G.R. No.
105625 January 24, 1994 Are Articles 166 and 170 of the Family Code
MARISSA BENITEZ-BADUA, petitioner,
vs.
COURT OF APPEALS, VICTORIA BENITEZ LIRIO AND
FEODOR BENITEZ AGUILAR, respondents.
Reynaldo M. Alcantara for petitioner.
Augustus Cesar E. Azura for private respondents.
PUNO, J.:
FACTS:
Spouses Vicente Benitez and Isabel Chipongian-
Benitez owned various properties in Laguna. Isabel
died in 1982 while Vicente died in 1989. Vicente
died intestate.
After Vicente’s death, his sister and nephew filed a
case for issuance of letters of administration of
Vicente's estate. They claim that Isable and Vicente
were childless and that one Marissa Benitez-Badua
who was raised and cared by them since childhood
is not their child and was not legally adopted by
them.
Marissa opposed the petition and alleged that she
is the sole heir of deceased Vicente and capable of
administering his estate. She presented Certificate
of Live Birth, as one of her evidences to prove her
claim.
The trial court decided in favor of Marissa and
dismissed the petition of Vicente’s sister and
nephew. The trial court relied on Articles 166 and
170 of the Family Code on impugning the
legitimacy of the child.
The appellate court reversed the trial court ad held
that Articles 166 and 170 of the Family Code are
not applicable.
ISSUE:
applicable in this case?
HELD:
No. Articles 164, 166, 170 and 171 of the Family
Code do not contemplate a situation, like in the
instant case, where a child is alleged not to be the
child of nature or biological child of a certain
couple. Rather, these articles govern a situation
where a husband (or his heirs) denies as his own a
child of his wife. Thus, under Article 166, it is the
husband who can impugn the legitimacy of said
child.
As regards the Birth Certificate which lists Marissa
as the child of Isabel and Vicente, the court said
that it is highly questionable and suspicions. Under
Article 410 of the New Civil Code, is states that,
"the books making up the Civil Registry and all
documents relating thereto shall be considered
public documents and shall be prima facie evidence
of the facts therein stated." The totality of contrary
evidence presented by the sister and nephew of
Vicente show that Isabel did not become pregnant
as testified to by the witnesses. Also the Deed of
Extra-Judicial Settlement of the Estate of the
Deceased Isabel Chipongian executed by Vicente
himself and by Isabel’s brother, stated that they are
the sole heirs of the deceased Isabel Chipongian
because she died without descendants or
ascendants". In executing this Deed, Vicente
effectively repudiated the Certificate of Live Birth of
Marissa where it appeared that Vicente was
Marissa’s father.
Therefore, Marissa’s petition before the Supreme
Court was dismissed.