The children remain legitimate even if the marriage of their parents is declared null and void due to psychological incapacity, the Supreme Court has ruled.

In a decision written by Associate Justice Jhosep Y. Lopez dated 5 February and uploaded on 21 May, the SC’s Second Division modified the ruling of a Regional Trial Court (RTC) that declared a child illegitimate following the nullity of her parents’ marriage.

The child was born before the couple were married and during the marriage the wife experienced physical, emotional, and verbal abuse from her husband.

The husband struggled with alcohol addiction, gambling, and infidelity, prompting the wife to file a petition to nullify their marriage. She presented evidence of abuse and a psychological report diagnosing her husband with a narcissistic personality disorder.

The petition was granted by the RTC which declared the marriage void due to the husband’s psychological incapacity.

But it also declared their child illegitimate since she was born before their marriage and her birth certificate did not show that she was legitimated.

The matter was brought by the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) to the SC, arguing that the child was legitimated by her parents’ marriage, even without a formal annotation on her birth certificate.

The SC affirmed that the marriage was void but ruled that the child remained legitimate.

Generally, when a marriage is nullified, a child is considered illegitimate from the time they were conceived. However, the Family Code allows exceptions, such as when the marriage is nullified due to psychological incapacity.

This applies whether the child was born before or during the marriage and the SC ruled a missing annotation on the birth certificate does not affect the child’s legal status.

“The formal requirement of annotating the legitimation is a mere administrative procedure which cannot impair substantive rights,” it said.

Once a child is legitimated under the Family Code, there is no legal basis for changing their status back to illegitimate, the SC emphasized, adding that allowing this would go against the law’s intent to protect the child’s best interests.

In his concurring opinion, Senior Associate Justice Marvic M.V.F. Leonen said that to protect the best interests of children and guard them against discrimination, those born outside of marriage should be referred to as “nonmarital children” instead of “illegitimate,” a derogatory term that perpetuates prejudice.