Digest Author: Dodot

Cabanas v. Pilapil (1974) Petition: Appeal [Decision of Cebu CFI] Petitioners-Appellee: Melchora Cabanas Defendant-Appellant: Francisco Pilapil Ponente: J. Fernando Date: 25 July 1974 Facts:
considered as emancipated for all purposes relative to said property, and he shall have over it dominion, usufruct and administration. (160)

FAMILY CODE [Insofar as decision, still consistent with old law]

Art. 225. The father and the mother shall jointly exercise legal guardianship over the property of the unemancipated common child without the necessity of a court appointment. In case of disagreement, the father's decision shall prevail, unless there is a judicial order to the contrary. Where the market value of the property or the annual income of the child exceeds P50,000, the parent concerned shall be required to furnish a bond in such amount as the court may determine, but not less than ten per centum (10%) of the value of the property or annual income, to guarantee the performance of the obligations prescribed for general guardians. xxx xxx xxx Art. 226. The property of the unemancipated child earned or acquired with his work or industry or by onerous or gratuitous title shall belong to the child in ownership and shall be devoted exclusively to the latter's support and education, unless the title or transfer provides otherwise. The right of the parents over the fruits and income of the child's property shall be limited primarily to the child's support and secondarily to the collective daily needs of the family. (321a, 323a)

Florentino Pilapil had a child, Millian Pilapil, w/ a married woman [the plaintiff, Melchora] o Florentino insured himself: identified Millian as the beneficiary specified that his brther, Francisco Pilapil, act as trustee during Millians minority Florentino died: proceeds of insurance paid to Francisco o Melchora filed complaint CFI Decision o Ordered Francisco to deliver proceeds of policy to Melchora, citing Arts. 320 & 321, CC. Melchora had filed the bond required by Art. 320 [for properties worth more than 2K] o Stated that property acquired by unemancipated child [through his own industry, or through any lucrative title] (1) belongs to the child in ownership, and (2) in usufruct to the father or mother whom he is under parental authority and whose company he lives. Insurance policy proceeds belongs to Millian Millian is a minor under the parental authority of her mother [and lives with the same] THUS: insurance proceed Millian in ownership, and in usufruct to her mother [Philippine law: usufruct entitled to possession Melchora entitled to possession of insurance policy proceeds THUS: trust [to deceased brother] is NULL and VOID for being in conflict w/ the law To protect Millian, court ordered increase in bond to be filed by Melchora, to P5K Francisco appealed to SC

Issues: 1.

Was the CFI correct in deciding that Millian had property rights to the proceeds from the insurance policy, while her mother had usufruct rights to the same? [YES]

Ruling/Ratio: 1. YES. Reaffirmed CFI Holding and Ratio [See facts.] Paramount consideration: welfare of the child Recognition in law of deep ties of parents-children Logical, natural assumption: Infidelity to the trust much less in the case of a mother than in the case of an uncle Added assurance of childs welfare: bond filed by her mother State acting as parens patriae: Judiciary, as an agent of the state, cannot remain insensible to preferring the parent, in considering the best interest of a minor Constitution: the state shall strengthen the family as a basic social institution Thus, even assuming a stronger case could be made for the uncle, deference to the constitutional mandate would still have led the CFI to decide as it did.

Pertinent laws/provisions/concepts: CIVIL CODE [Old Law]

Article 320. The father, or in his absence the mother, is the legal administrator of the property pertaining to the child under parental authority. If the property is worth more than two thousand pesos, the father or mother shall give a bond subject to the approval of the Court of First Instance. (159a) Article 321. The property which the unemancipated child has acquired or may acquire with his work or industry, or by any lucrative title, belongs to the child in ownership, and in usufruct to the father or mother under whom he is under parental authority and in whose company he lives; but if the child, with the parent's consent, should live independently from them, he shall be

Opinions: No separate opinions Disposition: Decision appealed from AFFIRMED. Principles: Parents and Children Other Rights and Duties in the Exercise of Parental Authority