Paternity and Filiation  Impugning the legitimacy of the child is a strictly personal right of the husband, or in

exceptional cases, his heirs, for the simple reason that he is the one directly confronted with
Jurisprudence: the scandal and ridicule which the infidelity of his wife.
 The child himself cannot choose his own filiation.
Presumption of Legitimacy
Tan vs. Trocio Braza vs. the Himaymaylan City Civil Registrar
 The boy was born during the wedlock of the woman from her lawful husband. This presumes  Validity of marriages as well as legitimacy and filiation can be questioned only in a direct
that the boy is their legitimate son unless physical access between the couple was action seasonably filed by the proper party and not through collateral attack.
impossible.
Record of Birth
Arbolario vs. CA Eceta vs Eceta
 In the absence of any fact that would show that their father’s marriage had been judicially Any authentic writing is treated not just a ground for compulsory recognition; it is in itself a voluntary
annulled, it would be reasonable to conclude that the foregoing union which resulted in the recognition that does not require a separate action for judicial approval.
birth of the children was extra-marital.
Open and Continuous Possession of a Status of a Child
Cabtania vs. CA Quismundo vs. WCC
 The fact that the woman’s husband is alive there is a valid subsisting marriage between them  The possession of status of a child does not in itself constitute an acknowledgement; it is
gives ris to the presumption that a child born within that marriage is legitimate even though only a ground for a child to compel recognition by his assumed parent.
the mother may have declared against its legitimacy or may have been sentenced as an
adulteress. Filiation Not Established
Locsin vs. Locsin
Conception vs. CA  Birth Certificate offers only prima facie evidence of filiation and may be refuted by contrary
 Since the wife’s 2nd marriage was void from the very beginning or void ab initio; the 2 nd evidence.
husband never became her husband and thus never acquired any right to impugn the
legitimacy of her child. Geronimo vs. Santos
 The presumption of legitimacy in favor of the child belonging to his mother’s first marriage  Proof of filiation cannot be raised as a collateral issue as in the instant case which is an action
stands. for annulment of document and recovery of possession.
 If there are irregularities and circumstances surrounding the alleged birth of respondent is
Estate of Rogelio Ong vs. Diaz sufficient then it can overthrow the presumption of regularity attached birth certificate of
 The death of the petitioner does not ipso facto negate the application of DNA testing for as the respondent.
long as there exist appropriate biological samples of his DNA.
 According to jurisprudence, DNA testing, which examines genetic codes obtained from body Imprescriptibility of the Action to Claim Legitimacy
cells of the illegitimate child and any physical residue of the long dead parent could be De la Rosa vs. CA
resorted to. (People vs Umanito)  Periods prescribed to do certain acts must be followed. However, under exceptional
circumstances a delay in the filing of an appeal may be excused on grounds of substantial
Who Can Impugn Legitimacy justice.
De Jusus vs. Dizon
 The presumption of legitimacy fixes a civil status for the child born in wedlock, and only the Rights of Legitimate Children
father, or in exceptional instances the latter’s heirs, can contest in an appropriate action the Tolentino vs. CA
legitimacy of a child born to his wife.  Philippine Law is silent whether or not a divorced woman may continue to use the surname
 It is only when the legitimacy of a child has been successfully impugned that the paternity of of her husband or ex-husband.
the husband can be rejected.  No wife cannot claim an exclusive right to use the husband’s surname nor cannot be
prevented from using it neither can she restrain others from using it.
Liyao vs. Liyao
  There being no actual legal injury to the petitioner save a deep hurt to her feelings which is ADOPTION
not a basis for injunctive relief.
Republic vs. CA
How Filiation Established  A petition cannot be dismissed by reason of failure to comply with a law which was not yet in
Aguilar vs. Siasat force and effect at the time.
 Document constitutes an admission of legitimate filiation in a public document or a private  Adoption statutes, being humane and salutary, hold the interests and welfare of the child to
handwritten instrument and signed by the parent concerned. It is evidence of filiation under be of paramount consideration.
the first paragraph of Article 172 of the Family code.
Cang vs CA and Spouses Clavano
DNA TESTING  In cases where the father opposes the adoption primarily because his consent thereto was
not sought, the matter of whether he had abandoned his child becomes a proper issue for
Rights of Illegitimate Children Surname determination.
RA 9255  Physical estrangement alone, without financial and moral desertion, is not tantamount to
 An Act Allowing Illegitimate Children may use the Surname of Their Father, amending for the abandonment.
Purpose Article 176 of Executive Order No. 209, Otherwise Known as the "Family Code of the
Philippines" Sayson vs CA
 Only the legitimate child is entitled to represent in the intestate estate of his or her
Julian Wang vs. Cebu LCR grandparents.
 The state has an interest in the names borne by individuals and entities for purposes of  Representation is a right created by fiction of law, by virtue of which the representative is
identification, an that a change of name is a privilege and not a right. raised to the place and the degree of the person represented, and acquires the rights which
 Petitioner must show not only some proper or compelling reason therefore but also that he the latter would have if he were living or if he could have inherited.
will be prejudiced by the use of his true and official name.  The relationship created by the adoption is between only the adopting parents and the
adopted child and does not extend to the blood relatives of either party.
Stephanie vs. CA
 The purpose of adoption is for the benefit of the adopted child, to elevate the status of an Acain vs. IAC
illegitimate child to that of a legitimate child.  Adoption gives to the adopted person the same rights and duties as if he were a legitimate
 It would be unjust that an adopted child who is supposed to enjoy the same rights and child of the adopted an makes the adopted person a legal heir of the adopter.
privileges being enjoyed by legitimate children to be discriminated by disallowing her/him to  If not disinherited then was totally omitted and preterited (the omission by a testator of
use the surname of his/her biological mother as her middle name. some one of his heirs who is entitled to a legitime in the succession.) then the adopted child
 If the law does not prohibit, it allows. can oppose but not the wife for she is not in the direct line.

Period to Prove Filiation Tamagro vs. CA

Arado Heirs vs Alcoran  Retroactive effect may not be given to the decree of adoption so as to impose a liability upon
 An illegitimate child, however, has no right to inherit ab intestato from the legitimate the adopting parents accruing at a time when adopting parents had no actual or physically
children and relatives of his father or mother. custody over the adopted child.
 The illegitimate child could not inherit from the estate of his/her grandmother by virtue of
the latter’s last will and testament. In re: petition for adoption of Michelle Lim
 The affidavit of consent given by the adopter’s American husband will not suffice since there
Legitimated Children – Requisites are certain requirements that he must comply as an American citizen.
BBB vs. AAA
 The civil status of a child cannot be attacked collaterally. The child’s legitimacy cannot be Velasco vs. Career Philippines Shipmanagement
contested by way of defense or as a collateral issue in another action for a different purpose.  If not the biological child of the deceased and not having been legally adopted by the
deceased, there is no basis to allow her to claim for death benefits in the absence of a court
 decree by merely relying on a “de facto adoption relationship” based on the circumstances
that she had been consistently considered by said spouses as their own child. Luna vs IAC
 When the very life and existence of the minor child is at stake and the child is of such age to
Inter-Country Adoption: who may adopt enable her to exercise an intelligent choice, courts can do no less than respect that choice
Republic vs. Hon Teldedano and uphold the child’s right to live in an atmosphere conducing to her physical, moral and
 In this case, adopting a brother or sister when married to an alien spouse is not an exception intellectual development.
to Article 185 of the family code where the husband and wife must jointly adopt as an alien  The threat may prove empty, but the child’s right to a wholesome family life that will provide
and provide the certain requirements. her with love, care, and understanding, guidance and counseling, and moral and material
security, but what if the threat is for real.
Support
Lam vs. Chua Unson III vs. Navarro
 The evidence must prove the capacity or resources of both parents who are jointly obliged to  It is in the best interest that the child no longer stays with her mother given the immoral
support their children as provided for under Article 195 of the Family Code. situation the mother entered into.

Lim-Lua vs. Lua Cervantes vs. Fajardo

 The amount of support which those related by marriage and family relationship is generally  The adopting parents have the right to the care and custody of the adopted child and
obliged to give each other shall be in proportion to the resources or means of the giver and exercise parental authority and responsibility over him.
to the needs of the recipient.
Santos, Sr. vs. CA
When demandable, when payable, where claimed, who is liable  When a parent entrusts the custody of a minor to another even in a document, what is given
Zaguirre vs. Castillo is merely temporary custody and it does not constitute a renunciation of parental authority.
 In a disbarment proceeding, it is immaterial that the complainant is in pari delicto because
this is not a proceeding to grant relief to the complainant, but one to purge the law Espiritu vs. CA
profession of unworthy members, to protect the public and the courts.  The presumption that the mother is the best custodian for a child under seven years of age is
strong but not conclusive.
Mangonon vs. CA
 Since the parents are incapacitated to support the children, under Article 199 of the Family Sombong vs. CA
Code, the grandfather, as the next immediate relative of the twins, is tasked to give support  The court is not bound to deliver a child into the custody of any claimant or any person, but
to his grandchildren in default of their parents. should, in the consideration of the facts, leave it in such custody as its welfare at the same
time appears to require.
Lacson vs Lacson
 Wife asking a demand made by way of a request or plea asking one to comply with his Eslao vs. CA
obligation to support owing to the urgency of the situation can be considered as alternative  The law allows a waiver of parental authority only in cases of adoption, guardianship and
to a formal demand. surrender to a children’s home or an orphan institution.
 The resulting juridical relationship between the husband and the wife’s brother (loaner) is a
quasi-contract, an equitable principle enjoining one from unjustly enriching himself at the Artadi vs. Bondagjy
expense of another.  The award of custody to the wife does not deprive the husband of parental authority. Thus,
we grant visitorial rights to husband as his Constitutionally protected natural and primary
PARENTAL AUTHORITY rights.
Dempsey vs. RTC
 Article 3 of PD 603 provides that all children shall be entitled to the rights herein set forth Laxamana vs. Laxamana
without distinction as to legitimacy or illegitimacy, sex, social status, political antecedents  the parents are already separated in fact, the courts must step in to determine in whose
and other factors. Rights must be enforced or protected to the extent that it is possible to do custody the child can better be assure the rights granted to him by law.
so.
Gualberto vs. Gualberto
 The mother’s immoral conduct may constitute a compelling reason to deprive her of
custody, but sexual preference or moral laxity alone does not prove parental neglect or
incompetence.
Hirsch vs. CA
 The mother is declared unsuitable to have custody of her children in one or more of the
following instances: neglect, abandonment, unemployment, immorality, habitual
drunkenness, drug addiction, maltreatment of the child, insanity, or affliction with a
communicable disease.

Dacasin vs. Del mundo-Dacasin

 Upon separation of the spouses, the mother takes sole custody under the law if the child is
below seven years old and any agreement to the contrary is void.

David vs. CA
 An illegitimate minor child is under the parental authority of his mother, who, as a
consequence of such authority is entitled to have custody of him/her.
 Rule 1021 makes no distinction between the case of a mother who is separated from her
husband and is entitled to the custody of her child and that of a mother of an illegitimate
child who, by law, is vested with sole parental authority, but is deprived of her rightful
custody of her child.

Silva vs. CA
 The biological father has visitorial right over his illegitimate children in view of the
constitutionally protected inherent and natural right of parents over their children.
 The biological father cannot prevent the mother in the exercise of her parental authority
from immigrating to another country with her illegitimate children.

Tonog vs. CA
 The child should not be wrenched from her familiar surroundings, and thrust into a strange
environment away from the people and places to which she had apparently formed an
attachment.

Briones vs. Miguel

 The parental authority over an illegitimate child resides in his/her mother, notwithstanding
his father’s recognition of him.