VOL.

378,MARCH7,2002

563

Liyao, Jr. vs. TanhotiLiyao

*

G.R.No.138961.March7,2002.

WILLIAMLIYAO,JR.,representedbyhismotherCorazon
Garcia, petitioner, vs. JUANITA TANHOTILIYAO,
PEARL MARGARET L. TAN, TITA ROSE L. TAN AND
LINDACHRISTINALIYAO,respondents.
Parent and Child; Presumption of Legitimacy; The
presumption of legitimacy of children does not only flow out from a
declaration contained in the statute but is based on the broad
principles of natural justice and the supposed virtue of the
mother.Under the New Civil Code, a child born and conceived
during a valid marriage is presumed to be legitimate. The
presumptionoflegitimacyofchildrendoesnotonlyflowoutfroma
declaration contained in the statute but is based on the broad
principlesofnaturaljusticeandthesupposedvirtueofthemother.
The presumption is grounded in a policy to protect innocent
offspringfromtheodiumofillegitimacy.
Same; Same; Actions; Impugning the legitimacy of the child is
a strictly personal right of the husband, or in exceptional cases, his
heirs for the simple reason that he is the one directly confronted
with the scandal and ridicule which the infidelity of his wife
produces and he should be the one to decide whether to conceal that
infidelity or expose it in view of the moral and economic interest
involved.ThefactthatCorazonGarciahadbeenlivingseparately
from her husband, Ramon Yulo, at the time petitioner was
conceivedandbornisofnomoment.Whilephysicalimpossibilityfor
the husband to have sexual intercourse with his wife is one of the
groundsforimpugningthelegitimacyofthechild,itbearsemphasis
that the grounds for impugning the legitimacy of the child
mentionedinArticle255oftheCivilCodemayonlybeinvokedby
the husband, or in proper cases, his heirs under the conditions set
forthunderArticle262oftheCivilCode.Impugningthelegitimacy
of the child is a strictly personal right of the husband, or in
exceptionalcases,hisheirsforthesimplereasonthatheistheone
directly confronted with the scandal and ridicule which the
infidelity of his wife produces and he should be the one to decide
whether to conceal that infidelity or expose it in view of the moral
and economic interest involved. It is only in exceptional cases that
his heirs are allowed to contest such legitimacy. Outside of these
cases, noneeven his heirscan impugn legitimacy; that would
amounttoaninsulttohismemory.
______________
* SECONDDIVISION.

564

564

SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATED
Liyao, Jr. vs. TanhotiLiyao

Same; Same; Same; It is settled that a child born within a

valid marriage is presumed legitimate even though the mother may
have declared against its legitimacy or may have been sentenced as
an adulteress; The child himself cannot choose his own filiationif
the husband, presumed to be the father does not impugn the
legitimacy of the child, then the status of the child is fixed, and the
latter cannot choose to be the child of his mothers alleged
paramour.Itisthereforclearthatthepresentpetitioninitiatedby
CorazonG.Garciaasguardianad litem of the then minor, herein
petitioner, to compel recognition by respondents of petitioner
William Liyao, Jr, as the illegitimate son of the late William Liyao
cannot prosper. It is settled that a child born within a valid
marriageispresumedlegitimateeventhoughthemothermayhave
declared against its legitimacy or may have been sentenced as an
adulteress. We cannot allow petitioner to maintain his present
petition and subvert the clear mandate of the law that only the
husband, or in exceptional circumstances, his heirs, could impugn
the legitimacy of a child born in a valid and subsisting marriage.
The child himself cannot choose his own filiation. If the husband,
presumed to be the father does not impugn the legitimacy of the
child, then the status of the child is fixed, and the latter cannot
choose to be the child of his mothers alleged paramour. On the
otherhand,ifthepresumptionoflegitimacyisoverthrown,thechild
cannotelectthepaternityofthehusbandwhosuccessfullydefeated
thepresumption.
Same; Same; Same; It is settled that the legitimacy of the child
can be impugned only in a direct action brought for that purpose,
by the proper parties and within the period limited by law.We
think not. As earlier stated, it is only in exceptional cases that the
heirs of the husband are allowed to contest the legitimacy of the
child. There is nothing on the records to indicate that Ramon Yulo
has already passed away at the time of the birth of the petitioner
nor at the time of the initiation of this proceedings. Notably, the
case at bar was initiated by petitioner himself through his mother,
CorazonGarcia,andnotthroughEnriqueandBernadetteYulo.It
is settled that the legitimacy of the child can be impugned only in a
direct action brought for that purpose, by the proper parties and
within the period limited by law.

PETITIONforreviewoncertiorariofadecisionoftheCourt
ofAppeals.
ThefactsarestatedintheopinionoftheCourt.
Castillo & Pobladorforpetitioner.
565

VOL.378,MARCH7,2002
Liyao, Jr. vs. TanhotiLiyao

565

 Quisumbing, Ignacio, Guia & Lambino Law Office for

privaterespondents.
DELEON,JR.,J.:
Beforeusisapetitionforreviewoncertiorariassailingthe
decisiondatedJune4,1999oftheCourtofAppealsinCA
1
G.R. C.V. No. 45394 which reversed the decision of the
RegionalTrialCourt(RTC)ofPasig,MetroManila,Branch
167 in declaring William Liyao, Jr. as the illegitimate
(spurious) son of the deceased William Liyao and ordering
JuanitaTanhotiLiyao,PearlMargaretL.Tan,TitaRoseL.
Tan and Linda Christina Liyao to recognize and
acknowledgeWilliamLiyao,Jr.asacompulsoryheirofthe
deceased William Liyao and entitled to all successional
rightsassuchandtopaythecostsofthesuit.
On November 29, 1976, William Liyao, Jr., represented
byhismotherCorazonG.Garcia,filedCivilCaseNo.24943
before the RTC of Pasig, Branch 7 which is an action for
compulsoryrecognitionastheillegitimate(spurious)child
of the late William Liyao against herein respondents,
JuanitaTanhotiLiyao,PearlMargaretL.Tan,TitaRoseL.
2
Tan and Linda Christina Liyao. The complaint was later
amended to include the allegation that petitioner was in
continuous possession and enjoyment of the status of the
child of said William Liyao, petitioner having been
recognized and acknowledged
as such child by the decedent
3
during his lifetime.
Thefactsasallegedbypetitionerareasfollows:
Corazon G. Garcia is legally married to but living
separatelyfromRamonM.Yuloformorethanten(10)years
atthetimeoftheinstitutionofthesaidcivilcase.Corazon
cohabitedwiththelateWilliamLiyaofrom1965uptothe
timeofWilliamsuntimelyde
______________
1

Entitled, William Liyao, Jr., represented by his mother and

guardian ad litem, Corazon G. Garcia, plaintiffappellee, v. Juanita

TanhotiLiyao, Pearl Margaret L. Tan and Linda Christina Liyao,
defendantsappellants,Rollo,pp.4468.
2Records,VolumeI,pp.17.
3Records,VolumeI,pp.2730;Rollo,pp.6972.

566

566

SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATED
Liyao, Jr. vs. TanhotiLiyao

mise on December 2, 1975. They lived together in the

company of Corazons two (2) children from her subsisting
marriage,namely:EnriqueandBernadette,bothsurnamed
Yulo, in a succession of rented houses in Quezon City and
Manila. This was with the knowledge of William Liyaos
legitimatechildren,TitaRoseL.TanandLindaChristina
LiyaoOrtiga, from his subsisting marriage with Juanita
TanhotiLiyao.TitaRoseandChristinawerebothemployed
at the Far East Realty Investment, Inc. of which Corazon

and William were then vice president and president,

respectively.
Sometime in 1974, Corazon bought a lot from Ortigas
and Co. which required the signature of her husband,
RamonYulo,toshowhisconsenttotheaforesaidsale.She
failedtosecurehissignatureand,hadneverbeenintouch
withhimdespitethenecessitytomeethim.Upontheadvice
ofWilliamLiyao,thesaleoftheparceloflandlocatedatthe
ValleVerdeSubdivisionwasregisteredunderthenameof
FarEastRealtyInvestment,Inc.
On June 9, 1975, Corazon gave birth to William Liyao,
Jr. at the Cardinal Santos Memorial Hospital. During her
three(3)daystayatthehospital,WilliamLiyaovisitedand
stayedwithherandthenewbornbaby,William,Jr.(Billy).
All the medical and hospital expenses, food and clothing
were paid under the account of William Liyao. William
Liyao even asked his confidential secretary, Mrs. Virginia
Rodriguez, to secure a copy of Billys birth certificate. He
likewiseinstructedCorazontoopenabankaccountforBilly
4
withtheConsolidatedBankandTrustCompany
andgave
5
weekly amounts to be deposited therein. William Liyao
would bring Billy to the office, introduce him as
his good
6
lookingsonandhadtheirpicturestakentogether.
During the lifetime of William Liyao, several pictures
were taken showing, among others, William Liyao and
Corazon together with Billys godfather, Fr. Julian Ruiz,
WilliamLiyaoslegalstaffandtheirwiveswhileonvacation
7
in Baguio. Corazon also presented pictures in court to
provethatthatsheusuallyaccompanied
______________
4ExhibitK.
5ExhibitK3.
6ExhibitsJ1J4,J11J13.
7ExhibitsNN5.

567

VOL.378,MARCH7,2002

567

Liyao, Jr. vs. TanhotiLiyao

William Liyao while attending8various social gatherings
and other important meetings. During the occasion of
WilliamLiyaoslastbirthdayonNovember22,1975heldat
the Republic Supermarket, William Liyao expressly
acknowledged Billy as his son in the presence of Fr. Ruiz,
MauritaPasionandotherfriendsandsaid,Hey,
look I am
9
still young, I can still make a good lookingson. Sincebirth,
Billy had been in continuous possession and enjoyment of
the status of a recognized and/or acknowledged child of
WilliamLiyaobythelattersdirectandovertacts.William
Liyao supported Billy and paid for his food, clothing and
othermaterialneeds.However,afterWilliamLiyaosdeath,
itwasCorazonwhoprovidedsolesupporttoBillyandtook
careofhistuitionfeesatLaSalle,Greenhills.WilliamLiyao
left his personal belongings, collections, clothing, old
newspaperclippingsandlaminationsatthehouseinWhite

PlainswherehesharedhislastmomentswithCorazon.
Testifying for the petitioner, Maurita Pasion declared
that she knew both Corazon G. Garcia and William Liyao
who were godparents to her children. She used to visit
Corazon and William Liyao from 19651975. The two
children of Corazon from her marriage to Ramon Yulo,
namely,BernadetteandEnrique(Ike),togetherwithsome
housemaids lived with Corazon and William Liyao as one
family. On some occasions like birthdays or some other
celebrations,Mauritawouldsleepinthecouplesresidence
andcookforthefamily.Duringtheseoccasions,shewould
usually see William Liyao in sleeping clothes. When
Corazon,duringthelatterpartof1974,waspregnantwith
herchildBilly,Mauritaoftenvisitedherthree(3)tofour(4)
times a week in Greenhills and later on in White Plains
where she would often see William Liyao. Being a close
friendofCorazon,shewasattheCardinalSantosMemorial
HospitalduringthebirthofBilly.Shecontinuouslyvisited
thematWhitePlainsandknewthatWilliamLiyao,while
living with her friend Corazon, gave support by way of
grocery supplies, money for household expenses and
matriculationfeesforthetwo(2)olderchildren,Bernadette
and Enrique. During William Liyaos birthday on
November22,1975heldattheRepublicSupermaketOffice,
______________
8ExhibitsN10N11,N14N15.
9TSN,January15,1987,p.32.

568

568

SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATED
Liyao, Jr. vs. TanhotiLiyao

hewascarryingBillyandtoldeverybodypresent,including
histwo(2)daughtersfromhislegalmarriage,Look,
this is
10
my son, very guapo and healthy. Hethentalkedabouthis
planforthebaptismofBillybeforeChristmas.Heintended
tomakeitengrandeandmake
the bells of San Sebastian
11
Church ring. Unfortunately, this did not happen since
WilliamLiyaopassedawayonDecember2,1975.Maurita
attended Mr. Liyaos funeral and helped Corazon pack his
clothes. She
even recognized a short sleeved shirt
of blue
12
13
andgray whichMr.Liyaoworeinaphotograph
aswell
14
asanothershirtoflimegreen asbelongingtothedeceased.
A note was also presented with the
following inscriptions:
15
To Cora, Love From William. Maurita remembered
having invited the couple during her mothers birthday
wherethecouplehadtheirpicturestakenwhileexhibiting
affectionate poses with one another. Maurita knew that
CorazonisstillmarriedtoRamonYulosincehermarriage
hasnotbeenannullednorisCorazonlegallyseparatedfrom
hersaidhusband.However,duringtheentirecohabitation
of William Liyao with Corazon Garcia, Maurita had not
seenRamonYulooranyothermaninthehousewhenshe
usuallyvisitedCorazon.
GloriaPanopiotestifiedthatsheistheownerofabeauty

parlor and that she knew that Billy is the son of her
neighbors, William Liyao and Corazon Garcia, the latter
being one of her customers. Gloria met Mr. Liyao at
Corazons house in Scout Delgado, Quezon City in the
Christmas of 1965. Gloria had numerous occasions to see
Mr. Liyao from 1966 to 1974 and even more so when the
coupletransferredtoWhitePlains,QuezonCityfrom1974
1975. At the time Corazon was conceiving, Mr. Liyao was
worriedthatCorazonmighthaveanothermiscarriagesohe
insistedthatshejuststayinthehouse,playmahjongand
not be bored. Gloria taught Corazon how to play mahjong
and together with Atty. Brillantes wife and sisterinlaw,
hadmahjongsessionsamongthemselves.Gloria
______________
10TSN,August31,1984,p.23.
11TSN,August31,1984,p.25.
12ExhibitF1.
13ExhibitG1.
14ExhibitF.
15ExhibitG1.

569

VOL.378,MARCH7,2002

569

Liyao, Jr. vs. TanhotiLiyao

knewthatMr.LiyaoprovidedCorazonwitharentedhouse,
paidthesalaryofthemaidsandfoodforBilly.Healsogave
Corazon financial support. Gloria knew that Corazon is
marriedbutisseparatedfromRamonYuloalthoughGloria
neverhadanyoccasiontoseeMr.YulowithCorazoninthe
housewhereMr.LiyaoandCorazonlived.
EnriqueGarciaYulotestifiedthathehadnotheardfrom
his father, Ramon Yulo, from the time that the latter
abandoned and separated from his family. Enrique was
about six (6) years old when William Liyao started to live
withthemuptothetimeofthelattersdeathonDecember
2, 1975. Mr. Liyao was very supportive and fond of
Enriqueshalfbrother,Billy.Heidentifiedseveralpictures
showingMr.LiyaocarryingBillyatthehouseaswellasin
the office. Enriques testimony was corroborated by his
sister, Bernadette Yulo, who testified that the various
pictures showing Mr. Liyao carrying Billy could not have
been superimposed and that the negatives were in the
possessionofhermother,CorazonGarcia.
Respondents, on the other hand, painted a different
pictureofthestory.
Linda Christina LiyaoOrtiga stated that her parents,
William16Liyao and Juanita TanhotiLiyao, were legally
married. LindagrewupandlivedwithherparentsatSan
Lorenzo Village, Makati, Metro Manila until she got
married; that her parents were not separated legally or in
fact and that there was no reason why any of her parents
would institute legal separation proceedings in court. Her
fatherlivedattheirhouseinSanLorenzoVillageandcame
home regularly. Even during out of town business trips or

for conferences with the lawyers at the office, her father

would change his clothes at home because of his personal
hygiene and habits. Her father reportedly had trouble
sleeping in other peoples homes. Linda described him as
very conservative and a strict disciplinarian. He believed
thatnoamountofsuccesswouldcompensateforfailureofa
home.Asabusinessman,hewasverytough,strong,fought
for what he believed in and did not give up easily. He
sufferedtwostrokesbeforethefatalattackwhichledtohis
deathon
______________
16Exhibit12.

570

570

SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATED
Liyao, Jr. vs. TanhotiLiyao

December 2, 1975. He suffered a stroke at the office

sometime in AprilMay 1974 and was attended by Dr.
SantiagoCo.Hethenstayedinthehousefortwo(2)tothree
(3)monthsforhistherapyandacupuncturetreatment.He
could not talk, move, walk, write or sign his name. In the
meantime, Linda and her sister, Tita Rose LiyaoTan, ran
the office. She handled the collection of rents while her
sisterreferredlegalmatterstotheirlawyers.WilliamLiyao
was bedridden and had personally changed. He was not
active in business and had dietary restrictions. Mr. Liyao
also suffered a milder stroke during the latter part of
September to October 1974. He stayed home for two (2) to
three (3) days and went back to work. He felt depressed,
however,andwaseasilybored.Hedidnotputinlonghours
intheofficeunlikebeforeandtriedtospendmoretimewith
hisfamily.
Linda testified that she knew Corazon Garcia is still
marriedtoRamonYulo.Corazonwasnotlegallyseparated
from her husband and the records from the Local Civil
Registrar do
not indicate that the couple obtained any
17
annulment oftheirmarriage.Oncein1973,Lindachanced
upon Ramon Yulo picking up Corazon Garcia at the
company garage. Immediately after the death of Lindas
father,CorazonwenttoLindasofficeforthereturnofthe
formers alleged investments with the Far East Realty
Investment,Inc.includingaparceloflandsoldbyOrtigas
andCompany.LindaaddedthatCorazon,whilestillaVice
Presidentofthecompany,wasabletotakeoutdocuments,
clothes and several laminated pictures of William Liyao
from the office. There was one instance when she was told
bytheguards,Mrs.
Yulo is leaving and taking out things
18
again. Linda then instructed the guards to bring Mrs.
Yulototheofficeupstairsbuthersister,TitaRose,decided
toletCorazonGarciago.Lindadidnotrecognizeanyarticle
ofclothingwhichbelongedtoherfatherafterhavingbeen
shown three (3) large suit cases full of mens clothes,
underwear,sweaters,shortsandpajamas.
Tita Rose LiyaoTan testified that her parents were

legallymarriedandhadneverbeenseparated.Theyresided
atNo.21Her
______________
17Exhibit3.
18TSN,February19,1988,p.45.

571

VOL.378,MARCH7,2002

571

Liyao, Jr. vs. TanhotiLiyao

nandezStreet,SanLorenzoVillage,Makatiuptothetime
19
of her fathers death on December 2, 1975. Her father
sufferedtwo(2)minorcardiovasculararrests(CVA)priorto
his death. During the first heart attack sometime between
April and May 1974, his speech and hands were affected
and he had to stay home for two (2) to three (3) months
under strict medication, taking aldomet, serpacil and
cifromet which were prescribed by Dr. Bonifacio
Yap, for
20
highbloodpressureandcholesterollevelcontrol. TitaRose
testified that after the death of Mr. Liyao, Corazon Garcia
was paid the amount of One Hundred Thousand Pesos
(P100,000.00)representingherinvestmentintheFarEast
Realty Investment, Inc. Tita Rose also stated that her
family never received any formal demand that they
recognizeacertainWilliamLiyao,Jr.asanillegitimateson
ofherfather,WilliamLiyao.Afterassumingthepositionof
Presidentofthecompany,TitaRosedidnotcomeacrossany
check signed by her late father representing payment to
lessorsasrentalsforthehouseoccupiedbyCorazonGarcia.
TitaRoseaddedthatthelaminatedphotographspresented
by Corazon Garcia are the personal collection of the
deceasedwhichweredisplayedatthelattersoffice.
The last witness who testified for the respondents was
RamonPineda,driverandbodyguardofWilliamLiyaofrom
1962to1974,whosaidthatheusuallyreportedforworkat
San Lorenzo Village, Makati to pick up his boss at 8:00
oclockinthemorning.Atpast7:00oclockintheevening,
either Carlos Palamigan or Serafin Villacillo took over as
nightshiftdriver.SometimebetweenAprilandMay1974,
Mr. Liyao got sick. It was only after a month that he was
able to report to the office. Thereafter, Mr. Liyao was not
abletoreporttotheofficeregularly.SometimeinSeptember
1974, Mr. Liyao suffered from another heart attack. Mr.
PinedaaddedthatasadriverandbodyguardofMr.Liyao,
he ran errands for the latter among which was buying
medicineforhimlikecapasidandaldomet.OnDecember2,
1975, Mr. Pineda was called inside the office of Mr. Liyao.
Mr.Pinedasawhisemployerleaningonthetable.Hetried
tomassageMr.Liyaosbreastanddecidedlaterto
______________
19Exhibit13.
20Exhibit15.

572

572

SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATED
Liyao, Jr. vs. TanhotiLiyao

carryandbringhimtothehospitalbutMr.Liyaodiedupon
arrivalthereat.Mrs.Liyaoandherdaughter,LindaLiyao
Ortigawerethefirsttoarriveatthehospital.
Mr.PinedaalsodeclaredthatheknewCorazonGarciato
be one of the employees of the Republic Supermarket.
People in the office knew that she was married. Her
husband, Ramon Yulo, would sometimes go to the office.
Onetime,in1974,Mr.PinedasawRamonYuloattheoffice
garageasiftofetchCorazonGarcia.Mr.Yulowhowasalso
askingaboutcarsforsale,representedhimselfascardealer.
WitnessPinedadeclaredthathedidnotknowanything
about the claim of Corazon. He freely relayed the
informationthathesawMr.YulointhegarageofRepublic
Supermarket once in 1973 and then in 1974 to Atty.
Quisumbing when he went to the latters law office. Being
thedriverofMr.Liyaoforanumberofyears,Pinedasaid
thatherememberedhavingdriventhegroupofMr.Liyao,
Atty. Astraquillo, Atty. Brillantes, Atty. Magno and Atty.
LaguiotoBaguioforavacationtogetherwiththelawyers
wives. During his employment, as driver of Mr. Liyao, he
doesnotrememberdrivingforCorazonGarciaonatripto
Baguioorforactivitieslikeshopping.
OnAugust31,1993,thetrialcourtrenderedadecision,
thedispositiveportionofwhichreadsasfollows:
WHEREFORE, judgment is hereby rendered in favor of the
plaintiffandagainstthedefendantsasfollows:
(a) Confirming the appointment of Corazon G. Garcia as the
guardianadlitemoftheminorWilliamLiyao,Jr.;
(b) Declaring the minor William Liyao, Jr. as the illegitimate
(spurious)sonofthedeceasedWilliamLiyao;
(c) Ordering the defendants Juanita Tanhoti Liyao, Pearl
Margaret L. Tan, Tita Rose L. Tan and Christian Liyao, to
recognize,andacknowledgetheminorWilliamLiyao,Jr.as
acompulsoryheirofthedeceasedWilliamLiyao,entitledto
allsuccesionalrightsassuch;and
(d) Costsofsuit.

21

______________
21CARollo,pp.361376.

573

VOL.378,MARCH7,2002

573

Liyao, Jr. vs. TanhotiLiyao

In ruling for herein petitioner, the trial court said it was
convinced by preponderance of evidence that the deceased
WilliamLiyaosiredWilliamLiyao,Jr.sincethelatterwas

conceivedatthetimewhenCorazonGarciacohabitedwith
thedeceased.Thetrialcourtobservedthathereinpetitioner
had been in continuous possession and enjoyment of the
statusofachildofthedeceasedbydirectandovertactsof
thelattersuchassecuringthebirthcertificateofpetitioner
throughhisconfidentialsecretary,Mrs.VirginiaRodriguez;
openly and publicly acknowledging petitioner as his son;
providing sustenance and even introducing herein
petitionertohislegitimatechildren.
TheCourtofAppeals,however,reversedtherulingofthe
trialcourtsayingthatthelawfavorsthelegitimacyrather
than the illegitimacy of the child and the presumption of
legitimacyisthwartedonlyonethnicgroundandbyproof
that marital intimacy between husband and wife was
physically impossible at the period cited in Article 257 in
relation to Article 255 of the Civil Code. The appellate
court gave weight to the testimonies of some witnesses for
therespondentsthatCorazonGarciaandRamonYulowho
were still legally married and have not secured legal
separation, were seen in each others company during the
supposed time that Corazon cohabited with the deceased
William Liyao. The appellate court further noted that the
birth certificate and the baptismal certificate of William
Liyao, Jr. which were presented by petitioner are not
sufficient to establish proof of paternity in the absence of
anyevidencethatthedeceased,WilliamLiyao,hadahand
in the preparation of said certificates and considering that
hissignaturedoesnotappearthereon.TheCourtofAppeals
statedthatneitherdofamilypicturesconstitutecompetent
proof of filiation. With regard to the passbook which was
presented as evidence for petitioner, the appellate court
observedthattherewasnothinginittoprovethatthesame
was opened by William Liyao for either petitioner or
Corazon Garcia since William Liyaos signature and name
donotappearthereon.
His motion for reconsideration having been denied,
petitionerfiledthepresentpetition.
It must be stated at the outset that both petitioner and
respondents have raised a number of issues which relate
solelytothe
574

574

SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATED
Liyao, Jr. vs. TanhotiLiyao

sufficiency of evidence presented by petitioner to establish

his claim of filiation with the late William Liyao.
Unfortunately, both parties have consistently overlooked
the real crux of this litigation: May petitioner impugn his
own legitimacy to be able to claim from the estate of his
supposedfather,WilliamLiyao?
Wedenythepresentpetition.
Under the New Civil Code, a child born and conceived
22
duringavalidmarriageispresumedtobelegitimate. The
presumptionoflegitimacyofchildrendoesnotonlyflowout
fromadeclarationcontainedinthestatutebutisbasedon
the broad principles of natural justice and the supposed

virtue of the mother. The presumption is grounded in a

policy to protect
innocent offspring from the odium of
23
illegitimacy.
The presumption of legitimacy of the child, however, is
not conclusive and consequently, may be overthrown by
evidencetothecontrary.Hence,Article255oftheNewCivil
24
Code provides:
Article 255. Children born after one hundred and eighty days
followingthecelebrationofthemarriage,andbeforethreehundred
days following its dissolution or the separation of the spouses shall
bepresumedtobelegitimate.
Against this presumption no evidence shall be admitted other
than that of the physical impossibility of the husbands having
accesstohiswife
______________
22 Article 255 of the Civil Code provides, Children

born after one hundred

and eighty days following the celebration of the marriage, and before three hundred
days following its dissolution or the separation of the spouses shall be presumed to
be legitimate. x x x Article 258 of the Civil Code also provides, A child born
within one hundred eighty days following the celebration of the marriage is prima
facie presumed to be legitimate. x x xAsimilarprovisionisnowfoundinArticle
164 of the Family Code which reads Children conceived or born during the
marriage of the parents are legitimate. Children conceived as a result of artificial
insemination of the wife with the sperm of the husband or that of a donor are
likewise legitimate children of the husband and his wife, provided that both of
them authorized or ratified such insemination in a written instrument executed
and signed by them before the birth of the child. The instrument shall be recorded
in the civil registry together with the birth certificate of the child.
2310AmJur2d,Bastards10at850.
24Article166oftheFamilyCodehasasimilarprovision.

575

VOL.378,MARCH7,2002

575

Liyao, Jr. vs. TanhotiLiyao

withinthefirstonehundredandtwentydaysofthethreehundred
whichprecededthebirthofthechild.
Thisphysicalimpossibilitymaybecaused:
1) Bytheimpotenceofthehusband;
2) Bythefactthathusbandandwifewerelivingseparatelyin
suchawaythataccesswasnotpossible;
3) Bytheseriousillnessofthehusband.

Petitionerinsiststhathismother,CorazonGarcia,hadbeen
living separately for ten (10) years from her husband,
Ramon Yulo, at the time that she cohabited with the late
William Liyao and it was physically impossible for her to
havesexualrelationswithRamonYulowhenpetitionerwas
conceived and born. To bolster his claim, petitioner
25
presented a document entitled, Contract of Separation,
executedandsignedbyRamonYuloindicatingawaiverof
rightstoanyandallclaimsonanypropertythatCorazon
26
Garciamightacquireinthefuture.
ThefactthatCorazonGarciahadbeenlivingseparately

fromherhusband,RamonYulo,atthetimepetitionerwas
conceived and born is of no moment. While physical
impossibility for the husband to have sexual intercourse
with his wife is one of the grounds for impugning the
legitimacyofthechild,itbearsemphasisthatthegrounds
for impugning the legitimacy of the child mentioned in
Article 255 of the Civil Code may only be invoked by the
husband,orinpropercases,hisheirsundertheconditions
27
set forth under Article 262 of the Civil Code. Impugning
thelegitimacyofthechildisastrictlypersonalrightofthe
husband, or in exceptional cases, his heirs for the simple
reason that he is the one directly confronted with the
scandalandridiculewhichtheinfidelityofhiswifeproduces
andheshouldbetheonetodecidewhethertoconcealthat
infidelity or expose
it in view of the moral and economic
28
interestinvolved. Itisonlyinexceptionalcasesthat
______________
25ExhibitA.
26ExhibitB.
27NowArticle171oftheFamilyCode.
28 I Tolentino Civil Code 537 (1990) citing Bevilaqua, Familia, p. 314

andMacadangdang v. CA,100SCRA73[1980].
576

576

SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATED
Liyao, Jr. vs. TanhotiLiyao

hisheirsareallowedtocontestsuchlegitimacy.Outsideof
thesecases,noneevenhisheirscanimpugnlegitimacy;
29
thatwouldamounttoaninsulttohismemory.
Itisthereforclearthatthepresentpetitioninitiatedby
CorazonG.Garciaasguardianad litemofthethenminor,
herein petitioner, to compel recognition by respondents of
petitioner William Liyao, Jr, as the illegitimate son of the
lateWilliamLiyaocannotprosper.Itissettledthatachild
born within a valid marriage is presumed legitimate even
thoughthemothermayhavedeclaredagainstitslegitimacy
30
ormayhavebeensentencedasanadulteress. Wecannot
allow petitioner to maintain his present petition and
subverttheclearmandateofthelawthatonlythehusband,
orinexceptionalcircumstances,hisheirs,couldimpugnthe
legitimacy of a child born in a valid and subsisting
marriage.Thechildhimselfcannotchoosehisownfiliation.
Ifthehusband,presumedtobethefatherdoesnotimpugn
the legitimacy of the child, then the status of the child is
fixed, and the latter cannot choose to be the child of his
mothers alleged paramour. On the other hand, if the
presumption of legitimacy is overthrown, the child cannot
electthepaternityofthehusbandwhosuccessfullydefeated
31
thepresumption.
Do the acts of Enrique and Bernadette Yulo, the
undisputedchildrenofCorazonGarciawithRamonYulo,in
testifying for herein petitioner amount to impugnation of
thelegitimacyofthelatter?
Wethinknot.Asearlierstated,itisonlyinexceptional

cases that the heirs of the husband are allowed to contest

thelegitimacyofthechild.Thereisnothingontherecords
toindicatethatRamonYulohasalreadypassedawayatthe
time of the birth of the petitioner nor at the time of the
initiation of this proceedings. Notably, the case at bar was
initiatedbypetitionerhimselfthroughhismother,Corazon
Garcia,andnotthroughEnriqueandBernadetteYulo.It is
settled that the legitimacy of the child can be impugned
______________
29Ibid.
30 Article 256 of the New Civil Code, now Article 167 of the Family

Code.
31ITolentinoCivilCode533[1990]citing1Manresa553.

577

VOL.378,MARCH7,2002

577

Liyao, Jr. vs. TanhotiLiyao

only in a direct action brought for that purpose, by the
proper parties and within the period limited by law.
Considering the foregoing, we find no reason to discuss
thesufficiencyoftheevidencepresentedbybothpartieson
the petitioners claim of alleged filiation with the late
William Liyao. In any event, there is no clear, competent
and positive evidence presented by the petitioner that his
allegedfatherhadadmittedorrecognizedhispaternity.
WHEREFORE, the instant petition is DENIED. The
assaileddecisionoftheCourtofAppealsinCAG.R.CVNo.
45394isherebyAFFIRMED.Nocosts.
SOORDERED.
Bellosillo (Chairman), Mendoza, Quisumbing and
Buena, JJ.,concur.
Petition denied, judgment affirmed.
Notes.For the success of an action to establish
illegitimatefiliationundersecondparagraphofArt.172of
the Family Code, a high standard of proof is required
specifically,toproveopenandcontinuouspossessionofthe
statusofanillegitimatechild,theremustbeevidenceofthe
manifestation of the permanent intention of the supposed
fathertoconsiderthechildashis,bycontinuousandclear
manifestationsofparentalaffectionandcare,whichcannot
be attributed to pure charity. (Jison vs. Court of Appeals,
286SCRA286[1998])
Thereisperhapsnopresumptionofthelawmorefirmly
established and founded on sounder morality and more
convincingreasonthanthepresumptionthatchildrenborn
inwedlockarelegitimate;Upontheexpirationoftheperiods
setforthinArticle170,andinpropercasesArticle171,of
the Family Code, the action to impugn the legitimacy of a
child would no longer be legally feasible and the status
conferred by the presumption becomes fixed and
unassailable.(De Jesus vs. Estate of Decedent Juan Gamboa
Dizon,366SCRA499[2001])

578

578

SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATED
Liyao, Jr. vs. TanhotiLiyao

Article263oftheCivilCodereferstoanactiontoimpugn
thelegitimacyofachild,toassertandprovethatapersonis
notamanschildbyhiswifeitdoesnotrefertosituations
where a child is alleged not to be the child at all of a
particular couple. (Labagala vs. Santiago, 371 SCRA 360
[2001])
o0o
579

Copyright 2015 Central Book Supply, Inc. All rights reserved.