Heirs of Gabatan v.

CA
March 13, 2009 | Leonardo-De Castro
Proof of filiation
jam

DOCTRINE: Best evidence rule must be complied with to prove filiation

CASE SUMMARY: The ownership of a parcel of land is in dispute between the siblings of the deceased and a self-proclaimed
daughter

FACTS:

A parcel of land was declared in the name of Juan Gabatan.

Lourdes Pacana claims that her mother, Hermogena, is the only child of Juan.
Upon the death of Juan, the parcel of land was entrusted to Juan’s brother Teofilo for administration.
Hermogena demanded for Teofilo to return to her the land. Teofilo refused. Eventually, Hermogena died.
After Teofilo died, Jabinis and Acantilado took possession of the disputed land.

The Heirs on the other hand contend that Juan died single and only had one brother and two sisters as heirs. Lourdes was not a
member of the family. Therefore, she cannot claim ownership of the land.

RTC – In favor of Lourdes, the parties presented two versions of Lourdes’ birth certificate, but sided with Lourdes
CA – Affirmed based on a Deed of Absolute Sale in favor of Hermogena stating that she is an heir of Juan Gabatan

ISSUE: WON the evidence provided was sufficient to prove filiation - NO

RULING:

The court noticed that the birth certificate and deeds of sale were suspiciously tampered and lacked signatures and tattered
with other irregularities.
Lourdes’ birth certificate does not prove her lineage to Juan Gabatan. It would’ve been more credible if she presented the birth
certificate of her mother.
She merely relied on the testimonies of her witnesses.

Under the best evidence rule, when the subject of inquiry is the contents of a document, no evidence shall be admissible other
than the original document itself. Although the best evidence rule admits of exceptions and there are instances where the
presentation of secondary evidence would be allowed, such as when the original is lost or the original is a public record, the
basis for the presentation of secondary evidence must still be established.

A party must first satisfactorily explain the loss of the best or primary evidence before he can resort to secondary evidence. A
party must first present to the court proof of loss or other satisfactory explanation for non-production of the original instrument.

DISPOSITION:

WHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED