6/30/2021 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly decree of adoption issued by a foreign court to be accepted for registration in the Philippines; and (4) that the modem trend is to encourage adoption and that every reasonable intendment should be sustained to promote such objective. On the other hand, the OSG in its Memorandum[29] reiterated that: (1) petitioner's adoption is subject to the Philippine laws; (2) the Philippine laws manifest a strong legislative intent to regulate adoption; (3) an adoption is valid only if made within the framework enunciated in RA 8043 and RA 8552; (4) petitioner's adoption was not performed under RA 8043; and (5) the adoption was not made pursuant to RA 8552. [30] The present petition relies upon the following ground: THE RTC ERRED IN RULING THAT UNDER PHILIPPINE-JURISDICTION A JUDICIAL RECOGNITION OF A FOREIGN DECREE OF ADOPTION IS NOT ALLOWED.[31] Our Ruling The petition is meritorious. The RTC erroneously ruled that a foreign judgment of adoption of a Filipino citizen cannot be judicially recognized based on the view that such recognition would render nugatory the Philippine laws on adoption. It bears to emphasize that there are two parties involved in an adoption process: the adopter and the adoptee. The RTC in this case failed to consider that Hayashi, the adopter, is a Japanese citizen. Article 15 of the Civil Code states that "[l]aws relating to family rights and duties, or to the status, condition and legal capacity of persons are binding upon citizens of the Philippines, even though living abroad." Owing to this nationality principle, the Philippine laws on adoption are thus binding on petitioner. However, with respect to the case of Hayashi, who is a Japanese citizen, it bears stressing that the Philippine courts are: precluded from deciding on his "family rights and duties, or on [his] status, condition and legal capacity" concerning the foreign judgment to which he is a party. [32] Thus, as to the foreign judgment of adoption obtained by Hayashi, if it is proven as a fact, the Philippine courts are limited to the determination of whether to extend its effect to petitioner, the Filipino party. By definition, adoption is "the process of making a child, whether related or not to the adopter, possess in general, the rights accorded to a legitimate child."[33] It is a juridical act, a proceeding in rem which creates a relationship that is similar to that which results from legitimate paternity and filiation.[34] The process of adoption therefore fixes a status, viz., that of parent and child.[35] More technically, it is an act by which relations of paternity and affiliation are recognized as legally existing between persons not so related by nature.[36] Adoption has also been defined as the taking into one's family of the child of another as son or daughter and heir and conferring on it a title to the rights and privileges of such. https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/66689 3/13