Insufficient proof

Support comprises everything indispensable for sustenance, dwelling, clothing, medical attendance, education and transportation, in keeping with the financial capacity of the family (Article 194, Family Code). Under Article 195 (FC), among those entitled to support from their parents are the illegitimate children. To be entitled however, an illegitimate child, like a girl, must prove paternity and filiation or that she is the daughter of the person from whom she is claiming support. How is filiation established or proven? Is a handwritten note of such person obligating himself to give support sufficient to prove it? These are the questions answered in this case of Lina.

Lina was born on July 1, 1999. Her birth certificate shows Caridad as her mother and Berto as her father, who paid her hospital bills, but only the signature of Caridad appears thereon because Berto refused to sign it. Claiming that Lina has been begotten out of her extramarital affair with Berto, Caridad thus filed in behalf of her daughter Lina, a Complaint for recognition and support against Berto based on a handwritten note the latter signed about two months after Lina’s birth, wherein he declared that: “I, Berto Solo, hereby undertake to give and provide financial support in the amount of P4,000 a month to Lina Largo, presently in the custody of her mother Caridad Largo without necessity of demand, subject to adjustment later depending on the needs of the child and my income.”

Arguing that her filiation was established by the above handwritten note, Lina as represented by her mother Caridad, prayed that Berto be ordered to (1) recognize her as his child, (2) give her support pendent lite in the increased amount of P8,000 a month and (3) give her adequate monthly financial support until she reaches the age of majority.

Berto countered that Caridad has not proven that he was the father of Lina and that he was only forced to execute the handwritten note because of threats coming from the New People’s Army (NPA).

The Regional Trial Court (RTC) granted Lina’s prayer for support pendent lite based on the handwritten note which it treated as “contractual support” in the amount of P3,000 a month. But after Berto filed a demurrer to evidence, the case was dismissed for insufficiency of evidence. According to the RTC, Lina’s Birth Certificate was not prima facie evidence of her filiation as it did not bear Berto’s signature, that his handwritten undertaking to give support did not contain a categorical acknowledgment that Lina is his child and that there was no showing that Berto performed any overt act of acknowledgement that Lina was his illegitimate daughter after the execution of the handwritten note.

On appeal to the Court of Appeals (CA), the RTC decision was reversed and set aside. The CA declared that Lina was the illegitimate daughter of Berto and ordered Berto to pay her support of P4,000 every 15th and 30th of the month. The CA said that Berto’s payment of Caridad’s hospital bills when she gave birth to Lina and his subsequent commitment to provide monthly support conclusively show that he was Lina’s father; that he merely acted in bad faith in omitting a statement of paternity in his handwritten undertaking to provide financial support and that the amount of P8,000 was reasonable and according to his income. Was the CA correct?

The Supreme Court said the CA is not correct. In this case, Lina relies mainly on the handwritten note executed by Berto. Said note does not contain any statement whatsoever about Lina’s filiation to Berto. It is not therefore an admission of filiation in a public document or a private handwritten instrument signed by the parent within the ambit of Article 172 (2) of the Family Code, which is likewise applicable to illegitimate children. While there are also verbal and written incriminating acts by the putative father acceptable as evidence to establish filiation like the record of birth, a will or a statement before as court of record or the notarial agreement to support a child, the handwritten note in this case does not contain any statement whatsoever about Lina’s filiation to Berto. It is therefore not within the ambit of Article 172 (2) vis a vis Article 175 of the Family Code which admits as competent evidence of illegitimate filiation, an admission of a filiation in a private handwritten instrument signed by the parent concerned.

The Certificate of Birth submitted by Lina has no probative value to establish filiation to Berto because the latter did not sign it. So the decision of the RTC dismissing the complaint for insufficiency of evidence should be reinstated (Nepomuceno vs Lopez, G.R. 181258, March 18, 2010).