G.R. No. 171713 - Estate of Ong vs. Diaz

In November 1993, Jinky C. Diaz (Jinky), who was married to a Japanese national Hasegawa Katsuo, met Rogelio G. Ong (Rogelio) in Tarlac City. Their acquaintance developed into a love relationship.
Despite Jinky’s valid marriage to Hasegawa (civil wedding in February 1993), Jinky and Rogelio cohabited from January 1994 to September 1998.
From this live-in relationship, Jinky conceived Joanne Rodjin Diaz, born on February 25, 1998. Rogelio accompanied Jinky during delivery, paid hospital and baptismal expenses, and provided for Joanne’s needs, recognizing her as his daughter.
In September 1998, Rogelio abandoned Jinky and Joanne and ceased supporting Joanne, denying paternity.

Jinky, as Joanne’s guardian, filed a Complaint for compulsory recognition and support against Rogelio in RTC Tarlac City. The Complaint prayed for Rogelio’s recognition of Joanne as his daughter, support, attorney’s fees, and other equitable reliefs.
Rogelio failed to file an answer after summons, leading to a default judgment on April 23, 1999, awarding recognition, monthly support of P10,000.00, reasonable attorney’s fees, and costs.
Rogelio filed motions to lift default, for reconsideration, and a motion for new trial, granted on June 16, 1999, vacating prior default and decision, allowing trial de novo, and ordering monthly support pendente lite beginning January 1999.

The central issue was paternity. Since Jinky was married to Hasegawa at Joanne’s birth, Joanne was presumed legitimate under Article 164 of the Family Code.
Rebuttal of legitimacy requires proof of physical impossibility of husband’s access to wife during the critical period (Article 166). Evidence showed Hasegawa (husband) was residing outside the Philippines and was absent during the conception period; no evidence of Jinky’s sexual relations with others nearby conception time.
Rogelio admitted paying hospital bills, sexual relationship with Jinky including visits post-birth, and taking care of Joanne immediately after birth.
The RTC on December 15, 2000, declared Joanne the illegitimate child of Rogelio and Jinky and affirmed support pendente lite until majority age.
Rogelio filed a Motion for Reconsideration, denied on January 19, 2001.

Rogelio appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA), with the case fully submitted for decision by July 2002.
Rogelio died on February 21, 2005; his estate was substituted as party respondent.
On November 23, 2005, the CA reversed the trial court’s decision, remanding the case for DNA testing to conclusively determine paternity.
Petitioner’s Motion for Reconsideration was denied by the CA on March 1, 2006.

The Estate of Rogelio Ong filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45.
Issues raised include the propriety of the CA’s refusal to dismiss respondent's complaint, the legitimacy presumption of Joanne, and the feasibility of DNA testing given Rogelio's death.
The Court limited its focus to the appropriateness of the remand for DNA analysis despite Rogelio’s death.

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in not dismissing respondent's complaint for compulsory recognition despite finding insufficient evidence that Rogelio Ong was the father.

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in not declaring Joanne as the legitimate child of Jinky and Hasegawa, considering the presumption of legitimacy and failure to rebut it.

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in remanding the case to the trial court for DNA analysis despite the death of Rogelio Ong, alleging that DNA testing was no longer feasible.