You are on page 1of 1

JANICE MARIE JAO, represented by her mother and guardian ad litem, ARLENE S.

No. L-49162 | July 28, 1987

DOCTRINE: The analysis of blood samples of the mother, the child, and the alleged father, can
establish conclusively that the man is not the father of the child. But group blood testing cannot
show that a man is the father of a particular child, but at least can show only a possibility that
he is.

FACTS: On October 28, 1968, Janice filed a case for recognition and support with the Juvenile
and Domestic Relations Court against Perico Jao. The latter denied paternity so the parties
agreed to a blood grouping test which was in due course conducted by the NBI upon order of
the trial court. The result of the blood grouping test indicated that Janice could not have been
the possible offspring of Perico and Arlene. The trial court initially found the result of the tests
legally conclusive but upon Janices second MR, it ordered the trial on the merits, after which,
Janice was declared the child of Jao, thus entitling her to his monthly support. The CA, upon
appeal, reversed the trial courts decision and held that although the findings of such blood tests
are not admissible to prove the fact of paternity as they show only a possibility that the alleged
father or any one of many others with the same blood type may have been the father of the
child, the Uniform Act recognizes that the tests may have some probative value to establish
paternity where the blood type and the combination in the child is shown to be rare, in which
case the judge is given discretion to let it in.

ISSUE: WON the result of the blood grouping tests are admissible and conclusive to prove non-

RULING: Yes. SC affirmed the CA decision. Where the issue is admissibility and
conclusiveness of blood grouping tests to disprove paternity, rulings have been much more
definite in their conclusions. For the past three decades, the use of blood typing in cases of
disputed parentage has already become an important legal procedure. There is now almost
universal scientific agreement that blood grouping tests are conclusive as to non-paternity,
although inconclusive as to paternity that is, the fact that the blood type of the child is a
possible product of the mother and alleged father does not conclusively prove that the child is
born by such parents; but, if the blood type of the child is not the possible blood type when the
blood of the mother and that of the alleged father are crossmatched, then the child cannot
possibly be that of the alleged father.
Medical science has shown that there are four types of blood in man which can be
transmitted through heredity. Although the presence of the same type of blood in two
persons does not indicate that one was begotten by the other, yet the fact that they are of
different types will indicate the impossibility of one being the child of the other. Thus,
when the supposed father and the alleged child are not in the same blood group, they cannot be
father and child by consanguinity.