Title
Masbate vs. Relucio
Case
G.R. No. 235498
Decision Date
Jul 30, 2018
Custody dispute over illegitimate child Queenie; mother granted sole parental authority, father awarded visitation rights; case remanded to determine mother's fitness and child's best interests.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 235498)

RTC Ruling

On December 4, 2015, the RTC applied the tender-age presumption (Family Code, Article 213) to award custody to Renalyn, ruling that children under seven years must remain with their mother. The petition was dismissed for lack of merit. Upon reconsideration, the RTC reaffirmed its decision on January 7, 2016, citing the mother’s sole parental authority over an illegitimate child (Family Code, Article 176) and finding no credible evidence of maternal unfitness.

CA Ruling

The Court of Appeals set aside the RTC orders, remanding the case for a full evidentiary trial to determine whether Renalyn had neglected Queenie, thereby rebutting the tender-age presumption. Pending trial, the CA (a) maintained provisional custody with Renalyn, (b) granted Ricky James visitation rights (two days weekly), and (c) allowed him “temporary custody” once monthly for up to 24 hours.

Issue Before the Supreme Court

Whether the CA correctly remanded the case for trial on the custody issue and properly granted respondent temporary custody and visitation.

Procedural Lapse and Substantial Justice

Although petitioners filed their Supreme Court petition one day late, the Court waived the procedural lapse in favor of substantial justice, emphasizing that technical defects should not override the welfare of a child.

Custody Rights and Parental Authority

Parental authority over legitimate children is exercised jointly by both parents (Family Code, Article 211). For illegitimate children, sole parental authority vests in the mother (Family Code, Article 176). The writ of habeas corpus in custody cases assesses (1) the petitioner’s right to custody, (2) wrongful withholding, and (3) the child’s best interest.

Tender-Age Presumption and Compelling Reasons

Under Article 213 of the Family Code, no child under seven may be separated from the mother absent compelling reasons (e.g., neglect, abandonment, immorality). The CA correctly recognized that factual issues regarding maternal neglect must be resolved through trial before the tender-age presumption can be overcome.

Substitute Parental Authority and Actual Custodian

If the mother is unfit, substitute parental authority follows the order in Article 216: grandparents, eldest siblings, and then the actual custodian. As Queenie’s actual custodian before the dispute, Ricky James falls within this preference if both the mother and grandparents are deemed unfit—subject to the child’s best interest.

Best Interest of the Child and Trial Requirement

The Court underscored that custody disputes are equitable proceedings focused on the minor’s welfare. A full trial is indispensable to evaluate all relevant evidence before altering custody arrangements. The CA’s remand for trial is affirmed.

Visitation Rights and Temporary Custody

The appellate court erred by granting respondent limited temporary custody pre-t

    ...continue reading

    Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
    Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.