EN BANC

BAR MATTER NO. 1625

RE: PETITION TO USE MAIDEN NAME IN PETITION TO TAKE THE 2006 BAR EXAMINATIONS, JOSEPHINE P. UY-
TIMOSA, PETITIONER

Sirs/Mesdames:
Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated JULY 18 2006.
BAR MATTER NO. 1625 - Petition to Use Maiden Name in Petition to Take the 2006 Bar Examinations,
JOSEPHINE P. UY-TIMOSA, petitioner.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
________________
Marriage does not change a woman's name,it merely changes her civil status. Her true and real name is that
given to her and entered in the Civil Registry which she may continue to use despite her marriage or cessation of
marriage for whatever reason she may have.
For our Resolution is the letter dated June 14, 2006 of Josephine P. Uy-Timosa, petitioner herein, praying that
she be allowed to use her maiden name, Josephine P. Uy, in her Petition to Take the 2006 Bar Examinations.
Petitioner alleged that, despite her marriage, she has continuously used her maiden name in all her
transactions, except in her school records and those in the Commission on Higher Education and other
offices. However, all her records in the University of Santo Tomas reflect her maiden name.
Petitioner further alleged that she and her husband have beenseparated since May 2000 and that a Petition
for Declaration of Nullity of Marriageis now pending before the Regional Trial Court, Branch 5, Manila. The case is
set to be submitted for decision on August 1, 2006.
Thus, petitioner requests that she be allowed to use her maiden name considering the impossibility of
facilitating on time the amendment of her surname appearing in all the records concerned.
We grant petitioner's request.GRANTED
Article 370 of the Civil Code reads:

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."
This provision clearly indicates that the wife's use of her husband's surname is optional, not
obligatory. Following; is the explanation given by the prominent civilist, Arturo M. Tolentino:
Under the present article of our Code, however, the word "may" is used, indicating that the use of
the husband's surname by the wife is permissive rather than obligatory. We have no law which
provides that the wife shall change her name to that of the husband upon marriage. This in is
consonance with the principle that surnames indicate descent. It seems, therefore, that a married
woman may use only her maiden name and surname. She has an option, but not a duty, to use the
surname of the husband in any of the ways provided by this Article."
The Court adopted this view in Yasin v. Judge, Shari'a District Court, thus:
"Even under the Civil Code, the use of the husband's surname during the marriage (Art. 370, Civil
Code), after the annulment of marriage (Art. 371, Civil Code) and after the death of the husband (Art.
373, Civil Code)is permissive and not obligatoryx xx.
When a woman marries a man, she need not apply and/or seek judicial authority to use her
husband's name by prefixing the word "Mrs." before her husband's full name or by adding her
husband's surname to her maiden first name. The law grants her such right (Art. 370, Civil
Code). Similarly, when the marriage ties or vinculum no longer exists as in the case of death of the
husband or divorce as authorized by the Muslim Code, the widow or divorcee need not seek judicial
confirmation of the change in her civil status in order to revert to her maiden name as the use of her
former husband's name is optional and not obligatory for her. When petitioner married her husband,
she did not change her name but only her civil status. Neither was she required to secure judicial
authority to use the surname of her husband after the marriage as no law requires it."
Clearly, petitioner has the right to use her maiden name Jospehine P. Uy in her Petition to Take the 2006 Bar
Examinations.
Section 14, Article II of the 1987 Constitution states that: "The State recognizes the role of women in nation
building, and shall ensure the fundamental equality before the law of women and men". This is our nation's
response to the increasing clamor of women worldwide for gender equality. Justice Flerida Ruth P. Romero, in her
Concurring Opinion in Yasin, expounded that if this constitutional provision means anything at all, "it signifies that
women, no less than men, shall enjoy the same rights accorded by law and this includes the freedom of choice
in the use of names upon marriage."
ACCORDINGLY, we GRANT petitioner's request to use her maiden name Josephine P. Uy in her Petition to
Take the 2006 Bar Examinations.
Very truly yours,

(SGD.) MA. LUISA D. VILLARAMA

Clerk of Court
Herrera, Remedial Law, 1996 Ed. III-A, p. 338, citing Yasin v. Judge, Shari'a District Court, 241 SCRA 606 (1995).
Tolentino, Civil Code of the Philippines, Commentaries and Jurisprudence, 1990, Vol. I, p. 675.
Supra.