24 January 2019

Rommel Jacinto Silverio

Mandaue City
Cebu

Dear Rommel:

This legal opinion seeks to answer your query as to whether or not you can change you’re
first name from Rommel to Mely and your gender from male to female under Philippine law
after you underwent sex realignment.

The Facts

Per your narration, the following are the relevant facts:

On April 4, 1977, you were born in the city of Manila and your were then registered as
Rommel Jacinto Selverio, a male.

On January 27, 2010 you underwent sex reassignment surgery in Bangkok. You were also
examined by Dr. Marcelino Cruz Jr., who supplied you a medical certificate attesting that you
had in fact undergone the procedure.

The Applicable Law

The applicable law is Article 376 of the Civil Code in relation to RA 9048 as amended
by RA 10172 which provides:

ART. 376. No person can change his name or surname without judicial
authority.

RA 10172 – SECTION 1.

Authority to Correct Clerical or Typographical Error and Change of First Name or

Nickname. – No entry in a civil register shall be changed or corrected without a judicial
order, except for clerical or typographical errors and change of first name or nickname,
the day and month in the date of birth or sex of a person where it is patently clear that
 there was a clerical or typographical error or mistake in the entry, which can be
corrected or changed by the concerned city or municipal civil registrar or consul general
in accordance with the provisions of this Act and its implementing rules and
regulations.”:

Section 2, paragraph (3)

‘Clerical or typographical error’ refers to a mistake committed in the performance of

clerical work in writing, copying, transcribing or typing an entry in the civil register that
is harmless and innocuous, such as misspelled name or misspelled place of birth,
mistake in the entry of day and month in the date of birth or the sex of the person or
the like, which is visible to the eyes or obvious to the understanding, and can be
corrected or changed only by reference to other existing record or records: Provided,
however, That no correction must involve the change of nationality, age, or status of
the petitioner.”

Analysis and Opinion

Taking into consideration the facts and the applicable laws, the law allows only a change of
name and entries on sex of a person where it is patently clear that there was a clerical or
typographical error or mistake in the entry.

Thus, I am of this opinion that your case is without basis in law.

Sincerely,

Evin M. Villaruben
Legal Counsel

24 January 2019
Mr. Miguel Ruiz
Santa Rosa, Lapulapu City
Cebu

Dear Miguel:

This legal opinion seeks to answer your query as to whether or not you are an
employee or business partner of your uncle and on whether or not you are entitled to 13 th
month pay, service incentive leave pay and overtime pay.

The Facts

Per your narration, the following are the relevant facts:

On April 2014, you were hired as a boat captain by Mr. Bernardo Ruiz were you can
chose your own crew with the arrangement that 1/3 of the income will be your share as
compensation with the crew members. 2/3 shall accrue to Bernardo the owner of the pump
boat.

Your usual operating hours is from 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM and sometimes until 7:00 PM
where your usual share in income P10,500.00 to be divided by you and the crew.

At times you had to pay the crew members from your own packet when the pump
boat cannot sail due to engine trouble.

On June 2017 you were no longer allowed to transport passenger and the boat were
taken by your uncle Bernardo.

The Applicable Law and Jurisprudence

Article 219 of the Labor Code that provides:

ART. 219 – Definitions

xxxx
 e. “Employer” includes any person acting in the interest of an employer,
directly or indirectly. xxxxx

f. “Employee” includes any person in the employ of an employer. xxxx

In Agapita Pajarillo vs Social Security System the Supreme Court has ruled by
emphasizing the control test that there is no employee-employer relationship when
neither the pilots nor the crew-members receive compensation from the boat-owners.
They only share in their own catch produced by their own efforts. There is no showing
that outside of their one-third share, the boat-owners have anything to do with the
distribution of the rest of the catch among the pilots and the crew-members. The
latter perform no service for the boat-owners, but mainly for their own benefit

Analysis and Opinion

Taking into consideration the facts and the applicable laws and jurisprudence, Article
219 of the Labor code does not apply to you because you were not working for the interest
of your uncle but for your own interest. Likewise, using the control test as ruled by the
Supreme Court, there is no showing that your uncle is controlling your nor your crew in the
conduct of your operation and in dividing your share of the income.

Thus, I am of this opinion that your case is without basis in law.

Sincerely,

Evin M. Villaruben
Legal Counsel

24 January 2019

Ms. Jasmine
Dear Jasmine:

This legal opinion seeks to answer your query as to whether or not error on the entry
of date of birth in your boyfriend’s birth certificate can be done by the civil registrar thru his
mother.

The Facts

Per your narration, the following are the relevant facts:

There was an error on your boyfriend’s birth certificate where his date of birth
indicated as May 15, 1978 which is more or less three months before his younger brother was
born on August 2, 1978. His actual date of birth was on May 15, 1977.

The Applicable Law

The applicable law is RA 9048 as amended by RA 10172 which provides:

RA 10172 – SECTION 1. Authority to Correct Clerical or Typographical Error and Change

of First Name or Nickname. – No entry in a civil register shall be changed or corrected
without a judicial order, except for clerical or typographical errors and change of first
name or nickname, the day and month in the date of birth or sex of a person where it
is patently clear that there was a clerical or typographical error or mistake in the entry,
which can be corrected or changed by the concerned city or municipal civil registrar or
consul general in accordance with the provisions of this Act and its implementing rules
and regulations.”:

SECTION 3. Who May File the Petition and Where. - Any person having direct and
personal interest in the correction of a clerical or typographical error in an entry
and/or change of first name or nickname in the civil register may file, in person, a
verified petition with the local civil registry office of the city or municipality where the
record being sought to be corrected or changed is kept.

Analysis and Opinion

 Thus, taking into consideration the facts and the applicable laws, I am of this opinion
that RA 9048 as amended by RA 10172 is applicable in your boyfriend’s case since it is very
clear that there was a clerical error or mistake in the entries date of birth in his birth certificate
but he must make the petition in his person before the civil registrar as the law provides.

Sincerely,

Evin M. Villaruben
Legal Counsel

24 January 2019

Joel Santiago
Talisay City
Cebu

Dear Joel:
 This legal opinion seeks to answer your query as to who will be liable for your injuries.

The Facts

Per your narration, the following are the relevant facts:

You were hit by a bus driven by Jimmy who admits that he was sleepy when the
accident happens. Laura is the bus operator but the real owner of the bus Alex. They operate
in the concept of kabit system.

The Applicable Law

The following provisions of the civil code and jurisprudence are applicable:

Civil Code Art. 2176. Whoever by act or omission causes damage to another, there
being fault or negligence, is obliged to pay for the damage done. Such fault or
negligence, if there is no pre-existing contractual relation between the parties, is called
a quasi-delict and is governed by the provisions of this Chapter. (1902a)

Civil Code Art. 2180. The obligation imposed by Article 2176 is demandable not only for
one's own acts or omissions, but also for those of persons for whom one is responsible.

xxxx

Employers shall be liable for the damages caused by their employees and household
helpers acting within the scope of their assigned tasks, even though the former are not
engaged in any business or industry.

In Lim vs CA the Supreme Court has held that the thrust of the law in enjoining the
kabit system is not so much as to penalize the parties but to identify the person upon
whom responsibility may be fixed in case of an accident with the end view of
protecting the riding public.

Analysis and Opinion

 Thus, taking into consideration the facts and applicable laws and jurisprudence, I am
of this opinion that the Joel the driver, Laura the operator and Alex the owner of the bus can
be both sued and is jointly and severally liable.

Sincerely,

Evin M. Villaruben
Legal Counsel