Daily TribuneThis principle applies not only when both parents exercise parental authority but also when sole parental authority is granted to one parent, such as the mother of an illegitimate child, despite recognition of the father’s paternity
Share
Supreme Court
The Supreme Court (SC) clarified that when sole parental authority is granted to the mother, as in the case of illegitimate children, substitute parental authority may be exercised by the grandparents or other persons specified in the Family Code.
In a decision penned by Associate Justice Antonio T. Kho Jr. dated 26 June and uploaded on 25 June, the Supreme Court’s Second Division partially granted the petition of collateral grandparents challenging the award of custody to a minor’s biological father.
In a habeas corpus proceeding before a Regional Trial Court (RTC), Winston Clark Stolk Sr. filed a petition for absolute and permanent custody of his minor son, Winston, following the death of the boy’s mother, Catherine Alfonso Daen, shortly after his birth.
Winston had been under the care of Nora A. Lopez and Marcelino Alfonso, collateral grandparents who were siblings of Winston’s biological grandparents.
The RTC granted Stolk’s petition citing DNA tests that showed a 99.9997-percent probability of paternity, along with a parentage report and Winston’s birth certificate, as establishing Stolk’s right to custody and parental authority.
The RTC applied Article 212 of the Family Code which provides that in case of a parent’s death, the surviving parent shall continue to exercise parental authority.
In response, the collateral grandparents filed a motion for reconsideration, arguing that a case study by the Department of Social Welfare and Development was necessary to determine the best environment for the minor’s development, considering Stolk’s legal issues with authorities in the United States and Suriname.
The RTC denied the motion for reconsideration.
The collateral grandparents filed a Notice of Appeal, which the RTC dismissed for nonpayment of docket fees within the prescribed period.
The collateral grandparents then filed a petition for certiorari before the Court of Appeals, but this was dismissed as time-barred, with the RTC decision having become final.
The Supreme Court, however, found an error in the RTC’s basis for awarding custody to Stolk solely on parentage grounds.
Citing Article 214 of the Family Code, the High Court emphasized that substitute parental authority should be exercised by the surviving grandparent or other specified persons under Article 216 in cases of the death, absence, or unsuitability of the parents.
This principle applies not only when both parents exercise parental authority but also when sole parental authority is granted to one parent, such as the mother of an illegitimate child, despite recognition of the father’s paternity.
Therefore, the Supreme Court underscored that in instances where sole parental authority rests with the mother, as with illegitimate children, substitute parental authority may be exercised by the grandparents or other specified individuals under Article 216 of the Family Code.
