FACTS:

Maria Virginia V. Remo, a married Filipino citizen, filed for the renewal of her passport with the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA). She requested to revert to her maiden name and surname, as her current passport was about to expire. However, the DFA denied her request, citing that the use of the maiden name is permitted in passport applications only when the married name has not been used before. The petitioner's motion for reconsideration was also denied. Subsequently, she appealed to the Office of the President, which dismissed her appeal. The Office of the President stated that under current rules, a married woman can only revert to her maiden name for passport purposes in cases of divorce, annulment, or declaration of nullity of marriage. The Court of Appeals upheld the ruling of the Office of the President, emphasizing that since there was no evidence of the petitioner's marriage being annulled or declared void, or a divorce decree being granted, she cannot revert to her maiden name in the replacement passport. The sole issue in this case was whether the petitioner, who used her husband's surname in her expired passport, can revert to her maiden name in the replacement passport despite being married. The Court held that the use of the husband's surname by the wife is not obligatory but permissive. Consequently, the petitioner was not allowed to revert to her maiden name in the replacement passport.

ISSUES:

1. Whether petitioner, who originally used her husband's surname in her expired passport, can revert to the use of her maiden name in the replacement passport despite the subsistence of her marriage.

RULING:

1. The Court ruled that petitioner cannot revert to the use of her maiden name in the replacement passport. The Court of Appeals found that for passport application and issuance purposes, RA 8239 limits the instances when a married woman applicant may exercise the option to revert to the use of her maiden name, such as in a case of a divorce decree, annulment or declaration of nullity of marriage. Since there was no showing that petitioner's marriage has been annulled, declared void, or a divorce decree has been granted, she cannot simply revert to her maiden name. The Court held that the use of the husband's surname by the wife is permissive rather than obligatory, but it can only be changed in the specific instances provided by RA 8239. Thus, the Court affirmed the ruling of the Office of President and denied the petition.

PRINCIPLES:

• The use of the husband's surname by the wife is permissive rather than obligatory. (Article 370, Civil Code)

• Reverting to the use of the maiden name by a married woman for passport purposes is limited to specific instances provided by the Philippine Passport Act of 1996. (Section 5(d), RA 8239)