G.R. No. 149428; June 4, 2004
Edna Maris Socorro C. Bruan, petitioner, vs. The People of the Philippines, respondent.

FACTS

Petitioner Edna Bruan and Walter Bruan were involved in a nullity of marriage case. The trial court issued orders concerning custody of their minor child, Kimberly Ann. An initial agreement granted Walter visitation rights. Subsequently, Walter filed a motion to be allowed to take the child to Germany for a study vacation. The court, after receiving evidence, issued an order on March 7, 1997, directing Edna to bring the child to court. Edna failed to comply. The court then issued another order on March 21, 1997, granting Walter’s travel motion upon posting a bond and directing law enforcement to pick up the child and deliver her to Walter, authorizing them to break open premises if necessary. Edna also failed to comply with this subsequent order.
Walter then initiated a separate indirect contempt proceeding against Edna for her willful disobedience of the court’s orders. Summons for this contempt case was served on Edna through substituted service at her given address upon her sister, as personal service was unavailing. Edna did not file an answer. The trial court proceeded to hear the contempt case and found her guilty, imposing a penalty of six months imprisonment and a fine. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the petitioner’s conviction for indirect contempt.

RULING

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction for indirect contempt but modified the penalty. The Court ruled that the petitioner’s willful failure to comply with the lawful orders of the trial court dated March 7 and 21, 1997, constituted indirect contempt under Section 3, Rule 71 of the Rules of Court. The orders were final and executory, and her disobedience tended to impede the administration of justice and disrespect the court’s authority. The defense of lack of personal service of the contempt petition’s summons was unavailing. Substituted service was properly effected under Rule 14, as the sheriff attempted personal service at her residence on two occasions and left the summons with a sister of sufficient age and discretion residing there. Her failure to answer the petition warranted a judgment on the pleadings.
However, the Court found the imposed penalty of imprisonment too severe under the circumstances. It recognized that the petitioner’s obstinate conduct, while unjustifiable, stemmed from a mother’s instinctive fear that her husband would take their child abroad and not return her. Considering that the child was eventually with Walter, the Court modified the penalty to a fine of Five Thousand Pesos (₱5,000.00) as a just and reasonable sanction for the contempt.