2
Opinion Collateral attack A LAW EA CH DAY (Keeps T rouble Away) By Jose C. Sison (The Philippine Star) Updated March 10, 2011 12:00 AM Comments (0) In a p etition for correction or cancellatio n of entry in the Civil Registry, can the court also determine the validity of the marriage and the legitimacy and filiation of the child? This is the question answered in th is case of Cory . Cory married Pabling on January 4, 1978. Their union bore three children, two boys and a girl. B ut after 24 years of marriage or on April 15, 2002, Pabling died while abroad. During the wake following the repatriation of Pabling’s remains back here, a woman by the name Celia began introducing herself and the minor boy she brought along with her as the wife and son of Pabling. Thereupon, Cory made inquiries in the civil regist ry and found out that t he boy’s name was Alfie born on January 1, 1996 with Celia as the mother and Pabling as the father , acknowledged by Pabling as his son and subsequ ently legitimated by virtue of the marriage of the parents on April 22 , 1998. Cory likewise obtained a copy of the marriage contract showing that Pabling and Celia were indeed married on April 22, 1998. Thus on December 23, 2005, Cory , in her b ehalf and in b ehalf of her children filed before the Regional T rial Court (RTC) a petition to correct the entries in t he birth record of Alfie in the Local Civil Registrar under Rule 108 of the Rules of Court charting the procedure by which an entry in the Local Civil Registry may be cancelled or corrected. In th e petition, Cory and her children alleged that Alfie could not have been legitimated by the supposed marriage between Pabling and Celia because said marriage was bigamous on account of the valid and subsisting marriage between her and Pabling. Thus they prayed for (1) the correction of the entries in Alfie’s birth record with respect to his legitim ation, the name of his father , and his acknowledgment, and the use of the surname of Pabling; (2) a directive to the guardians of Alfie to submit Alfie to DNA testin g to determine his paternity and filiation; and (3) the declaration of nullity of Alfie’s legitimation and, for this purpose, the declaration of the marriage of Pa bling and Celia as bigamous. On September 6, 20 07 however , on motion of Alfie and his guardians, the RTC dismissed t he petition without prejudice, holding that in a sp ecial proceeding for corre ction of entry , the court which is not acting as family court under the Family Code, has no jurisdic tion over an action to annul the marriage of Celia and Pabling, imp ugn the legitimacy of Alfie and order Alfie to be subjected t o DNA testing. Hence the RTC said that the controversy should be ventilated in an ordinary adversarial action. Was the RTC correct? Yes. In a special proceeding for correction or cancellation of entries in the Original Registry under Rule 108 of the Rules of Court vis a vis, Article 412 of the Civil Code, the trial court has no jurisdict ion to nullify marriages and to rule on legitimacy and filiation of a child. In t his case, the causes of action of Cory and her children is actually to seek the declaration of nullity of Pabling and Celia’s marriage as void for being bigamous and to impug n Alfie’s legitimacy, which are gover ned not by Rul e 108 but by Administrative Order No. 02-11-10-SC that took effect on March 6, 2003 and A rticle 171 of the Family Code respectively . Hence the petition sh ould be filed i n a family court as expressly provided in said Code. The validity of marriages as well as legitimacy and filiation can be questioned only in a direct action seasonably filed by the proper party (in this case the heirs of Pabling), and not through a collateral attack such as this petition filed before the RT C (Braza et. al. vs. Civil Registrar of Himaymaylan City Negros Oriental, et.a l, G.R. 181174 December 4, 200 9, 607 SCRA638) Collateral attack - A LA W EACH DA Y (Keeps Trouble A way) By Jose C.... ht tp://w ww.philstar.com /ArticlePr interFriendly.aspx?articleId=664730&... 1 of 2 5/ 30/2011 7:59 PM

Collateral Attack

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Collateral Attack

7/27/2019 Collateral Attack

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/collateral-attack 1/2

Opinion

Collateral attack

A LAW EACH DAY (Keeps Trouble Away) By Jose C. Sison (The Philippine Star) Updated March 10,2011 12:00 AM Comments (0) 

In a petition for correction or cancellation of entry in the Civil Registry, can the court also determine the validity of the

marriage and the legitimacy and filiation of the child? This is the question answered in this case of Cory.

Cory married Pabling on January 4, 1978. Their union bore three children, two boys and a girl. But after 24 years of 

marriage or on April 15, 2002, Pabling died while abroad.

During the wake following the repatriation of Pabling’s remains back here, a woman by the name Celia began

introducing herself and the minor boy she brought along with her as the wife and son of Pabling.

Thereupon, Cory made inquiries in the civil registry and found out that the boy’s name was Alfie born on January 1,

1996 with Celia as the mother and Pabling as the father, acknowledged by Pabling as his son and subsequently

legitimated by virtue of the marriage of the parents on April 22, 1998. Cory likewise obtained a copy of the marriage

contract showing that Pabling and Celia were indeed married on April 22, 1998.

Thus on December 23, 2005, Cory, in her behalf and in behalf of her children filed before the Regional Trial Court (RTC)

a petition to correct the entries in the birth record of Alfie in the Local Civil Registrar under Rule 108 of the Rules of 

Court charting the procedure by which an entry in the Local Civil Registry may be cancelled or corrected.

In the petition, Cory and her children alleged that Alfie could not have been legitimated by the supposed marriage

between Pabling and Celia because said marriage was bigamous on account of the valid and subsisting marriage

between her and Pabling. Thus they prayed for (1) the correction of the entries in Alfie’s birth record with respect to

his legitimation, the name of his father, and his acknowledgment, and the use of the surname of Pabling; (2) a

directive to the guardians of Alfie to submit Alfie to DNA testing to determine his paternity and filiation; and (3) the

declaration of nullity of Alfie’s legitimation and, for this purpose, the declaration of the marriage of Pabling and Celia as

bigamous.

On September 6, 2007 however, on motion of Alfie and his guardians, the RTC dismissed the petition without

prejudice, holding that in a special proceeding for correction of entry, the court which is not acting as family court

under the Family Code, has no jurisdiction over an action to annul the marriage of Celia and Pabling, impugn the

legitimacy of Alfie and order Alfie to be subjected to DNA testing. Hence the RTC said that the controversy should be

ventilated in an ordinary adversarial action. Was the RTC correct?

Yes. In a special proceeding for correction or cancellation of entries in the Original Registry under Rule 108 of the Rules

of Court vis a vis, Article 412 of the Civil Code, the trial court has no jurisdict ion to nullify marriages and to rule onlegitimacy and filiation of a child.

In this case, the causes of action of Cory and her children is actually to seek the declaration of nullity of Pabling and

Celia’s marriage as void for being bigamous and to impugn Alfie’s legitimacy, which are governed not by Rule 108 but

by Administrative Order No. 02-11-10-SC that took effect on March 6, 2003 and Article 171 of the Family Code

respectively. Hence the petition should be filed in a family court as expressly provided in said Code. The validity of 

marriages as well as legitimacy and filiation can be questioned only in a direct action seasonably filed by the proper

party (in this case the heirs of Pabling), and not through a collateral attack such as this petition filed before the RTC

(Braza et. al. vs. Civil Registrar of Himaymaylan City Negros Oriental, et.al, G.R. 181174 December 4, 2009, 607 

SCRA638)

teral attack - A LAW EACH DAY (Keeps Trouble Away) By Jose C.... http://www.philstar.com/ArticlePrinterFriendly.aspx?articleId=66

2 5/30/2011

Page 2: Collateral Attack

7/27/2019 Collateral Attack

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/collateral-attack 2/2

* * *

E-mail: [email protected] 

teral attack - A LAW EACH DAY (Keeps Trouble Away) By Jose C.... http://www.philstar.com/ArticlePrinterFriendly.aspx?articleId=66

2 5/30/2011