Sie sind auf Seite 1von 18

Modequillo Versus Breva  The land in question originally belonged to Lazaro Ba-a who

ISSUE – Is the property a family home? sold the same to the late Pablito (sic) Taneo father of the herein
FACTS plaintiff on September 18, 1941, by virtue of an Escritura de
 Jose Modequillo and Benito Malubay were ordered to pay RULING Venta. That on July 19, 1951 Abdon Gilig with his wife filed a
jointly and severally to plaintiff-appelants pertaining to  No. Civil Case No. 590 for recovery of property against Pablo Taneo,
damages from a vehicular accident killing Audi Salinas and  et al., wherein Judgment was rendered on June 24, 1964, in
injuring Renato Culan  Although article 162 states that “the provision of this chapter favor of Abdon Gilig and against Pablo Taneo ordering the
 July 7 1988, for payment, the sheriff levied a parcel of shall also govern residences insofar as said provisions are latter to pay damages in the amount of P5,000.00
residential land located at Poblacion Malalag Surigao Del Sur applicable It does not mean that Article 152 and 153 shall
registered in the name of Jose Modequillo. have a retroactive effect that all existing family residences are  As a result of a judgment in Civil Case No. 590 (for recovery of
 Jose Medequillo motioned to quash the levy of execution and deemed to have been constituted as family homes at the time property) in favor of private respondent, two (2) of petitioners'
alleged that the residential land were their family home built of their occupation prior to the effectivity of the family code properties were levied to satisfy the judgment amount of
in 1969 prior to the commencement of the case and hence and are exempt for payment of obligations. about P5,000.00: one was a parcel of land located in Barrio
exempt from execution, forced sale or attachment under  It means that all existing family residences at the time of the Igpit, Municipality of Opol, Misamis Oriental with an area of
Article 152 and 153 of Family Code except for the liabilities effectivity of the family code are prospectively entitled to the about five (5) hectares, and the other was the family home also
mentioned in Article 155. The debt sought is not one of those benefits accorded to a family home under family code. located at Igpit, Opol, Misamis Oriental.
enumerated under Article 155 of FC  In our present case, the house and lot became a family home
 Art. 152. The family home, constituted jointly by the upon the effectivity of the family code in august 3 1988 but it  The subject properties were sold at public auction on February
husband and the wife or by an unmarried head of a does not mean that family residences not considered as 12, 1966 to the private respondent as the highest bidder.
family, is the dwelling house where they and their family homes prior to the family code would be retroactively Consequently, after petitioners' failure to redeem the same, a
family reside, and the land on which it is situated. deemed as family homes at the time of their occupation. final deed of conveyance was executed on February 9, 1968,
 Art. 153. The family home is deemed constituted on  Since the debt arose from the time of the accident (march 16, definitely selling, transferring, and conveying said properties to
a house and lot from the time it is occupied as a 1976) and the judgment (January 29,1988) was before the the private respondent.
family residence. From the time of its constitution effectivity of the family code (august 3, 1988). This does not  To forestall such conveyance, petitioners filed an action on
and so long as any of its beneficiaries actually fall under the exemptions from executions provided in the November 5, 1985 (docketed as Civil Case No. 10407) to
resides therein, the family home continues to be family code. declare the deed of conveyance void and to quiet title over the
such and is exempt from execution, forced sale or  As to the argument that it is an agricultural land, the trial land with a prayer for a writ of preliminary injunction.
attachment except as hereinafter provided and to court correctly riled that the levy be levied on whatever rights  Petitioners aver that the house which their father constituted
the extent of the value allowed by law. the petitioner may have on the land. as family home is exempt from execution.
 Art. 155. The family home shall be exempt from
execution, forced sale or attachment except: Decision  In its decision of March 27, 1989, the RTC dismissed the
 (1) For non-payment of taxes;  Peittion dismissed. complaint. On appeal, the Court of Appeals affirmed in toto the
 (2) For debts incurred prior to the decision of the RTC.
constitution of the family home;
ISSUE:
 (3) For debts secured by mortgages on the G.R. No. 108532 March 9, 1999
premises before or after such PABLITO TANEO, JR., JOSE TANEO, NENA T. CATUBIG and HUSBAND,
constitution; and CILIA T. MORING and HUSBAND, petitioners,  Whether or not Taneo’s family home is exempt from
execution.
 (4) For debts due to laborers, mechanics, vs.
architects, builders, material men and COURT OF APPEALS and ABDON GILIG, respondents.
RULING:
others who have rendered service or Article 153. The family home is deemed constituted on a house and lot
furnished material for the construction of from the time it is occupied as a family residence. From the time of its
constitution and so long as any of its beneficiaries actually resides  The contention is not well-taken.
the building
 Trial court denied the motion. therein, the family home continues to be such and is exempt from
execution, forced sale or attachment except as hereinafter provided  While Article 153 of the Family Code provides that the family
 Respondents contend that it only became family home in home is deemed constituted on a house and lot from the time
and to the extent of the value allowed by law.
1988 and the family code took effect. The house and lot did it is occupied as a family residence, it does not mean that said
not qualify, as a family home since the Family code provision article has a retroactive effect such that all existing family
FACTS:
on family homes do not retroact. residences, petitioner's included, are deemed to have been
constituted as family homes at the time of their occupation that the house was erected not on the land which the Taneos property, which the petitioners thereafter occupied as their
prior to the effectivity of the Family Code and henceforth, are owned but on the land of one Plutarco Vacalares. By the very family home after they got married sometime in January 1987.
exempt from execution for the payment of obligations incurred definition of the law that the "family home is the dwelling  Sometime in September 1988, Araceli obtained a loan from
before the effectivity of the Family Code on August 3, 1988 house where a person and his family resides and the land on Claudio D. Acero, Jr. (Claudio) in the amount of ₱100,000.00,
(Mondequillo vs. Breva, 185 SCRA 766). Neither does Article which it is situated," it is understood that the house should be which was secured by a mortgage over the subject property. As
162 of said Code state that the provisions of Chapter 2, Title V constructed on a land not belonging to another. Apparently, payment, Araceli issued a check drawn against China Banking
thereof have retroactive effect. It simply means that all existing the constitution of a family home by Pablo Taneo in the instant Corporation payable to Claudio.
family residences at the time of the effectivity of the Family case was merely an afterthought in order to escape execution  When the check was presented for payment, it was dishonored
Code are considered family homes and are prospectively of their property but to no avail. as the account from which it was drawn had already been
entitled to the benefits accorded to a family home under the closed. The petitioners failed to heed Claudio’s subsequent
Family Code (Modequillo vs. Breva, supra). Since petitioner's demand for payment.
debt was incurred as early as November 25, 1987, it preceded G.R. No. 185064 January 16, 2012  Thus, on April 26, 1990, Claudio filed with the Prosecutor's
the effectivity of the Family Code. His property is therefore not Office of Malolos, Bulacan a complaint for violation of Batas
exempt from attachment . SPOUSES ARACELI OLIVA-DE MESA and ERNESTO S. DE Pambansa Blg. 22 (B.P. 22) against the petitioners. After
MESA, Petitioner, preliminary investigation, an information for violation of B.P.
 The applicable law, therefore. in the case at bar is still the Civil vs. 22 was filed against the petitioners with the Regional Trial
Code where registration of the declaration of a family home is SPOUSES CLAUDIO D. ACERO, JR. and MA. RUFINA D. ACERO, SHERIFF Court (RTC) of Malolos, Bulacan.
a prerequisite. Nonetheless, the law provides certain instances FELIXBERTO L. SAMONTE and REGISTRAR ALFREDO
where the family home is not exempted from execution, forced SANTOS, Respondents. RTC's DECISION (in Malolos, Bulacan): On October 21, 1992, the RTC
sale or attachment. rendered a Decision3 acquitting the petitioners but ordering them to pay
DECISION Claudio the amount of ₱100,000.00 with legal interest from date of
 Art. 243 reads: demand until fully paid.
While it is true that the family home is exempt from execution or forced
The family home extrajudicially formed shall be exempt from sale, such claim for exemption should be set up and proved to the Sheriff
 On March 15, 1993, a writ of execution was issued and Sheriff
execution, forced sale or attachment, except: before the sale of property at public auction. Failure to do so would
Felixberto L. Samonte (Sheriff Samonte) levied upon the
(1) For nonpayment of taxes; estop the party from later claimin the exemption.
subject property.
(2) For debts incurred before the declaration was recorded in
PONENTE: REYES, J.  On March 9, 1994, the subject property was sold on public
the Registry of Property;
auction; Claudio was the highest bidder and the corresponding
(3) For debts secured by mortgages on the premises before or
Nature of the Petition certificate of sale was issued to him.
after such record of the declaration;
(4) For debts due to laborers, mechanics, architects, builders,
material-men and others who have rendered service or This is a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of  Sometime in February 1995, Claudio leased the subject
furnished material for the construction of the building. Court filed by the Spouses Araceli Oliva-De Mesa (Araceli) and Ernesto S. property to the petitioners and a certain Juanito Oliva (Juanito)
De Mesa (Ernesto), assailing the Court of Appeals’ (CA) Decision1 dated for a monthly rent of ₱5,500.00. However, the petitioners and
June 6, 2008 and Resolution2 dated October 23, 2008 in CA-G.R. CV No. Juanito defaulted in the payment of the rent and as of October
 The trial court found that on March 7, 1964, Pablo Taneo
79391 entitled "Spouses Araceli Oliva-De Mesa and Ernesto De Mesa v. 3, 1998, their total accountabilities to Claudio amounted to
constituted the house in question, erected on the land of
Spouses Claudio Acero, Jr., et al." ₱170,500.00.
Plutarco Vacalares, as the family home. The instrument
constituting the family home was registered only on January  Meanwhile, on March 24, 1995, a Final Deed of Sale4 over the
24, 1966. The money judgment against Pablo Taneo was The Antecedent Facts subject property was issued to Claudio and on April 4, 1995,
rendered on January 24, 1964. Thus, at that time when the the Register of Deeds of Meycauayan, Bulacan cancelled TCT
"debt" was incurred, the family home was not yet constituted  This involves a parcel of land situated at No. 3 Forbes Street, No. T-76.725 (M) and issued TCT No. T-221755 (M)5 in his favor.
or even registered. Clearly, petitioners' alleged family home, as Mount Carmel Homes Subdivision, Iba, Meycauayan, Bulacan,  Unable to collect the aforementioned rentals due, Claudio and
constituted by their father is not exempt as it falls under the which was formerly covered by Transfer Certificate of Title his wife Ma. Rufina Acero (Rufina) (collectively referred to as
exception of Article 243 (2). (TCT) No. T-76.725 (M) issued by the Register of Deeds of Spouses Acero) filed a complaint for ejectment with the
Meycauayan, Bulacan and registered under Araceli’s name. Municipal Trial Court (MTC) of Meycauayan, Bulacan against
 Moreover, the constitution of the family home by Pablo Taneo The petitioners jointly purchased the subject property on April the petitioners and Juanito. In their defense, the petitioners
is even doubtful considering that such constitution did not 17, 1984 while they were still merely cohabiting before their claimed that Spouses Acero have no right over the subject
comply with the requirements of the law. The trial court found marriage. A house was later constructed on the subject property. The petitioners deny that they are mere lessors; on
the contrary, they are the lawful owners of the subject 2. Whether the lower courts erred in refusing to cancel Claudio’s In the earlier case of Kelley, Jr. v. Planters Products, Inc.,22 we stressed
property and, thus cannot be evicted therefrom. Torrens title TCT No. T-221755 (M) over the subject property. that:
[A:NO]. -Family home Under the Family Code, there is no need to constitute the family home
MTC'S DECISION: Giving due course to Spouses Acero’s complaint and judicially or extrajudicially. All family homes constructed after the
ordering the petitioners and Juanito to vacate the subject property. RULING: effectivity of the Family Code (August 3, 1988) are constituted as such by
Finding merit in Spouses Acero’s claims, the MTC dismissed the 2. Anent the second issue, this Court finds that the CA did not err in operation of law. All existing family residences as of August 3, 1988 are
petitioners' claim of ownership over the subject property. According to dismissing the petitioners’ complaint for nullification of TCT No. T- considered family homes and are prospectively entitled to the benefits
the MTC, title to the subject property belongs to Claudio as shown by TCT 221755 (M). accorded to a family home under the Family Code.23 (emphasis supplied
No. T-221755 (M). The subject property is a family home. and citation omitted.
The petitioners maintain that the subject property is a family home and, The foregoing rules on constitution of family homes, for purposes of
Also stated that from the time a Torrens title over the subject property accordingly, the sale thereof on execution was a nullity. In Ramos v. exemption from execution, could be summarized as follows:
was issued in Claudio’s name up to the time the complaint for ejectment Pangilinan,20 this Court laid down the rules relative to exemption of
was filed, the petitioners never assailed the validity of the levy made by family homes from execution:  First, family residences constructed before the effectivity of
Sheriff Samonte, the regularity of the public sale that was conducted For the family home to be exempt from execution, distinction must be the Family Code or before August 3, 1988 must be constituted
thereafter and the legitimacy of Claudio’s Torrens title that was made as to what law applies based on when it was constituted and what as a family home either judicially or extrajudicially in
resultantly issued. requirements must be complied with by the judgment debtor or his accordance with the provisions of the Civil Code in order to be
successors claiming such privilege. Hence, two sets of rules are exempt from execution;
 The petitioners appealed the MTC’s July 22, 1999 Decision to applicable.  Second, family residences constructed after the effectivity of
the RTC. 1st Rule: If the family home was constructed before the effectivity of the the Family Code on August 3, 1988 are automatically deemed
Family Code or before August 3, 1988, then it must have been to be family homes and thus exempt from execution from the
RTC'S DECISION: This appeal was, however, dismissed in a Decision constituted either judicially or extra-judicially as provided under time it was constituted and lasts as long as any of its
dated November 22, 1999 due to the petitioners’ failure to submit their Articles 225, 229-231 and 233 of the Civil Code. beneficiaries actually resides therein;
Memorandum. The petitioners sought reconsideration of the said  Third, family residences which were not judicially or
decision but the same was denied in an Order dated January 31, 2000.  Judicial constitution of the family home requires the filing of a extrajudicially constituted as a family home prior to the
verified petition before the courts and the registration of the effectivity of the Family Code, but were existing thereafter, are
CA'S DECISION: Assailing the RTC’s November 22, 1999 Decision and court’s order with the Registry of Deeds of the area where the considered as family homes by operation of law and are
January 31, 2000 Order. In a December 21, 2006 Decision,8 the CA denied property is located. Meanwhile, extrajudicial constitution is prospectively entitled to the benefits accorded to a family
the petitioner’s petition for review. This became final on July 25, 2007.9 governed by Articles 240 to 242 of the Civil Code and involves home under the Family Code.
In the interregnum, on October 29, 1999, the petitioners filed against the the execution of a public instrument which must also be
respondents a complaint10 to nullify TCT No. T-221755 (M) and other registered with the Registry of Property. Failure to comply with Here, the subject property became a family residence sometime in
documents with damages with the RTC of Malolos, Bulacan. Therein, the either one of these two modes of constitution will bar a January 1987. There was no showing, however, that the same was
petitioners asserted that the subject property is a family home, which is judgment debtor from availing of the privilege. judicially or extrajudicially constituted as a family home in accordance
exempt from execution under the Family Code and, thus, could not have with the provisions of the Civil Code. Still, when the Family Code took
been validly levied upon for purposes of satisfying the March 15, 1993 2nd Rule: or family homes constructed after the effectivity of the Family effect on August 3, 1988, the subject property became a family home by
writ of execution. Code on August 3, 1988, there is no need to constitute extrajudicially or operation of law and was thus prospectively exempt from execution. The
judicially, and the exemption is effective from the time it was constituted petitioners were thus correct in asserting that the subject property was
On September 3, 2002, the RTC rendered a Decision,11 which dismissed and lasts as long as any of its beneficiaries under Art. 154 actually resides a family home.
the petitioners’ complaint. Citing Article 155(3) of the Family Code, the therein. The family home’s exemption from execution must be set up and
RTC ruled that even assuming that the subject property is a family home, proved to the Sheriff before the sale of the property at public auction.
the exemption from execution does not apply. A mortgage was  Moreover, the family home should belong to the absolute
constituted over the subject property to secure the loan Araceli obtained community or conjugal partnership, or if exclusively by one RATIONALE:
from Claudio and it was levied upon as payment therefor. spouse, its constitution must have been with consent of the
other, and its value must not exceed certain amounts Despite the fact that the subject property is a family home and, thus,
On appeal, the CA affirmed the RTC’s disposition in its Decision13 dated depending upon the area where it is located. Further, the debts should have been exempt from execution, we nevertheless rule that the
June 6, 2008. incurred for which the exemption does not apply as provided CA did not err in dismissing the petitioners’ complaint for nullification
under Art. 155 for which the family home is made answerable of TCT No. T-221755 (M). We agree with the CA that the petitioners
ISSUES: must have been incurred after August 3, 1988.21 should have asserted the subject property being a family home and its

1. Whether the petitioners are guilty of forum-shopping; [A: NO].


being exempted from execution at the time it was levied or within a sometime and somewhere, and it is essential to an effective sale, that the petitioners claimed that the subject property is a family
reasonable time thereafter. As the CA aptly pointed out: administration of justice that, once a judgment has become final, the home, thus, exempt from execution.
winning party be not, through a mere subterfuge, deprived of the fruits
In the light of the facts above summarized, it is evident that appellants of the verdict. We now rule that claims for exemption from execution of For all intents and purposes, the petitioners’ negligence or omission to
did not assert their claim of exemption within a reasonable time. properties under Section 12 of Rule 39 of the Rules of Court must be assert their right within a reasonable time gives rise to the presumption
Certainly, reasonable time, for purposes of the law on exemption, does presented before its sale on execution by the sheriff.26 (citations omitted) that they have abandoned, waived or declined to assert it. Since the
not mean a time after the expiration of the one-year period provided for exemption under Article 153 of the Family Code is a personal right, it is
in Section 30 of Rule 39 of the Rules of Court for judgment debtors to Reiterating the foregoing in Spouses Versola v. Court of Appeals,27 this incumbent upon the petitioners to invoke and prove the same within the
redeem the property sold on execution, otherwise it would render Court stated that: prescribed period and it is not the sheriff’s duty to presume or raise the
nugatory final bills of sale on execution and defeat the very purpose of Under the cited provision, a family home is deemed constituted on a status of the subject property as a family home.
execution – to put an end to litigation. x x x.24 house and lot from the time it is occupied as a family residence; there is
no need to constitute the same judicially or extrajudicially. The petitioners’ negligence or omission renders their present assertion
The foregoing disposition is in accord with the Court’s November 25, doubtful; it appears that it is a mere afterthought and artifice that cannot
2005 Decision in Honrado v. Court of Appeals,25 where it was The settled rule is that the right to exemption or forced sale under be countenanced without doing the respondents injustice and depriving
categorically stated that at no other time can the status of a residential Article 153 of the Family Code is a personal privilege granted to the the fruits of the judgment award in their favor. Simple justice and fairness
house as a family home can be set up and proved and its exemption from judgment debtor and as such, it must be claimed not by the sheriff, but and equitable considerations demand that Claudio’s title to the property
execution be claimed but before the sale thereof at public auction: by the debtor himself before the sale of the property at public be respected. Equity dictates that the petitioners are made to suffer the
auction. It is not sufficient that the person claiming exemption merely consequences of their unexplained negligence.
While it is true that the family home is constituted on a house and lot alleges that such property is a family home. This claim for exemption
from the time it is occupied as a family residence and is exempt from must be set up and proved to the Sheriff. x x x.28 (emphasis supplied and WHEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing disquisitions, the petition
execution or forced sale under Article 153 of the Family Code, such claim citations omitted) is DENIED. The assailed Decision dated June 6, 2008 of the Court of
for exemption should be set up and proved to the Sheriff before the sale Appeals in CA-G.R. CV No. 79391, which affirmed the Decision of the
of the property at public auction. Failure to do so would estop the party Having failed to set up and prove to the sheriff the supposed exemption Regional Trial Court of Malolos, Bulacan, Branch 22, in Civil Case No.
from later claiming the exemption. As this Court ruled in Gomez v. of the subject property before the sale thereof at public auction, the 1058-M-99 and dismissed the complaint for declaration of nullity of TCT
Gealone: petitioners now are barred from raising the same. Failure to do so estop No. 221755 (M) and other documents, and the October 23, 2008
them from later claiming the said exemption. Resolution denying reconsideration, are AFFIRMED.
Although the Rules of Court does not prescribe the period within which Indeed, the family home is a sacred symbol of family love and is the
to claim the exemption, the rule is, nevertheless, well-settled that the repository of cherished memories that last during one’s lifetime.29 It is LEGAL BASIS: Article 153
right of exemption is a personal privilege granted to the judgment debtor likewise without dispute that the family home, from the time of its
and as such, it must be claimed not by the sheriff, but by the debtor constitution and so long as any of its beneficiaries actually resides The family home is deemed constituted on a house and lot from the
himself at the time of the levy or within a reasonable period thereafter; therein, is generally exempt from execution, forced sale or attachment.30 time it is occupied as a family residence. From the time of its
constitution and so long as any of its beneficiaries actually resides
"In the absence of express provision it has variously held that claim (for The family home is a real right, which is gratuitous, inalienable and free therein, the family home continues to be such and is exempt from
exemption) must be made at the time of the levy if the debtor is present, from attachment. It cannot be seized by creditors except in certain execution, forced sale or attachment except as hereinafter provided
that it must be made within a reasonable time, or promptly, or before special cases.31 However, this right can be waived or be barred and to the extent of the value allowed by law. (223a)
the creditor has taken any step involving further costs, or before by laches by the failure to set up and prove the status of the property as
advertisement of sale, or at any time before sale, or within a reasonable a family home at the time of the levy or a reasonable time thereafter.
time before the sale, or before the sale has commenced, but as to the
[G.R. No. 138493. June 15, 2000]
last there is contrary authority." In this case, it is undisputed that the petitioners allowed a considerable
TEOFISTA BABIERA, petitioner, vs. PRESENTACION B.
time to lapse before claiming that the subject property is a family home
CATOTAL, respondent.
In the light of the facts above summarized, it is self-evident that and its exemption from execution and forced sale under the Family Code.
DECISION
appellants did not assert their claim of exemption within a reasonable The petitioners allowed the subject property to be levied upon and the
PANGANIBAN, J.:
time. Certainly, reasonable time, for purposes of the law on exemption, public sale to proceed. One (1) year lapsed from the time the subject
The Facts
does not mean a time after the expiration of the one-year period property was sold until a Final Deed of Sale was issued to Claudio and,
"Presentacion B. Catotal (hereafter referred to as PRESENTACION) filed
provided for in Section 30 of Rule 39 of the Rules of Court for judgment later, Araceli’s Torrens title was cancelled and a new one issued under
with the RTC, a petition for the cancellation of the entry of birth of
debtors to redeem the property sold on execution, otherwise it would Claudio’s name, still, the petitioner remained silent.
Teofista Babiera (herafter referred to as TEOFISTA)
render nugatory final bills of sale on execution and defeat the very
Catotal:
purpose of execution—to put an end to litigation.1awphil We said In fact, it was only after the respondents filed a complaint for unlawful
before, and We repeat it now, that litigation must end and terminate detainer, or approximately four (4) years from the time of the auction
 that she is the only surviving child of the late spouses Eugenio petition pursuant to Article 171 of the Family Code; and finally that the Hermogena did not give birth to petitioner. In other words,
Babiera and Hermogena Cariosa, who died. instant petition is barred by prescription in accordance with Article 170 the prayer herein is not to declare that petitioner is an
 On September 20, 1996 a baby girl was delivered by 'hilot' in of the Family Code.' The trial court denied the motion to dismiss. illegitimate child of Hermogena, but to establish that the
the house of spouses Eugenio and Hermogena Babiera and Court of Appeals: held that the evidence adduced during trial proved former is not the latter's child at all. Verily, the present action
without the knowledge of said spouses, Flora Guinto, the that petitioner was not the biological child of Hermogena Babiera. It does not impugn petitioners filiation to Spouses Eugenio and
mother of the child and a housemaid of spouses Eugenio and also ruled that no evidence was presented to show that Hermogena Hermogena Babiera, because there is no blood relation to
Hermogena Babiera, caused the registration/recording of the became pregnant in 1959. It further observed that she was already 54 impugn in the first place.
facts of birth of her child, by simulating that she was the child years old at the time, and that her last pregnancy had occurred way Petitioners recourse to Article 263 of the New Civil Code [now
of the spouses Eugenio, then 65 years old and Hermogena, back in 1941. The CA noted that the supposed birth took place at home, Art. 170 of the Family Code] is not well-taken. This legal
then 54 years old, and made Hermogena Babiera appear as notwithstanding the advanced age of Hermogena and its concomitant provision refers to an action to impugn legitimacy. It is
the mother by forging her signature x x x; medical complications. Moreover, petitioner's Birth Certificate was not inapplicable to this case because this is not an action to
signed by the local civil registrar, and the signature therein, which was impugn the legitimacy of a child, but an action of the private
Petitioner: then 15 years old, saw with her own eyes and personally purported to be that of Hermogena, was different from her other respondents to claim their inheritance as legal heirs of their
witnessed Flora Guinto give birth to Teofista Guinto, in their house, signatures. childless deceased aunt. They do not claim that petitioner
assisted by 'hilot'; that the birth certificate x x x of Teofista Guinto is The CA also deemed inapplicable Articles 170 and 171 of the Family Violeta Cabatbat Lim is an illegitimate child of the deceased,
void ab initio, as it was totally a simulated birth, signature of informant Code, which stated that only the father could impugn the child's but that she is not the decedents child at all. Being neither [a]
forged, and it contained false entries, legitimacy, and that the same was not subject to a collateral attack. It legally adopted child, nor an acknowledged natural child, nor
 The child is made to appear as the legitimate child of the late held that said provisions contemplated a situation wherein the husband a child by legal fiction of Esperanza Cabatbat, Violeta is not a
spouses Eugenio Babiera and Hermogena Cariosa, when she is or his heirs asserted that the child of the wife was not his. In this case, legal heir of the deceased."[12] (Emphasis supplied.)
not; the action involved the cancellation of the childs Birth Certificate for
b. Petitioner next contends that the action to contest her status
being void ab initio on the ground that the child did not belong to either
 The signature of Hermogena Cariosa, the mother, is as a child of the late Hermogena Babiera has already
the father or the mother.
falsified/forged. She was not the informant; prescribed. She cites Article 170 of the Family Code which
Issues:
 The family name BABIERA is false and unlawful and her provides the prescriptive period for such action:
correct family name is GUINTO, her mother being single; a. WON Article 171 of the family code is applicable
"Art. 170. The action to impugn the legitimacy of
 Her real mother was Flora Guinto and her status, an b. WON the petition is barred by prescription with Article 171
the child shall be brought within one year from the
illegitimate child; The natural father, the carpenter, did not Held: knowledge of the birth or its recording in the civil
sign it; that the respondent Teofista Barbiera's birth the Petition is hereby DENIED and the assailed Decision AFFIRMED. register, if the husband or, in a proper case, any of
certificate is void ab initio, and it is patently a simulation of Costs against petitioner. his heirs, should reside in the city or municipality
birth, since it is clinically and medically impossible for the Ratio: where the birth took place or was recorded.
supposed parents to bear a child in 1956 "If the husband or, in his default, all of his heirs do
a. Petitioner contends that respondent has no standing to sue,
 Hermogena Cariosa Babiera, was already 54 years old and not reside at the place of birth as defined in the first
because Article 171[8] of the Family Code states that the child's filiation
Eugenio was already 65 years old paragraph or where it was recorded, the period
can be impugned only by the father or, in special circumstances, his
 Hermogena's last child birth was in the year 1941, the year heirs. She adds that the legitimacy of a child is not subject to a collateral
shall be two years if they should reside in the
petitioner was born; Philippines; and three years if abroad. If the birth of
attack.This argument is incorrect. Respondent has the requisite
 that the void and simulated birth certificate of Teofista Guinto standing to initiate the present action. Section 2, Rule 3 of the Rules of
the child has been concealed from or was unknown
would affect the hereditary rights of petitioner who inherited to the husband or his heirs, the period shall be
Court, provides that a real party in interest is one "who stands to be
the estate of cancelled and declared void and theretofore she counted from the discovery or knowledge of the
benefited or injured by the judgment in the suit, or the party entitled to
prays that after publication, notice and hearing, judgment birth of the child or of the fact of registration of said
the avails of the suit."[9] The interest of respondent in the civil status of
[be] render[ed] declaring x x x the certificate of birth of birth, whichever is earlier."
petitioner stems from an action for partition which the latter filed
respondent Teofista Guinto as declared void, invalid and against the former.[10] The case concerned the properties inherited by This argument is bereft of merit. The present action involves the
ineffective and ordering the respondent local civil registrar of respondent from her parents. cancellation of petitioners Birth Certificate; it does not impugn her
Iligan to cancel from the registry of live birth of Iligan City legitimacy. Thus, the prescriptive period set forth in Article 170 of the
BIRTH CERTIFICATE Moreover, Article 171 of the Family Code is not applicable to
Family Code does not apply. Verily, the action to nullify the Birth
the present case. A close reading of this provision shows that
TEOFISTA filed a motion to dismiss on the grounds that 'the petition Certificate does not prescribe, because it was allegedly void ab initio.[13]
it applies to instances in which the father impugns the
states no cause of action, it being an attack on the legitimacy of the All in all, we find no reason to reverse or modify the factual finding of
legitimacy of his wifes child. The provision, however,
respondent as the child of the spouses Eugenio Babiera and Hermogena the trial and the appellate courts that petitioner was not the child of
presupposes that the child was the undisputed offspring of
Cariosa Babiera; that plaintiff has no legal capacity to file the instant respondents parents.
the mother. The present case alleges and shows that
G.R. No. 153798 September 2, 2005 Francisco and Genoveva Mercado, has not presented the precise, on her legitimate filiation to the decedent. A legitimate
BELEN SAGAD ANGELES, Petitioners, marriage contract between her supposed parents or produced child is a product of, and, therefore, implies a valid and lawful
vs. any acceptable document to prove such union. And evidently marriage. Remove the element of lawful union and there is
ALELI "CORAZON" ANGELES MAGLAYA, Respondent. to debunk respondent’s claim of being the only child of strictly no legitimate filiation between parents and child.
Ponente: Garcia J Francisco, petitioner likewise averred that she and Francisco Article 164 of the Family Code cannot be more emphatic on
had, during their marriage, legally adopted Concesa A. the matter: "Children conceived or born during the marriage
Thesis Statement: In this petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 Yamat, et al. Petitioner thus urged that she, being the surviving of the parents are legitimate."
of the Rules of Court, petitioner Belen Sagad Angeles seeks to set aside spouse of Francisco, be declared as possessed of the superior  A party in whose favor the legal presumption exists may rely
the Decision dated May 29, 20021 of the Court of Appeals in CA G.R. CV right to the administration of his estate. on and invoke such legal presumption to establish a fact in
No. 66037, reversing an earlier Order of the Regional Trial Court at  Respondent, as petitioner a quo, commenced the presentation issue. He need not introduce evidence to prove that fact. For,
Caloocan City which dismissed the petition for the settlement of the of her evidence by taking the witness stand. She testified a presumption is prima facie proof of the fact presumed.
intestate estate of Francisco Angeles, thereat commenced by the herein having been born on November 20, 1939 as the legitimate child However, it cannot be over-emphasized, that while a fact
respondent Aleli "Corazon" Angeles-Maglaya. of Francisco M. Angeles and Genoveva Mercado, who died in thus prima facie established by legal presumption shall, unless
Facts: January 1988.5 She also testified having been in open and overthrown, stand as proved, the presumption of legitimacy
continuous possession of the status of a legitimate child. Four under Article 164 of the Family Code may be availed only upon
 The legal dispute between the parties started when, on March (4) other witnesses testified on her behalf, namely: Tomas convincing proof of the factual basis therefor, i.e., that the
25, 1998, in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) at Caloocan City, Angeles,6 Francisco Yaya,7 Jose O. Carreon8 and Paulita child’s parents were legally married and that his/her
respondent filed a petition2 for letters of administration and Angeles de la Cruz.9 Respondent also offered in evidence her conception or birth occurred during the subsistence of that
her appointment as administratrix of the intestate estate of birth certificate which contained an entry stating that she was marriage. Else, the presumption of law that a child is legitimate
Francisco M. Angeles (Francisco, hereinafter). In the petition, born at the Mary Johnston Hospital, Tondo, Manila, to does not arise.
docketed as Special Proceedings No. C-2140 and raffled to Francisco Angeles and Genoveva Mercado and whereon the  In the case at bench, the Court of Appeals, in its decision under
Branch 120 of the court, respondent alleged, among other handwritten word "Yes" appears on the space below the review, did not categorically state from what facts established
things, the following: question "Legitimate? (Legitimo?)"; pictures taken during during the trial was the presumption of respondent’s supposed
respondent’s wedding as bride to Atty. Guillermo T. Maglaya; legitimacy arose. But even if perhaps it wanted to, it could not
1. That Francisco, a resident of 71 B. Serrano St., Grace Park, Caloocan, and a copy of her marriage contract. Likewise offered were her have possibly done so. For, save for respondent’s gratuitous
died intestate on January 21, 1998 in the City of Manila, leaving behind scholastic and government service records. assertion and an entry in her certificate of birth, there is
four (4) parcels of land and a building, among other valuable properties; absolutely no proof of the decedent’s marriage to
2. That there is a need to appoint an administrator of Francisco’s estate; RTC Ruling
respondent’s mother, Genoveva Mercado. To stress, no
3. That she (respondent) is the sole legitimate child of the deceased and marriage certificate or marriage contract – doubtless the best
Genoveva Mercado, and, together with petitioner, Belen S. Angeles,  Eventually, in an Order dated July 12, 1999,11 the trial court, on
evidence of Francisco’s and Genoveva’s marriage, if one had
decedent’s wife by his second marriage, are the surviving heirs of the its finding that respondent failed to prove her filiation as
been solemnized21 – was offered in evidence. No priest, judge,
decedent; and legitimate child of Francisco, dismissed the petition.
mayor, or other solemnizing authority was called to the
4. That she has all the qualifications and none of the disqualifications CA Ruling witness box to declare that he solemnized the marriage
required of an administrator. between the two. None of the four (4) witnesses respondent
 Reversed and set aside the trial court’s order of dismissal and presented could say anything about, let alone affirm, that
 Petitioner opposed the basic petition and prayed that she, directed it to appoint respondent as administratrix of the supposed marriage. At best, their testimonies proved that
instead of respondent, be made the administratrix of estate of Francisco. respondent was Francisco’s daughter.
Francisco’s estate. In support of her opposition and plea,
petitioner alleged having married Francisco on August 7, 1948 Issue: WON respondent (Aleli “Corazon” Angeles) is the legitimate child  While perhaps not determinative of the issue of the existence
before Judge Lucio M. Tianco of the Municipal Court of Rizal, a of decedent Francisco M. Angeles and Genoveva Mercado of marriage between Francisco and Genoveva, we can even go
union which was ratified two (2) months later in religious rites to the extent of saying that respondent has not even presented
at the Our Lady of Grace Parish in Caloocan City, and that Ruling: NO. WHEREFORE, the herein assailed decision of the Court of a witness to testify that her putative parents really held
Francisco represented in their marriage contract that he was Appeals is hereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE, and the order of the trial themselves out to the public as man-and-wife. Clearly,
single at that time. Petitioner also averred that court dismissing Special Proceedings No. C-2140 REINSTATED therefore, the Court of Appeals erred in crediting respondent
respondent could not be the daughter of Francisco for, with the legal presumption of legitimacy which, as above
Rational:
although she was recorded as Francisco’s legitimate daughter, explained, should flow from a lawful marriage between
the corresponding birth certificate was not signed by him.
 We are unable to lend concurrence to the appellate court’s Francisco and Genevova. To reiterate, absent such a marriage,
Pressing on, petitioner further alleged that as here, there is no presumption of legitimacy and, therefore,
conclusion on the legitimate status of respondent, or, to be
respondent, despite her claim of being the legitimate child of there was really nothing for petitioner to rebut.
 Parenthetically, for all her unyielding stance that her mother and Genoveva Mercado. And the word "married" is written in  The argument may be advanced that the aforesaid wedding
and Francisco Angeles were married in 1938, respondent the certificate to indicate the union of Francisco and Genoveva. pictures, the school and service records and the testimony of
never, thru the years, even question what would necessarily be  The Birth Certificate presented was not signed by Francisco respondent’s witnesses lend support to her claim of enjoying
a bigamous Francisco-Belen Sagad marriage. Ironical as it may against whom legitimate filiation is asserted. Not even by open and continuous possession of the status of a child of
seem, respondent herself undermined her very own case. As it Genoveva. It was signed by the attending physician, one Francisco. The Court can even concede that respondent may
were, she made certain judicial admission negating her own Rebecca De Guzman, who certified to having attended the have been the natural child of Francisco with Genoveva.
assertion – as well as the appellate court’s conclusion - that birth of a child. Such certificate, albeit considered a public Unfortunately, however, that angle is not an, or at issue in the
Francisco was legally married to Genoveva. As may be recalled, record of a private document is, under Section 23, Rule 132 of case before us. For, respondent peremptorily predicated her
respondent had declared that her mother Genoveva died the Rules of Court, evidence only of the fact which gave rise to petition for letters of administration on her being a legitimate
in 1988, implying, quite clearly, that when Francisco its execution: the fact of birth of a child. Jurisprudence teaches child of Francisco who was legally married to her mother,
contracted marriage with petitioner Belen S. Angeles in 1948, that a birth certificate, to be considered as validating proof of Genoveva, propositions which we have earlier refuted herein.
Genoveva and Francisco were already "spouses". Now, then, if, paternity and as an instrument of recognition, must be signed
as respondent maintained despite utter lack of evidence, that by the father and mother jointly, or by the mother alone if the  Petitioner Aleli "Corazon Maglaya belabors with repetitious
Genoveva Mercado and Francisco were married in 1938, it father refuses persistence the argument that she is a legitimate child or the
follows that the marriage of Francisco to petitioner Belen only daughter of Francisco M. Angeles and Genoveva Y.
Angeles in 1948, or prior to Genoveva’s death, would  It cannot be over-emphasized that the legitimate filiation of a Mercado. In the case at bench, other than the self-serving
necessarily have to be bigamous, hence void,24 in which case child is a matter fixed by law itself. It cannot, as the decision declaration of the petitioner, there is nothing in the record to
petitioner could not be, as respondent alleged in her petition under review seems to suggest, be made dependent on the support petitioner’s claim that she is indeed a legitimate child
for letters of administration, a "surviving spouse" of the declaration of the attending physician or midwife, or that of of the late Francisco M. Angeles and Genoveva Y. Mercado. In
decedent. We quote the pertinent allegation: the mother of the newborn child. For then, an unwed mother, other words, Francisco M. Angeles was never married before
 4. The surviving heirs of decedent are the petitioner [Corazon] with or without the participation of a doctor or midwife, could or at anytime prior to his marriage to Belen Sagad, contrary to
herself who is 58 years old, and BELEN S. Angeles, the surviving veritably invest legitimate status to her offspring through the the claim of petitioner that Francisco M. Angeles and Genoveva
spouse of deceased Francisco M. Angeles by his second simple expedient of writing the putative father’s name in the Y. Mercado were married in 1938
marriage, who is about 77 years old . ..YEARS OLD . . . " appropriate space in the birth certificate. A long time past, this  While petitioner may have submitted certifications to the
 We can concede, because Article 172 of the Family Code Court cautioned against according a similar unsigned birth effect that the records of marriages during the war years . . .
appears to say so, that the legitimate filiation of a child can be certificate prima facie evidentiary value of filiation: were totally destroyed, no secondary evidence was presented
established by any of the modes therein defined even without by petitioner to prove the existence of the marriage between
Give this certificate evidential relevancy, and we thereby pave the way Francisco M. Angeles and Genoveva Y. Mercado, even as no
direct evidence of the marriage of his/her supposed parents. for any scheming unmarried mother to extort money for her child (and
Said article 172 reads: witness was presented to confirm the celebration of such
herself) from any eligible bachelor or affluent pater familias. How? She marriage.
 Art. 172. The filiation of legitimate children is established by simply causes the midwife to state in the birth certificate that the
any of the following:  Petitioner presented pictures. However, it is already settled
newborn babe is her legitimate offspring with that individual and the
1. The record of birth appearing in the civil register or a final law that photographs are not sufficient evidence of filiation or
certificate will be accepted for registration and any lawyer with sufficient
judgments; or acknowledgment.
imagination will realize the exciting possibilities from such mischief of
2. An admission of legitimate filiation in a public document or a such prima facie evidence – when and if the "father" dies in ignorance of  To be sure, very little comfort is provided by petitioner’s birth
private handwritten instrument and signed by the parent the fraudulent design certificate and even her marriage contract.. . . Reason: These
concerned. documents were not signed by Francisco . . . . Equally
 In the absence of the foregoing evidence, the legitimate  Just like her Birth Certificate, respondent can hardly derive inconsequential are petitioner’s school records . . . . all these
filiation shall be proved by: comfort from her marriage contract to Atty. Maglaya and from lacked the signatures of both Francisco and Genoveva . . . .
1. The open and continuous possession of the status of a legitimate her student and government records which indicated or  Following the rule on conclusiveness of judgment, herein
child; or purported to show that Francisco Angeles is her father. The respondent is precluded from claiming that she is the
same holds true for her wedding pictures which showed legitimate daughter of Francisco and Genoveva Mercado. In
2. Any other means allowed by the Rules of Court and special laws. Francisco giving respondent’s hands in marriage. These papers fine, the issue of herein respondent’s legitimate filiation to
or documents, unsigned as they are by Francisco or the Francisco and the latter’s marriage to Genoveva, having been
 Here, respondent presented, in support of her claim of execution of which he had no part, are not sufficient evidence judicially determined in a final judgment by a court of
legitimacy, a copy of her Birth Certificate dated November 23, of filiation or recognition. And needless to stress, they cannot competent jurisdiction, has thereby become res judicata and
1939 issued by the Civil Registrar of the City of Manila. In it, her support a finding of the legitimate union of Francisco and may not again be resurrected or litigated between herein
birth was recorded as the legitimate child of Francisco Angeles Genoveva. petitioner and respondent or their privies in a subsequent
action, regardless of the form of the latter.
 Finally, it should be noted that on the matter of appointment brought to the Court of Appeals. However, it reversed the decision of the The fight for administration of Vicente’s estate ensued. In 1990, the
of administrator of the estate of the deceased, the surviving trial court. It considered the birth certificate of Ida stating that she was private respondents Victoria and Feodor prayed for the issuance of
spouse is preferred over the next of kin of the decedent. When born of different parents. letters of administration of Vicente’s estate in favor of Feodor Aguilar.
the law speaks of "next of kin", the reference is to those who Petitioner then opposed the petition. She alleged that she is the sole
are entitled, under the statute of distribution, to the heir of the deceased Vicente and capable of administering his estate.
decedent’s property; one whose relationship is such that he is ISSUE: The parties further exchanged reply and rejoinder to the buttress their
entitled to share in the estate as distributed, or, in short, an legal postures.
1. Whether or not petitioner is entitled to Jose Santiago’s 1/3
heir. In resolving, therefore, the issue of whether an applicant portion of the property he co-owned with respondents,
for letters of administration is a next of kin or an heir of the The petitioner presented evidence and testified that she was raised and
through succession, sale, or donation.
decedent, the probate court perforce has to determine and cared by the deceased spouses since childhood, though not related to
2. Whether or not respondents may impugn petitioner’s filiation
pass upon the issue of filiation. A separate action will only them by blood, nor legally adopted. Victoria, Vicente’s sister,
in this action for recovery of title and possession.
result in a multiplicity of suits. Upon this consideration, the trial categorically declared that petitioner was not the biological child of the
court acted within bounds when it looked into and pass upon said spouses who were unable to physically procreate.
RULING:
the claimed relationship of respondent to the late Francisco
Angeles. 1. No. The Court ruled that there is no valid sale in this case. Jose The trial court decided in favor of the petitioner and dismissed the
Santiago did not have the right to transfer the ownership of the private respondent’s petition for letters and administration and
Legal Basis: entire property to Ida Labagala for the 2/3 of the said property declared petitioner as the legitimate daughter and sole heir of the late
belonged to his two sisters. Moreover, one of the essential spouses Vicente and Isabel.
Art. 172. The filiation of legitimate children is established by any of the
following: element of a contract is consent. The petitioner is a minor at
the time of sale thus absent of the said consent will render it Issue: Whether or not Marissa Benitez-Badua is the sole heir of the late
1. The record of birth appearing in the civil register or a final spouses Vicente and Isabel.
judgments; or void. In addition, petitioner admittedly did not pay any centavo
2. An admission of legitimate filiation in a public document or a for the property which also renders it void. Furthermore, the
deed cannot be a valid donation. Being a minor, the acceptance Ruling: No. The petition is dismissed for lack of merit.
private handwritten instrument and signed by the parent
concerned. of the donation should have been made by her father, mother
or legal representative. Ratio: The claim for inheritance of a child who is not the biological or
2. Yes. Article 263 refers to an action to impugn the legitimacy of adopted child of deceased was denied, on the ground that Articles 164,
In the absence of the foregoing evidence, the legitimate filiation shall be 166, 170, and 171 of the Family Code do not contemplate a situation
a child, to assert and prove that a person is not a man’s child
proved by: where a child is alleged not to be the child by nature or biological child
1. The open and continuous possession of the status of a legitimate by his wife. However, the present respondents are asserting
not merely that petitioner is not a legitimate child of Jose, but of a certain couple. Rather, these articles govern a situation where the
child; or husband or his heirs denies as his own a child of his wife.
that she is not a child of Jose at all. A baptismal certificate. A
2. Any other means allowed by the Rules of Court and special laws. baptismal certificate is not a conclusive proof of filiation. Use
of a family name certainly does not establish pedigree. Thus,
she cannot inherit from him through intestate succession. G.R. No. 108366 February 16, 1994
Ida Lagabala vs Nicolasa Santiago JOHN PAUL E. FERNANDEZ, ET AL., petitioners,
DECISION:
vs.
FACTS: WHEREFORE, the petition is denied, and the decision of the Court of THE COURT OF APPEALS and CARLITO S. FERNANDEZ, respondents.
Appeals is affirmed. Costs against petitioner.
Jose T. Santiago is the owner of a parcel of land covered by TCT No. Facts:
64729, located in Rizal Avenue Extension, Sta. Cruz, Manila. However, his Marissa Benitez-Badua vs. CA, Victoria Benitez Lirio and Feodor 1. John Paul Fernandez and Claro Antonio Fernandez to compel Carlito
two sisters sued him for the recovery of 2/3 portion of the land alleging Benitez Aguilar Fernandez to recognize or acknowledge them as his illegitimate
that he had fraudulently registered it in his name. The trial court ruled in G.R. No. 105625, January 24, 1994 children.
favor of his sisters. Few years after, Jose died intestate. His sisters then Puno, J.: 2. Violeta pointed to Carlito as the father of her two sons. She claimed
filed a complaint before the Regional Trial Court for the recovery of 1/3 that they started their illicit sexual relationship six (6) months after their
portion of the said land which was in the possession of the Ida C. Facts: The spouses Vicente and Isabel Benitez owned various first meeting. The tryst resulted in the birth of petitioner Claro Antonio
Labagala, who claimed to be the daughter of Jose. The trial court ruled in properties. Isabel died in April 1982 while Vicente died 7 years after on March 1, 1984, and of petitioner John Paul on not know that Carlito
favor of Labagala. According to the trial court, the said deed constitutes Isabel. was married until the birth of her two children. She averred they were
a valid donation. Even if it were not, Labagala would still be entitled of married in civil rites in October, 1983. In March, 1985, however, she
Jose’s share of the property for she is the daughter. The matter was then discovered that the marriage license which they used was spurious.
To bolster their case, petitioners presented the following documentary of Father Liberato Fernandez who solemnized the baptismal ceremony Medication was given to Sandra but her condition did not improve.
evidence: their certificates of live birth, identifying respondent Carlito of petitioner Claro. Sandra became irritable and moody. She felt sick and unhappy.
as their father; the baptismal certificate of petitioner Claro which also
The following day, August 8, 1989, Sandra saw Moreno Tumimpad
states that his father is respondent Carlito; photographs of Carlito taken There is no proof that Father Fernandez is a close friend of Violeta
coming out from the kitchen and told her mother, "Mama, patayin mo
during the baptism of petitioner Claro; and pictures of respondent Esguerra and the private respondent which should render
'yan, bastos." 2
Carlito and Claro taken at the home of Violeta Esguerra. unquestionable his identification of the private respondent during
3. RTC favored the petitioners. “The defendant (herein private petitioner Claro's baptism. In the absence of this proof, we are not Mrs. Pastora Salcedo, worried of her daughter's condition, brought her
respondent) is hereby ordered to recognize Claro Antonio Carlito prepared to concede that Father Fernandez who officiates numerous to Regina Hospital. Sandra was able to relieve herself the following day
Fernandez, now aged 6, and John Paul Fernandez, now aged 4 1/2 as his baptismal ceremonies day in and day out can remember the parents of but still remained moody and irritable. She refused to take a bath in spite
sons.” the children he has baptized. of scoldings from her mother. She did not want to eat and whenever she
did, she would vomit.
4. CA reversed and set aside the trial court decision. It found that the
"proof relied upon by the (trial) court (is) inadequate to prove the G.R. No. 109144 August 19, 1994 Sandra was brought to a doctor in Oroquieta City for a second checkup.
(private respondent's) paternity and filiation of (petitioners)." It further Dr. Conol, the examining physician, ordered a urinalysis. Jose C. Lim, a
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, Medical Technologist, conducted the urinalysis. The result revealed that
held that the doctrine of res judicata applied because of the dismissal of
vs. Sandra was pregnant. 3 Mrs. Pastora Salcedo could not believe that her
the petitioners complaint in Civil Case No. Q-45567. Petitioners' motion
MORENO L. TUMIMPAD, accused-appellant. daughter was pregnant and so she brought Sandra to Madonna and Child
for reconsideration was denied on December 22, 1992.
Hospital in Cagayan de Oro City. Dr. Kho, and OB-GYNE Specialist,
Issue: Can the court compel Carlito Fernandez to recognize the examined Sandra and subjected her to a pelvic ultra-sound examination.
Ponente: KAPUNAN, J.:
petitioners as illegitimate children based on presented set of evidence? The results were positive. The fetus' gestational age was equivalent to
Nature: 17.1 weeks. 4 Another ultra-sound examination at the United Doctors
Ruling: Medical Center (UDMC) at Quezon City on September 11, 1989
Accused-appellant Constable Moreno L. Tumimpad and co-accused
No. The Court finds no merit in the petition. confirmed that she was indeed pregnant. 5
Constable Ruel C. Prieto were charged with the crime of rape
committed against a 15-year old Mongoloid child in a complaint dated On January 11, 1990, Sandra gave birth to a baby boy who was named
Firstly, we hold that petitioners cannot rely on the photographs on May 24, 1991, signed by her mother, Mrs. Pastora L. Salcedo, which Jacob Salcedo. Hence, the filing of the complaint 6 by Mrs. Pastora
showing the presence of the private respondent in the baptism of reads: Salcedo.
petitioner Claro. These photographs are far from proofs that private
respondent is the father of petitioner Claro. As explained by the private That during the period between the last week of March 1989 and the first During the investigation conducted by the CIS, about thirty (30) pictures
respondent, he was in the baptism as one of the sponsors of petitioner week of April 1989, in Barangay Lower Lamac, Oroquieta City, of different persons were laid on the table and Sandra was asked to pick
Claro. His testimony was corroborated by Rodante Pagtakhan. Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the said up the pictures of her assailants. Sandra singled out the pictures of
accused did then and there, wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously, have (sic) Moreno Tumimpad and Ruel Prieto. 7 Later, Sandra was brought out of
Secondly, the pictures taken in the house of Violeta showing private carnal knowledge with Sandra Salcedo, complainant's daughter, a the investigation room to a police line-up of ten people, including
respondent showering affection to Claro fall short of the evidence woman who is a mongoloid and so weak of mind and in intellect as to be Moreno Tumimpad and Ruel Prieto. She was again asked to point to her
required to prove paternity. capable of giving rational and legal consent. assailants. Without hesitation, Sandra fingered Moreno Tumimpad and
Thirdly, the baptismal of petitioner Claro naming private respondent as Ruel Prieto.8
Facts:
his father has scant evidentiary value. There is no showing that private Mrs. Pastora Salcedo testified that she requested her two daughters-in-
respondent participated in its preparation. Sandra Salcedo at the time of the incident was a 15-year old Mongoloid
law, Joy Salcedo and Celsa Salcedo, to ask Sandra the identity of the
and daughter of Lt. Col. Teofisto Salcedo and Pastora Salcedo. She had a
persons who sexually molested her.
Fourth, the certificates of live birth of the petitioners identifying mind of a five-year old child, who still needed to be fed and dressed up.
private respondent as their father are not also competent evidence on Her vocabulary was limited and most of the time she expressed herself Sandra identified in open court accused Moreno Tumimpad and Ruel
the issue of their paternity. Again, the records do not show that private by motions. Prieto as the persons who raped her and said she wished them dead, as
respondent had a hand in the preparation of said certificates. We they did something bad to her. 11 She once again demonstrated how she
Col. Teofisto Salcedo was then Provincial Commander of Misamis
reiterated this rule in Berciles, op. cit., when we held that "a birth was sexually abused. She held her two thighs with her two hands next to
Occidental. Four security men were assigned to him, two of whom were
certificate no signed by the alleged father therein indicated is not her sexual organ saying, "panty" and then placed her hand on her breast
accused Constable Ruel Prieto and accused-appellant Moreno
competent evidence of paternity." and gestured as if she were sucking. She also touched her private organ
Tumimpad.
and made a push and pull movement. 12
We have also reviewed the relevant testimonies of the witnesses for It was on August 7, 1989, when Sandra complained of constipation. Mrs.
During the trial, the accused moved that a blood test, both "Major
the petitioners and we are satisfied that the respondent appellate court Salcedo then brought her to a doctor in Oroquieta City for a checkup.
Blood Grouping Test" and "Pheno Blood Typing" be conducted on the
properly calibrated their weight. Petitioners capitalize on the testimony
offended party, her child Jacob and the two accused. The result of the 2. Accused-appellant simplistically and quite erroneously argues that his  Their relationship became intimate and with his promise of
test conducted by the Makati Medical Center showed that Jacob conviction was based on the medical finding that he and the victim have marriage, they eloped to Guagua.
Salcedo has a type "O" blood, Sandra Salcedo type "B", accused Ruel the same blood type "O".
Prieto type "A" and accused-appellant type "O".  In October, 1962, she delivered a still-born female child at the
Accused-appellants' culpability was established mainly by testimonial
Manila Sanitarium. The death certificate was signed by Artemio
Both accused anchored their defense on mere denial contending that it evidence given by the victim herself and her relatives. The blood test was
was impossible for them to have committed the crime of rape. adduced as evidence only to show that the alleged father or any one of  December 30, 1963 Merceditas S. Ilano was born, her birth was
many others of the same blood type may have been the father of the recorded as Merceditas de los Santos Ilano, child of Leoncia
After trial on the merits, the trial court convicted Moreno Tumimpad of
child. As held by this Court in Janice Marie Jao vs. Court of Appeals 19: Aguinaldo de los Santos and Artemio Geluz Ilano
the crime charged but acquitted the other accused, Ruel Prieto, on
reasonable doubt, stating that he "has a different type of blood with (sic) Paternity — Science has demonstrated that by the analysis of blood
the child Jacob Salcedo as his type of blood is "A", while that of child samples of the mother, the child, and the alleged father, it can be  The support by Artemio for Leoncia and Merceditas was
Jacob Salcedo is type "O". established conclusively that the man is not the father of a particular sometimes in the form of cash personally delivered by him, thru
child. But group blood testing cannot show only a possibility that he is. Melencio, thru Elynia (niece of Leoncia) or thru Merceditas
ISSUES: herself; and sometimes in the form of a check
Statutes in many states, and courts in others, have recognized the value
1. WON lower court erred in not appreciating the impossibility of and the limitations of such tests. Some of the decisions have recognized
 During the time that Artemio and Leoncia were living as husband
committing the offense charged without detection. the conclusive presumption of non-paternity where the results of the
and wife, he showed concern as the father of Merceditas
test, made in the prescribed manner, show the impossibility of the
2. WON lower court erred in convicting the accused-appellant base on alleged paternity. This is one of the few cases in which the judgment of
major blood grouping test known as ABO and RHS test, not a paternal  Prior to the birth of Merceditas, Elynia used to accompany her
the Court may scientifically be completely accurate, and intolerable aunt and sometimes with petitioner in his car to the Manila
test known as chromosomes or HLA test. results avoided, such as have occurred where the finding is allowed to Sanitarium for prenatal check-up
RULING: 1. No 2. No. turn on oral testimony conflicting with the results of the test. The findings
of such blood tests are not admissible to prove the fact of paternity as  Elynia used to go to Artemio’s office to get money as
RATIO: they show only a possibility that the alleged father or any one of many support
1. It is true that the accused usually went with Col. Salcedo during others with the same blood type may have been the father of the child.
inspection tours but sometimes they were left behind and would  Artemio’s defense was a total and complete denial of any
WHEREFORE, accused-appellant's guilt of the crime of rape having been
play pingpong or card games with Sandra at the ground floor of the relationship with Leoncia and Merceditas, he also denied the
proven beyond reasonable doubt, the decision appealed from is hereby
house. While Sandra was always with her mother, there were times following:
AFFIRMED.
when she was left alone in the house with the accused.
SO ORDERED.  Signatures of the death certificate of a female child
Mrs. Pastora Salcedo testified that she requested her two daughters-in- surnamed Ilano.
law, Joy Salcedo and Celsa Salcedo, to ask Sandra the identity of the
persons who sexually molested her. G.R. No. 104376 February 23, 1994  notes alleged to have been received from him by Elynia
ARTEMIO G. ILANO, petitioner, vs. for delivery to Leoncia
The victim more than once positively identified accused-appellant THE COURT OF APPEALS and MERCEDITAS (sic) S. ILANO, represented
Moreno Tumimpad as one of the perpetrators of the crime. First, during by her mother, LEONCIA DE LOS SANTOS, respondent.  signatures appearing in Merceditas' Report Card
the investigation conducted by the CIS, Sandra singled out accused- NOCON, J.:
appellant and his co-accused from among the thirty (30) pictures of  a photo of himself with a handwritten dedication
FACTS
different persons shown to her. Second, at the police lineup of several
persons, likewise conducted by the CIS, Sandra once again unerringly
 He was sick on December 30, 1963 and was hospitalized
 Leoncia was working as secretary to Atty. Mariano C. Virata and on January 7, 1964. He does not understand why this
pointed accused-appellant and his co-accused as the ones who raped one of their clients is Artemio G. Ilano (petitioner). In less than a case was filed against him
her. Third, in open court, Sandra without hesitation, pointed to accused-
year, Leoncia resigned from her work.
appellant as the perpetrator of the crime.
 Melencio admitted that he was the one who procured the
Melinda Joy Salcedo, the victim's sister-in-law, testified that Sandra  in 1957, Leoncia, then managing a business of her own as apartment for Leoncia, leased it in his name, paid the rentals and
demonstrated to her how she was ravished by the two accused Namarco distributor, met Artemio again who was engaged in the bought the necessities therefor. He and Leoncia lived together and
same business shared the same bed.
IN SHORT, THEIR TESTIMONIES WERE CRUCIAL TOWARDS THE
CONVICTION OF THE ACCUSED.  Since then, Artemio would give Leoncia his unsold allocation of
goods. Later, Artemio courted her more than four years
 Nilda Ilano Ramos, daughter of petitioner denied that her father  (1) Natural, whether actual or by fiction, were those born  To be sure, to establish "the open and continuous possession of
was at the Manila Sanitarium on December 30, 1963 as he was sick outside of lawful wedlock of parents who, at the time of the status of an illegitimate child," it is necessary to comply with
and was advised to have a complete body rest conception of the child, were not disqualified by any certain jurisprudential requirements. "Continuous" does not,
impediment to marry each other (Article 119, old Civil however, mean that the concession of status shall continue
 Victoria J. Ilano, petitioner's wife, further corroborated about Code; Article 269, new Civil Code) forever but only that it shall not be of an intermittent character
petitioner's sickness on December 30, 1963 and hospitalization on while it continues (De Jesus v. Syquia, 58 Phil. 866)
January 7, 1964  (2) Spurious, whether incestuous, were disqualified to
marry each other on account of certain legal  The possession of such status means that the father has treated
 Trial court was not fully satisfied that petitioner is the father of impediments the child as his own, directly and not through other, spontaneously
Merceditas but the Court of Appeals did not share the same view and without concealment though without publicity (since the
as the trial court, declaring plaintiff MERCEDITAS S. ILANO as the  Since petitioner had a subsisting marriage to another at the time relation is illegitimate) (J.B.L. Reyes and R.C. Puno, Outline of
duly acknowledged and recognized illegitimate child of defendant Merceditas was conceived, she is a spurious child. In this regard, Philippine Civil Law, Vol. 1, 1964 ed., pp. 269-270 citing Coquia vs.
ARTEMIO G. ILANO Article 287 of the Civil Code provides that illegitimate children Coquia, CA 50, O.G. 3701)
other than natural in accordance with Article 269 and other than
ISSUE natural children by legal fiction are entitled to support and such  There must be a showing of the permanent intention of the
successional rights as are granted in the Civil Code. supposed father to consider the child as his own, by continuous
 WON MERCEDITAS S. ILANO is the duly acknowledged and
and clear manifestation of paternal affection and care. (Tolentino,
recognized illegitimate child.  The Civil Code has given these rights to them because Civil Code of the Philippines, Vol. 1, 1983 ed., p. 602). (Mendoza
the transgressions of social conventions committed by vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 86302, September 24, 1991.)
PETITIONER’S CONTENTION
the parents should not be visited upon them. They were
 since the complaint against him has been dismissed by the trial born with a social handicap and the law should help  The mere denial by Artemio of his signature is not sufficient to
court, therefore was absolutely no obligation on his part to give them to surmount the disadvantages facing them offset the totality of the evidence indubitably showing that the
support to Merceditas through the misdeeds of their parents. signature thereon belongs to him.

 It would have been only from the date of the judgment of the trial  HOWEVER, before Article 287 can be availed of, THERE MUST  The entry in the Certificate of Live Birth that Leoncia and Artemio
court that support should have commenced, if so granted. FIRST BE A RECOGNITION OF PATERNITY EITHER VOLUNTARILY was falsely stated therein as married does not mean that
OR BY COURT ACTION. This arises from the legal principle that an Merceditas is not appellee's daughter. This particular entry was
 Under the law in force when the complaint was filed, an unrecognized spurious child like a natural child has no rights from caused to be made by Artemio himself in order to avoid
adulterous child cannot maintain an action for compulsory his parents or to their estate because his rights spring not from the embarrassment.
recognition filiation or blood relationship but from his acknowledgment by the
parent  It is difficult to believe that plaintiffs mother, who is a mere
 In order that the birth certificate may constitute a voluntary dressmaker, had long beforehand diabolically conceived of a plan
recognition, it must be signed by the father  In other words, the rights of an illegitimate child arose to make it appear that defendant, who claims to be a total
not because he was the true or real child of his parents stranger to be a total stranger, was the father of her child, and in
 Equivocal act, such as signing under the caption "parent" in the but because under the law, he had been recognized or the process falsified the latter's signatures and handwriting.
report card, is not sufficient acknowledged as such a child (The relevant law on the
matter is Article 283 of the Civil Code)  The natural, logical and coherent evidence of plaintiff from the
 Merceditas has never been to the family home of petitioner at genesis of the relationship between Leoncia and Artemio, their
Imus, Cavite; nor introduced to his family; nor brought around  The belated denial of paternity after the action has been filed living together as circumstances of Merceditas birth, the acts of
town by him, treated as his child, introduced to other people as his against the putative father is not the denial that would destroy the Artemio in recognizing and supporting Merceditas, find ample
child, led people to believe that she was part of his family paternity of the child which had already been recognized by support from the testimonial and documentary evidence which
defendant by various positive acts clearly evidencing that he is leaves no room to reasonably doubt his paternity which may not
HELD/RULING plaintiff's father. A recognition once validly made is irrevocable. It be infirmed by his belated denials.
cannot be withdrawn. A mere change of mind would be
 YES. incompatible with the stability of the civil status of person, the  WHEREFORE, the petition is hereby DENIED. The decision of
permanence of which affects public interest. Even when the act in the Court of Appeals dated December 17, 1991 and its resolution
 Under the then prevailing provisions of the Civil Code, illegitimate dated February 26, 1992 are AFFIRMED
which it is made should be revocable, the revocation of such act
children or those who are conceived and born out of wedlock were
will not revoke the recognition itself (1 Tolentino, pp. 579-580,
generally classified into two groups:
1983 Ed.)
LEGITIMATE CHILDREN
c. He made known to the personnel of the International School i. Her uncles and aunts, i.e., brothers and sisters of her father,
G.R. No. 86639 June 2, 1994 where oppositor was enrolled that she was his daughter. regarded her as their niece and introduced her to others as the eldest
MA. THERESA R. ALBERTO, petitioner, 2. The following incidents would show the direct acts of the daughter of Juan Alberto.
vs. family of the deceased. j. The children of the brothers and sisters of Juan Alberto
COURT OF APPEALS, INTESTATE ESTATE OF JUAN M. ALBERTO, and a. When the deceased’s younger sister, Mrs. Aurita Alberto recognized her as their cousin.
YOLANDA R. ALBERTO, respondents. Solidum asked that the oppositor be sent to her house in her Sunday best 3.3. Jose Tablizo testified that:
The father is obliged to recognize the child as his natural child when the to meet her father for the first time; a. There was a strong physical resemblance between the
child is in continuous possession of status of a child of the alleged father b. When Fr. Arcilla brought the oppositor to the bedside of the deceased and the oppositor.
by the direct acts of the latter or his family. deceased in the hospital and Fr. Arcilla asked the guard to give way to b. The deceased and the oppositor wrote similarly.
PONENTE: ROMERO, J. her as she was a member of the family; c. It was known among the friends of the deceased, particularly
c. When the step-mother of the deceased, during the wake, the Breeze Gang, composed of the witness, Jose Tablizo, the deceased
NATURE OF THE CASE introduced the oppositor to her youngest sister as an elder sister. and 4 others.
 On September 18, 1953, a child named Ma. Theresa Alberto 3. Prescinding from the foregoing, there is sufficient evidence to d. Sometime in 1967, the deceased showed him the report card
was born out of wedlock to one Aurora Reniva with Juan M. prove that the oppositor is the child of the deceased. of the Oppositor and boasted of her high grades.
Alberto as the alleged father. Accordingly, she used "Alberto" 3.1. Oppositor’s mother, Aurora Reniva, testified: e. The friends of the deceased had a party in Virac, Catanduanes
as her surname in all her school records and correspondences. a. of an indiscretion that led to the conception of and giving birth for the oppositor whom they considered as the deceased’s daughter.
 On September 18, 1967, Juan M. Alberto, felled by a bullet to the oppositor; (This was corroborated by Silverio Taberara.)
from an assassin’s gun, died intestate. His widow, Yolanda R. b. that Mrs. Aurita Solidum arranged the meeting between the 4. Atty. Martiniano Vivo testified that Commissioner of
Alberto, filed a petition for the administration of his estate on oppositor and the deceased at the MOPC; (This particular testimony was Immigration Edmundo Reyes, as lawyer for the deceased, made an
January 10, 1968. After the publication of notices, she was corroborated by Cristeta Andaya, former maid of Mrs. Solidum, and by appointment with him (Atty. Vivo) for a conference, at which they
appointed as the administratrix of the estate. the oppositor) and discussed the latter’s letter to the deceased regarding the oppositor. In
 After the Inventory and Appraisal and the Administratrix' c. that Juan Alberto had been sending her money from time to said conference, Com. Reyes said that the deceased was not denying that
Accounting were approved on August 1, 1970 and on April 29, time. he was the father of the oppositor. And because of his marital status and
1971 respectively, the proceedings were ordered closed and 3.2. Oppositor also testified that: the fact that he was a public official, he wanted to avoid public scandal
terminated. a. She had her first meeting with her father at the MOPC where with the promise to support the oppositor quietly through a cousin, Fr.
he gave her P500.00 personally and two telephone numbers where he Arcilla.
 On September 15, 1978, Ma. Theresa Alberto filed a motion for
could be contacted and where they talked about her name, age and other
leave to intervene as oppositor and to re-open the proceedings
matters. CA RULING
praying that she be declared to have acquired the status of a
b. She had other meetings with her father at the MOPC on which The Court of Appeals reversed the above decision of the probate court.
natural child and as such, entitled to share in the estate of the
occasions her father also gave her money.
deceased.
c. The deceased visited her two times at the International School Assuming the foregoing to be true, they do not satisfy the degree of proof
whose rules on visitors were strict and when her father visited her, the to establish that oppositor was in continuous possession of the status of
PROBATE COURT RULING
secretary of the principal told her that her father was waiting for her. This a natural child of the deceased. They may show that the defendant was
Upon the presentation by the parties of their respective evidence during
showed that the deceased had identified himself to the personnel of the convinced of his paternity in relation to the children; but they do not
the trial, the probate court was convinced that indeed, Ma. Theresa
school that he was the father of the oppositor. show any intent on his part to place such children in the possession of
Alberto had been ontinuous possession of the status of a natural child.
d. He promised to see her in her school during her birthday on status of natural children. The continued possession of such status
Thereupon, it rendered a decision compelling the decedent’s heirs and
September 18, 1968 but was not able to do so because of his untimely cannot be founded on conjectures and presumption. So, also, the mere
estate to recognize her as a natural daughter and to allow her to
death. fact that defendant’s mother used to visit the child, cannot be considered
participate in the estate proceedings.
e. The deceased promised to bring the oppositor to Catanduanes as conduct of his family sufficient to confer the uninterrupted possession
The probate court’s findings are quoted hereunder, to wit:
but failed likewise because of his death. of the status of a natural child.
1. In the case at bar, the Court believes, and so holds, that the
f. When oppositor and her mother went to the PGH on the
oppositor has been in continuous possession of the status of a
occasion of her father’s death, Fr. Arcilla held her by the hand and asked We find the evidence of oppositor-appellee even weaker. As a matter of
child of Juan Alberto by his direct acts as well as the acts of his
the guard to make way for her because she was a child of Juan Alberto. fact, a letter written by oppositor to Jose Tablizo after the death of the
family, as follows:
g. After the wake for her deceased father, the deceased’s step- deceased, betrays a lack of association between the deceased and
a. The deceased gave the oppositor sums of money for her
mother, Saturnina Alberto, introduced her as a sister to Joy Alberto her oppositor such as normally characterizes the relationship between father
schooling;
half-sister. and child. It gives the impression that the deceased studiously distanced
b. The deceased made known to his friends and relatives that she
h. Congressman Jose Alberto allowed her associates, upon her himself from the oppositor and had no intention whatsoever of
was his daughter; and
representations, to use the ballroom of the Regent of Manila for practice recognizing oppositor as his child. The pertinent portion of the letter
purposes. Congressman Alberto was the owner of the Regent of Manila. reads:
I have always been proud to be JMA’s eldest daughter, and I feel In view of the foregoing, we hold that petitioner has been in continuous Petitioners averred that they were the children of deceased Catalino
even prouder after I heard from people like you. You were the ones possession of the status of a natural child of the deceased in accordance Gono, an acknowledged natural child of Juan Casocot, who, by intestate
that knew him most, shared his dreams as a young man, and with Article 283 of the Civil Code which provides, inter alia: succession, should thus be held to be the owners of the property.
witnessed his struggle from Palmera’s slums to Forbes Park. You saw Art. 283. In any of the following cases, the father is obliged to Additionally, they asserted that one of the petitioners, Anunciacion
him rise from cargador to lawyer and, finally, to governor; I only recognize the child as his natural child: Gono-Javier purchased the parcels of land from the Provincial
heard about them through Mama. His life was a novel, and if I were 2. When the child is in continuous possession of status of a child Government of Agusan following the levy thereof for tax delinquency.
to help write it, I would be able to contribute but a few pages, for I of the alleged father by the direct acts of the latter or his family.
knew him only as a Big Man. It is YOU who had a part in the first Respondents Contention
adventures of that same novel, and I envy you. Since the oppositor seeks a judicial declaration that she be recognized as In their answer, private respondents, all nephews and nieces of Juan
a natural child to enable her to participate in the estate of the deceased, Casocot except for Carlos Monte de Ramos, a grandnephew, and Nonito
Hence this petition. Article 285 of the Civil Code prescribing the period when such action Marave, a stranger, to whom a portion of one of the parcels of land had
should be brought governs. It provides: been sold, contended that:
Art. 285. The action for the recognition of natural children may be
ISSUE brought only during the lifetime of the presumed parents, except in 1. since the complaint had failed to state that Catalino Gono had
Whether or not the estate and heirs of deceased Juan M. Alberto be the following cases: been recognized by Juan Casocot either in a record of birth or
ordered to recognize petitioner as the deceased’s natural daughter on 1. If the father or mother died during the minority of the in a will, an independent action for voluntary recognition
the basis of the evidence presented by petitioner to establish her claim child, in which case the latter may file the action before should have first been instituted to permit any intestate
that she has been in continuous possession of the status of a natural child the expiration of four years from the attainment of his successional right to legally pass to petitioners.
(Yes) majority. 2. questioned property had been sold by Juan Casocot to private
respondents Restituta and Fermin Casocot and a portion to
Juan M. Alberto died during the minority of petitioner, that is, on private respondent Marave. Private respondents belied the
Private respondent, Yolanda Alberto, the sole witness for private September 18, 1967 — the day petitioner turned fourteen. As such, claim that petitioner Gono-Javier purchased the property
respondents, denied that Juan M. Alberto ever recognized Ma. Theresa petitioner had four years from the time she reached twenty-one on from the Provincial Government of Agusan.
Alberto as his daughter. She presented in evidence letters to prove that September 18, 1974, which was then the age of majority, within which 3. defense of prescription was raised on the ground that private
Juan M. Alberto refused to recognize Ma. Theresa Alberto as his own. to bring the aforesaid action. Thus, petitioner had until September 18, respondents had been in possession of the disputed property
1978 within which to file the action for recognition. Petitioner filed her in good faith and for value for more than 17 years before
However, these letters do not prove that Juan M. Alberto refused to motion for leave to intervene as oppositor and to re-open the petitioners' action was instituted.
recognize Ma. Theresa Alberto. All that the letters stated was that Aurora proceedings with the prayer that she be declared to have acquired the
Reniva was having a difficult time raising a child by her own self and status of a natural child and as such, entitled to share in the estate of the
RTC rendered judgment for petitioners declaring them to be the
therefore, she was seeking the assistance of Juan M. Alberto. deceased, on September 15, 1978. Said motion was, therefore,
lawful owners of the property. The court, in rejecting the claim of
seasonably filed three days before the expiration of the four-year period.
ownership made by private respondents, opined
Moreover, it is noteworthy that Juan M. Alberto never took any step to
stop petitioner from using his surname. RULING
WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, this petition is hereby GRANTED, 1. that the deed of sale executed by Juan Casocot on 19
As found by the trial court, recognition of petitioner's status as a natural the decision of the Court of Appeals is REVERSED and that of the probate April 1960, when he was already 80 years old, in favor of
daughter of Juan M. Alberto was made, not only by the latter, but by his court AFFIRMED. respondents Restituta and Fermin Casocot was
relatives as well — Fr. Cipriano Arcilla, Jose Alberto, Aurita Solidum and absolutely simulated and void.
Saturnina Alberto, among others. Private respondent only had to present 2. It ruled that petitioners' father, Catalino Gono, had been
any one of those relatives to negate petitioner's testimony that she had G.R. No. 111994 December 29, 1994 duly recognized by Juan Casocot since 1954 to be his
been acknowledged by them as the eldest daughter of the deceased. Her GONO-JAVIER vs CA natural child that thereby entitled petitioners to inherit
failure to do so baffles this Court. If indeed Ma. Theresa Alberto were VITUG, J.: the parcels of land in question.
fabricating her testimony, the family of the deceased would have been FACTS 3. The trial court likewise held that the property had been
more than willing to destroy the claims of an intruder. Under the Juan Casocot, the alleged natural grandfather of petitioners, owned five sold to petitioner Anunciacion Gono-Javier on 05 and 20
circumstances, it is safe for us to assume that had any of the relatives parcels of land. June 1956 after it had been levied by the Provincial
mentioned by petitioner been presented as witness for private Petitioners filed a case with the RTC for the recovery of ownership and Government for
respondent, their testimonies would be detrimental to the latter's cause. possession of the above five parcels of land. non-payment of taxes.

Petitioners Contention On appeal by private respondents, the Court of Appeals reversed the
trial court's decision, and ordered the dismissal of the complaint by
petitioners for the recovery of title and possession of the disputed Casocot himself died in 1964. Article 278 of the New Civil Code, the law SO ORDERED.
parcels. The appellate court ratiocinated and concluded: applicable in 1954,3 provided:

Gaspay vs. Court of Appeals 238 SCRA


1. The trial court declared Catalino GonoAto be rt. 278. Recognition shall be made in the record of birth, a will, a
163
the acknowledged natural child of Juan statement before a court of record, or in any authentic writing.
Casocot on the basis of a statement in a deed
FACTS
of donation which he made in favor of Eugenia The statement made in the deed of donation, a public document,
Gonzales, widow of Catalino Gono, to the
 October 14, 1983, Flaviano Gaspay died intestate and without
executed by Juan Casocot in favor of Eugenia Gonzales, widow of a child, he was then married to Aguenda Denoso.
effect that among the reasons for making the Catalino, i.e., that among the reasons for the donation was that the
donation was the fact that the donee "is the  June 6, 1988 Guadalupe Gaspar Alfaro alleged that she’s the
donee was "the surviving spouse of my son had with my common law
surviving spouse of my son had with my acknowledged illegitimate child of Flaviano with Claudia
wife," would have well been explicit enough or, at the very least,
common law wife." The deed of donation was Pason. Motion to dismiss was filed by Flaviano Gaspay Junior
sufficient to make it fall within the purview of the doctrine of incidental
made about 11 years after the death of (adopted son) and Edilberta (not a next of kin) saying
recognition. Unfortunately for petitioners, however, the recognition
Catalino Gono. In the first place, the statement Guadalupe had no proof of filiation and actually a stranger
came too late. The donation, whereon the questioned statement
therein describing Eugenia Gonzales "the appeared, was made on 29 March 1954, or about 11 years after the
 Trial court eventually dismissed the petition saying that
surviving spouse of my son had with my Guadalupe failed to prove testimonial and documentary
death of Catalino in 1942 or 1943.
common law wife" is only, if at all, an indirect evidences her status and further concluded that her action
acknowledgement of Catalino Gono as the son should have filed in the lifetime of Flaviano.
The provisions of the Civil Code4 on acknowledgment would readily
of Juan Casocot. This falls short of the  September 30, 1991, CA reversed the decision of the trial
indicate that voluntary acknowledgment can legally be effected only
requirement that the voluntary recognition of a court.
during the lifetime of both the acknowledging parent and the
natural child must be expressly made either in
acknowledged illegitimate child. When that voluntary recognition is so
 Evidences is ample to prove filiation as illegitimate
the record of birth, or in a will, or in a child
timely made, an action for its judicial declaration can survive the death
statement before the court of record or in any
of either or both parties (see Gaspay, Jr. vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No.  Evidence is sufficient to show that Guadalupe
authentic writing. (Civil Code, Art. 278). Art. consented to the acknowledgement as illegitimate
102372, 15 November 1994). The reason for this latter rule (BAKA
281 requires that if the child is of age, his child
ITANONG NI SIR) is that the due recognition of an illegitimate child in a
recognition must be with consent. Obviously,  Guadalupe’s action can be instituted even after
record of birth, a will, a statement before a court of record, or in any
therefore, it was not possible for Catalino Gono death of the putative father
authentic writing (Art. 278, Civil Code) is, in itself, a consummated act of
to have given his consent, even if the indirect ISSUE
acknowledgment of the child, and no further court action is required
reference to him in the deed of donation as the
(see Divinagracia vs. Bellosillo, 143 SCRA 356), albeit not prohibited, to  Is Guadalupe an illetimate child?
son of Juan Casocot were considered a
yet have it declared as such. When a party is so minded as to still bring RULING
sufficient acknowledgment. For these reasons,
it was error for the trial court to declare the
an action on the basis of such voluntary acknowledgment, no time  Yes
plaintiff-appellees, the children of Catalino
frame for initiating it would obviously be a constraint.  Testimony of Martin Garin (agent to logging concessionaire of
Gono, to be the owners of the four parcels of Flaviano for 18 years 1932 to 1951) who verified the
land by right of inheritance. Parenthetically, where, a claim for recognition is predicated on other handwriting and signature of Flaviano in a letter addressed to
evidence merely tending to prove paternity (LIKE SA CASE NA’TO), i.e., Lupe and Toming (husband of Guadalupe) regarding the
outside of a record of birth, a will, a statement before a court of record hospitalization expenses of Guadalupe’s daugheter. Martin
*I only included CA Ratio and Issue na related sa lesson :D
or an authentic writing, judicial action within the applicate statute of also testified of the affair of Flaviano to Guadalupe’s mother.
limitations5 is essential in order to establish the child's  Guadalupe still uses the last name Gaspay married to Alfaro
ISSUE : WON the appellate court gravely erred in reversing the trial acknowledgment. Thus, the mere possession of status of a child, announcing to the world her consent to the
court's decision holding that Catalino Gono was the acknowledged contrary to the assertion in passing of petitioners, does not itself acknowledgement as the illegitimate child of Flaviano.
natural child of Juan Casocot by his common law wife, and that the constitute an acknowledgment; it is only a ground for the child to  Action of acknowledgement of filiation may be brought even
deceased Juan Casocot's declaration in his deed of donation to Eugenia compel, by judicial action, recognition by his assumed parent. after death of the putative father. She is entitled to the
Gonzales, wife of Catalino Gono, that the deceased was giving the land
administration of estate.
in donation to the surviving wife of my son is sufficient recognition.
RULING  Petitioners failed to apply for letters of administration, 30
“All told, we find no valid justification for sustaining the petition. days after the death of Flaviano
Petitioners' first assignment of error would have been impressed with WHEREFORE, the decision of the Court of Appeals is AFFIRMED. Costs  6 of Rule 68 section b in conjunction with
merit had the acknowledgment in the deed of donation in 1954 been against petitioners. subsection (c) - if the husband or widow, or next to
extended to Catalino prior to his death sometime in 1942 or 1943. Juan
kin, neglects for 30 days after the death of a person were not recognized by their parents before or after their
to apply for administration or to request that marriage.
administration be granted to some other person…..  On August 15, 1960 the children and grandchildren of the first
it may be granted to such another person as the and second marriages of Lucio Perido executed a document ISSUE:
court may select denominated as "Declaration of Heirship and Extra-judicial
Partition," whereby they partitioned among themselves Lots  Are the five children of Lucio Perido with Marcelina Baliguat
Nos. 458, 471, 506, 511, 509, 513-B, 807, and 808, all of the legitimate?
G.R. No. L-28248 March 12, 1975 Cadastral Survey of Himamaylan, Occidental Negros.
Ruling:
LEONORA PERIDO, joined by husband MANUEL PIROTE, INOCENCIA
PERIDO, ALBENIO PERIDO, PAULINO PERIDO, LETIA PERIDO, joined by  Yes. The Court of Appeals found that there was evidence to
husband BIENVENIDO BALYAO, LETICIA PERIDO, joined by husband  Evidently the children belonging to the first marriage of Lucio show that Lucio Perido's wife, Benita Talorong, died during the
FELIX VILLARUZ, EUFEMIA PERIDO, CONSOLACION PERIDO, ALFREDO Perido had second thoughts about the partition. On March 8, Spanish regime. This finding conclusive upon us and beyond
PERIDO, GEORGE PERIDO, AMPARO PERIDO, WILFREDO PERIDO, 1962 they filed a complaint in the Court of First Instance of our power of review. Under the circumstance, Lucio Perido had
MARGARITA PERIDO, ROLANDO SALDE and EDUARDO Negros Occidental, which complaint was later amended on no legal impediment to marry Marcelina Baliguat before the
SALDE, petitioners, February 22, 1963, against the children of the second marriage, birth of their first child in 1900.
vs. praying for the annulment of the so-called "Declaration of
MARIA PERIDO, SOFRONIO PERIDO, JUAN A. PERIDO, GONZALO Heirship and Extra-Judicial Partition" and for another partition  The statement that he was not actually married to Marcelina
PERIDO, PACITA PERIDO, MAGDALENA PERIDO, ALICIA PERIDO, of the lots mentioned therein among the plaintiffs alone. Baliguat is weak and insufficient to rebut the presumption that
JOSEFINA PERIDO, FE PERIDO, TERESA PERIDO and LUZ persons living together husband and wife are married to each
PERIDO, respondents. other. Consequently, every intendment of the law leans
 They alleged, among other things, that they had been induced toward legalizing matrimony. Persons dwelling together in
 Lucio Perido of Himamaylan, Negros Occidental, married twice by the defendants to execute the document in question apparent matrimony are presumed, in the absence of any
during his lifetime. His first wife was Benita Talorong, with through misrepresentation, false promises and fraudulent counter-presumption or evidence special to the case, to be in
whom he begot three (3) children: Felix, Ismael, and Margarita. means; that the lots which were partitioned in said document fact married. The reason is that such is the common order of
After Benita died Lucio married Marcelina Baliguat, with whom belonged to the conjugal partnership of the spouses Lucio society, and if the parties were not what they thus hold
he had five (5) children: Eusebio, Juan, Maria, Sofronia and Perido and Benita Talorong, and that the five children of Lucio themselves out as being, they would he living in the constant
Gonzalo. Lucio himself died in 1942, while his second wife died Perido with Marcelina Baliguat were all illegitimate and violation of decency and of law. A presumption established by
in 1943. therefore had no successional rights to the estate of Lucio our Code of Civil Procedure is "that a man and woman
Perido, who died in 1942. The defendants denied the foregoing deporting themselves as husband and wife have entered into a
 Of the three (3) children belonging to the first marriage only allegations. lawful contract of marriage." (Sec. 334, No. 28) Semper
Margarita Perido is still living. Her deceased brother, Felix praesumitur pro matrimonio — Always presume marriage."
Perido, is survived by his children Inocencia, Leonora, Albinio,  After trial the lower court rendered its decision dated July 31,
Paulino, Letia, Leticia, and Eufemia, all surnamed Perido. 1965, annulling the "Declaration of Heirship and Extra-Judicial
Nicanora Perido, another daughter of Felix, is also deceased, Partition." However, it did not order the partition of the lots
but is survived by two (2) sons, Rolando and Eduardo Salde. involved among the plaintiffs exclusively in view of its findings G.R. No. 77867 February 6, 1990
that the five children of Lucio Perido with his second wife,
Marcelina Baliguat, were legitimate; that all the lots, except Lot ISABEL DE LA PUERTA, petitioner,
 Margarita's other deceased brother, Ismael Perido, is survived No. 458, were the exclusive properties of Lucio Perido; and that vs.
by his children, namely: Consolacion, Alfredo, Wilfredo, and 11/12 of Lot No. 458 belonged to the conjugal partnership of THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS and CARMELITA DE LA
Amparo. Susano Perido, another son of Ismael, is dead, but Lucio Perido and his second wife, Marcelina Baliguat.The Court PUERTA, respondents.
survived by his own son George Perido. of Appeals affirmed it in toto.
Isabel de la Puerta for and in her own behalf.
 Of Lucio Perido's five (5) children by his second wife, two are Gilbert D. Camaligan for private respondent.
already dead, namely: Eusebio and Juan. Eusebio is survived by  The petitioners insist that said children of Narcelina Baliguat
his children Magdalena Perido, Pacita Perido, Alicia Perido, PONENTE: CRUZ, J.:
were illegitimate on the theory that the first three were born
Josefina Perido, Fe Perido, Teresa Perido, and Luz Perido, while out of wedlock even before the death of Lucio Perido's first
Juan is survived by his only child, Juan A. Perido. wife, while the last two were also born out of wedlock and
NATURE OF THE CASE: This case involves the filiation of Carmelita de la (3) When the child was conceived during the time when the mother adopters can make for themselves an heir, but they cannot thus make
Puerta, who claims successional rights to the estate of her alleged cohabited with the supposed father; one for their kindred. 23
grandmother, Dominga Revuelta. (4) When the child has in his favor any evidence or proof that the
defendant is his father. (n) The result is that Carmelita, as the spurious daughter of Vicente de la
FACTS: Dominga Revuelta died in 1966 with a will leaving her properties Puerta, has successional rights to the intestate estate of her father but
to her three surviving children - Alfredo, Vicente and Isabel. Isabel was Art. 284. The mother is obliged to recognize her natural child: not to the estate of Dominga Revuelta. Her claims for support and
appointed executrix of the will.1 (1) In any of the cases referred to in the preceding article, as between the inheritance should therefore be filed in the proceedings for the
 When Isabel filed the petition for the probate of the will, it child and the mother; settlement of her own father's estate 24 and cannot be considered in the
was opposed by her brothers, who averred that their mother (2) When the birth and the identity of the child are clearly proved. (136a) probate of Dominga Revuelta's Will.
was already senile at the time of the execution of the will and The reason for this rule was explained in the recent case of Diaz v.
did not fully comprehend its meaning. Moreover, some of the The issue in this case that has an answer related to adoption - Intermediate Appellate Court, 21 thus:
properties listed in the inventory of her estate belonged to
them exclusively. 2 ISSUE: Whether or not Carmelita de la Puerta can claim support and Article 992 of the New Civil Code provides a barrier or iron curtain in that
 Meantime, Isabel was appointed special administratrix by the successional rights to the estate of Dominga Revuelta, the mother of it prohibits absolutely a succession abintestato between the illegitimate
probate court. 3 Alfredo subsequently died, leaving Vicente Vicente? [A: NO]. child and the legitimate children and relatives of the father or mother of
the lone oppositor. 4 said legitimate child. They may have a natural tie of blood, but this is not
 In 1974, Vicente de la Puerta filed a petition to adopt RULING: NO. Carmelita cannot claim support and successional rights to recognized by law for the purpose of Article 992. Between the legitimate
the estate of Domingo Revuelta. family and the illegitimate family there is presumed to be an intervening
Carmelita de la Puerta. After hearing, the petition was
granted. 5 However, the decision was appealed by Isabel to the antagonism and incompatibility. The illegitimate child is disgracefully
Court of Appeals. Vicente subsequently died. As a spurious child of Vicente, Carmelita is barred from inheriting from looked down upon by the legitimate family; the family is in turn, hated by
Dominga because of Article 992 of the Civil Code, which lays down the the illegitimate child the latter considers the privileged condition of the
 Carmelita, having been allowed to intervene in the probate
barrier between the legitimate and illegitimate families. This article former, and the resources of which it is thereby deprived; the former in
proceedings of Domingo Revuelta, filed a motion for the
provides quite clearly: turn sees in the illegitimate child nothing but the product of sin, palpable
payment to her of a monthly allowance as the acknowledged
evidence of a blemish broken in life; the law does no more than recognize
natural child of Vicente de la Puerta.7
Art. 992. An illegitimate child has no right to inherit abintestato from the this truth, by avoiding further ground of resentment. 22
 The probate court granted the motion. legitimate children and relatives of his father or mother; nor shall such
 Isabel appealed on the ground that Carmelita was not the children or relatives inherit in the same manner from the illegitimate
natural child of Vicente de la Puerta, who was married to child. G.R. No. 71994 May 31, 1990
Genoveva de la Puerta and that Carmelita's real parents are EDNA PADILLA MANGULABNAN as guardian ad litem for minor ALFIE
Juanita Austrial and Gloria Jordan. The so-called spurious children or illegitimate children other than natural ANGELO ACERO, petitioner,
 Vicente and Genoveva separated and never reconciled. In children, commonly known as bastards, include adulterous children or vs.
1962, Gloria Jordan started living with Vicente de la Puerta in those born out of wedlock to a married woman cohabiting with a man THE HONORABLE INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT AND AMBROCIO
his house, which was only five or six houses away from where other than her husband or to a married man cohabiting with a woman TAN CHEW ACERO, respondents.
she herself was staying. Genoveva said that the relationship other than his wife. They are entitled to support and successional rights
between her husband and Gloria was well known in the (Art. 287, CC). But their filiation must be duly proven.(Ibid, Art. 887) The requirement for recognition by the father or mother jointly or by
community.11 only one of them as provided by law refers in particular to a natural
 However, the lower court declared that Carmelita’s father Ab Intestato is a Latin term which means “"by intestacy." It refers to laws child under Article 276 of the Civil Code. An illegitimate child or spurious
was Vicente de la Puerta and her mother is Gloria Jordan who governing the succession of property after its previous owner dies child in which case recognition is not required before support may be
were living as common law husband and wife until his death. without a valid will. granted.
Also, during the hearing of her adoption case, Vicente de la
Puerta stated in court that Carmelita de la Puerta is his Indeed, even as an adopted child, Carmelita would still be barred from Ponente: GANCAYCO, J.
daughter with Gloria Jordan. inheriting from Dominga Revuelta for there would be no natural
kindred ties between them and consequently, no legal ties to bind them Nature of the Case: This is a case of an illegitimate child who was
Art. 283. In any of the following cases, the father is obliged to recognize either. As aptly pointed out by Dr. Arturo M. Tolentino: denied support pendente lite by the appellate court. The child is
the child as his natural child: If the adopting parent should die before the adopted child, the latter confused as to what he is supposed to do. Petitioner pictured a big man
(1) In cases of rape, abduction or seduction, when the period of the cannot represent the former in the inheritance from the parents or eating a small child which will not fail to repel and horrify all decent
offense coincides more or less with that of the conception; ascendants of the adopter. The adopted child is not related to the men. She contends that this very image readily forms itself in the mind
(2) When the child is in continuous possession of status of a child of the deceased in that case, because the filiation created by fiction of law is when we consider this case.
alleged father by the direct acts of the latter or of his family; exclusively between the adopter and the adopted. "By adoption, the
Facts: (3) Parents and acknowledged natural children and the legitimate respondent herein, is married and had no legal capacity to contract
 Petitioner filed in the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City an descendants of the latter; marriage at the time of his conception is not a natural child but an
action for actual, compensatory and moral damages and (4) Parents and natural children by legal fiction and the legitimate and illegitimate child or spurious child in which case recognition is not
support for her child Alfie Angelo. illegitimate descendants of the latter; required before support may be granted.
 Pending the litigation an application for support pendente lite (5) Parents and illegitimate children who are not natural.
was filed to which an opposition was filed by private Brothers and sisters owe their legitimate and natural brothers and However, under Article 887 of the Civil Code, in all cases of illegitimate
respondent. sisters, although they are only of the half blood, the necessaries of life children, their filiation must be proved. Such filiation may be proved by
when by a physical or mental defect, or any other cause not imputable the voluntary or compulsory recognition of the illegitimate (spurious
RTC Ruling: The trial court ordered private respondent to pay monthly to the recipients, the latter cannot secure their subsistence. This child). Recognition is voluntary when made in the record of birth, a will,
support in the amount of P1,500.00 to the minor child, Alfie. assistance includes, in a proper case, expenses necessary for elementary a statement before a court of record or in any authentic writing. It is
 Private respondent moved for a reconsideration but his motion education and for professional or vocational training. compulsory when by court action the child brings out his recognition.
was denied.
From the foregoing provision it is clear that parents and illegitimate As above related the affidavits of petitioner and the two (2) witnesses
CA Ruling: The petition was granted and the orders of the trial court children who are not natural children are also obliged to support each were presented to prove the paternity of the child, and a birth certificate
were annulled without pronouncement as to costs. other as specified in paragraph No. 5 above cited. It is to be was also presented to corroborate the same. The Court agrees with the
distinguished from the obligation to support each other as between the court a quo that the status of the minor child had been provisionally
 Hence, a petition for certiorari was filed in the Court of Appeals
parents and acknowledged natural children and the legitimate or established.
questioning the said order of the trial court.
illegitimate children of the latter; and that between parents and natural
children by legal fiction and the legitimate and illegitimate descendants Legal Basis/Jargons:
Issue:
WON in order to show entitlement for support, an illegitimate
of the latter under paragraphs (3) and (4) abovecited. ART. 276. A natural child may be recognized by the father and mother
child or spurious child must first be recognized. - NO Under Article 287 of the Civil Code it is provided: jointly, or by only one of them.

Ruling:
NO. ART. 287. Illegitimate children other than natural in accordance with ART. 287. Illegitimate children other than natural in accordance with
The petition is impressed with merit. Article 269 and other than natural children by legal fiction are entitled to Article 269 and other than natural children by legal fiction are entitled to
support and such successional rights as are granted in this Code. support and such successional rights as are granted in this Code.
Although Art. 291, in enumerating those entitled to support, refers in
paragraph 3 to 'acknowledged natural children,' and in paragraph 5 In this case petitioner established the paternity of the child, Alfie not
simply to 'illegitimate children who are not natural' nonetheless there is only by her own affidavit but also by the affidavits of two (2) witnesses. PEOPLE vs RAFANAN Jr
a need for the latter class of children (spurious) to be recognized either In addition thereto petitioner submitted a birth certificate of the child. Insanity
voluntarily or by judicial decree, otherwise they cannot demand The private respondent claims that the same is spurious as it was sworn
support. The private respondent contends that the cases cited in the before a notary public in Manila when the child was born in Cavite FACTS: On February 27, 1976, complainant Estelita Ronaya who was then
decision (Crisolo v. Macadaeg, 94 Phil. 862 [1954]; Cruz v. Castillo, 28 Maternity Clinic in Las Pinas Rizal. only fourteen years old was hired as a househelper by the mother of the
SCRA 719 [l969]) refer to the right of natural children to support. The accused. The accused Policarpio Rafanan and his family lived with his
principle, however, is the same. Thus in Paulino v. Paulino, 113 Phil. There must be a declaration of the status of the child from which the mother in the same. Policarpio was then married and had two children.
697 [1961], which involves a claim to inheritance by a spurious child, it right to support is derived and before support can be ordered. Such a On March 16, 1976, in the evening, after dinner, Estelita
was held: declaration may be provisional, that is, by affidavits. Ronaya was sent by the mother of the accused to help in their store
An illegitimate (spurious) child to be entitled to support and which was located in front of their house. Attending to the store at the
successional rights from his putative or presumed parents must prove While the appellate court claims that the birth certificate is prima facie time was the accused. At 11:00 o'clock in the evening, the accused called
his filiation to them. Filiation may be established by the voluntary or evidence of acknowledgment of the child, and that until it is finally the complainant to help him close the door of the store and as the latter
compulsory recognition of the illegitimate (spurious) child. Recognition proved to be spurious it must be upheld, it nevertheless observed that complied and went near him, he suddenly pulled the complainant inside
is voluntary when made in the record of birth, a will, a statement its probative value is impaired by the verified opposition of the private the store and said that they should have intercourse, Ronaya refused.
before a court of record, or in any authentic writing.' It is compulsory respondent. The accused held a bolo and pointed it to the throat of the complainant
when by court action the child brings about his recognition. threatening her with said bolo should she resist. He then raped Ronaya
The requirement for recognition by the father or mother jointly or by in spite of her resistance and struggle. After the sexual intercourse, the
Article 291 of the Civil Code provides as follows: only one of them as provided by law refers in particular to a natural accused cautioned the complainant not to report the matter to her
ART 291. The following are obliged to support each other to the whole child under Article 276 of the Civil Code. Such a child is presumed to be mother or anybody in the house, otherwise he would kill her. In the
extent set forth in the preceding article: the natural child of the parents recognizing it who had the legal capacity evening of March 17, 1976, the family of the accused learned what
(1) The spouses; to contract marriage at the time of conception. Thus, an illegitimate happened that night.
(2) Legitimate ascendants and descendants; child like the minor Alfie in this case whose father, the private
The principal submission of appellant is that he was suffering already pointed out, it is complete loss of intelligence which must be
from a metal aberration characterized as schizophrenia when he inflicted shown if the exempting circumstance of insanity is to be found. Ruling:
his violent intentions upon Estelita. The trial court suspended the trial The law presumes every man to be sane. A person accused of No. To allow the change of surname would cause confusion as to the
and ordered appellant confined at the National Mental Hospital in a crime has the burden of proving his affirmative allegation of minors' parentage and might create the impression that the minors are
Mandaluyong for observation and treatment. In the meantime, the case insanity. Here, appellant failed to present clear and convincing evidence illegitimate since they would carry the maternal surname only. That
was archived. Appellant was admitted into the hospital on 29 December regarding his state of mind immediately before and during the sexual would be inconsistent with their legitimate status as indicated in their
1976 and stayed there until 26 June 1978. assault on Estelita. It has been held that inquiry into the mental state of birth records.
On the last report dated 26 June 1978, appellant was described the accused should relate to the period immediately before or at the very The minors Dionesio, Jr. and Bombi Roberto, who are presumably
as behaved, helpful in household chores and no longer talking while moment the act is committed. Appellant rested his case on the legitimate, are supposed to bear principally the surname Divinagracia,
alone. He was said to be "fairly groomed" and "oriented" and as denying testimonies of two (2) physicians which, however, did not purport to their father's surname (Art. 364, Civil Code).
having hallucinations. The report concluded that he was in a "much characterize his mental condition during that critical period of time. They To allow them, at their mother's behest, to bear only their mother's
improved condition" and "in a mental condition to stand court trial." did not specifically relate to circumstances occurring on or immediately surname (which they are entitled to use together with their father's
Trial of the case thus resumed. The defense first presented Dr. before the day of the rape. Their testimonies consisted of broad surname) and to discard altogether their father's surname thus
Arturo Nerit who suggested that appellant was sick one or two years statements based on general behavioral patterns of people afflicted with removing the prima-facie evidence of their paternal provenance or
before his admission into the hospital, in effect implying that appellant schizophrenia. ancestry, is a serious matter in which, ordinarily, the minors and their
was already suffering from schizophrenia when he raped complainant. father should be consulted. The mother's desire should not be the sole
ISSUE: Whether or not the reason of insanity in this case is sufficient to consideration.
relieve himself of criminal liability through exempting circumstance. G.R. No. L-55538 March 15, 1982 The change of name is allowed only when there are proper and
HELD: NO reasonable causes for such change (Sec. 5, Rule 103, Rules of Court).
RATIO: The Supreme Court of Spain held that in order that this exempting In the Matter of the Change of Names of DIONESIO DIVINAGRACIA, Where, as in this case, the petitioners are minors, the courts should
circumstance may be taken into account, it is necessary that there be a JR., and BOMBI ROBERTO DIVINAGRACIA to DIONESIO NALDOZA and take into account whether the change of name would redound their
complete deprivation of intelligence in committing the act, that is, that BOMBI ROBERTO NALDOZA, respectively. ZOSIMA NALDOZA, as welfare or would prejudice them.
the accused be deprived of reason; that there be no responsibility for his natural guardian and guardian ad litem of said minors, petitioner- Examples of cases where change of surname was granted:
own acts; that the acts without the least discernment; or that there be a appellant,
total deprivation of freedom of the will. For this reason, it was held that vs. A. Oshita vs. Republic
the imbecility or insanity at the time of the commission of the act should REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES and JUDGE FERNANDO S. RUIZ of the Where the petitioner, a legitimate daughter of a Filipino mother and a
absolutely deprive a person of intelligence or freedom of will, because Court of First Instance of Bohol, Branch IV, respondents-appellees. Japanese, elected Philippine citizenship, and her older brother and
mere abnormality of his mental faculties does not exclude imputability. Facts: sister were using their mother's surname, and the petitioner felt
1. Desirous of obliterating any connection between her two minor embarrassed in using her Japanese father's surname (Oshita) because
The allegation of insanity or imbecility must be clearly proved. children and their scapegrace father (for being a swindler), Zosima, on of the ill-feeling harbored by some Filipinos against the Japanese, and
Without positive evidence that the defendant had previously lost his August 10, 1978, filed in the Court of First Instance of Bohol a petition there was no showing that her desire to use the maternal surname
reason or was demented, a few moments prior to or during the wherein she prayed that the surname of her two children be changed (Bartolome) was motivated by any fraudulent purpose or that the
perpetration of the crime, it will be presumed that he was in a normal from Divinagracia to Naldoza, her surname (Special Proceeding No. change of surname would prejudice public interest, her petition to
condition. Acts penalized by law are always reputed to be voluntary, and 768). After due publication and hearing, the trial court dismissed the change her surname from Oshita to Bartolome was granted
it is improper to conclude that a person acted unconsciously, in order to petition.
relieve him from liability, on the basis of his mental condition, unless his B. Alfon vs. Republic
insanity and absence of will are proved. The classmates of Dionesio, Jr. and Bombi Roberto allegedly teased Where the petitioner's name in the civil registry is Maria Estrella
Schizophrenia pleaded by appellant has been described as a them about their father being a swindler. Two criminal cases for estafa Veronica Primitiva Duterte, Duterte being the surname of her father
chronic mental disorder characterized by inability to distinguish between were filed in court against the father. Filomeno, who was married to her mother, Estrella Alfon, but the
fantasy and reality, and often accompanied by hallucinations and petitioner since infancy has used the name Estrella S. Alfon, particularly
delusions 2. From that decision, Zosima Naldoza appealed to this Court under in the school and voting records, there is reasonable ground for
In the findings of the case, testimonies negates complete Republic Act No. 5440. Appellant's seven assignments of error may be allowing her to change her surname from Duterte to Alfon. Such a
destruction of intelligence at the time of commission of the act charged reduced to the question of whether there is a justification for the two change would avoid confusion
which, in the current state of our caselaw, is critical if the defense of children to drop their father's surname and use their mother's surname
insanity is to be sustained. The fact that appellant Rafanan threatened only.
complainant Estelita with death should she reveal she had been sexually
assaulted by him, indicates, to the mind of the Court, that Rafanan was Issue: Should the two minors be allowed to discontinue using their
aware of the reprehensible moral quality of that assault. In any case, as father's surname and use only their mother's surname?

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen