What have been Considered Proofs of Natural Filiation and Paternity in the Philippines

By: 114

I.

Introduction

In the Philippines, there are two (2) kinds of natural children according to the Family
Code the legitimate and illegitimate child1. Family Code provides for the three respectively:
Art. 164. Children conceived or born during the marriage of the parents are
legitimate.
Children conceived as a result of artificial insemination of the wife with the
sperm of the husband or that of a donor or both are likewise legitimate
children of the husband and his wife, provided, that both of them authorized
or ratified such insemination in a written instrument executed and signed by
them before the birth of the child. The instrument shall be recorded in the civil
registry together with the birth certificate of the child. (55a, 258a)

Art. 165. Children conceived and born outside a valid marriage are
illegitimate, unless otherwise provided in this Code.
Legitimate and illegitimate children are by natural filiation which shall mean that they are
related to their parents blood. An issue arises when the legitimacy or the filiation of the child
is being impugned or doubted. Such issue usually arises when mothers go after the alleged
father for support to which the latter do not recognize or acknowledge the child as his own,
1 Family Code, Chapter 1, Art. 163, (1987).

when the children or mothers representing their children in case of minority wants to claim
benefits from the death of their alleged or father or claim their rightful share from the estate
of the latter or in some cases, they just want to be acknowledged by their supposed father. If
proven, such children have rights on to such matters.
This study shall examine whether the provisions of the Family Code regarding the proofs of
paternity and filiation were strictly observed by the Supreme Court or is it only upon their
discretion to implement such provisions or not. The solutions of such issues by presenting the
provisions of the law and decided cases by the court on to what means can the child go after
his or her natural filiation or on to what grounds can he or she proves his or her natural
relationship to his or her alleged father. Such considered proofs of filiation and paternity shall
be limited within the jurisdiction of the Philippines.

II.

Applicable Law

In the issue at bar which involves relationship among family members specifically the
father and the child, the provisions of the Family Code of the Philippines is the law which
shall apply. This Code is the law which governs issues relating to family and property
relations.2

History
The roots of the Family Code of the Philippines can be traced during the Spanish occupation.
It is rooted in the different aspects of the Spanish Civil Code which became effective in the
Philippines in 1889. Spain was known for being patriarchal giving the husband full
authority and responsibility for his children and wife. In 1898, Spain ceded the Philippines to
the United States of America for an ample amount of money. From there, the laws in the
2 ERNESTO L. PINEDA, THE FAMILY CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES (2011 ed.)

Philippines especially the Civil Code were greatly influenced by the American laws. This
period allowed women to acquire more power as she was given the right for the first time to
sell the properties she acquired before the marriage. Back then, the family law was still part
of the Civil Code. Not until July 6, 1987 when President Corazon Aquino signed the present
Family Code of the Philippines which took effect on August 3, 1988, one year after its
publication in the newspaper of general circulation.3
Purpose
The reasons for the execution of the Family Code is to grant spouses equal rights, give dual
authority to parents in the family and provide special protection for children in case either
parent remarries which were not evident prior to the execution. Id.

Application
The provisions of the Family Code shall be applied to issues pertaining to family and
property relations specifically to Marriage, Legal Separation, Rights and Obligations
Between Husband and Wife, Property Relations Between Husband and Wife, Family,
Paternity and Filiation, Adoption, Support, Parental Authority, Emancipation and Age of
Majority4.

III.

Application of the Law and Jurisprudence

Since the topic or issue at hand of this paper pertains to proving the relationship of the child
to his father, Title VI of the Family Code of the Philippines shall apply upon this research. As
mentioned earlier in this paper, there are two kinds of children by nature the legitimate and

3 Diana F. Franco, Family law in the Philippines An Overview,

http://www.funkit.com/~thaslow/articles/Family_law_in_the_Philippines_An_Overview.pdf
4 FAMILY CODE, title I-IX

illegitimate. According to Article 172 and 175 respectively, legitimate children as well as
illegitimate children can establish their filiation through the following:
(1) The record of birth appearing in the civil register or a final judgment; or
(2) An admission of legitimate filiation in a public document or a private
handwritten instrument and signed by the parent concerned.
In the absence of the foregoing evidence, the legitimate filiation shall be
proved by:
(1) The open and continuous possession of the status of a legitimate child; or
(2) Any other means allowed by the Rules of Court and special laws.

Numbers 1 and 2 mentioned above shall be considered the primary evidences while 3 and 4
shall be considered the secondary evidences. It shall be noted that the latter is not admissible
if the former exist. Regarding the first primary evidence, it shall refer to any public
documents relating to the books making up the civil register and all documents given than
that the alleged father shall have a participation in acquiring such documents. Mere writing of
his name shall consider the document void. Hence, his signature is necessary.5
In Fernandez vs. CA and Fernandez6 where the petitioner presented documentary evidences
to prove the filiation of her children to their alleged father certificates of live birth,
baptismal certificate, pictures taken at the house of the petitioner and pictures taken during
the baptism, the court ruled that the petition be dismissed. The ruling based their decision in
the insufficiency of evidences. First, the certificates of live birth and baptismal certificate
have no evidentiary value for the reason that the private respondent did not participate in its
preparation. Second, pictures taken at the house of the petitioner is insufficient to prove
5 ALICIA V. SEMPIO DIY, HANDBOOK ON THE FAMILY CODE OF THE
PHILIPPINES (2003 ed.)
6 Fernandez vs. CA and Fernandez, G.R. No. 108366, February 16, 1994.

paternity. Lastly, pictures taken during the baptism dont stand proofs of paternity. Private
respondent explained that he was merely a sponsor to the baptism.
In the case of Solinap v. Locsin7 where respondent presented a machine-copy of the certificate
of live birth and a picture of his mother standing beside the coffin of his alleged father to
constitute filiation, the court ruled the petition to be with merit when the petitioners showed a
true photocopy of the live birth of respondent showing that the alleged did not affix his
signature such evidence lacks authenticity. A picture taken beside the alleged father cannot
constitute proof filiation, anyone can stand beside a coffin and thereafter utilize it to claim the
estate of the deceased.
For the second primary evidence, admission in a public document or in a handwritten
instrument signed by the parent concerned would constitute paternity. In the case of Verceles
v. Posada8, the late alleged father wrote a letter to the petitioner stating his readiness to be
responsible for the child conceived by the petitioner before his demise. It was ruled by court
that the child is his illegitimate child. The act done by the father is in itself a consummated
acknowledgement and no further court action is required. In fact, any authentic writing is
treated not just a ground for compulsory recognition; it is in itself a voluntary recognition that
does not require a separate action for judicial approval. Another case is Dela Cruz v. Garcia9
where the alleged father wrote in his own handwriting that his wife, the petitioner is pregnant
and that they live together in their house before his demise. The petition coincide her intent to
use the surname of the alleged father but the Local Civil Registrar denied his application. The
court ruled in favor of the petitioner. The child conceived by the petitioner is the illegitimate
child of the alleged father even though without his signature. The petitioner contends that the
handwritten instrument even though not signed by him is sufficient for the requirement of
Article 172. The court also granted the use of the surname of the father to the childs name
7 Solinap v. Locsin, G.R. No. 146737, December 10, 2001.
8 Verceles v. Posada, G.R. No. 159785, April 27, 2007.
9 Dela Cruz v. Garcia, G.R. No. 177728, July 31, 2009.

pertinent to the Republic Act No. 9255 or also known as An Act Allowing Illegitimate
Children to Use the Surname of their Father, Amending for the Purpose, Article 176 of
Executive Order No. 209, otherwise known as the Family Code of the Philippines. This Act
provides that:
"Article 176. Illegitimate children shall use the surname and shall
be under the parental authority of their mother, and shall be entitled to
support in conformity with this Code. However, illegitimate children may
use the surname of their father if their filiation has been expressly
recognized by the father through the record of birth appearing in the civil
register, or when an admission in a public document or private
handwritten instrument is made by the father. Provided, the father has the
right to institute an action before the regular courts to prove non-filiation
during his lifetime. The legitime of each illegitimate child shall consist of
one-half of the legitime of a legitimate child."10 (emphasis provided)
For the secondary evidence or the second paragraph of Article 172, by continuous
possession shall mean uninterrupted and consistent possession, but does not require any
particular length of time. It is necessary that such recognition has been consistently shown
and manifested throughout the years publicly, spontaneously, continuously and in an
uninterrupted manner and that this recognition is showed through overt acts and conduct.
11

Any other means allowed by the Rules of Court and special laws may include the childs

baptismal certificate, a judicial admission, the family bible wherein the name of the child is
entered, common reputation respecting pedigree, admission by silence, extrajudicial
admission, presumptions and other kinds of proof under Rule 130 of the Revised Rules of
Court. It shall be noted that baptismal certificate is not a proof of filiation. It only proves the
10 Family Code of the Philippines, Republic Act 9255, Article 176 (2004)
11 Jison v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 124853, February 24, 1998.

fact of the administration of the sacrament or the act of baptism on the day specified.
Although it is allowed by the Rules of Court, it is a shallow and negligible proof of filiation.12
In Mendoza vs. CA13 where private respondent claimed that she is the illegitimate child of the
petitioner on the grounds of continuous possession of the alleged father to her, the court ruled
that continuous does not mean that the concession of status shall continue forever but only
that it shall not be an intermittent character while it continues. The possession of such status
means that the father has treated the child as his own, directly and through others,
spontaneously and without concealment though without publicity. There must be a showing
of the permanent intention of the supposed father to consider the child as his own, by
continuous and clear manifestation of paternal affection and care. Although private
respondent failed to show evidence on the grounds of continuous possession, she has
established his legitimacy through any other means allowed by the rules of court and special
laws. In the case at bar, there was an act of pedigree 14 as she was attested by the heirs of the
alleged father as his illegitimate daughter. Such acts or declarations may be received in
evidence as an exception to the hearsay rule.
In the evolution of evidences, science has discovered new ways to prove the childs filiation
to his father. One of it is the DNA tetsing or the deoxyribonucleic acid testing. On October
15, 2007, the Rule on DNA Evidence in the Philippines took effect. Stated in its provisions,
"DNA testing" means verified and credible scientific methods which include the extraction of
DNA from biological samples, the generation of DNA profiles and the comparison of the
information obtained from the DNA testing of biological samples for the purpose of
determining, with reasonable certainty, whether or not the DNA obtained from two or more
distinct biological samples originates from the same person (direct identification) or if the
12 Id. At 4.
13 Mendoza v. Court of Appeal, G.R. No. L-36637 July 14, 1978.
14 Rules of Court, Revised Rule on Evidence of the Philippines, Rule 130,
Section 40 (1989)

biological samples originate from related persons (kinship analysis). It shall determine the
Probability of Parentage which is defined as the numerical estimate for the likelihood of
parentage of a putative parent compared with the probability of a random match of two
unrelated individuals in a given population15.
In the case of Herrera v. Alba16, the court ordered the parties to undergo DNA testing to
prove the filiation of the respondent to the petitioner. The Supreme Court applied the Vallejo
guidelines which is a acquired in the case of People v. Vallejo17:
In assessing the probative value of DNA evidence, therefore, courts should
consider, among other things, the following data:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.

how the samples were collected,

how they were handled,
the possibility of contamination of the samples,
the procedure followed in analyzing the samples,
whether the proper standards and procedures were followed in
conducting the tests,
and the qualification of the analyst who conducted the tests.

In this case, the Supreme Court declared that in filiation cases, before paternity inclusion
can be had, the DNA test result must state that the there is at least a 99.9% probability that
the person is the biological father. However, a 99.9% probability of paternity (or higher but
never possibly a 100% ) does not immediately result in the DNA test result being admitted as
an overwhelming evidence. It does not automatically become a conclusive proof that the
alleged father, in this case Herrera, is the biological father of the child (Alba). Such result is
still a disputable or a refutable evidence which can be brought down if the Vallejo Guidelines
are not complied with18.

15 Rule on DNA Evidence, Section 3 (2007)

16 Herrera v. Alba, G.R. No. 148220. June 15, 2005.
17 People v. Vallejo, G.R. No. 144656, May 9, 2002
18 Agustin v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 162571, June 15, 2005

In regards with DNA analogy, physical resemblance between a child and alleged parent
can also be considered as proof of filiation.19 In the case of Tijing v. CA, where the court ruled
in favor of the petitioners for having one of the grounds that the trial court observed several
times that when the child and Bienvenida were both in court, the two had strong similarities
in their faces, eyes, eyebrows and head shapes. Resemblance between a minor and his
alleged parent is competent and material evidence to establish parentage. Needless to stress,
the trial courts conclusion should be given high respect, it having had the opportunity to
observe the physical appearances of the minor and petitioner concerned.20

IV.

Conclusion

From the provisions of law and case reports, we can clearly see how the law desires to
protect the rights of children and how Family Code served its purpose for the latters
protection with its evolution from the Civil Code. The study has found that the establishment
of proof of filiation always has its core on Article 172 which consists of the primary and
secondary evidences. First in the primary evidences are documents in the civil register
proving birth or final judgment. It should be noted that the alleged father should have a
participation in the preparation of such for it to be considered a prima facie evidence of
filiation. Second in the primary evidence is the public declaration or a private handwritten
instrument signed by the concerned father. Cases showed that it need not to be signed given
that the party can prove the authenticity of such document and that it is written or publicly
declared by the concerned parent. Secondary evidences note that in continuous possession,
the possession must be consistent and uninterrupted, that the recognition is shown through
overt acts and conduct and that it be done spontaneously and publicly. Any other means
allowed by the Rules of Court and special laws may include the childs baptismal certificate,
19 Id. at 2
20 Tijing v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 125901, March 8, 2001

a judicial admission, the family bible wherein the name of the child is entered, common
reputation respecting pedigree, admission by silence, extrajudicial admission, presumptions
and other kinds of proof under Rule 130 of the Revised Rules of Court. It should be taken
account that baptismal certificate is not a proof of filiation, it is just a proof of sacrament
undergone by the child. Section 40. Family reputation or tradition regarding pedigree of the
Revised Rule on Evidence is also taken account in such provision regarding the familys
knowledge of the alleged filiation in exception of the hearsay rule. Brought about by the
evolution of evidences, DNA testing came in to the picture. The Supreme Court ordered the
application of DNA testing in certain kinds of cases. One of which is proving filiation. But
such results from this mean are still refutable unless it follows the Vellejo guidelines. From
the analogy of DNA, the child having resemblance to the father concerned can be a strong
ground for proving filiation.
These are what have been considered proofs of natural filiation in the Philippines.
Concerning the issues mentioned earlier, these proofs shall stand grounds to prove filiation
and paternity. But considering the evolution of laws and evidences, the repeal of which shall
not be impossible.