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

Popular posts from this blog