REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

NATIONAL CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
Manila City
Branch 143

ANDREA A. DELA CRUZ, ANGELA A. DELA CRUZ, AURORA A. DELA

CRUZ AND JASMINE A. DELA CRUZ, REPRESENTED BY THEIR
MOTHER SOFIA A. DELA CRUZ,
Plaintiffs,

- versus - Civil Case No. 2314

For: Legal Support

DANIEL C. DELA CRUZ,

Defendant.
x------------------------------------------------------------x

ANSWER WITH MOTION TO CONDUCT PATERNITY

TEST THROUGH DNA TESTING/EXAMINATION

Defendant, through counsel, respectfully submits its Answer with Motion to

Conduct Paternity Test Through DNA Testing/Examination and avers that:

1. Defendant admits the factual circumstances stated under

Paragraphs one (1), two (2), and three (3) of the complaint with
the additional averment that he may be served with all court
processes through the undersigned counsel;

2. Defendant recognized his children with Sofia, namely: Andrea,

Angela, and Aurora as evidenced by their respective birth
certificates attached herein as “ANNEX A-1”, “ANNEX A-2”,
and “ANNEX A-3” but specifically denies his filiation against
Jasmine A. Dela Cruz (Jasmine for brevity) for lack of
information to form a belief as to the truth of the matters alleged
therein.

3. Defendant specifically denies paragraphs 5, 6, 7 and 8 for being

baseless and of no truth whatsoever.

4. Defendant admits paragraph 9 of the complaint but specifically

denies the rest of the allegations in the complaint not only for its
lack of sufficient knowledge and information as to form a belief
as to their veracity but also as to the utter tentativeness, and
lack of particularity and specificity of the remaining allegations.
 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

5. The denial of paternity is bolstered by the fact that on January

9, 2022, the defendant departed the Philippines for a business
trip to New Zealand. The defendant returned to the Philippines
on June 19, 2023. Therefore, it is impossible for him to be the
father of Jasmine, as she would have been conceived
approximately nine months before December;

A copy of Defendant’s airplane ticket dated 09 January 2022

bound for New Zealand is hereby attached as Annex “A”.

6. Furthermore, their Mother also failed to provide the original

copy of Jasmine's birth certificate, which would have served as
evidence of an intention to manipulate the truth.

7. The submitted affidavits of Barangay Captain Morales and two

(2) others stating the defendant never impugned the legitimacy
of Jasmine were not sufficient to establish filiation.

8. In order to erase the doubt as to the issue regarding the

biological parent of Jasmine, the Defendant hereby manifest his
willingness to undergo Paternity Test of Jasmine through DNA
Testing or Examination;

9. As seafarer and under our laws, a corresponding percentage of

his monthly salary is automatically remitted to his
beneficiary/family and only a portion of it is left to him.

A copy of Defendant’s payslips is herein attached as “ANNEX

“B” and series;

10. The allegations of Sofia that defendant wilfully and maliciously

failed to provide support and that the former cannot carry the
financial burden of raising their family are of no basis as the
remittances from Defendant’s monthly salary are consistent.

Copies of Defendant’s remittances are herein attached as

“ANNEX “C” and series;

11. In the case of XXX Petitioner vs. People of the Philippines (GR
No. 255877, 29 March 2023), the highest court stress that:

“Lastly, it bears stressing that the obligation to provide

support is imposed by the law mutually upon both spouses.45
The obligation is not a one-way street for the husband to
 support his wife. The wife has the identical obligation to provide
support to her husband. The law certainly did not intend to
impose a heavier burden on the husband to provide support for
his wife, or institutionalize criminal prosecution as a measure to
enforce support from him.”

12. The facts alleged in this Answer should be enough to make

Plaintiff reasonably believe that defendant did not fail to fulfil his
obligation to give financial support and Jasmine’s legitimacy
remains in question;

13. Lastly, the Labor Code of the Philippines provides:

“It shall be mandatory for all Filipinos abroad to remit a

portion of their foreign exchange earnings to their families,
dependents, and/or beneficiaries in the country in accordance
with rules and regulations prescribed by the Secretary of
Labor.”

14. Considering all the evidence presented, it is evident that the

Defendant has sufficiently proven his ability to provide support
to his children under the care of their mother.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, premises duly considered, it is most respectfully

prayed to this Honourable Court that:

1. This Honourable Court accepts this Answer;

2. An Order be issued allowing Defendant to Conduct Paternity Test

through DNA Test/Examination with Jasmine A. Dela Cruz;
3. The Court would order the Plaintiff to return the amounts given by
Defendant in excess of their monthly needs;

Other just and equitable reliefs are likewise prayed for.

Respectfully submitted this 20th day of February, 2024, at the City of

Manila.

PEREZ LAW AND ASSOCIATES

12th Floor, X Building
Malate, Manila City
Tel No.: 8524-9214
Email address: inquiry.pla@pla.law.ph
 By:

(signed)
Atty. Wilma A. Perez
Roll No. 10578 / IBP No. 84672 1/8/2024
PTR No. 96785 1/12/2024
MCLE Compliance No. VI-857 98 10/5/2023