Bonifacia P. Vancil vs. Helen G. Belmes G.R. No.

132223 June 19, 2001

FACTS: The RTC appointed Bonifacia Vancil, an American citizen, as legal and judicial
guardian over the persons and estate of Valerie and Vincent, the children of her
deceased son Reeder. Helen Belmes, the natural mother of the minor children,
instituted a motion for removal of Guardianship and Appointment of Vancil, asserting
that she is the natural mother in custody of and exercising parental authority over the
subject minors. Trial court rejected Belmes'petition. The CA reversed the RTC order.
Since Valerie had reached the age of majority at the time the case reached the SC, the
Court resolves to determine who between the mother and grandmother of minor Vincent
should be his guardian.

ISSUE: Whether Helen Belmes is the sole guardian of the minor Vincent.

RULING:
Belmes, being the natural mother of Vincent, has the preferential right to be his
guardian. Art. 211 of the FC states: "The father and the mother shall jointly exercise
parental authority over the persons of their common children. In case of disagreement,
the father’s decision shall prevail, unless there is a judicial order to the contrary. xxx."

Vancil, as the surviving grandparent, can exercise substitute parental authority only in
case of death, absence or unsuitability of Belmes. Considering that Belmes is still alive
and has exercised continuously parental authority over Vincent, Vancil has to prove
Belmes'unsuitability. Assuming that Belmes is unfit as a guardian of Vincent, still Vancil
cannot qualify as a substitute guardian. She admitted in her petition that an expatriate
like her will find difficulty of discharging the duties of a guardian. As the Court held in
Guerrero vs Teran, the courts should not appoint persons as guardians who are not
within the jurisdiction of the courts as they will find it difficult to protect the wards.