G.R. No. 234660 - Spouses Magdalino Gabun and Carol Gabun, Nora A. Lopez, and Marcelino Alfonso vs. Winston Clark Stolk, Sr.

Petitioners Spouses Magdalino and Carol Gabun, Nora A. Lopez, and Marcelino Alfonso are collateral grandparents and actual custodians of minor Winston Clark Daen Stolk, Jr. Respondent Winston Clark Stolk, Sr. is the biological father.
Respondent and Winston’s mother, Catherine Alfonso Daen, cohabited in Florida (without marriage). Catherine returned to the Philippines in early 2007 to give birth and died hours after Winston’s birth on July 22, 2007.

Respondent filed a Verified Petition for Habeas Corpus seeking absolute and permanent custody of Winston.
The RTC ordered a DNA test at respondent’s expense, which showed a 99.9997% probability of paternity.
On April 22, 2014, the RTC granted custody to respondent, relying on Articles 212 and 213 of the Family Code.
Petitioners’ Motion for Reconsideration and Supplemental Motion were denied on November 4, 2014.

Petitioners filed a Notice of Appeal on November 24, 2014, but the RTC dismissed it on December 7, 2014 for nonpayment of fees; finality was declared on December 11, 2014. Subsequent motions for reconsideration were denied (August 26, 2016; May 19, 2017).
Petitioners filed a Rule 65 petition for certiorari before the CA on July 28, 2017. The CA dismissed it as time-barred (August 23, 2017) and denied reconsideration (October 9, 2017).
Petitioners sought review under Rule 45 before the Supreme Court on October 26, 2017.

Did the CA err in dismissing petitioners’ certiorari petition as time-barred?
Did the RTC commit grave abuse of discretion in dismissing petitioners’ appeal for nonpayment of fees?

Did the RTC misapply Family Code provisions (Articles 212–213 vs. 176, 214, 216) and ignore the best-interest factors under the Rule on Custody of Minors?
Should minor-protective procedural relaxations apply in the interest of Winston’s welfare?