child
remains under the care and custody of his/her parent(s)
and be provided with love, care, understanding and
security towards the full and harmonious development of
his/her personality. Only when such efforts prove
insufficient and no appropriate placement or adoption
within the child's extended family is available shall
adoption by an unrelated person be considered.
(b) In all matters relating to the care, custody and
adoption of a child, his/her interest shall be the
paramount consideration in accordance with the tenets
set forth in the United Nations (UN) Convention on the
Rights of the Child; UN Declaration on Social and Legal
Principles Relating to the Protection and Welfare of
Children with Special Reference to Foster Placement and
Adoption, Nationally and Internationally; and the Hague
Convention on the Protection of Children and
Cooperation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption. Toward
this end, the State shall provide alternative protection
and assistance through foster care or adoption for every
child who is neglected, orphaned, or abandoned.
(c) It shall also be a State policy to:
(i) Safeguard the biological parent(s) from making
hurried decisions to relinquish his/her parental authority
over his/her child;
(ii) Prevent the child from unnecessary separation from
his/her biological parent(s);
(iii) Protect adoptive parent(s) from attempts to disturb
his/her parental authority and custody over his/her
adopted child.
Any voluntary or involuntary termination of parental
authority shall be administratively or judicially declared
so as to establish the status of the child as "legally
available for adoption" and his/her custody transferred to
the Department of Social Welfare and Development or to
any duly licensed and accredited child-placing or
child-caring agency, which entity shall be authorized to
take steps for the permanent placement of the child;
(iv) Conduct public information and educational
campaigns to promote a positive environment for
adoption;
(v) Ensure that sufficient capacity exists within
government and private sector agencies to handle
adoption inquiries, process domestic adoption
applications, and offer adoption-related services
including, but not limited to, parent preparation and
post-adoption education and counseling; and
(vi) Encourage domestic adoption so as to preserve the
child's identity and culture in his/her native land, and
only when this is not available shall intercountry adoption
be considered as a last resort.
Section 3. Definition of Terms. – For purposes of this
Act, the following terms shall be defined as:
(a) "Child" is a person below eighteen (18) years of age.
(b) "A child legally available for adoption" refers to a
child who has been voluntarily or involuntarily committed
to the Department or to a duly licensed and accredited
child-placing or child-caring agency, freed of the parental
authority of his/her biological parent(s) or guardian or
adopter(s) in case of rescission of adoption.
(c) "Voluntarily committed child" is one whose parent(s)
knowingly and willingly relinquishes parental authority to
the Department.
(d) "Involuntarily committed child" is one whose
parent(s), known or unknown, has been permanently
and judicially deprived of parental authority due to
abandonment; substantial, continuous, or repeated
neglect; abuse; or incompetence to discharge parental
responsibilities.
(e) "Abandoned child" refers to one who has no proper
parental care or guardianship or whose parent(s) has
deserted him/her for a period of at least six (6)
continuous months and has been judicially declared as
such.
(f) "Supervised trial custody" is a period of time within
which a social worker oversees the adjustment and
emotional readiness of both adopter(s) and adoptee in
stabilizing their filial relationship.
(g) "Department" refers to the Department of Social
Welfare and Development.
(h) "Child-placing agency" is a duly licensed and
accredited agency by the Department to provide
comprehensive child welfare services including, but not
limited to, receiving applications for adoption, evaluating
the prospective adoptive parents, and preparing the
adoption home study.
(i) "Child-caring agency" is a duly licensed and
accredited agency by the Department that provides
twenty four (24)-hour residential care services for
abandoned, orphaned, neglected, or voluntarily
committed children.
(j) "Simulation of birth" is the tampering of the civil
registry making it appear in the birth records that a
certain child was born to a person who is not his/her
biological mother, causing such child to lose his/her true
identity and status.
ARTICLE II
PRE-ADOPTION SERVICES
Section 4. Counseling Service. – The Department
shall provide the services of licensed social workers to
the following:
(a) Biological Parent(s) – Counseling shall be provided to
the parent(s) before and after the birth of his/her child.
No binding commitment to an adoption plan shall be
permitted before the birth of his/her child. A period of six
(6) months shall be allowed for the biological parent(s) to
reconsider any decision to relinquish his/her child for
adoption before the decision becomes irrevocable.
Counseling and rehabilitation services shall also be
offered to the biological parent(s) after he/she has
relinquished his/her child for adoption.
Steps shall be taken by the Department to ensure that no
hurried decisions are made and all alternatives for the
child's future and the implications of each alternative
have been provided.
(b) Prospective Adoptive Parent(s) – Counseling sessions,
adoption fora and seminars, among others, shall be
provided to prospective adoptive parent(s) to resolve
possible adoption issues and to prepare him/her for
effective parenting.
(c) Prospective Adoptee – Counseling sessions shall be
provided to ensure that he/she understands the nature
and effects of adoption and is able to express his/her
views on adoption in accordance with his/her age and
level of maturity.
Section 5. Location of Unknown Parent(s). – It
shall be the duty of the Department or the child-placing
or child-caring agency which has custody of the child to
exert all efforts to locate his/her unknown biological
parent(s). If such efforts fail, the child shall be registered
as a foundling and subsequently be the subject of legal
proceedings where he/she shall be declared abandoned.
Section 6. Support Services. – The Department shall
develop a pre-adoption program which shall include,
among others, the above mentioned services.
ARTICLE III
ELIGIBILITY
Section 7. Who May Adopt. – The following may
adopt:
(a) Any Filipino citizen of legal age, in possession of full
civil capacity and legal rights, of good moral character,
has not been convicted of any crime involving moral
turpitude, emotionally and psychologically capable of
caring for children, at least sixteen (16) years older than
the adoptee, and who is in a position to support and care
for his/her children in keeping with the means of the
family. The requirement of sixteen (16) year difference
between the age of the adopter and adoptee may be
waived when the adopter is the biological parent of the
adoptee, or is the spouse of the adoptee's parent;
(b) Any alien possessing the same qualifications as above
stated for Filipino nationals: Provided, That his/her
country has diplomatic relations with the Republic of the
Philippines, that he/she has been living in the Philippines
for at least three (3) continuous years prior to the filing
of the application for adoption and maintains such
residence until the adoption decree is entered, that
he/she has been certified by his/her diplomatic or
consular office or any appropriate government agency
that he/she has the legal capacity to adopt in his/her
country, and that his/her government allows the adoptee
to enter his/her country as his/her adopted
son/daughter: Provided, Further, That the requirements
on residency and certification of the alien's qualification
to adopt in his/her country may be waived for the
following:
(i) a former Filipino citizen who seeks to adopt a relative
within the fourth (4th) degree of consanguinity or affinity;
or
(ii) one who seeks to adopt the legitimate son/daughter
of his/her Filipino spouse; or
(iii) one who is married to a Filipino citizen and seeks to
adopt jointly with his/her spouse a relative within the
fourth (4th) degree of consanguinity or affinity of the
Filipino spouse; or
(c) The guardian with respect to the ward after the
termination of the guardianship and clearance of his/her
financial accountabilities.
Husband and wife shall jointly adopt, except in the
following cases:
(i) if one spouse seeks to adopt the legitimate
son/daughter of the other; or
(ii) if one spouse seeks to adopt his/her own illegitimate
son/daughter: Provided, However, that the other spouse
has signified his/her consent thereto; or
(iii) if the spouses are legally separated from each other.
In case husband and wife jointly adopt, or one spouse
adopts the illegitimate son/daughter of the other, joint
parental authority shall be exercised by the spouses.
Section 8. Who May Be Adopted. – The following
may be adopted:
(a) Any person below eighteen (18) years of age who has
been administratively or judicially declared available for
adoption;
(b) The legitimate son/daughter of one spouse by the
other spouse;
(c) An illegitimate son/daughter by a qualified adopter to
improve his/her status to that of legitimacy;
(d) A person of legal age if, prior to the adoption, said
person has been consistently considered and treated by
the adopter(s) as his/her own child since minority;
(e) A child whose adoption has been previously rescinded;
or
(f) A child whose biological or adoptive parent(s) has
died: Provided, That no proceedings shall be initiated
within six (6) months from the time of death of said
parent(s).
Section 9. Whose Consent is Necessary to the
Adoption. – After being properly counseled and
informed of his/her right to give or withhold his/her
approval of the adoption, the written consent of the
following to the adoption is hereby required:
(a) The adoptee, if ten (10) years of age or over;
(b) The biological parent(s) of the child, if known, or the
legal guardian, or the proper government instrumentality
which has legal custody of the child;
(c) The legitimate and adopted sons/daughters, ten (10)
years of age or over, of the adopter(s) and adoptee, if
any;
(d) The illegitimate sons/daughters, ten (10) years of age
or over, of the adopter if living with said adopter and the
latter's spouse, if any; and
(e) The spouse, if any, of the person adopting or to be
adopted.
ARTICLE IV
PROCEDURE
Section 10. Hurried Decisions. – In all proceedings
for adoption, the court shall require proof that the
biological parent(s) has been properly counseled to
prevent him/her from making hurried decisions caused
by strain or anxiety to give up the child, and to sustain
that all measures to strengthen the family have been
exhausted and that any prolonged stay of the child in
his/her own home will be inimical to his/her welfare and
interest.
Section 11. Case Study. – No petition for adoption
shall be set for hearing unless a licensed social worker of
the Department, the social service office of the local
government unit, or any child-placing or child-caring
agency has made a case study of the adoptee, his/her
biological parent(s), as well as the adopter(s), and has
submitted the report and recommendations on the
matter to the court hearing such petition.
At the time of preparation of the adoptee's case study,
the concerned social worker shall confirm with the Civil
Registry the real identity and registered name of the
adoptee. If the birth of the adoptee was not registered
with the Civil Registry, it shall be the responsibility of the
concerned social worker to ensure that the adoptee is
registered.
The case study on the adoptee shall establish that he/she
is legally available for adoption and that the documents
to support this fact are valid and authentic. Further, the
case study of the adopter(s) shall ascertain his/her
genuine intentions and that the adoption is in the best
interest of the child.
The Department shall intervene on behalf of the adoptee
if it finds, after the conduct of the case studies, that the
petition should be denied. The case studies and other
relevant documents and records pertaining to the
adoptee and the adoption shall be preserved by the
Department.
Section 12. Supervised Trial Custody. – No petition
for adoption shall be finally granted until the adopter(s)
has been given by the court a supervised trial custody
period for at least six (6) months within which the parties
are expected to adjust psychologically and emotionally to
each other and establish a bonding relationship. During
said period, temporary parental authority shall be vested
in the adopter(s).
The court may motu proprio or upon motion of any party
reduce the trial period if it finds the same to be in the
best interest of the adoptee, stating the reasons for the
reduction of the period. However, for alien adopter(s),
he/she must complete the six (6)-month trial custody
except for those enumerated in Sec. 7 (b) (i) (ii) (iii).
If the child is below seven (7) years of age and is placed
with the prospective adopter(s) through a pre-adoption
placement authority issued by the Department, the
prospective adopter(s) shall enjoy all the benefits to
which biological parent(s) is entitled from the date the
adoptee is placed with the prospective adopter(s).
Section 13. Decree of Adoption. – If, after the
publication of the order of hearing has been complied
with, and no opposition has been interposed to the
petition, and after consideration of the case studies, the
qualifications of the adopter(s), trial custody report and
the evidence submitted, the court is convinced that the
petitioners are qualified to adopt, and that the adoption
would redound to the best interest of the adoptee, a
decree of adoption shall be entered which shall be
effective as of the date the original petition was filed.
This provision shall also apply in case the petitioner(s)
dies before the issuance of the decree of adoption to
protect the interest of the adoptee. The decree shall
state the name by which the child is to be known.
Section 14. Civil Registry Record. – An amended
certificate of birth shall be issued by the Civil Registry, as
required by the Rules of Court, attesting to the fact that
the adoptee is the child of the adopter(s) by being
registered with his/her surname. The original certificate
of birth shall be stamped "cancelled" with the annotation
of the issuance of an amended birth certificate in its
place and shall be sealed in the civil registry records. The
new birth certificate to be issued to the adoptee shall not
bear any notation that it is an amended issue.
Section 15. Confidential Nature of Proceedings
and Records. – All hearings in adoption cases shall be
confidential and shall not be open to the public. All
records, books, and papers relating to the adoption cases
in the files of the court, the Department, or any other
agency or institution participating in the adoption
proceedings shall be kept strictly confidential.
If the court finds that the disclosure of the information to
a third person is necessary for purposes connected with
or arising out of the adoption and will be for the best
interest of the adoptee, the court may merit the
necessary information to be released, restricting the
purposes for which it may be used.
ARTICLE V
EFFECTS OF ADOPTION
Section 16. Parental Authority. – Except in cases
where the biological parent is the spouse of the adopter,
all legal ties between the biological parent(s) and the
adoptee shall be severed and the same shall then be
vested on the adopter(s).
Section 17. Legitimacy. – The adoptee shall be
considered the legitimate son/daughter of the adopter(s)
for all intents and purposes and as such is entitled to all
the rights and obligations provided by law to legitimate
sons/daughters born to them without discrimination of
any kind. To this end, the adoptee is entitled to love,
guidance, and support in keeping with the means of the
family.
Section 18. Succession. – In legal and intestate
succession, the adopter(s) and the adoptee shall have
reciprocal rights of succession without distinction from
legitimate filiation. However, if the adoptee and his/her
biological parent(s) had left a will, the law on
testamentary succession shall govern.
ARTICLE VI
RESCISSION OF ADOPTION
Section 19. Grounds for Rescission of Adoption. –
Upon petition of the adoptee, with the assistance of the
Department if a minor or if over eighteen (18) years of
age but is incapacitated, as guardian/counsel, the
adoption may be rescinded on any of the following
grounds committed by the adopter(s): (a) repeated
physical and verbal maltreatment by the adopter(s)
despite having undergone counseling; (b) attempt on the
life of the adoptee; (c) sexual assault or violence; or (d)
abandonment and failure to comply with parental
obligations.
Adoption, being in the best interest of the child, shall not
be subject to rescission by the adopter(s). However, the
adopter(s) may disinherit the adoptee for causes
provided in Article 919 of the Civil Code.
Section 20. Effects of Rescission. – If the petition is
granted, the parental authority of the adoptee's
biological parent(s), if known, or the legal custody of the
Department shall be restored if the adoptee is still a
minor or incapacitated. The reciprocal rights and
obligations of the adopter(s) and the adoptee to each
other shall be extinguished.
The court shall order the Civil Registrar to cancel the
amended certificate of birth of the adoptee and restore
his/her original birth certificate.
Succession rights shall revert to its status prior to
adoption, but only as of the date of judgment of judicial
rescission. Vested rights acquired prior to judicial
rescission shall be respected.
All the foregoing effects of rescission of adoption shall be
without prejudice to the penalties imposable under the
Penal Code if the criminal acts are properly proven.
ARTICLE VII
VIOLATIONS AND PENALTIES
Section 21. Violations and Penalties. – (a) The
penalty of imprisonment ranging from six (6) years and
one (1) day to twelve (12) years and/or a fine not less
than Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000.00), but not more
than Two hundred thousand pesos (P200,000.00) at the
discretion of the court shall be imposed on any person
who shall commit any of the following acts:
(i) obtaining consent for an adoption through coercion,
undue influence, fraud, improper material inducement,
or other similar acts;
(ii) non-compliance with the procedures and safeguards
provided by the law for adoption; or
(iii) subjecting or exposing the child to be adopted to
danger, abuse, or exploitation.
(b) Any person who shall cause the fictitious registration
of the birth of a child under the name(s) of a person(s)
who is not his/her biological parent(s) shall be guilty of
simulation of birth, and shall be punished by prision
mayor in its medium period and a fine not exceeding Fifty
thousand pesos (P50,000.00).
Any physician or nurse or hospital personnel who, in
violation of his/her oath of office, shall cooperate in the
execution of the abovementioned crime shall suffer the
penalties herein prescribed and also the penalty of
permanent disqualification.
Any person who shall violate established regulations
relating to the confidentiality and integrity of records,
documents, and communications of adoption
applications, cases, and processes shall suffer the
penalty of imprisonment ranging from one (1) year and
one (1) day to two (2) years, and/or a fine of not less
than Five thousand pesos (P5,000.00) but not more than
Ten thousand pesos (P10,000.00), at the discretion of
the court.
A penalty lower by two (2) degrees than that prescribed
for the consummated offense under this Article shall be
imposed upon the principals of the attempt to commit
any of the acts herein enumerated. Acts punishable
under this Article, when committed by a syndicate or
where it involves two (2) or more children shall be
considered as an offense constituting child trafficking
and shall merit the penalty of reclusion perpetua.
Acts punishable under this Article are deemed committed
by a syndicate if carried out by a group of three (3) or
more persons conspiring and/or confederating with one
another in carrying out any of the unlawful acts defined
under this Article. Penalties as are herein provided, shall
be in addition to any other penalties which may be
imposed for the same acts punishable under other laws,
ordinances, executive orders, and proclamations.
When the offender is an alien, he/she shall be deported
immediately after service of sentence and perpetually
excluded from entry to the country.
Any government official, employee or functionary who
shall be found guilty of violating any of the provisions of
this Act, or who shall conspire with private individuals
shall, in addition to the above-prescribed penalties, be
penalized in accordance with existing civil service laws,
rules and regulations: Provided, That upon the filing of a
case, either administrative or criminal, said government
official, employee, or functionary concerned shall
automatically suffer suspension until the resolution of the
case.
Section 22. Rectification of Simulated Births. – A
person who has, prior to the effectivity of this Act,
simulated the birth of a child shall not be punished for
such act: Provided, That the simulation of birth was
made for the best interest of the child and that he/she
has been consistently considered and treated by that
person as his/her own son/daughter: Provided,
further, That the application for correction of the birth
registration and petition for adoption shall be filed within
five (5) years from the effectivity of this Act and
completed thereafter: Provided, finally, That such person
complies with the procedure as specified in Article IV of
this Act and other requirements as determined by the
Department.
ARTICLE VIII
FINAL PROVISIONS
Section 23. Adoption Resource and Referral
Office. – There shall be established an Adoption
Resources and Referral Office under the Department
with the following functions: (a) monitor the existence,
number, and flow of children legally available for
adoption and prospective adopter(s) so as to facilitate
their matching; (b) maintain a nationwide information
and educational campaign on domestic adoption; (c)
keep records of adoption proceedings; (d) generate
resources to help child-caring and child-placing agencies
and foster homes maintain viability; and (e) do policy
research in collaboration with the Intercountry Adoption
Board and other concerned agencies. The office shall be
manned by adoption experts from the public and private
sectors.
Section 24. Implementing Rules and
Regulations. – Within six (6) months from the
promulgation of this Act, the Department, with the
Council for the Welfare of Children, the Office of Civil
Registry General, the Department of Justice, Office of the
Solicitor General, and two (2) private individuals
representing child-placing and child-caring agencies shall
formulate the necessary guidelines to make the
provisions of this Act operative.
Section 25. Appropriations. – Such sum as may be
necessary for the implementation of the provisions of this
Act shall be included in the General Appropriations Act of
the year following its enactment into law and
thereafter.Section 26. Repealing Clause. – Any law,
presidential decree or issuance, executive order, letter of
instruction, administrative order, rule, or regulation
contrary to, or inconsistent with the provisions of this Act
is hereby repealed, modified, or amended
accordingly.Section 27. Separability Clause. – If any
provision of this Act is held invalid or unconstitutional,
the other provisions not affected thereby shall remain
valid and subsisting.Section 28. Effectivity Clause. –
This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days following its
complete publication in any newspaper of general
circulation or in the Official Gazette.
Approved: February 25, 1998
Republic Act 8043
The Inter-Country Adoption Act of 1995
"AN ACT ESTABLISHING THE RULES TO
GOVERN INTER-COUNTRY ADOPTION OF
FILIPINO CHILDREN, AND FOR OTHER
PURPOSES"
Section 1. Short Title. — This Act shall be known
as the "Inter-Country Adoption Act of 1995."
Sec. 2. Declaration of Policy. — It is hereby
declared the policy of the State to provide every
neglected and abandoned child with a family that will
provide such child with love and care as well as
opportunities for growth and development. Towards
this end, efforts shall be exerted to place the child
with an adoptive family in the Philippines. However,
recognizing that inter-country adoption may be
considered as allowing aliens not presently allowed by
law to adopt Filipino children if such children cannot
be adopted by qualified Filipino citizens or aliens, the
State shall take measures to ensure that inter-country
adoptions are allowed when the same shall prove
beneficial to the child's best interests, and shall serve
and protect his/her fundamental rights.
Sec. 3. Definition of Terms. — As used in this Act.
the term:
(a) Inter-country adoption refers to the
socio-legal process of adopting a Filipino child by a
foreigner or a Filipino citizen permanently residing
abroad where the petition is filed, the supervised trial
custody is undertaken, and the decree of adoption is
issued outside the Philippines.
(b) Child means a person below fifteen (15)
years of age unless sooner emancipated by law.
(c) Department refers to the Department of
Social Welfare and Development of the Republic of
the Philippines.
(d) Secretary refers to the Secretary of the
Department of Social Welfare and Development.
(e) Authorized and accredited agency refers
to the State welfare agency or a licensed adoption
agency in the country of the adopting parents which
provide comprehensive social services and which is
duly recognized by the Department.
(f) Legally-free child means a child who has
been voluntarily or involuntarily committed to the
Department, in accordance with the Child and Youth
Welfare Code.
(g) Matching refers to the judicious pairing of
the adoptive child and the applicant to promote a
mutually satisfying parent-child relationship.
(h) Board refers to the Inter-country Adoption
Board.
ARTICLE II
THE INTER-COUNTRY ADOPTION BOARD
Sec. 4. The Inter-Country Adoption Board. —
There is hereby created the Inter-Country Adoption
Board, hereinafter referred to as the Board to act as
the central authority in matters relating to
inter-country adoption. It shall act as the
policy-making body for purposes of carrying out the
provisions of this Act, in consultation and coordination
with the Department, the different child-care and
placement agencies, adoptive agencies, as well as
non-governmental organizations engaged in
child-care and placement activities. As such, it shall:
 (a) Protect the Filipino child from abuse,
exploitation, trafficking and/or sale or any other
practice in connection with adoption which is harmful,
detrimental, or prejudicial to the child;
(b) Collect, maintain, and preserve confidential
information about the child and the adoptive parents;
(c) Monitor, follow up, and facilitate completion
of adoption of the child through authorized and
accredited agency;
(d) Prevent improper financial or other gain in
connection with an adoption and deter improper
practices contrary to this Act;
(e) Promote the development of adoption
services including post-legal adoption;
(f) License and accredit child-caring/placement
agencies and collaborate with them in the placement
of Filipino children;
(g) Accredit and authorize foreign adoption
agency in the placement of Filipino children in their
own country; and
(h) Cancel the license to operate and blacklist the
child-caring and placement agency or adoptive
agency involved from the accreditation list of the
Board upon a finding of violation of any provision
under this Act.
Sec. 5. Composition of the Board. — The Board
shall be composed of the Secretary of the
Department as ex officio Chairman, and six (6) other
members to be appointed by the President for a
nonrenewable term of six (6) years: Provided, That
there shall be appointed one (1) psychiatrist or
psychologist, two (2) lawyers who shall have at least
the qualifications of a regional trial court judge, one
(1) registered social worker and two (2)
representatives from non-governmental
organizations engaged in child-caring and placement
activities. The members of the Board shall receive a
per diem allowance of One thousand five hundred
pesos (P1,500) for each meeting attended by them:
Provided, further, That no compensation shall be paid
for more than four (4) meetings a month.
Sec. 6. Powers and Functions of the Board. —
The Board shall have the following powers and
functions:
(a) to prescribe rules and regulations as it may
deem reasonably necessary to carry out the
provisions of this Act, after consultation and upon
favorable recommendation of the different agencies
concerned with the child-caring, placement, and
adoption;
(b) to set the guidelines for the convening of an
Inter-country Adoption Placement Committee which
shall be under the direct supervision of the Board;
(c) to set the guidelines for the manner by which
selection/matching of prospective adoptive parents
and adoptive child can be made;
(d) to determine a reasonable schedule of fees
and charges to be exacted in connection with the
application for adoption;
(e) to determine the form and contents of the
application for inter-country adoption;
(g) to institute systems and procedures to
prevent improper financial gain in connection with
adoption and deter improper practices which are
contrary to this Act;
(h) to promote the development of adoption
services, including post-legal adoption services,
(i) to accredit and authorize foreign private
adoption agencies which have demonstrated
professionalism, competence and have consistently
pursued non-profit objectives to engage in the
placement of Filipino children in their own country:
Provided, That such foreign private agencies are duly
authorized and accredited by their own government
to conduct inter-country adoption: Provided, however,
That the total number of authorized and accredited
foreign private adoption agencies shall not exceed
one hundred (100) a year;
(j) to take appropriate measures to ensure
confidentiality of the records of the child, the natural
parents and the adoptive parents at all times;
(k) to prepare, review or modify, and thereafter,
recommend to the Department of Foreign Affairs,
Memoranda of Agreement respecting inter-country
adoption consistent with the implementation of this
Act and its stated goals, entered into, between and
among foreign governments, international
organizations and recognized international
non-governmental organizations;
(l) to assist other concerned agencies and the
courts in the implementation of this Act, particularly
as regards coordination with foreign persons,
agencies and other entities involved in the process of
adoption and the physical transfer of the child; and
(m) to perform such other functions on matters
relating to inter-country adoption as may be
determined by the President.
ARTICLE III
PROCEDURE
Sec. 7. Inter-Country Adoption as the Last
Resort. — The Board shall ensure that all
possibilities for adoption of the child under the Family
Code have been exhausted and that inter-country
adoption is in the best interest of the child. Towards
this end, the Board shall set up the guidelines to
ensure that steps will be taken to place the child in
the Philippines before the child is placed for
inter-country adoption: Provided, however, That the
maximum number that may be allowed for foreign
adoption shall not exceed six hundred (600) a year
for the first five (5) years.
Sec. 8. Who May be Adopted. — Only a legally
free child may be the subject of inter-country
adoption. In order that such child may be considered
for placement, the following documents must be
submitted to the Board:
(a)Child study;
(b)Birth certificate/foundling certificate;
(c)Deed of voluntary commitment/decree of
abandonment/death certificate of parents;
(d)Medical evaluation /history;
(e)Psychological evaluation, as necessary; and
(f)Recent photo of the child.
Sec. 9. Who May Adopt. — An alien or a Filipino
citizen permanently residing abroad may file an
application for inter-country adoption of a Filipino
child if he/she:
(a) is at least twenty-seven (27) years of age and
at least sixteen (16) years older than the child to be
adopted, at the time of application unless the adopter
is the parent by nature of the child to be adopted or
the spouse of such parent:
(b) if married, his/her spouse must jointly file for
the adoption;
(c) has the capacity to act and assume all rights
and responsibilities of parental authority under his
national laws, and has undergone the appropriate
counseling from an accredited counselor in his/her
country;
(d) has not been convicted of a crime involving
moral turpitude;
(e) is eligible to adopt under his/her national law;
(f) is in a position to provide the proper care and
support and to give the necessary moral values and
example to all his children, including the child to be
adopted;
(g) agrees to uphold the basic rights of the child
as embodied under Philippine laws, the U.N.
Convention on the Rights of the Child, and to abide by
the rules and regulations issued to implement the
provisions of this Act;
(h) comes from a country with whom the
Philippines has diplomatic relations and whose
government maintains a similarly authorized and
accredited agency and that adoption is allowed under
his/her national laws; and
(i) possesses all the qualifications and none of
the disqualifications provided herein and in other
applicable Philippine laws.
Sec. 10. Where to File Application. — An
application to adopt a Filipino child shall be filed
either with the Philippine Regional Trial Court having
jurisdiction over the child, or with the Board, through
an intermediate agency, whether governmental or an
authorized and accredited agency, in the country of
the prospective adoptive parents, which application
shall be in accordance with the requirements as set
forth in the implementing rules and regulations to be
promulgated by the Board.
The application shall be supported by the following
documents written and officially translated in English.
(a) Birth certificate of applicant(s);
(b) Marriage contract, if married, and divorce
decree, if applicable;
(c) Written consent of their biological or adoptive
children above ten (10) years of age, in the form of
sworn statement;
(d) Physical, medical and psychological
evaluation by a duly licensed physician and
psychologist;
(e) Income tax returns or any document showing
the financial capability of the applicant(s);
(f) Police clearance of applicant(s);
(g) Character reference from the local
church/minister, the applicant's employer and a
member of the immediate community who have
known the applicant(s) for at least five (5) years; and
(h) Recent postcard-size pictures of the
applicant(s) and his immediate family;
The Rules of Court shall apply in case of adoption by
judicial proceedings.
Sec. 11. Family Selection/Matching. — No child
shall be matched to a foreign adoptive family unless it
is satisfactorily shown that the child cannot be
adopted locally. The clearance, as issued by the
Board, with the copy of the minutes of the meetings,
shall form part of the records of the child to be
adopted. When the Board is ready to transmit the
Placement Authority to the authorized and accredited
inter-country adoption agency and all the travel
documents of the child are ready, the adoptive
parents, or any one of them, shall personally fetch the
child in the Philippines.
Sec. 12. Pre-adoptive Placement Costs. — The
applicant(s) shall bear the following costs incidental
to the placement of the child;
(a) The cost of bringing the child from the
Philippines to the residence of the applicant(s) abroad,
including all travel expenses within the Philippines
and abroad; and
(b) The cost of passport, visa, medical
examination and psychological evaluation required,
and other related expenses.
Sec. 13. Fees, Charges and Assessments. —
Fees, charges, and assessments collected by the
Board in the exercise of its functions shall be used
solely to process applications for inter-country
adoption and to support the activities of the Board.
Sec. 14. Supervision of Trial Custody. — The
governmental agency or the authorized and
accredited agency in the country of the adoptive
parents which filed the application for inter-country
adoption shall be responsible for the trial custody and
the care of the child. It shall also provide family
counseling and other related services. The trial
custody shall be for a period of six (6) months from
the time of placement. Only after the lapse of the
period of trial custody shall a decree of adoption be
issued in the said country a copy of which shall be
sent to the Board to form part of the records of the
child.
During the trial custody, the adopting parent(s) shall
submit to the governmental agency or the authorized
and accredited agency, which shall in turn transmit a
copy to the Board, a progress report of the child's
adjustment. The progress report shall be taken into
consideration in deciding whether or not to issue the
decree of adoption.
The Department of Foreign Affairs shall set up a
system by which Filipino children sent abroad for trial
custody are monitored and checked as reported by
the authorized and accredited inter-country adoption
agency as well as the repatriation to the Philippines of
a Filipino child whose adoption has not been
approved.
Sec. 15. Executive Agreements. — The
Department of Foreign Affairs, upon representation of
the Board, shall cause the preparation of Executive
Agreements with countries of the foreign adoption
agencies to ensure the legitimate concurrence of said
countries in upholding the safeguards provided by
this Act.
ARTICLE IV
PENALTIES
Sec. 16. Penalties. —
(a) Any person who shall knowingly participate in the
conduct or carrying out of an illegal adoption, in
violation of the provisions of this Act, shall be
punished with a penalty of imprisonment ranging
from six (6) years and one (1) day to twelve (12)
years and/or a fine of not less than Fifty thousand
pesos (P50,000), but not more than Two hundred
thousand pesos (P200.000), at the discretion of the
court. For purposes of this Act, an adoption is illegal if
it is effected in any manner contrary to the provisions
of this Act or established State policies, its
implementing rules and regulations, executive
agreements, and other laws pertaining to adoption.
Illegality may be presumed from the following acts:
(1)consent for an adoption was acquired through,
or attended by coercion, fraud, improper material
inducement;
(2)there is no authority from the Board to effect
adoption;
(3)the procedures and safeguards placed under
the law for adoption were not complied with; and
(4)the child to be adopted is subjected to, or
exposed to danger, abuse and exploitation.
(b)Any person who shall violate established
regulations relating to the confidentiality and integrity
of records, documents and communications of
adoption applications, cases and processes shall
suffer the penalty of imprisonment ranging from one
(1) year and one (1) day to two (2) years, and/or a
fine of not less than Five thousand pesos (P5,000),
but not more than Ten thousand pesos (P10,000), at
the discretion of the court.
A penalty lower by two (2) degrees than that
prescribed for the consummated felony under this
Article shall be imposed upon the principals of the
attempt to commit any of the acts herein
enumerated.
Acts punishable under this Article, when committed
by a syndicate or where it involves two or more
children shall be considered as an offense
constituting child trafficking and shall merit the
penalty of reclusion perpetua.
Acts punishable under this Article are deemed
committed by a syndicate if carried out by a group of
three (3) or more persons conspiring and/or
confederating with one another in carrying out any of
the unlawful acts defined under this Article.Penalties
as are herein provided shall be in addition to any
other penalties which may be imposed for the same
acts punishable under other laws, ordinances,
executive orders, and proclamations.

Sec. 17. Public Officers as Offenders. — Any

government official, employee or functionary who
shall be found guilty of violating any of the provisions
of this Act, or who shall conspire with private
individuals shall, in addition to the above-prescribed
penalties, be penalized in accordance with existing
civil service laws, rules and regulations: Provided,
That upon the filing of a case, either administrative or
criminal, said government official, employee or
functionary concerned shall automatically suffer
suspension until the resolution of the case.
ARTICLE V
FINAL PROVISIONS
Sec. 18. Implementing Rules and
Regulations. — The Inter-country Adoption Board,
in coordination with the Council for the Welfare of
Children, the Department of Foreign Affairs, and the
Department of Justice, after due consultation with
agencies involved in child-care and placement, shall
promulgate the necessary rules and regulations to
implement the provisions of this Act within six (6)
months after its effectivity.
G.R. Nos. 168992-93 May 21, 2009
Sec. 19. Appropriations. — The amount of Five
million pesos (P5,000,000) is hereby appropriated IN RE: PETITION FOR ADOPTION OF MICHELLE P.
from the proceeds of the Lotto for the initial LIM,
operations of the Board and subsequently the
appropriations of the same shall be included in the MONINA P. LIM, Petitioner.
General Appropriations Act for the year following its
enactment. x - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x

IN RE: PETITION FOR ADOPTION OF MICHAEL

Sec. 20. Separability Clause. — If any provision, JUDE P. LIM,
or part hereof is held invalid or unconstitutional, the
remainder of the law or the provision not otherwise MONINA P. LIM, Petitioner.
affected, shall remain valid and subsisting.
DECISION
Sec. 21. Repealing Clause. — Any law, decree,
executive order, administrative order or rules and CARPIO, J.:
regulations contrary to, or inconsistent with the
provisions of this Act are hereby repealed, modified or The Case
amended accordingly.
This is a petition for review on certiorari filed by Monina P.
Lim (petitioner) seeking to set aside the Decision 1 dated
Sec. 22. Effectivity Clause. — This Act shall take 15 September 2004 of the Regional Trial Court, General
effect fifteen (15) days after its publication in two (2) Santos City, Branch 22 (trial court), in SPL. PROC. Case
newspapers of general circulation. Nos. 1258 and 1259, which dismissed without prejudice
the consolidated petitions for adoption of Michelle P. Lim
and Michael Jude P. Lim.
Approved: June 7, 1995
The Facts
The following facts are undisputed. Petitioner is an
optometrist by profession. On 23 June 1974, she married
Primo Lim (Lim). They were childless. Minor children,
whose parents were unknown, were entrusted to them
by a certain Lucia Ayuban (Ayuban). Being so eager to
have a child of their own, petitioner and Lim registered
the children to make it appear that they were the
children’s parents. The children2 were named Michelle P.
Lim (Michelle) and Michael Jude P. Lim (Michael).
Michelle was barely eleven days old when brought to the
clinic of petitioner. She was born on 15 March
1977.3 Michael was 11 days old when Ayuban brought
him to petitioner’s clinic. His date of birth is 1 August
1983.4
The spouses reared and cared for the children as if they
were their own. They sent the children to exclusive
schools. They used the surname "Lim" in all their school
records and documents. Unfortunately, on 28 November
1998, Lim died. On 27 December 2000, petitioner
married Angel Olario (Olario), an American citizen.
Thereafter, petitioner decided to adopt the children by
availing of the amnesty5 given under Republic Act No.
85526(RA 8552) to those individuals who simulated the
birth of a child. Thus, on 24 April 2002, petitioner filed
separate petitions for the adoption of Michelle and
Michael before the trial court docketed as SPL PROC.
Case Nos. 1258 and 1259, respectively. At the time of the
filing of the petitions for adoption, Michelle was 25 years
old and already married, while Michael was 18 years and
seven months old.
Michelle and her husband gave their consent to the
adoption as evidenced by their Affidavits of
Consent.7 Michael also gave his consent to his adoption
as shown in his Affidavit of Consent.8 Petitioner’s
husband Olario likewise executed an Affidavit of
Consent9 for the adoption of Michelle and Michael.
In the Certification issued by the Department of Social
Welfare and Development (DSWD), Michelle was
considered as an abandoned child and the whereabouts
of her natural parents were unknown.10 The DSWD
issued a similar Certification for Michael.11
The Ruling of the Trial Court
On 15 September 2004, the trial court rendered
judgment dismissing the petitions. The trial court ruled
that since petitioner had remarried, petitioner should
have filed the petition jointly with her new husband. The
trial court ruled that joint adoption by the husband and
the wife is mandatory citing Section 7(c), Article III of RA
8552 and Article 185 of the Family Code.
Petitioner filed a Motion for Reconsideration of the
decision but the motion was denied in the Order dated 16
June 2005. In denying the motion, the trial court ruled
that petitioner did not fall under any of the exceptions
under Section 7(c), Article III of RA 8552. Petitioner’s
argument that mere consent of her husband would
suffice was untenable because, under the law, there are
additional requirements, such as residency and
certification of his qualification, which the husband, who
was not even made a party in this case, must comply.
As to the argument that the adoptees are already
emancipated and joint adoption is merely for the joint
exercise of parental authority, the trial court ruled that
joint adoption is not only for the purpose of exercising
parental authority because an emancipated child
acquires certain rights from his parents and assumes
certain obligations and responsibilities.
Hence, the present petition.
Issue
Petitioner appealed directly to this Court raising the sole
issue of whether or not petitioner, who has remarried,
can singly adopt.
The Court’s Ruling
Petitioner contends that the rule on joint adoption must
be relaxed because it is the duty of the court and the
State to protect the paramount interest and welfare of
the child to be adopted. Petitioner argues that the legal
maxim "dura lex sed lex" is not applicable to adoption
cases. She argues that joint parental authority is not
necessary in this case since, at the time the petitions
were filed, Michelle was 25 years old and already married,
while Michael was already 18 years of age. Parental
authority is not anymore necessary since they have been
emancipated having attained the age of majority.
We deny the petition.
Joint Adoption by Husband and Wife
It is undisputed that, at the time the petitions for
adoption were filed, petitioner had already remarried.
She filed the petitions by herself, without being joined by
her husband Olario. We have no other recourse but to
affirm the trial court’s decision denying the petitions for
adoption. Dura lex sed lex. The law is explicit. Section 7,
Article III of RA 8552 reads:
SEC. 7. Who May Adopt. - The following may adopt:
(a) Any Filipino citizen of legal age, in possession of full
civil capacity and legal rights, of good moral character,
has not been convicted of any crime involving moral
turpitude, emotionally and psychologically capable of
caring for children, at least sixteen (16) years older than
the adoptee, and who is in a position to support and care
for his/her children in keeping with the means of the
family. The requirement of sixteen (16) year difference
between the age of the adopter and adoptee may be
waived when the adopter is the biological parent of the
adoptee, or is the spouse of the adoptee’s parent;
(b) Any alien possessing the same qualifications as above
stated for Filipino nationals: Provided, That his/her
country has diplomatic relations with the Republic of the
Philippines, that he/she has been living in the Philippines
for at least three (3) continuous years prior to the filing
of the application for adoption and maintains such
residence until the adoption decree is entered, that
he/she has been certified by his/her diplomatic or
consular office or any appropriate government agency
that he/she has the legal capacity to adopt in his/her
country, and that his/her government allows the adoptee
to enter his/her country as his/her adopted
son/daughter: Provided, further, That the requirements
on residency and certification of the alien’s qualification
to adopt in his/her country may be waived for the
following:
(i) a former Filipino citizen who seeks to adopt a relative
within the fourth (4th) degree of consanguinity or affinity;
or
(ii) one who seeks to adopt the legitimate son/daughter
of his/her Filipino spouse; or
(iii) one who is married to a Filipino citizen and seeks to
adopt jointly with his/her spouse a relative within the
fourth (4th) degree of consanguinity or affinity of the
Filipino spouses; or
(c) The guardian with respect to the ward after the
termination of the guardianship and clearance of his/her
financial accountabilities.
Husband and wife shall jointly adopt, except in the
following cases:
(i) if one spouse seeks to adopt the legitimate
son/daughter of the other; or
(ii) if one spouse seeks to adopt his/her own illegitimate
son/daughter: Provided, however, That the other spouse
has signified his/her consent thereto; or
(iii) if the spouses are legally separated from each other.
In case husband and wife jointly adopt, or one spouse
adopts the illegitimate son/daughter of the other, joint
parental authority shall be exercised by the spouses.
(Emphasis supplied)
The use of the word "shall" in the above-quoted provision
means that joint adoption by the husband and the wife is
mandatory. This is in consonance with the concept of
joint parental authority over the child which is the ideal
situation. As the child to be adopted is elevated to the
level of a legitimate child, it is but natural to require the
spouses to adopt jointly. The rule also insures harmony
between the spouses.12
The law is clear. There is no room for ambiguity.
Petitioner, having remarried at the time the petitions for
adoption were filed, must jointly adopt. Since the
petitions for adoption were filed only by petitioner herself,
without joining her husband, Olario, the trial court was
correct in denying the petitions for adoption on this
ground.
Neither does petitioner fall under any of the three
exceptions enumerated in Section 7. First, the children to
be adopted are not the legitimate children of petitioner or
of her husband Olario. Second, the children are not the
illegitimate children of petitioner. And third, petitioner
and Olario are not legally separated from each other.
The fact that Olario gave his consent to the adoption as
shown in his Affidavit of Consent does not suffice. There
are certain requirements that Olario must comply being
an American citizen. He must meet the qualifications set
forth in Section 7 of RA 8552 such as: (1) he must prove
that his country has diplomatic relations with the
Republic of the Philippines; (2) he must have been living
in the Philippines for at least three continuous years prior
to the filing of the application for adoption; (3) he must
maintain such residency until the adoption decree is
entered; (4) he has legal capacity to adopt in his own
country; and (5) the adoptee is allowed to enter the
adopter’s country as the latter’s adopted child. None of
these qualifications were shown and proved during the
trial.
These requirements on residency and certification of the
alien’s qualification to adopt cannot likewise be waived
pursuant to Section 7. The children or adoptees are not
relatives within the fourth degree of consanguinity or
affinity of petitioner or of Olario. Neither are the
adoptees the legitimate children of petitioner.
Effects of Adoption
Petitioner contends that joint parental authority is not
anymore necessary since the children have been
emancipated having reached the age of majority. This is
untenable.
Parental authority includes caring for and rearing the
children for civic consciousness and efficiency and the
development of their moral, mental and physical
character and well-being.13 The father and the mother
shall jointly exercise parental authority over the persons
of their common children.14 Even the remarriage of the
surviving parent shall not affect the parental authority
over the children, unless the court appoints another
person to be the guardian of the person or property of
the children.15
It is true that when the child reaches the age of
emancipation — that is, when he attains the age of
majority or 18 years of age16 — emancipation terminates
parental authority over the person and property of the
child, who shall then be qualified and responsible for all
acts of civil life.17 However, parental authority is merely
just one of the effects of legal adoption. Article V of RA
8552 enumerates the effects of adoption, thus:
ARTICLE V
EFFECTS OF ADOPTION
SEC. 16. Parental Authority. - Except in
cases where the biological parent is the
spouse of the adopter, all legal ties
between the biological parent(s) and the
adoptee shall be severed and the same
shall then be vested on the adopter(s).
SEC. 17. Legitimacy. - The adoptee shall
be considered the legitimate
son/daughter of the adopter(s) for all
intents and purposes and as such is
entitled to all the rights and obligations
provided by law to legitimate
sons/daughters born to them without
discrimination of any kind. To this end,
the adoptee is entitled to love, guidance,
and support in keeping with the means
of the family.
SEC. 18. Succession. - In legal and
intestate succession, the adopter(s) and
the adoptee shall have reciprocal rights
of succession without distinction from
legitimate filiation. However, if the
adoptee and his/her biological parent(s)
had left a will, the law on testamentary
succession shall govern.
Adoption has, thus, the following effects: (1) sever all
legal ties between the biological parent(s) and the
adoptee, except when the biological parent is the spouse
of the adopter; (2) deem the adoptee as a legitimate
child of the adopter; and (3) give adopter and adoptee
reciprocal rights and obligations arising from the
relationship of parent and child, including but not limited
to: (i) the right of the adopter to choose the name the
child is to be known; and (ii) the right of the adopter and
adoptee to be legal and compulsory heirs of each
other.18 Therefore, even if emancipation terminates
parental authority, the adoptee is still considered a
legitimate child of the adopter with all the rights 19 of a
legitimate child such as: (1) to bear the surname of the
father and the mother; (2) to receive support from their
parents; and (3) to be entitled to the legitime and other
successional rights. Conversely, the adoptive parents
shall, with respect to the adopted child, enjoy all the
benefits to which biological parents are entitled20 such as
support21 and successional rights.22
We are mindful of the fact that adoption statutes, being
humane and salutary, hold the interests and welfare of
the child to be of paramount consideration. They are
designed to provide homes, parental care and education
for unfortunate, needy or orphaned children and give
them the protection of society and family, as well as to
allow childless couples or persons to experience the joys
of parenthood and give them legally a child in the person
of the adopted for the manifestation of their natural
parental instincts. Every reasonable intendment should
be sustained to promote and fulfill these noble and
compassionate objectives of the law. 23 But, as we have
ruled in Republic v. Vergara:24
We are not unmindful of the main purpose of adoption
statutes, which is the promotion of the welfare of the
children. Accordingly, the law should be construed
liberally, in a manner that will sustain rather than defeat
said purpose. The law must also be applied with
compassion, understanding and less severity in view of
the fact that it is intended to provide homes, love, care
and education for less fortunate children. Regrettably,
the Court is not in a position to affirm the trial court’s
decision favoring adoption in the case at bar, for the
law is clear and it cannot be modified without
violating the proscription against judicial
legislation. Until such time however, that the law on
the matter is amended, we cannot sustain the
respondent-spouses’ petition for adoption. (Emphasis
supplied)1avvphi1.zw+
Petitioner, being married at the time the petitions for
adoption were filed, should have jointly filed the petitions
with her husband. We cannot make our own legislation
to suit petitioner.
Petitioner, in her Memorandum, insists that subsequent
events would show that joint adoption could no longer be
possible because Olario has filed a case for dissolution of
his marriage to petitioner in the Los Angeles Superior
Court.
We disagree. The filing of a case for dissolution of the
marriage between petitioner and Olario is of no moment.
It is not equivalent to a decree of dissolution of marriage.
Until and unless there is a judicial decree for the
dissolution of the marriage between petitioner and Olario,
the marriage still subsists. That being the case, joint
adoption by the husband and the wife is required. We
reiterate our ruling above that since, at the time the
petitions for adoption were filed, petitioner was married
to Olario, joint adoption is mandatory.

WHEREFORE, we DENY the petition. We AFFIRM the

Decision dated 15 September 2004 of the Regional Trial
Court, General Santos City, Branch 22 in SPL. PROC.
Case Nos. 1258 and 1259. Costs against petitioner.

SO ORDERED.

ANTONIO T. CARPIO
Associate Justice

G.R. No. 164948 June 27, 2006

DIWATA RAMOS LANDINGIN Petitioner,
vs.
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.
DECISION
CALLEJO, SR., J.:
Assailed in this petition for review on certiorari under
Rule 45 of the Rules of Court is the Decision1 of the Court
of Appeals in CA-G.R. CV No. 77826 which reversed the
Decision2 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Tarlac City,
Branch 63 in Civil Case No. 2733 granting the Petition for
Adoption of the petitioner herein.
The Antecedents
On February 4, 2002, Diwata Ramos Landingin, a citizen
of the United States of America (USA), of Filipino
parentage and a resident of Guam, USA, filed a
petition3 for the adoption of minors Elaine Dizon Ramos
who was born on August 31, 1986;4 Elma Dizon Ramos,
who was born on September 7, 1987;5 and Eugene Dizon
Ramos who was born on August 5, 1989. 6 The minors
are the natural children of Manuel Ramos, petitioner’s
brother, and Amelia Ramos.
Landingin, as petitioner, alleged in her petition that when
Manuel died on May 19, 1990, 7 the children were left to
their paternal grandmother, Maria Taruc Ramos; their
biological mother, Amelia, went to Italy, re-married there
and now has two children by her second marriage and no
longer communicated with her children by Manuel Ramos
nor with her in-laws from the time she left up to the
institution of the adoption; the minors are being
financially supported by the petitioner and her children,
and relatives abroad; as Maria passed away on
November 23, 2000, petitioner desires to adopt the
children; the minors have given their written consent8 to
the adoption; she is qualified to adopt as shown by the
fact that she is a 57-year-old widow, has children of her
own who are already married, gainfully employed and
have their respective families; she lives alone in her own
home in Guam, USA, where she acquired citizenship, and
works as a restaurant server. She came back to the
Philippines to spend time with the minors; her children
gave their written consent9 to the adoption of the minors.
Petitioner’s brother, Mariano Ramos, who earns
substantial income, signified his willingness and
commitment to support the minors while in petitioner’s
custody.
Petitioner prayed that, after due hearing, judgment be
rendered in her favor, as follows:
WHEREFORE, it is most respectfully prayed to this
Honorable Court that after publication and hearing,
judgment be rendered allowing the adoption of the minor
children Elaine Dizon Ramos, Elma Dizon Ramos, and
Eugene Dizon Ramos by the petitioner, and ordering that
the minor children’s name follow the family name of
petitioner.
Petitioner prays for such other reliefs, just and equitable
under the premises.10
On March 5, 2002, the court ordered the Department of
Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) to conduct a
case study as mandated by Article 34 of Presidential
Decree No. 603, as amended, and to submit a report
thereon not later than April 4, 2002, the date set for the
initial hearing of the petition.11 The Office of the Solicitor
General (OSG) entered its appearance12 but deputized
the City Prosecutor of Tarlac to appear in its
behalf.13 Since her petition was unopposed, petitioner
was allowed to present her evidence ex parte. 14
The petitioner testified in her behalf. She also presented
Elaine Ramos, the eldest of the adoptees, to testify on
the written consent executed by her and her
siblings.15 The petitioner marked in evidence the Affidavit
of Consent purportedly executed by her children Ann,
Errol, Dennis and Ricfel Branitley, all surnamed Landingin,
and notarized by a notary public in Guam, USA, as proof
of said consent.16
On May 24, 2002, Elizabeth Pagbilao, Social Welfare
Officer II of the DSWD, Field Office III, Tarlac, submitted
a Child Study Report, with the following
recommendation:
In view of the foregoing, undersigned finds minors Elaine,
Elma & Eugene all surnamed Ramos, eligible for adoption
because of the following reasons:
1. Minors’ surviving parent, the mother has voluntarily
consented to their adoption by the paternal aunt, Diwata
Landingin this is in view of her inability to provide the
parental care, guidance and support they need. An
Affidavit of Consent was executed by the mother which is
hereto attached.
2. The three minors subject for adoption have also
expressed their willingness to be adopted and joins the
petitioners in Guam, USA in the future. A joint Affidavit of
consent is hereto attached. The minors developed close
attachment to the petitioners and they regarded her as
second parent.
3. The minors are present under the care of a temporary
guardian who has also family to look after. As young
adolescents they really need parental love, care,
guidance and support to ensure their protection and well
being.
In view of the foregoing, it is hereby respectfully
recommended that minors Elaine D. Ramos, Elma D.
Ramos and Eugene D. Ramos be adopted by their
maternal aunt Diwata Landingin. Trial custody is hereby
further recommended to be dispensed with considering
that they are close relatives and that close attachments
was already developed between the petitioner and the 3
minors.17
Pagbilao narrated what transpired during her interview,
as follows:
The mother of minors came home together with her son
John Mario, this May 2002 for 3 weeks vacation. This is to
enable her appear for the personal interview concerning
the adoption of her children.
surnames of the children be changed from
"Dizon-Ramos" to "Ramos-Landingin."
Let a copy of this decision be furnished the Local Civil
Registrar of Tarlac, Tarlac for him to effect the
corresponding changes/amendment in the birth
certificates of the above-mentioned minors.
SO ORDERED.19
The OSG appealed20 the decision to the Court of Appeals
on December 2, 2002. In its brief21 for the
oppositor-appellant, the OSG raised the following
arguments:
I

The plan for the adoption of minors by their paternal THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN
aunt Diwata Landingin was conceived after the death of GRANTING THE PETITION FOR
their paternal grandmother and guardian. The paternal ADOPTION DESPITE THE LACK OF
relatives including the petitioner who attended the wake CONSENT OF THE PROPOSED
of their mother were very much concerned about the ADOPTEES’ BIOLOGICAL MOTHER.
well-being of the three minors. While preparing for their
adoption, they have asked a cousin who has a family to II
stay with minors and act as their temporary guardian.
THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN
The mother of minors was consulted about the adoption GRANTING THE PETITION FOR
plan and after weighing the benefits of adoption to her ADOPTION DESPITE THE LACK OF THE
children, she voluntarily consented. She realized that her WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE
children need parental love, guidance and support which PETITIONER’S CHILDREN AS REQUIRED
she could not provide as she already has a second family BY LAW.
& residing in Italy. Knowing also that the petitioners &
her children have been supporting her children up to the III
present and truly care for them, she believes her children
will be in good hands. She also finds petitioners in a THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN
better position to provide a secured and bright future to GRANTING THE PETITION FOR
her children.18 ADOPTION DESPITE PETITIONER’S
FAILURE TO ESTABLISH THAT SHE IS
However, petitioner failed to present Pagbilao as witness IN A POSITION TO SUPPORT THE
and offer in evidence the voluntary consent of Amelia PROPOSED ADOPTEES.
Ramos to the adoption; petitioner, likewise, failed to
present any documentary evidence to prove that Amelia On April 29, 2004, the CA rendered a decision22 reversing
assents to the adoption. the ruling of the RTC. It held that petitioner failed to
adduce in evidence the voluntary consent of Amelia
On November 23, 2002, the court, finding merit in the Ramos, the children’s natural mother. Moreover, the
petition for adoption, rendered a decision granting said affidavit of consent of the petitioner’s children could not
petition. The dispositive portion reads: also be admitted in evidence as the same was executed
in Guam, USA and was not authenticated or
WHEREFORE, it is hereby ordered that henceforth, acknowledged before a Philippine consular office, and
minors Elaine Dizon Ramos, Elma Dizon Ramos, Eugene although petitioner has a job, she was not stable enough
Dizon Ramos be freed from all legal obligations to support the children. The dispositive portion of the CA
obedience and maintenance from their natural parents decision reads:
and that they be declared for all legal intents and
purposes the children of Diwata Ramos Landingin. Trial WHEREFORE, premises considered, the appealed
custody is dispensed with considering that decision dated November 25, 2002 of the Regional Trial
parent-children relationship has long been established Court, Branch 63, Tarlac City in Spec. Proc. No. 2733 is
between the children and the adoptive parents. Let the hereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE.
SO ORDERED.23
Petitioner filed a Motion for Reconsideration24 on May 21,
2004, which the CA denied in its Resolution dated August
12, 2004.25
Petitioner, thus, filed the instant petition for review on
certiorari26 on September 7, 2004, assigning the
following errors:
1. THAT THE HONORABLE LOWER COURT HAS
OVERLOOKED AND MISAPPLIED SOME FACTS AND
CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH ARE OF WEIGHT AND
IMPORTANCE AND WHICH IF CONSIDERED WOULD
HAVE AFFECTED THE RESULT OF THE CASE.
2. THAT THE HONORABLE LOWER COURT ERRED IN
CONCLUDING THAT THE PETITIONER-APPELLEE IS NOT
FINANCIALLY CAPABLE TO SUPPORT THE THREE
CHILDREN.27
The issues raised by the parties in their pleadings are the
following: (a) whether the petitioner is entitled to adopt
the minors without the written consent of their biological
mother, Amelia Ramos; (b) whether or not the affidavit
of consent purportedly executed by the
petitioner-adopter’s children sufficiently complies with
the law; and (c) whether or not petitioner is financially
capable of supporting the adoptees.
The Court’s Ruling
The petition is denied for lack of merit.
It has been the policy of the Court to adhere to the liberal
concept, as stated in Malkinson v. Agrava, 28 that
adoption statutes, being humane and salutary, hold the
interest and welfare of the child to be of paramount
consideration and are designed to provide homes,
parental care and education for unfortunate, needy or
orphaned children and give them the protection of
society and family in the person of the adopter as well as
to allow childless couples or persons to experience the
joys of parenthood and give them legally a child in the
person of the adopted for the manifestation of their
natural parental instincts. Every reasonable intendment
should thus be sustained to promote and fulfill these
noble and compassionate objectives of the law.29
However, in Cang v. Court of Appeals,30 the Court also
ruled that the liberality with which this Court treats
matters leading to adoption insofar as it carries out the
beneficent purposes of the law to ensure the rights and
privileges of the adopted child arising therefrom, ever
mindful that the paramount consideration is the overall
benefit and interest of the adopted child, should be
understood in its proper context and perspective. The
Court’s position should not be misconstrued or
misinterpreted as to extend to inferences beyond the
contemplation of law and jurisprudence. Thus, the
discretion to approve adoption proceedings is not to be
anchored solely on best interests of the child but likewise,
with due regard to the natural rights of the parents over
the child.31
Section 9 of Republic Act No. 8552, otherwise known as
the Domestic Adoption Act of 1998, provides:
Sec. 9. Whose Consent is Necessary to the Adoption. -
After being properly counseled and informed of his/her
right to give or withhold his/her approval of the adoption,
the written consent of the following to the adoption is
hereby required:
(a) The adoptee, if ten (10) years of age or over;
(b) The biological parent(s) of the child, if known, or the
legal guardian, or the proper government instrumentality
which has legal custody of the child;
(c) The legitimate and adopted sons/daughters, ten (10)
years of age or over, of the adopter(s) and adoptee, if
any;
(d) The illegitimate sons/daughters, ten (10) years of age
or over, of the adopter, if living with said adopter and the
latter’s souse, if any;
(e) The spouse, if any, of the person adopting or to be
adopted.
The general requirement of consent and notice to the
natural parents is intended to protect the natural
parental relationship from unwarranted interference by
interlopers, and to insure the opportunity to safeguard
the best interests of the child in the manner of the
proposed adoption.32
Clearly, the written consent of the biological parents is
indispensable for the validity of a decree of adoption.
Indeed, the natural right of a parent to his child requires
that his consent must be obtained before his parental
rights and duties may be terminated and re-established
in adoptive parents. In this case, petitioner failed to
submit the written consent of Amelia Ramos to the
adoption.
We note that in her Report, Pagbilao declared that she
was able to interview Amelia Ramos who arrived in the
Philippines with her son, John Mario in May 2002. If said
Amelia Ramos was in the Philippines and Pagbilao was
able to interview her, it is incredible that the latter would
not require Amelia Ramos to execute a Written Consent
to the adoption of her minor children. Neither did the
petitioner bother to present Amelia Ramos as witness in
support of the petition.
Petitioner, nonetheless, argues that the written consent A None, sir.
of the biological mother is no longer necessary because
when Amelia’s husband died in 1990, she left for Italy Q Do you know what place in Italy did she reside?
and never came back. The children were then left to the
guidance and care of their paternal grandmother. It is A I do not know, sir.
the paternal relatives, including petitioner, who provided
for the children’s financial needs. Hence, Amelia, the Q Did you receive any news about Amelia Ramos?
biological mother, had effectively abandoned the children.
Petitioner further contends that it was by twist of fate A What I know, sir, was that she was already married
that after 12 years, when the petition for adoption was with another man.
pending with the RTC that Amelia and her child by her
second marriage were on vacation in the Philippines. Q From whom did you learn that?
Pagbilao, the DSWD social worker, was able to meet her,
and during the meeting, Amelia intimated to the social
A From others who came from Italy, sir.
worker that she conformed to the adoption of her three
children by the petitioner.
Q Did you come to know whether she has children by her
second marriage?
Petitioner’s contention must be rejected. When she filed
her petition with the trial court, Rep. Act No. 8552 was
A Yes, sir, she got two kids.37
already in effect. Section 9 thereof provides that if the
written consent of the biological parents cannot be
Elaine, the eldest of the minors, testified, thus:
obtained, the written consent of the legal guardian of the
minors will suffice. If, as claimed by petitioner, that the
biological mother of the minors had indeed abandoned Q Where is your mother now?
them, she should, thus have adduced the written consent
of their legal guardian. A In Italy, sir.

Ordinarily, abandonment by a parent to justify the Q When did your mother left for Italy?
adoption of his child without his consent, is a conduct
which evinces a settled purpose to forego all parental A After my father died, sir.
duties.33 The term means neglect and refusal to perform
the filial and legal obligations of love and support. If a Q How old were you when your mother left for Italy in
parent withholds presence, love, care, the opportunity to 1990?
display filial affection, and neglects to lend support and
maintenance, the parent, in effect, abandons the child. 34 A Two years old, sir.

Merely permitting the child to remain for a time
undisturbed in the care of others is not such an
abandonment.35 To dispense with the requirement of
consent, the abandonment must be shown to have
existed at the time of adoption.36
In this case, petitioner relied solely on her testimony and
that of Elaine Ramos to prove her claim that Amelia
Ramos had abandoned her children. Petitioner’s
testimony on that matter follows:
Q Where is the mother of these three children now?
A She left for Italy on November 20, 1990, sir.
Q At the time when Amelia Ramos left for Italy, was there
an instance where she communicated with the family?
A None, sir.
Q How about with her children?
Q At the time when your mother left for Italy, did your
mother communicate with you?
A No, sir.38
However, the Home Study Report of the DSWD Social
Worker also stated the following:
IV. Background of the Case:
xxxx
Since the mother left for Italy, minors siblings had been
under the care and custody of their maternal
grandmother. However, she died in Nov. 2001 and an
uncle, cousin of their deceased father now serves as their
guardian. The petitioner, together with her children and
other relatives abroad have been supporting the minor
children financially, even during the time that they were
still living with their natural parents. Their mother also
sends financial support but very minimal.39
 xxxx
V. Background Information about the Minors Being
Sought for Adoption:
xxxx
As the eldest she tries her best to be a role model to her
younger siblings. She helps them in their lessons, works
and has fun with them. She also encourages openness
on their problems and concerns and provides petty
counseling. In serious problems she already consult (sic)
her mother and petitioner-aunt.40
xxxx
In their 5 years of married life, they begot 3 children,
herein minors, Amelia recalled that they had a happy and
comfortable life. After the death of her husband, her
in-laws which include the petitioner had continued
providing support for them. However being ashamed of
just depending on the support of her husband’s relatives,
she decided to work abroad. Her parents are also in need
of financial help as they are undergoing maintenance
medication. Her parents mortgaged their farm land
which she used in going to Italy and worked as domestic
helper.
When she left for Italy in November 1990, she entrusted
her 3 children to the care & custody of her mother-in-law
who returned home for good, however she died on
November 2000.
While working in Italy, she met Jun Tayag, a married
man from Tarlac. They became live-in partners since
1995 and have a son John Mario who is now 2 years old.
The three of them are considered Italian residents.
Amelia claimed that Mr. Tayag is planning to file an
annulment of his marriage and his wife is amenable to it.
He is providing his legitimate family regular support.
Amelia also sends financial support ranging from
P10,000-P15,000 a month through her parents who
share minimal amount of P3,000-P5,000 a month to his
(sic) children. The petitioner and other paternal relatives
are continuously providing support for most of the needs
& education of minors up to present.41
Thus, when Amelia left for Italy, she had not intended to
abandon her children, or to permanently sever their
mother-child relationship. She was merely impelled to
leave the country by financial constraints. Yet, even while
abroad, she did not surrender or relinquish entirely her
motherly obligations of rearing the children to her now
deceased mother-in-law, for, as claimed by Elaine herself,
she consulted her mother, Amelia, for serious personal
problems. Likewise, Amelia continues to send financial
support to the children, though in minimal amounts as
compared to what her affluent in-laws provide.
Let it be emphasized, nevertheless, that the adoption of
the minors herein will have the effect of severing all legal
ties between the biological mother, Amelia, and the
adoptees, and that the same shall then be vested on the
adopter.42 It would thus be against the spirit of the law if
financial consideration were to be the paramount
consideration in deciding whether to deprive a person of
parental authority over his/her children. More proof has
to be adduced that Amelia has emotionally abandoned
the children, and that the latter will not miss her
guidance and counsel if they are given to an adopting
parent.43 Again, it is the best interest of the child that
takes precedence in adoption.
Section 34, Rule 132 of the Rules of Court provides that
the Court shall consider no evidence which has not been
formally offered. The purpose for which the evidence is
offered must be specified. The offer of evidence is
necessary because it is the duty of the Court to rest its
findings of fact and its judgment only and strictly upon
the evidence offered by the parties. Unless and until
admitted by the court in evidence for the purpose or
purposes for which such document is offered, the same is
merely a scrap of paper barren of probative weight. Mere
identification of documents and the markings thereof as
exhibits do not confer any evidentiary weight on
documents unless formally offered.44
Petitioner failed to offer in evidence Pagbilao’s Report
and of the Joint Affidavit of Consent purportedly
executed by her children; the authenticity of which she,
likewise, failed to prove. The joint written consent of
petitioner’s children45 was notarized on January 16, 2002
in Guam, USA; for it to be treated by the Rules of Court in
the same way as a document notarized in this country it
needs to comply with Section 2 of Act No. 2103, 46 which
states:
Section 2. An instrument or document acknowledged and
authenticated in a foreign country shall be considered
authentic if the acknowledgment and authentication are
made in accordance with the following requirements:
(a) The acknowledgment shall be made before (1) an
ambassador, minister, secretary of legation, chargé d
affaires, consul, vice-consul, or consular agent of the
Republic of the Philippines, acting within the country or
place to which he is accredited, or (2) a notary public or
officer duly authorized by law of the country to take
acknowledgments of instruments or documents in the
place where the act is done.
(b) The person taking the acknowledgment shall certify
that the person acknowledging the instrument or
document is known to him, and that he is the same
person who executed it, and acknowledged that the
same is his free act and deed. The certificate shall be
under his official seal, if he is by law required to keep a
seal, and if not, his certificate shall so state. In case the
acknowledgment is made before a notary public or an
officer mentioned in subdivision (2) of the preceding
paragraph, the certificate of the notary public or the
officer taking the acknowledgment shall be authenticated
by an ambassador, minister, secretary of legation,
chargé de affaires, consul, vice-consul, or consular agent
of the Republic of the Philippines, acting within the
country or place to which he is accredited. The officer
making the authentication shall certify under his official
seal that the person who took the acknowledgment was
at the time duly authorized to act as notary public or that
he was duly exercising the functions of the office by
virtue of which he assumed to act, and that as such he
had authority under the law to take acknowledgment of
instruments or documents in the place where the
acknowledgment was taken, and that his signature and
seal, if any, are genuine.
As the alleged written consent of petitioner’s legitimate
children did not comply with the afore-cited law, the
same can at best be treated by the Rules as a private
document whose authenticity must be proved either by
anyone who saw the document executed or written; or
by evidence of the genuineness of the signature or
handwriting of the makers.47
Since, in the instant case, no further proof was
introduced by petitioner to authenticate the written
consent of her legitimate children, the same is
inadmissible in evidence.
In reversing the ruling of the RTC, the CA ruled that
petitioner was not stable enough to support the children
and is only relying on the financial backing, support and
commitment of her children and her siblings.48 Petitioner
contradicts this by claiming that she is financially capable
as she has worked in Guam for 14 years, has savings, a
house, and currently earns $5.15 an hour with tips of not
less than $1,000.00 a month. Her children and siblings
have likewise committed themselves to provide financial
backing should the need arise. The OSG, again in its
comment, banks on the statement in the Home Study
Report that "petitioner has limited income." Accordingly,
it appears that she will rely on the financial backing of her
children and siblings in order to support the minor
adoptees. The law, however, states that it is the adopter
who should be in a position to provide support in keeping
with the means of the family.
Since the primary consideration in adoption is the best
interest of the child, it follows that the financial capacity
of prospective parents should also
be carefully evaluated and considered. Certainly, the
adopter should be in a position to support the would-be
adopted child or children, in keeping with the means of
the family.
According to the Adoption Home Study
Report49 forwarded by the Department of Public Health &
Social Services of the Government of Guam to the DSWD,
petitioner is no longer supporting her legitimate children,
as the latter are already adults, have individual lives and
families. At the time of the filing of the petition, petitioner
was 57 years old, employed on a part-time basis as a
waitress, earning $5.15 an hour and tips of around
$1,000 a month. Petitioner’s main intention in adopting
the children is to bring the latter to Guam, USA. She has
a house at Quitugua Subdivision in Yigo, Guam, but the
same is still being amortized. Petitioner likewise knows
that the limited income might be a hindrance to the
adoption proceedings.
Given these limited facts, it is indeed doubtful whether
petitioner will be able to sufficiently handle the financial
aspect of rearing the three children in the US. She only
has a part-time job, and she is rather of age. While
petitioner claims that she has the financial support and
backing of her children and siblings, the OSG is correct in
stating that the ability to support the adoptees is
personal to the adopter, as adoption only creates a legal
relation between the former and the latter. Moreover, the
records do not prove nor support petitioner’s allegation
that her siblings and her children are financially able and
that they are willing to support the minors herein. The
Court, therefore, again sustains the ruling of the CA on
this issue.
While the Court recognizes that petitioner has only the
best of intentions for her nieces and nephew, there are
legal infirmities that militate against reversing the ruling
of the CA. In any case, petitioner is not prevented from
filing a new petition for adoption of the herein minors.
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the petition is hereby
DENIED.
SO ORDERED.

G.R. No. 148311. March 31, 2005
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADOPTION
STEPHANIE NATHY ASTORGA GARCIA
HONORATO B. CATINDIG, petitioner.
DECISION
SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, J.:
May an illegitimate child, upon adoption by her natural
father, use the surname
mother as her middle name? This is the issue raised
in the instant case.
The facts are undisputed.
On August 31, 2000, Honorato B. Catindig, herein
petitioner, filed a petition1 to adopt his minor illegitimate
child Stephanie Nathy Astorga Garcia. He alleged
therein, among others, that Stephanie was born on June
26, 1994;2that her mother is Gemma Astorga Garcia;
that Stephanie has been using her mother’s middle name
and surname; and that he is now a widower and qualified
to be her adopting parent. He prayed that Stephanie’s
middle name Astorga be changed to "Garcia," her
mother’s surname, and that her surname "Garcia" be
changed to "Catindig," his surname.
On March 23, 2001,3 the trial court rendered the assailed
Decision granting the adoption, thus:
"After a careful consideration of the evidence presented
by the petitioner, and in the absence of any opposition to
the petition, this Court finds that the petitioner possesses
all the qualifications and none of the disqualification
provided for by law as an adoptive parent, and that as
such he is qualified to maintain, care for and educate the
child to be adopted; that the grant of this petition would
redound to the best interest and welfare of the minor
Stephanie Nathy Astorga Garcia. The Court further holds
that the petitioner’s care and custody of the child since
her birth up to the present constitute more than enough
compliance with the requirement of Article 35 of
Presidential Decree No. 603.
WHEREFORE, finding the petition to be meritorious, the
same is GRANTED. Henceforth, Stephanie Nathy
Astorga Garcia is hereby freed from all obligations of
obedience and maintenance with respect to her natural
mother, and for civil purposes, shall henceforth be the
petitioner’s legitimate child and legal heir. Pursuant to
Article 189 of the Family Code of the Philippines, the
minor shall be known as STEPHANIE NATHY CATINDIG.
Upon finality of this Decision, let the same be entered in
the Local Civil Registrar concerned pursuant to Rule 99 of
the Rules of Court.
Let copy of this Decision be furnished the National
OF Statistics Office for record purposes.
SO ORDERED."4
On April 20, 2001, petitioner filed a motion for
clarification and/or reconsideration5 praying that
Stephanie should be allowed to use the surname of her
natural mother (GARCIA) as her middle name.
On May 28, 2001,6 the trial court denied petitioner’s
of her natural motion for reconsideration holding that there is no law or
jurisprudence allowing an adopted child to use the
surname of his biological mother as his middle name.
Hence, the present petition raising the issue of whether
an illegitimate child may use the surname of her mother
as her middle name when she is subsequently adopted
by her natural father.
Petitioner submits that the trial court erred in depriving
Stephanie of a middle name as a consequence of
adoption because: (1) there is no law prohibiting an
adopted child from having a middle name in case there is
only one adopting parent; (2) it is customary for every
Filipino to have as middle name the surname of the
mother; (3) the middle name or initial is a part of the
name of a person; (4) adoption is for the benefit and best
interest of the adopted child, hence, her right to bear a
proper name should not be violated; (5) permitting
Stephanie to use the middle name "Garcia" (her mother’s
surname) avoids the stigma of her illegitimacy; and; (6)
her continued use of "Garcia" as her middle name is not
opposed by either the Catindig or Garcia families.
The Republic, through the Office of the Solicitor General
(OSG), agrees with petitioner that Stephanie should be
permitted to use, as her middle name, the surname of
her natural mother for the following reasons:
First, it is necessary to preserve and maintain Stephanie’s
filiation with her natural mother because under Article
189 of the Family Code, she remains to be an intestate
heir of the latter. Thus, to prevent any confusion and
needless hardship in the future, her relationship or proof
of that relationship with her natural mother should be
maintained.
Second, there is no law expressly prohibiting Stephanie
to use the surname of her natural mother as her middle
name. What the law does not prohibit, it allows.
Last, it is customary for every Filipino to have a middle
name, which is ordinarily the surname of the mother.
This custom has been recognized by the Civil Code and
Family Code. In fact, the Family Law Committees agreed
that "the initial or surname of the mother should
immediately precede the surname of the father so that
the second name, if any, will be before the surname of
the mother."7
We find merit in the petition.
Use Of Surname Is Fixed By Law –
For all practical and legal purposes, a man's name is the
designation by which he is known and called in the
community in which he lives and is best known. It is
defined as the word or combination of words by which a
person is distinguished from other individuals and, also,
as the label or appellation which he bears for the
convenience of the world at large addressing him, or in
speaking of or dealing with him.8 It is both of personal as
well as public interest that every person must have a
name.
The name of an individual has two parts: (1) the given
or proper name and (2) the surname or family
name. The given or proper name is that which is given
to the individual at birth or at baptism, to distinguish him
from other individuals. The surname or family name is
that which identifies the family to which he belongs and
is continued from parent to child. The given name may
be freely selected by the parents for the child, but the
surname to which the child is entitled is fixed by law.9
Thus, Articles 364 to 380 of the Civil Code provides the
substantive rules which regulate the use of surname 10 of
an individual whatever may be his status in life, i.e.,
whether he may be legitimate or illegitimate, an adopted
child, a married woman or a previously married woman,
or a widow, thus:
"Art. 364. Legitimate and legitimated children shall
principally use the surname of the father.
Art. 365. An adopted child shall bear the surname of the
adopter.
xxx
Art. 369. Children conceived before the decree annulling
a voidable marriage shall principally use the surname of
the father.
Art. 370. A married woman may use:
(1) Her maiden first name and surname and add her
husband's surname, or
(2) Her maiden first name and her husband's surname or
(3) Her husband's full name, but prefixing a word
indicating that she is his wife, such as ‘Mrs.’
Art. 371. In case of annulment of marriage, and the wife
is the guilty party, she shall resume her maiden name
and surname. If she is the innocent spouse, she may
resume her maiden name and surname. However, she
may choose to continue employing her former husband's
surname, unless:
(1) The court decrees otherwise, or
(2) She or the former husband is married again to
another person.
Art. 372. When legal separation has been granted, the
wife shall continue using her name
and surname employed before the legal separation.
Art. 373. A widow may use the deceased
husband's surname as though he were still living, in
accordance with Article 370.
Art. 374. In case of identity of names and surnames,
the younger person shall be obliged to use such
additional name or surname as will avoid confusion.
Art. 375. In case of identity of names and surnames
between ascendants and descendants, the word ‘Junior’
can be used only by a son. Grandsons and other direct
male descendants shall either:
(1) Add a middle name or the mother's surname,
(2) Add the Roman numerals II, III, and so on.
x x x"
Law Is Silent As To The Use Of
Middle Name –
As correctly submitted by both parties, there is no law
regulating the use of a middle name. Even Article
17611 of the Family Code, as amended by Republic Act
No. 9255, otherwise known as "An Act Allowing
Illegitimate Children To Use The Surname Of Their
Father," is silent as to what middle name a child may use.
The middle name or the mother’s surname is only
considered in Article 375(1), quoted above, in case there
is identity of names and surnames between ascendants
and descendants, in which case, the middle name or the
mother’s surname shall be added.
Notably, the law is likewise silent as to what
middle name an adoptee may use. Article 365 of the
Civil Code merely provides that "an adopted child shall
bear the surname of the adopter." Also, Article 189 of the
Family Code, enumerating the legal effects of adoption,
is likewise silent on the matter, thus:
"(1) For civil purposes, the adopted shall
be deemed to be a legitimate child of the
adopters and both shall acquire the reciprocal rights
and obligations arising from the relationship of parent
and child, including the right of the adopted to use
the surname of the adopters;
x x x"
However, as correctly pointed out by the OSG, the
members of the Civil Code and Family Law Committees
that drafted the Family Code recognized the Filipino
custom of adding the surname of the child’s
mother as his middle name. In the Minutes of the
Joint Meeting of the Civil Code and Family Law
Committees, the members approved the suggestion
that the initial or surname of the mother should
immediately precede the surname of the father,
thus
"Justice Caguioa commented that there is a difference
between the use by the wife of the surname and that of
the child because the father’s surname indicates the
family to which he belongs, for which reason he
would insist on the use of the father’s surname by
the child but that, if he wants to, the child may
also use the surname of the mother.
Justice Puno posed the question: If the child chooses to
use the surname of the mother, how will his name be
written? Justice Caguioa replied that it is up to him but
that his point is that it should be mandatory that the
child uses the surname of the father and
permissive in the case of the surname of the
mother.
Prof. Baviera remarked that Justice Caguioa’s point is
covered by the present Article 364, which reads:
Legitimate and legitimated children shall principally use
the surname of the father.
Justice Puno pointed out that many names change
through no choice of the person himself precisely
because of this misunderstanding. He then cited the
following example: Alfonso Ponce Enrile’s correct
surname is Ponce since the mother’s surname is Enrile
but everybody calls him Atty. Enrile. Justice Jose
Gutierrez David’s family name is Gutierrez and his
mother’s surname is David but they all call him Justice
David.
Justice Caguioa suggested that the proposed
Article (12) be modified to the effect that it shall
be mandatory on the child to use the surname of
the father but he may use the surname of the
mother by way of an initial or a middle name. Prof.
Balane stated that they take note of this for inclusion in
the Chapter on Use of Surnames since in the proposed
Article (10) they are just enumerating the rights of
legitimate children so that the details can be covered in
the appropriate chapter.
xxx
Justice Puno remarked that there is logic in the
simplification suggested by Justice Caguioa that the
surname of the father should always be last because
there are so many traditions like the American tradition
where they like to use their second given name and the
Latin tradition, which is also followed by the Chinese
wherein they even include the Clan name.
 xxx
Justice Puno suggested that they agree in
principle that in the Chapter on the Use of
Surnames, they should say that initial or surname
of the mother should immediately precede the
surname of the father so that the second name, if
any, will be before the surname of the mother.
Prof. Balane added that this is really the Filipino
way. The Committee approved the
suggestion."12 (Emphasis supplied)
In the case of an adopted child, the law provides that
"the adopted shall bear the surname of the
adopters."13 Again, it is silent whether he can use a
middle name. What it only expressly allows, as a matter
of right and obligation, is for the adoptee to bear the
surname of the adopter, upon issuance of the decree of
adoption.14
The Underlying Intent of
Adoption Is In Favor of the
Adopted Child –
Adoption is defined as the process of making a child,
whether related or not to the adopter, possess in general,
the rights accorded to a legitimate child. 15 It is a juridical
act, a proceeding in rem which creates between two
persons a relationship similar to that which results from
legitimate paternity and filiation.16 The modern trend is
to consider adoption not merely as an act to establish a
relationship of paternity and filiation, but also as an act
which endows the child with a legitimate status .17 This
was, indeed, confirmed in 1989, when
the Philippines, as a State Party to the Convention
of the Rights of the Child initiated by the United
Nations, accepted the principle that adoption is
impressed with social and moral responsibility,
and that its underlying intent is geared to favor
the adopted child.18 Republic Act No. 8552, otherwise
known as the "Domestic Adoption Act of 1998,"19 secures
these rights and privileges for the adopted.20
One of the effects of adoption is that the adopted is
deemed to be a legitimate child of the adopter for all
intents and purposes pursuant to Article 189 21 of the
Family Code and Section 1722 Article V of RA 8552.23
Being a legitimate child by virtue of her adoption,
it follows that Stephanie is entitled to all the
rights provided by law to a legitimate child
without discrimination of any kind, including the
right to bear the surname of her father and her
mother, as discussed above. This is consistent with
the intention of the members of the Civil Code and Family
Law Committees as earlier discussed. In fact, it is a
Filipino custom that the initial or surname of the mother
should immediately precede the surname of the father.
Additionally, as aptly stated by both parties, Stephanie’s
continued use of her mother’s surname (Garcia) as her
middle name will maintain her maternal lineage. It is to
be noted that Article 189(3) of the Family Code and
Section 1824, Article V of RA 8552 (law on adoption)
provide that the adoptee remains an intestate heir of
his/her biological parent. Hence, Stephanie can well
assert or claim her hereditary rights from her natural
mother in the future.
Moreover, records show that Stephanie and her mother
are living together in the house built by petitioner for
them at 390 Tumana, San Jose, Baliuag, Bulacan.
Petitioner provides for all their needs. Stephanie is
closely attached to both her mother and father. She calls
them "Mama" and "Papa". Indeed, they are one normal
happy family. Hence, to allow Stephanie to use her
mother’s surname as her middle name will not only
sustain her continued loving relationship with her mother
but will also eliminate the stigma of her illegitimacy.
Liberal Construction of
Adoption Statutes In Favor Of
Adoption –
It is a settled rule that adoption statutes, being humane
and salutary, should be liberally construed to carry out
the beneficent purposes of adoption.25 The interests and
welfare of the adopted child are of primary and
paramount consideration,26 hence, every reasonable
intendment should be sustained to promote and fulfill
these noble and compassionate objectives of the law.27
Lastly, Art. 10 of the New Civil Code provides that:
"In case of doubt in the interpretation or application of
laws, it is presumed that the lawmaking body intended
right and justice to prevail."
This provision, according to the Code Commission, "is
necessary so that it may tip the scales in favor of right
and justice when the law is doubtful or obscure. It will
strengthen the determination of the courts to avoid an
injustice which may apparently be authorized by some
way of interpreting the law."28
Hence, since there is no law prohibiting an illegitimate
child adopted by her natural father, like Stephanie, to
use, as middle name her mother’s surname, we find no
reason why she should not be allowed to do so.
WHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED. The assailed
Decision is partly MODIFIED in the sense that Stephanie
should be allowed to use her mother’s surname
"GARCIA" as her middle name.

Let the corresponding entry of her correct and complete

name be entered in the decree of adoption.

SO ORDERED.

Panganiban, (Chairman), Corona, Carpio-Morales, and

Garcia, JJ., concur.