Scribd
Upload
33 views2 pages

Case Recit Spec Proc Himamaylan

The case is about a petition filed by Cristina Braza to correct entries in the civil registry related to her deceased husband Pablo. The entries acknowledged another son, Patrick, and showed Pablo was married to another woman, Lucille. However, the trial court and appellate court did not grant the petition. The Supreme Court ruled the trial court did not have jurisdiction under Rule 108 to nullify marriages or determine legitimacy, and the case should be filed in family court instead.

Uploaded by

Hazel Natanauan
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
33 views2 pages

Case Recit Spec Proc Himamaylan

The case is about a petition filed by Cristina Braza to correct entries in the civil registry related to her deceased husband Pablo. The entries acknowledged another son, Patrick, and showed Pablo was married to another woman, Lucille. However, the trial court and appellate court did not grant the petition. The Supreme Court ruled the trial court did not have jurisdiction under Rule 108 to nullify marriages or determine legitimacy, and the case should be filed in family court instead.

Uploaded by

Hazel Natanauan
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

What is the case about?

What are the important concepts in the case that we need to know

December 23, 2005 - RTC & CA NOT GRANTED- PETITION for review on certiorari of a decision of the
Court of Appeals.

The case of Ma. Cristina Torres Braza vs. THE CITY CIVIL REGISTRAR OF HIMAMAYLAN CITY, NEGROS
OCCIDENTAL

Is about the Petition for Correction of Entry under Rule 108 which was filed before the RTC of
Himamaylan City. The Petition was not granted by the RTC and the CA. So the Petitioner filed a
PETITION for review on certiorari before the Supreme Court

I here the, Petitioner Cristina Braza and DECEASED Pablo were married SINCE 1978. However, during the
wake of Pablo the second wife and the son appeared, Lucille and Patrick titular SHOWED UP and
introduced themselves as wife and son of the deceased. Siguro sa sama ng loob, Cristina investigated
and obtained a copy of Birth Cert of Patrick in THE CITY CIVIL REGISTRAR OF HIMAMAYLAN CITY,
NEGROS OCCIDENTAL.

The records in the civil registry showed that

(His deceased husband) Pablo acknowledged Patrick as his son in 1997

Patrick was legitimated by subsequent marriage of Pablo and Lucille (KINASAL w/ Subsisting marriage)

Pablo and Lucille’s marriage certificate

Cristina filed a petition for cancellation of entries in the Civil Registry and prayed for:

1. Correction of Patrick’s birth certificate, his legitimation, the name of the father, the
acknowledgement and the use of surname BRAZA (INLINE SA RULE 108)
2. Direction to Lucille to submit Patrick for DNA testing
3. Declaration of nullity of legitimation of Patrick and declaration of the marriage of Pablo and
Lucille as bigamous.

MEDYO NAGTIPID PO SYA DITO

KASI THERES A QUESTION OF FACT THAT NEEDS TO BE RESOLVED WHICH SUBSTANTIAL IN NATURE

Issue: Whether the trial court, in this case, may rule upon the validity of marriage between Pablo and
Lucille and answer questions regarding Patrick’s legitimacy under Rule 108?

The Supreme Court Ruled that

NO.

In a special proceeding for correction of entry under Rule 108 (Cancellation or Correction of Entries in
the Original Registry), the trial court has no jurisdiction to nullify marriages and rule on legitimacy and
filiation.
Because in this case the cause of action is actually to seek the declaration of Pablo and Lucille’s marriage
as void for being bigamous and impugn Patrick’s legitimacy, which causes of action are governed not by
Rule 108 but by A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC which took effect on March 15, 2003, and Art. 17118 of the Family
Code, respectively, hence, the petition should be filed in a Family Court as expressly provided in said
Code.

You might also like