Title
Daoang vs. Municipal Judge, San Nicolas, Ilocos Norte
Case
G.R. No. L-34568
Decision Date
Mar 28, 1988
Respondents, with a legitimate grandchild, sought to adopt minors. Petitioners opposed, citing Article 335 disqualifying adopters with legitimate children. Supreme Court ruled respondents not disqualified, affirming adoption as Article 335 excludes grandchildren.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-34568)

Procedural History

• March 23, 1971 – Antero and Amanda Agonoy file Spec. Proc. No. 37 in the Municipal Court of San Nicolas to adopt minors Quirino Bonilla and Wilson Marcos.
• April 22, 1971 – Roderick and Rommel Daoang (through their father) oppose the adoption, alleging disqualification under Civil Code Art. 335(1).
• June 30, 1971 – Municipal Court grants the adoption petition, declaring the minors as legal children of the Agonoys and ordering surname changes.
• March 28, 1988 – Supreme Court receives petition for review on certiorari challenging the disqualification issue.

Legal Issue

Whether spouses Antero and Amanda Agonoy are disqualified to adopt under paragraph (1), Article 335 of the Civil Code on account of having a legitimate, now-deceased daughter (Estrella Agonoy) and, by extension, grandchildren.

Applicable Law

Civil Code of the Philippines (adopted 1950)
Article 335(1): “The following cannot adopt: (1) Those who have legitimate, legitimated, acknowledged natural children, or children by legal fiction; …”

Petitioners’ Argument

• The Agonoys’ legitimate daughter and her children (the Daoangs) constitute “descendants” disqualified to adopt.
• Adoption would introduce a “foreign element” into the family and permanently reduce the Daoangs’ legitimes, contrary to succession policy and the principle against irrevocable disinheritance.
• Reliance on In re Adoption of Millendez, which emphasizes protection of legitimes and family unity.

Trial Court’s Ruling

The Municipal Court held the statutory term “children” under Art. 335(1) is clear and does not extend to grandchildren. By expressio unius est exclusio alterius, the absence of “grandchildren” in the enumeration excludes them from the prohibition.

Supreme Court’s Analysis

  1. Statutory Construction – Article 335(1) is clear and unambiguous; no need for judicial expansion.
  2. Legislative Intent – The Civil Code’s framers deliberately used “children” (not “descendants”) to limit disqualification to direct children.
  3. Historical Comparison – Spanish Civil Code

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.