NARCISO SALAS, vs. ANNABELLE MATUSALEM, G.R. No. 180284 September 11, 2013 - CASE DIGEST – Remedial Law 2 – Provisional Remedies – Support Pendente Lite

 

NARCISO SALAS, vs. ANNABELLE MATUSALEM, G.R. No. 180284 September 11, 2013

- CASE DIGEST – Remedial Law 2 – Provisional Remedies – Support Pendente Lite

VILLARAMA, JR., J.

Facts: Matusalem filed a complaint for Support against Salas. She claimed that Salas is the father of her son. Salas, already 56 years old at the time, enticed her as she was then only 24 years old, making her believe that he is a widower. Salas rented an apartment where Matusalem stayed and shouldered all expenses in the delivery of their child.

However, when Matusalem refused the offer of Salas’ family to take the child from her, Salas abandoned her and their child.

Salas prayed for support pendente lite and monthly support in the amount of ₱20k. Salas denied paternity of the child.

RTC: To give as monthly support of 2k for the child through the mother

CA: Salas satisfactorily established the illegitimate filiation of her son and no error was committed by the RTC in granting the prayer for support.

ISSUE: Whether or not the RTC and CA erred in ruling that Matusalem’s evidence sufficiently proved that her son is the illegitimate child of Salas.

Conflicting positions:

Matusalem: Salas is the father of her son and therefore prayed for support pendente lite of ₱20k monthly.

Salas: Salas denied paternity of the child. RTC decided the case without affording him the right to introduce evidence on his defense; and RTC erred in finding that he is the putative father and ordering him to give monthly support.

Held: Yes. If the father did not sign in the birth certificate, the placing of his name by the mother, doctor, registrar, or other person is incompetent evidence of paternity. Neither can such birth certificate be taken as a recognition in a public instrument and it has no probative value to establish filiation to the alleged father.

The testimonies of Matusalem and the owner of the apartment unit Salas rented as to the circumstances of the birth, Salas’ financial support and his regular visits to her, though replete with details, do not approximate the "overwhelming evidence, documentary and testimonial" proof of paternity.

A high standard of proof is required to establish paternity and filiation. An order for recognition and support may create an unwholesome situation or may be an irritant to the family or the lives of the parties so that it must be issued only if paternity or filiation is established by clear and convincing evidence.

CA’s decision is reversed and set aside. RTC case is dismissed.