Case Summary (G.R. No. 206647)
Petitioner and Respondent
Petitioner: Richelle P. Abella, individually and as next friend of Marl Jhorylle Abella
Respondent: Policarpio CabaAero
Key Dates
– July 25, 2000; September 10, 2000; February 8, 2002 – Alleged dates of sexual abuse
– August 21, 2002 – Birth of Marl Jhorylle Abella
– April 22, 2005 – Filing of Complaint for Support
– March 19, 2007 – RTC Decision dismissing Complaint without prejudice
– August 25, 2011 – Court of Appeals Decision affirming dismissal on substantive grounds
– January 15, 2013 – CA Resolution denying reconsideration
– August 9, 2017 – Supreme Court Decision
Applicable Law
– 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines
– Family Code of the Philippines (Articles 175–176, 194–195, 201–203)
– Republic Act No. 9255 (amending Article 176)
– 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 45
Factual Background
Richelle alleges that while still a minor, she was sexually abused by CabaAero and bore his child, Marl Jhorylle. She filed criminal charges for rape and later for child abuse under RA 7610, both of which were dismissed. She then sought a monthly support allowance of ₱3,000 from CabaAero.
Procedural History
CabaAero denied paternity. After two continuances, pretrial occurred ex parte in February 2007; Richelle testified to the abuse, threatened silence, and her exclusive relation with CabaAero. The RTC dismissed the Complaint without prejudice for failure to implead the minor child. On certiorari, the Court of Appeals upheld the dismissal—not for non-joinder but on the ground that filiation had not been established. The CA held that separate filiation proceedings were prerequisite to support. Reconsideration was denied, prompting the present petition under Rule 45.
Issue
Whether an action for support may proceed directly, integrating the question of filiation, or whether filiation must be separately adjudicated before support can be granted.
Supreme Court Ruling
The Supreme Court reversed. It held that while an action for compulsory recognition may precede one for support, an action for support may validly integrate filiation issues. Dismissal was unwarranted; the proper remedy was remand to allow presentation of evidence on paternity and, if established, to adjudicate support.
Legal Analysis
- Family Code Articles 194–195 define the scope of support and obligors, including illegitimate children once filiation is proven or acknowledged.
- Article 203 allows support pendente lite and demands support only from judicial or extrajudicial demand. Illegitimate children, like Marl Jhorylle, are entitled to support but must establish filiation by record, admission, continuous possession, or other means.
- In Dolina v. Vallecera and Agustin v. Court of Appeals, the Court re
Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 206647)
Facts of the Case
- Petitioner Richelle P. Abella was a minor between 2000 and 2002 when she alleged repeated sexual abuse by respondent Policarpio Cabaáero at his rest house in Barangay Masayo, Tobias Fornier, Antique.
- As a result of the alleged abuse, Richelle gave birth to Marl Jhorylle Abella on August 21, 2002, and attributed paternity to Cabaáero.
- Richelle filed a rape complaint on February 27, 2002, and later a child abuse complaint under Republic Act No. 7610; both were dismissed.
- On April 22, 2005, Richelle filed a Complaint for Support seeking a monthly allowance of ₱3,000 for her minor daughter.
- In his Answer, Cabaáero denied any sexual relations with Richelle and disclaimed paternity of the child.
Trial Proceedings
- The Regional Trial Court (Branch 12, San Jose, Antique) conducted two pre-trial resets; only Richelle’s counsel appeared at the February 21, 2007 pre-trial.
- The court granted Richelle’s motion to present evidence ex parte.
- Richelle testified to specific dates of alleged abuse (July 25, 2000; September 10, 2000; February 8, 2002), threats by Cabaáero for her silence, and three letters sent by him.
- She insisted she had no sexual relations with any other man and named Cabaáero as the father of her child.
- The child’s birth certificate did not indicate Cabaáero as father.
Regional Trial Court Decision
- On March 19, 2007, the RTC dismissed the Complaint without prejudice due to Richelle’s failure to implead her minor daughter Marl Jhorylle Abella as a plaintiff.
- Richelle then petitioned for certiorari and mandamus before the Court of Appeals.
Court of Appeals Decision and Resolution
- August 25, 2011 Decision:
- Upheld dismissal of the Com