G.R. No. 94523 - St. Theresita's Academy vs. National Labor Relations Commission

On April 9, 2008, Sheryl M. Mendez (Mendez) and Dr. John O. Maliga (Maliga) were married under Muslim rites in Cotabato City.
Prior to the marriage, they had a daughter, Princess Fatima M. Maliga, born out of wedlock and raised by Mendez.

Maliga alleged that Mendez reverted to Christianity after the wedding, despite professing Islam at marriage; that she took Princess Fatima to Manila, enrolled her in a Catholic school, and taught her Christian practices without his consent.
On November 2, 2010, Maliga filed with the 1st Shariʿa Circuit Court (ShCC) a petition for judicial confirmation of talaq (divorce) and prayed for probational custody of Princess Fatima pending resolution.
Maliga filed an urgent motion for temporary custody; on November 12, 2010, the ShCC granted it without setting a hearing or serving Mendez notice.

On November 18, 2010, Mendez filed her Answer denying apostasy, asserting her long-standing practice of Islam, her fitness and financial capacity as mother, and invoking the rule that custody of children under seven belongs to the mother.
On December 3, 2010, the ShCC partially reconsidered its custody order by allowing Mendez visitation rights but maintained temporary custody with Maliga.
An Agama Arbitration Council failed to reconcile the spouses; the ShCC set the case for merits.

Confirming Maliga’s talaq against Mendez;
Awarding permanent care and custody of Princess Fatima to Maliga with visitation rights to Mendez within Cotabato City;
Ordering Maliga to pay Mendez a consolatory gift (mutʾa) of ₱24,000.00.

Mendez appealed to the Shariʿa District Court (ShDC), contesting jurisdiction, the absence of hearing, and asserting her right to custody under Muslim law.
On March 30, 2012, the ShDC affirmed the ShCC order, holding that Mendez’s alleged apostasy disentitled her to custody under Muslim law and that Maliga, as a Muslim father, was best positioned to raise the child.

Mendez filed a petition for certiorari under Rule 45, assigning errors regarding jurisdiction, due process, and the propriety of custody award.
The Supreme Court reinstated the petition, received comments, and appointed an amicus curiae to opine on jurisdiction.

Whether the ShCC erred in acting on Maliga’s urgent motion for temporary custody without notice and hearing.
Whether the ShCC and ShDC had jurisdiction under Presidential Decree No. 1083 to decide custody issues.
Whether the custody of Princess Fatima was properly granted to Maliga in light of due process, evidence, and applicable Muslim law.