G.R. No. 115640 March 15, 1995
REYNALDO ESPIRITU and GUILLERMA LAYUG, petitioners, vs. COURT OF APPEALS and TERESITA MASAUDING, respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Reynaldo Espiritu and respondent Teresita Masauding began a common-law relationship in the United States in 1984. Their daughter, Rosalind Therese, was born on August 16, 1986. They married in the Philippines on October 7, 1987, and their son, Reginald Vince, was born on January 12, 1988. Their relationship deteriorated, leading to separation in 1990. Teresita returned to California, leaving the children with Reynaldo, who later brought them to the Philippines and left them in the care of his sister, co-petitioner Guillerma Layug, when he returned to the U.S. for work. Teresita filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus on December 8, 1992, to gain custody. The trial court dismissed the petition, suspended Teresita’s parental authority, and awarded sole parental authority to Reynaldo. The Court of Appeals reversed this decision, awarding custody to Teresita. Petitioners now seek a review, contending the appellate court disregarded factual findings and engaged in speculation.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in awarding custody of the minor children to their mother, Teresita Masauding, based on a mechanical application of statutory presumptions regarding the age of the children, instead of conducting a proper assessment of the children’s welfare and best interests as the paramount consideration.

RULING

The Supreme Court GRANTED the petition, REVERSED and SET ASIDE the decision of the Court of Appeals, and REINSTATED the trial court’s decision awarding custody to the father, Reynaldo Espiritu. The Court held that the appellate court erred by applying Article 363 of the Civil Code and Article 213 of the Family Code mechanically, treating the seven-year age limit as an arbitrary cutoff rather than a guide based on a strong but rebuttable presumption. The paramount criterion in custody disputes is always the child’s welfare and best interests. At the time of the decision, both children were over seven years old (Rosalind turned seven on August 16, 1993, and Reginald on January 12, 1995) and capable of expressing a choice. The record, including a child psychologist’s report, revealed Rosalind’s clear preference to stay with her father and aunt, and negative feelings and emotional disturbances caused by her mother’s behavior. Furthermore, compelling reasons existed not to grant custody to the mother, including her conviction for bigamy and illicit activities that affected the children’s emotional growth. Reynaldo was found to be a fit parent, and his assignment abroad was temporary; he had since permanently returned to the Philippines. Thus, the children’s choice and welfare were best served by awarding custody to their father.