Sie sind auf Seite 1von 5

Coverage: Family Home, Cases, Paternity to Mario; they begot a child; Teresa objected to

End except Care & Absence Herardo claiming visitation rights of the child
-SC: child is a legitimate child of Mario in the
PATERNITY AND FILIATION first valid marriage & not in the second void
union; paternity by judicial imposition (?)
Marriage: status of spouses in relation to each
other -Atty Torregs: Mario is victim; was not even a
party in the case; SC violated his right to due
Paternity: status of father in relation to child process
(maternity for mother)
-this CASE illustrates the presumption IN LAW
Filiation: status of child in relation to parents that a child born during the existence of a valid
-Universal truth: maternity is a fact, paternity is marriage, even if actually born during an illicit
a mystery; whether or not husband is father; no relationship by the same mother with another
instance where status of mother is disputed man, is a legitimate child of the husband in the
-Filiation: by nature (legitimate/ illegitimate) or valid subsisting marriage
by adoption 2)child born during an existing valid marriage is
-There are only 2 kinds of children: legitimate legitimate; but this presumption of legitimacy
or illegitimate springs from the fact of marriage

Legitimate children: -if there is proof of marriage, child is presumed

legitimate; there has to be clear and convincing
1)children conceived OR born inside a valid
evidence that a marriage took place for
presumption to arise; otherwise, there can be
2)children conceived OR born before judgment no presumption of legitimacy (Angeles vs
declaring marriage annulled (because voidable Maglaya)
marriage is valid until annulled) or nullity
-presumption of legitimacy cannot arise from
(based on 36)
another presumption; because there is also
3)children conceived or born during a presumption that when two persons represent
subsequent marriage which is void under Art themselves as husband & wife, they are
53 for failure to comply with liquidation, presumed to be married though disputable
distribution, etc.
-but presumption of legitimacy can only arise
4)artificially inseminated child from the fact of marriage, not from anther
Illegitimate children: presumption

1)children conceived AND born outside a valid

marriage (no marriage at all, common-law Remedy of husband if he suspects that child is
relationship) not his: remedy of impugning (assail/attack)
2)children conceived AND born within/during a the legitimacy of the child (Art 166); there is
void marriage, except conceived or born under no question here that the wife is mother and
36 & 53 fathered by husband

3)children conceived AND/OR born within a -TAKE NOTE: law uses term impugning
valid marriage to a father other than the legitimacy but this term legitimacy is
husband different from the term illegitimate children in
relation to legitimate children as two kinds of
natural filiation. In these instances where there
1)any child conceived OR born during a valid are legitimate/illegitimate children, there is no
marriage is presumed legitimate question here that the child was delivered by
-conceived and delivered by the wife & the wife and fathered by husband in relation to
fathered by husband 166
CASE: Concepcion vs CA (page 604, Sta. -if legitimacy of child is successfully impugned
Maria)- Teresa & Herardo bigamously under 166, result is child will not be illegitimate
cohabited while Teresa was legally married to because if paternity is impugned, there is really
no relationship between child and husband;
they are strangers to each other; neither 2)WIFE cannot impugn legitimacy of child-
illegitimate/legitimate consistent with universal truth
-so dont confuse legitimacy here with CASE: Concepcion vs CA- Teresa argued that
legitimate/illegitimate children; they are used in Jose Herardo is child of Herardo, not Mario,
different contexts but SC disregarded her argument since she
-but here, child is illegitimate child of mother cannot impugn legitimacy of her own child
but not child at all of father even if she declared that child was not child of
her husband, or even if she is declared an
GROUNDS: Art 166 adulteress
It was physically impossible for husband to -reasons: avoid situations where wife would
have sexual intercourse with wife within 1st 120 claim that child is not of husbands out of spite
days of 300 days immediately preceding the
birth of child because of: 3)legitimacy of child cannot be attacked
collaterally- there has to be direct attack;
1)physical impossibility to have sexual cannot be raised in other proceedings as
intercourse cause by: physical incapacity defense
(inability of husband e.g. inability to get an
erection, impotency); distance between -CASE: Tison vs CA- action was reconveyance
husband and wife (separated in such a way of property but as a defense, defendant
that sexual intercourse was not possible); impugned the legitimacy of the nieces; cannot
serious illness that prevents husband from be done since this amounts to collateral attack
having sexual intercourse 4) This action of impugning legitimacy
-TAKE NOTE of period, very specific prescribes- 1, 2, 3 years (Art 170)

2)scientific or biological reason -reckoning point in Art 170 for counting

prescription if concealed: Is it knowledge of
-e.g. both of you are Filipinos & child is birth or knowledge of its registration or fact of
German (harhar) its registration whether or not husband knew of
3)consent/ratification of husband was vitiated such registration?
in case of artificially inseminated child -Policy is favoring legitimacy of child; the
Principles in impugning legitimacy of child: shorter the prescriptive period, the better for
1)right to impugn belongs to husband alone child

-only husband of the wife can file; exceptions:

-Heirs may file: if husband dies before Distinguish 2 situations contemplated under Art
expiration of period to file action to impugn; 170:
husband dies after filing action without a)husband knew of the time the birth took
husband desisting; child was born after death place- if at time of delivery the husband was
of husband (Art 171) there, count from knowledge of birth, not
-doesnt include the wife; wife is an heir of knowledge that child is not his
husband but cannot impugn legitimacy of child b)birth was not known to husband because it
CASE: Tison vs CA (page 629, Sta. Maria)- was concealed or husband simply did not
auntie died & was survived by nieces and know- husband was not around when child was
husband of auntie sold property; but nieces delivered; prescriptive period is to be counted
contested this since husband did not obtain from time of the FACT OF REGISTRATION OF
their consent & they were the heirs BIRTH, NOT THE KNOWLEDGE of THE FACT
-husband impugned the legitimacy of the
nieces; husband claimed that they were not -it should be FACT, not knowledge because
children of their father who was the brother of registration is a constructive notice to the
the auntie whole world

-but SC said husband cannot impugn since he -logical interpretation: fact of registration,
is not husband of the mother of the nieces whether or not husband knew about it
BASIC PRINCIPLES governing right of 1)record of birth in the local civil registrar or
husband to impugn APPLY ONLY when: final judgment declaring that child is child of the
-Child is really child of mother/wife: no dispute parents
that child is child of wife or she was the one -in so far as record of birth is concerned;
who gave birth; issue is only the paternity of admissible only against parent if it is shown
child that parent participated in the preparation of
-if issue is whether child was actually delivered record of birth/birth certificate; only if husband
by wife (maternity), these principles do not signed birth certificate
apply, and HENCE: 1)action to impugn can be -even if mother wrote your name & you did not
filed not just by husband but by any interested affix signature, husband is safe O.O
party 2)admission of filiation made in a public
2)can be attacked collaterally document, like and affidavit, or
3)wife is not prohibited from impugning- since -an admission made in a private document:
after all, she is not really the mother must be handwritten & signed by parent
4)does not prescribe- in Catotal, now an action concerned
to nullify a document which is void, and an -if public & notarized, enough that it is signed;
action to nullify does not prescribe unlike private document, must be handwritten
CASE: Babiera vs Catotal (page 630, Sta. & signed
Maria)- child was delivered by the housemaid -first paragraph of 172 are primary proofs of
but in the birth certificate, child was made to filiation; while second paragraph: of 172 are
appear as child of the employer-spouses when secondary proofs
in truth, child was that of housemaid -go for primary proofs to prove filiation; must
-legitimate child filed action in court to declare exhaust the primary proofs before one can use
that the child is not child at all of her parents secondary proofs:
but of the housemaid 1)open and continuous possession of status of
-SC said that rule on impugning legitimacy of a legitimate child
child presupposes that child was really child of CASE: Jison vs CA (page 639, Sta. Maria)-
the wife; do not apply when issue is whether lawyer supported her, spent for education of
child is of both parents child, spent for apartment of child while she
-here, not anymore a case of impugning was still student
legitimacy; this is a case of declaring someone -these actuations of father in relation to Molina
to be not a child of either or both spouses (child) were considered by court as evidence
-so the rules are (refer to above) that she has been in possession of status as
-MANY QUESTIONS will come from here an illegitimate daughter
-even if parent expressly disclaims, actions
speak louder than words; treatment accorded
-if there is an ISSUE as to whether child is to child may be evidence of filiation (secondary
child of husband, there is also ISSUE where proof)
parents deny that he is their child and hence,
child becomes an aggrieved party 2)evidence as may be authorized by the rules
of court or special laws
-Remedy of child here: an action to compel
alleged parent to recognize him (go to court -e.g. testimonies of witnesses, persons familiar
and compel) with relationship, relatives of father

-Action to claim filiation: be recognized as -with technology now, most reliable and is an
legitimate or illegitimate acceptable proof now: DNA testing


proofs to prove legitimate filiation 1)if result of DNA testing yields positive result &
percentage of paternity is 99.99 % or more:
result is disputable presumption of paternity;
can be overcome by contrary evidence (like
you can establish within 300 days preceding circumstances of birth and marriage to local
birth, there as physical impossibility to have civil registrar who will record
sexual intercourse); without contrary evidence, -IF child dies before marriage; legitimation still
there is disputable presumption benefits the heirs; effect of legitimation
2)if result is below 99.9% but positive (there is retroacts
likelihood that purported parent is really -status of legitimated child may be assailed by
parent): only corroborative evidence of parties whose successional rights are
paternity; not in itself sufficient to prove prejudiced
-prescriptive period to impugn his status- 5
3)if result is negative: conclusive evidence of years from death of either parents; only from
non-paternity; cannot be overcome by contrary death of parents that successional rights are
evidence prejudiced; these start from moment of death

-allowable proofs of filiation: same with ADOPTION

legitimate & illegitimate; differ only in
Both procedural & substantive
prescriptive periods:
-our concern in substantive aspect (?)
1)action to claim legitimate filiation: under Art
175 & Tayag vs CA, can be filed anytime during -2 existing laws: Domestic Adoption Law &
lifetime of child regardless if parents are dead/ Inter-country adoption act
alive -compare two laws & familiarize the provisions
-operative fact here is lifetime of child DISTINCTIONS
2)if filiation claimed is illegitimate & proof 1)age of adoptee
consists of secondary evidence- during the
-DOM: child should be less than 18
lifetime of purported parent
-INT: child is less than 15
-MAY the heirs of child file an action? GR: Can
only be filed by child, except (Art 173) 2)age of adopter
1)death during minority (173) -DOM: at least 18
2)death while insane -INT: at least 27
-here, death is common denominator because 3)citizenship requirement of child to be
if alive, he can do it even if insane; may adopted
recover sanity during lucid interval and file it -DOM: Filipino or alien
-INT: only a Filipino child can be adopted
-only in event of death where heirs can do it
4)residency requirement of adopters
-prescriptive period: 5 years from death
-DOM: adopter may either be an alien/Filipino
1)if Filipino, can either be a resident abroad or
-process whereby an illegitimate child acquires 2)if foreigner, can be permanent resident
status of being legitimate abroad but have residence in Phil for 3
-WHO may be legitimated? Only children born continuous years (may be waived under the 3
to parents who at the time of conception exceptions; e.g. foreigner wish to adopt
where legally capacitated to marry each other legitimate child of his Filipino spouse; foreigner
or were only disqualified due to age (Art 177); is former Filipino citizen who wished to adopt
2 instances only relative within 4th civil degree)
-legitimation takes place with subsequent -INT: permanently residing abroad (either
marriage of parents Filipino or alien)
-but procedurally, marriage is not enough- still 5)matching process
have to submit affidavit of legitimation stating
-DOM: doesnt require matching process or a coordinates with child-placement agency
pairing procedure where adopter is matched abroad where petition is for adoption is filed
with prospective child to make sure relationship -petition for adoption is filed with competent
will be for best interest of child; adopter can court in country where adopter resides; trial
pre-determine the child custody takes place there & decree of adoption
-INT: adopter has to go through matching is issued by foreign court
process; cant pre-determine child to be -RTC then only has clerical duty under INT
6)availability of adoption laws
-INT: enacted to supplement domestic;
1)severs the child-parent relationship between
accommodate cases not under domestic
child & biological parents
adoption law
2)no successional rights between biological
-but likely that adoption may qualify under both;
parents & child; adopted child cannot inherit
but INT is a remedy of last resort; only
from them through intestate succession & vice
availed if adoption cant be done under
versa; but still possible that biological parents
domestic adoption law
may share in the estate of the child (& vice
-DOM: as long as adoption can be done here, versa) through testate succession (through a
one is required to avail this will), not intestate
7)where it is filed -intestate succession is now with adopted child
-DOM: petition for adoption is filed in the RTC & adopters, since he acquired status of
designated as a family court by SC in the place legitimate child; they are the same EXCEPT
where prospective adopter resides (not of the legitimate children are entitled to inherit from
child to be adopted) ascendants & have right to representation
-INT: considering adopters are permanently (inherit in case parent predeceases the
residing abroad, application for adoption is filed grandparent; inherits what his parent should
in RTC designated as family court in place have inherited if he was alive)
having jurisdiction over the prospective -adopted children do not have such right of
adoptee representation because the relationship is only
8)process with adopted & adopter; it doesnt go beyond
this; hence adopted cannot inherit from
-DOM: entire process undertaken by the court, grandparent if his parent dies first
e.g. hearing, trial custody
3)effect of decree of adoption retroacts to time
-INT: several agencies are involved of filing of the petition
9)application vs. petition 4)parental authority is now exercised by
-DOM: file petition (application not required) adoptive parents; obligation to support, take
directly with RTC as family court custody & exercise parental authority are now
-INT: file application of adoption with RTC as exercised by them
family court or in Inter-country adoption Board
-distinguish application from petition
-if filed with RTC under INT: doesnt receive
evidence nor issue decree of adoption; only
part is to scrutinize the application and
supporting documents; determine if all
qualifications are complied with, not the merits
of application
-when RTC determines that adopter qualifies or
has complied with requirements, records are
forwarded to Inter-country board and it