SC awards grandparents custody over father after mother's death

MANILA, Philippines — In cases involving illegitimate children where the mother is the sole legitimate parental authority, the grandparents shall exercise "substitute parental authority," as specified in the Family Code, the Supreme Court (SC) said.

In a June 26, 2024 decision, the Supreme Court's second division "partially granted" a petition by a minor's grandparents challenging the award of custody to the minor's father following the mother's death shortly after childbirth.

The case stemmed from a habeas corpus petition filed by Winston Clark Stolk in a Regional Trial Court (RTC), seeking absolute custody of his minor son, Winston, after the death of the child's mother, Catherine Daen. 

It should be noted that Stolk and his late wife, Catherine Daen, lived together in the United States for four years without marrying,

Daen returned to the Philippines in 2007 to give birth, after which she passed away, leaving the child in the care of her parents, Nora Lopez and Marcelino Alfonso.

The RTC granted Stolk's petition and gave him the custody of Winston. 

The court found that the DNA test, which indicated a 99.9997% probability of paternity, along with the parentage report and Winston's birth certificate, confirmed Stolk's right to custody and parental authority over Winston.

The grandparents contested the decision, filing a motion for reconsideration and arguing for a Department of Social Welfare and Development case study to determine the best environment for Winston.

They cited Stolk's legal issues in the US and Suriname and the fact that Stolk and Daen were not married.

However, the RTC denied the motion for reconsideration, which prompted them to file a petition before the Court of Appeals (CA).

The appellate court also denied their petition for being “time-barred” and said that the RTC’s decision already attained finality.

Despite the lower court’s agreement with the petitioner, the SC said that the RTC and the CA erred in awarding Stolk the custody of the child based solely on parentage.

Citing Article 214 of the Family Code, the High Court reiterated that in case of the death, absence, or unsuitability of the parents, substitute parental authority shall be exercised by the surviving grandparent or to the specified persons under Article 216 of the law.

“This applies not only when both parents exercise parental authority but also when only one parent has sole custody, such as the mother of an illegitimate child, to whom the law explicitly grants sole parental authority, notwithstanding the father’s recognition of the child,” the SC said in a press release.

Article 216 of the Family Code stipulates the following:

In default of parents or a judicially appointed guardian, the following person shall exercise substitute parental authority over the child in the order indicated:

(1) The surviving grandparent, as provided in Art. 214;
(2) The oldest brother or sister, over twenty-one years of age, unless unfit or disqualified; and
(3) The child's actual custodian, over twenty-one years of age, unless unfit or disqualified.

The SC also pointed out the lack of marriage between Stolk and Daen, which the High Court said the RTC did not consider.

“All told, the Court finds that the RTC committed grave abuse of discretion in awarding respondent custody over Winston based solely on parentage,” the court’s decision read.

“Consequently, the CA committed a reversible error in dismissing outright the Petition for Certiorari filed by petitioners from the said RTC ruling on procedural grounds,” it added.

The SC remanded the case to the RTC, instructing it to consider the factors and measures outlined in the Rule on Custody of Minors when deciding Winston's custody.