G.R. No. L-8606 December 27, 1956
Intestate Estate of the late Bibiana Olivete. Heirs of Marciano Olivete, petitioners-appellees, vs. Rodrigo O. Mata, oppositor-appellant.
FACTS
Bibiana Olivete died intestate on March 30, 1911. She was survived by Rodrigo Olivete Mata, her only child, begotten with Candido Mata in August 1910. Candido Mata was married to Basilisa Manaliksa since 1898; Basilisa died in 1927. The intestate was also survived by her nephews Mariano Olivete and Antonio Olivete (both deceased, with their respective heirs). Rodrigo Olivete Mata claims to be a recognized natural child of the intestate. The parties stipulated that he is the only child of Bibiana Olivete. He presented an instrument (Exhibit A) executed before a notary public where Bibiana Olivete declared she recognized Rodrigo as her child, both parents being without legal impediment to marry. This instrument was denied admission at trial as incompetent and immaterial. Uncontradicted testimony established that Candido Mata was married to Basilisa Manaliksa from 1898 until her death in 1927. The trial court issued an order declaring heirs and adjudicating properties in favor of the petitioners (heirs of the nephews) and another order denying a petition for probate of an alleged newly discovered will in the same proceedings. Rodrigo Olivete Mata appealed.
ISSUE
The primary issue is whether Rodrigo Olivete Mata is a legally acknowledged natural child of Bibiana Olivete entitled to inherit from her intestate estate.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the orders of the trial court. Rodrigo Olivete Mata is not a legally acknowledged natural child. The instrument (Exhibit A) is not the public document required by Article 131 of the Civil Code of Spain for recognition. More decisively, even if recognition were attempted, it is legally invalid because, at the time of Rodrigo’s conception, his father Candido Mata was a married man (to Basilisa Manaliksa). Under Article 119 of the Civil Code of Spain, for an illegitimate child to be legally acknowledged, the parents must be free to marry at the time of the child’s conception. Since Candido Mata was legally married, Rodrigo is an adulterous child, a class of illegitimate child who may not be legally acknowledged by the mother. The trial court’s conclusion that he was not legally recognized is correct, albeit on this different legal ground. Regarding the subordinate issue, the Supreme Court also found no error in the trial court’s refusal to consider a petition for probate of an alleged newly discovered will in the same intestate proceedings and its direction that separate proceedings be instituted, given that the decedent died in 1911 and the oppositor had previously stipulated that she died intestate.