Art. 189. Adoption shall have the following effects:
(1) For civil purposes, the adopted shall be deemed to be a legitimate child of the adopters and both shall acquire the reciprocal rights and obligations arising from the relationship of parent and child, including the right of the adopted to use the surname of the adopters;
(2) The parental authority of the parents by nature over the adopted shall terminate and be vested in the adopters, except that if the adopter is the spouse of the parent by nature of the adopted, parental authority over the adopted shall be exercised jointly by both spouses; and
(3) The adopted shall remain an intestate heir of his parents and other blood relatives. (39(1)a, (3)a, PD 603)
Adoption - is a juridical act that creates between two persons certain relations purely civil, of paternity and filiation.
Consequently, the child has the right to bear the surname of the adopter, to receive support, and to inherit.
The relationship established by the adoption is limited to the adopting parents and does not extend to their other relatives, except as expressly provided by the law.Thus, the adopted child cannot be considered as a relative of the ascendants and collaterals of the adopting parents, nor of the legitimate children which they may have after the adoption, except that the law imposes certain impediments to marriage by reason of adotion. Neither are the children of the adopted consodered as descendants of the adopter.(Santos, Jr. v Republic, 21 SCRA 379)
Hence, no relationship is created between the adopted and the collaterals of the adopting parent. As a consequence, the adopted is an heir of the adopters but not the relatives of the adopter. (Teotico v Val, 13 SCRA 406)
Hence, no relationship is created between the adopted and the collaterals of the adopting parent. As a consequence, the adopted is an heir of the adopters but not the relatives of the adopter. (Teotico v Val, 13 SCRA 406)
Article 981. Should children of the deceased and descendants of other children who are dead, survive, the former shall inherit in their own right, and the latter by right of representation.
Right to Citizenship
-do not include the acquisition of the citizenship of the adopter (Cheng Ling v Galang, L-11931, October 27, 1958)
-the fact remains that he would still retain the citizenship of the natural father, with the result that should eventually benefit from it should his father become a naturalized Filipino (Tan Hoi v Republic, No. L-15266, September 30, 1960)
The citizenship of the adopter is a political matter, and not civil in nature, and the ways in which it should be conferred outside the ambit of the Civil Code.
The rule changed due to the enactment of the RA 9225 which provides:
Sec 4. Derivative Citizenship- The unmarried child whether legitimate, illegitimate or adopted, below eighteen (18) years of age, of those who are re-acquire Philippine citizenship upon effectivity of this Act shall be deemed citizens of ther Philippines.
Art. 190. Legal or intestate succession to the estate of the adopted shall be governed by the following rules:
(1) Legitimate and illegitimate children and descendants and the surviving spouse of the adopted shall inherit from the adopted, in accordance with the ordinary rules of legal or intestate succession;
(2) When the parents, legitimate or illegitimate, or the legitimate ascendants of the adopted concur with the adopter, they shall divide the entire estate, one-half to be inherited by the parents or ascendants and the other half, by the adopters;
(3) When the surviving spouse or the illegitimate children of the adopted concur with the adopters, they shall divide the entire estate in equal shares, one-half to be inherited by the spouse or the illegitimate children of the adopted and the other half, by the adopters.
(4) When the adopters concur with the illegitimate children and the surviving spouse of the adopted, they shall divide the entire estate in equal shares, one-third to be inherited by the illegitimate children, one-third by the surviving spouse, and one-third by the adopters;
(5) When only the adopters survive, they shall inherit the entire estate; and
(6) When only collateral blood relatives of the adopted survive, then the ordinary rules of legal or intestate succession shall apply. (39(4)a, PD 603)
Illustrations
1. A adopted B, B later married C and they gave birth to E, a legitimated child. F, an illegitimate child of B before his marriage with C, his surviving spouse. Distribute the estate if estate of B is P120,000.00
E- 1/2 or P60,000.00
F- 1/4 or P30,000.00
C- 1/4 or P30,000.00
This is the distribution made by paragraph 1 of Article 190 of Family Code. The adopter, however, does not get any share of the estate.
2. A adopted B, B died, leaving an estate of P100,000.00 with A and his natural parents, C and D, as his survivors. Distribute the estate.
A - 1/2 or P50,000.00
C & D - 1/2 or P50,000.00
3. A adopted B. He married C and died without an issue. He is survived by C, his wife and A, his adopter. He left an estate of P100,000.00. Distribute the estate.
C - 1/2 or P50,000.00
A - 1/2 or P50,000.00
If, instead of getting married, B lived with a woman without the benefit of a marriage and they gave birth to C. Distribute his estate which is P100,000.00.
C - 1/2 or P50,000.00
A - 1/2 or P50,000.00
4. A adopted B. Before B’s marriage to C, he had an illegitimate child with D, named E. He died with an estate of P120,000.00, leaving his spouse, illegitimate child, and A, his adopter, as his survivors. Distribute the estate.
C - 1/3 or P40,000.00
E - 1/3 or P40,000.00
A - 1/3 or P40,000.00
5. A and B adopted C, who died with an estate of P100,000.00. He left no survivors except A and B. Distribute the estate.
The law says that if the only survivors are the adopters, they shall inherit the entire estate, A and B would therefore get P100,000.00 (See par. 5, Art. 190, Family Code)
Case:
G.R. No. L-22523
Santos, Jr. v. Republic
September 29, 1967
ANGELES, J.
Facts:
The above-named spouses filed the petition before the court a quo on January 8, 1963, praying that the minor Edwin Villa y Mendoza, 4 years old, be declared their (petitioner's) son by adoption. Evidence was presented that the order setting the case for hearing has been duly published, Exhibit A. There having been no opposition registered to the petition, the petitioners were permitted to adduce their evidence.
It was established that the petitioners are both 32 years of age, Filipinos, residing in the City of Manila. They were married in 1957 and have maintained a conjugal home of their own. They do not have a child of their own blood. Neither spouse has any legitimate, legitimated, illegitimate, acknowledged natural child, or natural child by legal fiction, nor has any one of them been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude. Edwin Villa y Mendoza, 4 years old, is a child of Francisco Villa and Florencia Mendoza who are the common parents of the petitioner-wife Edipola Villa Santos and the minor. Luis E. Santos, Jr., is a lawyer, with business interests in a textile development enterprise and the IBA electric plant, and is the general manager of Medry Inc. and the secretary-treasurer of Bearen Enterprises. His income is approximately P600.00 a month. His co-petitioner-wife, is a nurse by profession, with an average monthly earning of about P300.00.
It was also shown that Edwin Villa y Mendoza was born on May 22, 1958, Exhibit C. He was a sickly child since birth. Due to the child's impairing health his parents entrusted him to the petitioners who reared and brought him up for the years thereafter, and as a result, there developed between the petitioners and the child, a deep and profound love for each other. The natural parents of the minor testified that they have voluntarily given their consent to the adoption of their son by the petitioners, and submitted their written consent and conformity to the adoption, and that they fully understand the legal consequences of the adoption of their child by the petitioners.
Issue:
Whether or not an elder sister may adopt a younger brother.
Ruling:
Yes, petition for the adoption of the subject minor is granted.
With respect to the objection that the adoption in this particular case will result in a dual relationship between the parties, that the adopted brother will also be the son of the adopting elder sister, that fact alone should not prevent the adoption. One is by nature, while the other is by fiction of law. The relationship established by the adoption is limited to the adopting parents and does not extend to their other relatives, except as expressly provided by law. Thus, the adopted child cannot be considered as a relative of the ascendants and collaterals of the adopting parents, nor of the legitimate children which they may have after the adoption except that the law imposes certain impediments to marriage by reason of adoption.
Neither are the children of the adopted considered as descendants of the adopter (Tolentino, Civil Code, Vol. I, 1960 Ed., p. 652, citing 1 Oyuelos 284; Perez, Gonzales and Castan; 4-11 Enneccerus, Kipp & Wolff 177; Muñoz P. 104). So even considered in relation to the rules on succession which are in pari materia, the adoption under consideration would not be objectionable on the ground alone of the resulting relationship between the adopter and the adopted. Similar dual relationships also result under our law on marriage when persons who are already related, by blood or by affinity, marry each other. But as long as the relationship is not within the degrees prohibited by law, such marriages are allowed notwithstanding the resulting dual relationship. And as We do not find any provision in the law that expressly prohibits adoption among relatives, they ought not to be prevented.
No comments:
Post a Comment