RUANO, Mary Jannyn E.

1-W
Persons & Family Relations
28 November 2022

TOPIC: Parental Authority

ZENAIDA MEDINA v. VENANCIA L. MAKABALI

G.R. No. L-26953
March 28, 1969
REYES, J.B.L., J.:

Basic Principle: According to Article 363 of the Civil Code, in all questions on the case,
custody, education and property of children, the latte’s welfare shall be paramount, and that for
compelling reasons even a child under seven may be ordered separated from the mother.

IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION FOR HABEAS CORPUS OF MINOR SHANG

KO VINGSON, YU SHIRLY VINGSON & SHIRLY VINGSON DEMAISIP v. JOVY
CABCABAN
UDK No. 14817
January 13, 2014
ABAD, J.:

Basic Principle: Under Section 1, Rule 102 of the Rules of Court, the writ of habeas corpus is
available in cases involving the rightful custody over a minor. The general rule is that parents
should have the custody over their minor children, but the State has the right to intervene where
the parents, rather than care for such children, treat them cruelly, and abusively, impairing their
growth and well-being and leaving them emotional scars that they carry throughout their lives
unless they are liberated from such parents and property counseled.

CHERITH BUCAL v. MANNY BUCAL

G.R. No. 206957
June 17, 2015
PERLAS-BERNABE, J.:

Basic Principle: The Court concludes that the grant of visitation rights by the RTC in favor of
Manny, as contained in the PPO, and reiterated in its assailed Orders, being both unexplained and
not prayed for , is an act of grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction
which deserves correction through the prerogative writ of certiorari. There is no need to delve
into the

MELCHORA CABANAS v. FRANCISCO PILAPIL

G.R. No. L-25843
July 25, 1974
FERNANDO, J.:

Basic Principle: The welfare of the child is the paramount consideration. It is not an
unreasonable assumption that between a mother and an uncle, the mother is likely to lavish more
care on and pay greater attention to the child. There are no circumstances that did militate against
what conforms to the natural order of things, even if the language of the law were not as clear. It
is not to be lost sight of either that the judiciary pursuant to its role as an agency of the State as
parens patriae, with an even greater stress on family unit under the present Constitution, did
weigh in the balance the opposing claims and did come to the conclusion that the welfare of the
child called for the mother to be entrusted with such responsibility.

NOEL BAGTAS v. HON. RUTH SANTOS

G.R. No. 166682
November 27, 2009
CARPIO, J.:

Basic Principle: Article 214 of the Civil Code states that in case of absence or unsuitability of
the parents, substitute parental authority shall be exercised by the surviving grandparent.

The Family Code authorizes the courts to, if the welfare of the child so demands, deprive the
parents concerned of parental authority over the child or adopt such measures as may be proper
under the circumstances.

REYNALDO ESPIRITU and GUILLERMA LAYUG v. COURT OF APPEALS

G.R. No. 115640
March 15, 1995
MELO, J.:

Basic Principle: Courts are mandated by the Family Code to take into account all relevant
considerations. If a child is under seven years of age, the law presumes that the mother is the best
custodian. The presumption is strong but not conclusive. If a child is over seven, his choice is
paramount but the court is not bound by that choice. The court may find the chosen parent unfit
and award custody to the other parent, or even to a third party as it deems fit under the
circumstances. The presumption under the second paragraph of Art 213 of the Family Code no
longer applies as the children are over seven years. The children understand the unfortunate
shortcomings of their mother and have been affected in their emotional growth by her behavior.

JOYCELYN GUALBERTO v. CRISANTO GUALBERTO

G.R. No. 154994
June 25, 2006
PANGANIBAN, J.:

Basic Principle: Sexual preference or moral laxity alone does not prove parental neglect or
incompetence. Not even the fact that a mother is a prostitute or has been unfaithful to her
husband would render her unfit to have custody of her minor child. To deprive the wife of
custody, the husband must clearly establish that her moral lapses have had an adverse effect on
the welfare of the child or have distracted the offending spouse from exercising proper parental
care.

GRACE GRANDE v. PATRICIO ANTONIO

G.R. 206248
February 18, 2014
VELASCO, JR., J.:

Basic Principle: Parental authority over minor children is lodged by Article 176 on the mother.
Custody over the minor children also goes to the mother, unless she is shown to be unfit.

Illegitimate children shall use the surname and shall be under the parental authority of their
mother, and shall be entitled to support in conformity with this Code.

HERALD DACASIN v. SHARON DACASIN

G.R. No. 168785
February 5, 2010
CARPIO, J.:

Basic Principle: A child within the age bracket of seven years, the law decides for the separated
or divorced parents how best to take care of the child and that is to give custody to the separated
mother. The separated parents cannot contract away the provision of the Family Code on the
maternal custody of children below seven years anymore that they can privately agree that a
mother who unemployed, immoral, habitually drunk, drug addict, insane or afflicted with a
communicable disease will have sole custody of a child under seven as these are reasons to
deemed compelling to preclude the application of the exclusive maternal custody regime under
the second paragraph of Article 213.

BONIFACIA VANCIL v .HELEN BELMES

G.R. No. 132223
June 19, 2001
SANDOVAL-GUITERREZ, J.:

Basic Principle: The law vests on the father and mother joint parental authority over the persons
of their common children. In case of absence or death of either parent, the parent present shall
continue exercising parental authority. Only in case of the parent’s death, absence or unsuitability
may substitute parental authority be exercised by the surviving grandparent.

The child illegitimacy does not in any way affect the order of priority in the exercise of parental
authority. Article 176 of the Family Code states that an illegitimate child shall be under the
parental authority of the mother who should also be entitled to the custody of the child.