Vizcarra v. Vizcarra-Nocillado

 

Vizcarra v. Vizcarra-Nocillado

G.R. No. 205241

January 11, 2023

 

FACTS:

                Ireneo Vizcarra is the registered owner in fee simple of parcels of land located in Parañaque City. Ireneo died and was survived by Constancio and Purificacion. However, Constancio died and was survived by his heirs, namely, his wife, Concepcion, and their children. Meanwhile, Purificacion died without any legitimate issues. The Heirs of Constancio executed an "Extra Judicial Settlement of the Estate of Ireneo Vizcarra, Constancio F. Vizcarra and Purificacion Vizcarra" where by virtue of the Extrajudicial Settlement, the Heirs of Constancio were able to cause the cancellation of TCT No. 63087 registered in the name of Ireneo and subsequent partition of the said property. Hence, a new certificates of title were issued in the name of the Heirs of Constancio. Subsequently, respondents filed a complaint before the RTC of Parañaque City praying for the declaration of nullity of the Extrajudicial Settlement and the cancellation of the certificates of title issued in the name of the Heirs of Constancio. They alleged that they are the heirs of Silvestre F. Vizcarra (Silvestre). According to them, Silvestre was the son of Ireneo with a woman named Rosalia Ferrer, and as such, he was entitled a share in the estate of Ireneo. However, Silvestre predeceased Ireneo, thus, respondents filed the complaint in representation of their father, Silvestre, to claim and assert their right as heirs of Ireneo. To prove Silvestre's filiation with Ireneo, they a Certificate dated September 11, 2007 issued by the National Statistics Office (NSO) indicating that Silvestre's father was a certain "Irineo Vizcarra"; Certificate from the Office of the Local Civil Registrar of Parañaque, stating that to its Register of Births, Silvestre was born to "Irineo Vizcarra" and "Rosalia Ferrer"; and Marriage Contract between Silvestre and Trinidad Agner, wherein it was indicated that Ireneo was the father of Silvestre.

 

ISSUE:

                Whether or not the heirs of Silvestre were able to establish the filiation of Silvestre so as to entitle respondents a share in the estate of Ireneo.

 

HELD:

                No. Heirs of Silvestre never alleged nor adduced any proof that Ireneo was married to Silvestre's mother, a woman named Rosalia. Thus, no presumption of legitimacy arose in favor of Silvestre. Accordingly, while the complaint filed by respondents was for the nullification of the Extrajudicial Settlement executed by petitioners, considering that respondent's claim is anchored on their alleged right to represent Silvestre, it became incumbent upon them to first establish the illegitimate filiation of Silvestre to Ireneo. The burden of proving paternity is on the person who alleges that the putative father is the biological father of the child. Time and again, this Court has ruled that a high standard of proof is required to establish paternity and filiation. If petitions for recognition and support are dismissed for failure to meet such high standard, with more reason that the court cannot declare a person to be an illegitimate heir of a decedent without any evidence to support such declaration in a proceeding for declaration of nullity of documents. Illegitimate children may establish their illegitimate filiation in the same way and on the same evidence as legitimate children in accordance with Art 172 of the Family Code. Such action to establish illegitimate filiation must be brought within the same period specified in Art 173, except when the action is based on the second paragraph of Art 172, in which case the action may be brought during the lifetime of the alleged parent. Art 173 of the Family Code provides that an action to claim legitimacy may be brought by the child during his or her lifetime. However, such right to establish filiation may be transferred to the heirs of the child whose filiation is questioned should the child die during minority or in a state of insanity.

                Birth certificates offer prima facie evidence of filiation. To overthrow the presumption of truth contained in a birth certificate, a high degree of proof is needed. However, a certificate of live birth purportedly identifying the putative father is not competent evidence of paternity when there is no showing that the putative father had a hand in the preparation of said certificate." Thus, if the alleged father did not intervene in the birth certificate, e.g., supplying the information himself, the inscription of his name by the mother or doctor or registrar is null and void; the mere certificate by the registrar without the signature of the father is not proof of voluntary acknowledgment on the latter's part.