You are on page 1of 4


Grande v Antonio
Child Custody, no Res Judicata

Tender Age Presumption
The so-called tender-age presumption under
Article 213 of the Family Code may be overcome
only by compelling evidence of the mother’s
unfitness. The mother has been 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. (Gualberto v
Art 213: In case of separation of the parents,
parental authority shall be exercised by the
parent designated by the Court. The Court shall
take into account all relevant considerations,
especially the choice of the child over seven years
of age, unless the parent chosen is unfit.
No child under seven years of age shall be
separated from the mother unless the court finds
compelling reasons to order otherwise.
Biological parents may be beneficiaries of the
adopted child

Article 26 (Bayot v Court of Appeals)
(2) Rebecca no longer had a legal right in this
jurisdiction to have her marriage with Vicente
declared void, the union having previously been
dissolved on February 22, 1996 by the foreign
divorce decree she personally secured as an
American citizen. Pursuant to the second
paragraph of Article 26 of the Family Code, such

Gomez. Estoppel has been characterized as harsh or odious. et al. An essential element of estoppel is that the person Elements of Estoppel invoking it has been influenced and has relied on the representations or conduct of the person sought to be estopped. estoppel becomes a most effective weapon to accomplish an injustice. In Republic of the Philippines vs. divorce restored Vicentes capacity to contract another marriage. When misapplied. Garcia. and this element is wanting in the instant case. and not favored in law. In Cristobal vs.. the Filipino spouse shall likewise have capacity to remarry under Philippine Law. Art 26 Par. this Court held that no estoppel based on a document can be invoked by one who has not been misled by the false statements contained therein. in as much as it shuts a man's mouth from speaking the truth and debars the truth in a case. Estoppel cannot be sustained by mere argument or doubtful inference. this Court ruled that there is no estoppel when the statement or action invoked as its basis did not mislead the adverse party. 2: When a marriage between a Filipino citizen and a foreigner is validly celebrated and a divorce thereafter validly obtained abroad by the alien spouse capacitating him or her to remarry. it must be clearly proved in .

upon the conduct or statements of the party to be estopped (3) action or inaction based thereon of such character as to change the position or status of the . or at least calculated to convey the impression that the facts are otherwise than. the essential elements are: (1) conduct amounting to false representation or concealment of material facts. (2) reliance. of the real facts. No party should be precluded from making out his case per its truth unless by force of some positive principle of law. and in relation to the party invoking the estoppel in his favor. actual or constructive. (3) knowledge. As related to the party claiming the estoppel. (2) intent. and inconsistent with. or at least influence. the essential elements are: (1) lack of knowledge and of the means of knowledge of the truth as the facts in questions. the other party. consequently.all its essential elements by clear. those which the party subsequently attempts to assert. or at least expectation that his conduct shall be acted upon by. estoppel in pais must be applied strictly and should not be enforced unless substantiated in every particular. The essential elements of estoppel in pais may be considered in relation to the party sought to be estopped. in good faith. and. convincing and satisfactory evidence. As related to the party to be estopped.

party claiming the estoppel. detriment or prejudice. to his injury. .