Sagala- Eslao v CA

(G.R. 116773)
FACTS:
On June 22, 1984, petitioner Maria Paz Cordero-Ouye and Reynaldo Eslao were married. Out
of their marriage, two children were begotten, namely, Leslie Eslao and Angelica Eslao. Leslie
was entrusted to the care and custody of Maria, while Angelica stayed with the spouse’s
mother, Teresita.
Four years after, Reynaldo Eslao died. Petitioner intended to bring Angelica with her but
Teresita prevailed upon her to entrust the custody of Angelica, reasoning out that her son just
died and to ease her grief, she needed the company of the child to at least compensate for the
loss of her late son.
A few years later, Maria married Dr. James Manabu-Ouye, a Japanese-American and the
petitioner migrated to USA to join her new husband. Maria returned to the Philippines to be
reunited with her children and bring them to live with her in the United States. The petitioner
then informed the Teresita about her desire to take custody of Angelica and explained that her
present husband expressed his willingness to adopt Leslie and Angelica and to provide for their
support and education. Respondent resisted the idea by way of explaining that the child was
entrusted to her when she was ten days old and accused the petitioner of having abandoned
Angelica.
Issue: Whether or not the mother has the right to the custody of her daughter.
Held:
Yes. The trial court’s discussion, in consonance with the provision that the child’s welfare is
always the paramount consideration in all questions concerning his care and custody is enough
to convince the Court to decide in favor of the mother.
Parental authority and responsibility are inalienable and may not be transferred or renounced
except in cases authorized by law. The right attached to parental authority, being purely
personal, the law allows a waiver of parental authority only in cases of adoption, guardianship
and surrender to a children's home or an orphan institution. When a parent entrusts the custody
of a minor to another, such as a friend or godfather, even in a document, what is given is merely
temporary custody and it does not constitute a renunciation of parental authority. Even if a
definite renunciation is manifest, the law still disallows the same.
In this case, when Maria entrusted the custody of her minor child to Teresita, what she gave to
the latter was merely temporary custody and it did not constitute abandonment or renunciation
of parental authority.
Thus, the right to the custody of the child belongs to Maria.