CIVIL
PERSONALITY
Article
41. For civil purposes, the fetus is considered born if it is alive at the time
it is completely delivered from the mother’s womb. However, if the fetus had an
intra-uterine life of less than seven months, it is not deemed born if it dies
within twenty-four hours after its complete delivery from the maternal womb.
(30a)
The law
avoids an abortion of six-month fetus because the child is well-formed and may
live if he is already seven months, also it is considered as birth.
Under Article
1025 of the Civil Code in order to be capacitated to inherit, the heir, devisee
or legatee must be living in the moment of succession, except in the case of
representation.
Illustration:
RV
executed a will instituting the fetus inside Lyn’s womb. When Lyn’s gave birth
to a child it had an intra-uterine life of 8 months. But if the child dies
after birth and already considered born he would transmit successional rights
to his heir. Remember that taking of the property is conditioned on his birth.
What if
Lyn’s child only had an intra-uterine life of 6 ½ months or less than 7 months,
in order to inherit and transmit successional rights to his heirs he must have
lived for at least 24 hours from complete separation in the maternal womb. If
not, the child did not have juridical capacity.
Acquisition of personality
Under the
CBA fetus is already dependent to his mother for sustenance to survive.
Dependent means is “one who relies on another for support; one not able to
exist or sustain oneself without the power or aid of someone else.”
Legitimate
child is a product of a valid and lawful marriage, while the illegitimate are
conceived and born outside a valid marriage, unless the law itself gives them
legitimate status.
Case
Digest
Angeles
vs. Maglaya, G.R. No. 153798
Facts: Respondent
Aleli Maglaya is the child of the deceased to his first wife while Petitioner
Belen Angeles is the wife of the deceased. Francisco
died intestate, leaving behind four (4) parcels of land and a building later
there is a need to appoint an administrator of Francisco's estate.
Respondent claimed that she is the sole legitimate child of
the deceased to his first wife and she seeks the administration of the
estate of her father but was oppose by
Belen S. Angeles the second wife, one of the surviving heirs of the decedent,
she alleged that respondent is an illegitimate child of the
deceased. .
Issue:
Whether or not Aleli Maglaya the respondent is an illegitimate child
which precluding her to become the administratrix.
Ruling:
No, the respondent is not illegitimate.
As
stated in Article 164 of the Family Code cannot be more emphatic on the matter:
“Children conceived or born during the marriage of the parents are legitimate.”
The issue of legitimacy is cannot be attacked collaterally.
Reference/s:
·
Family
Code of the Philippines Judge
Albano, Ed Vincent S. (2017)
·
Prepared by:
Kath Lyn B. Flores
College of Law
Laguna State Polytechnic
University
Santa Cruz Laguna
Comments
Post a Comment