Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 175 views

    Silva Vs CA, Gonzales

    Uploaded by

    Elvis Jagger Abdul Jabhar
    1. Carlitos Silva and Suzanne Gonzales had two children together but later separated. Gonzales refused to allow Silva visitation rights on weekends, so Silva filed a petition in court. 2. The trial court granted Silva visitation rights but Gonzales appealed. The appellate court denied Silva's visitation rights. 3. The Supreme Court reinstated the trial court's decision, granting Silva visitation rights. The Court found no evidence that Silva would not act in the children's best interests during visits. Parents have a right to visit children they do not have custody of under the Family Code.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Silva Vs CA, Gonzales

    Uploaded by

    Elvis Jagger Abdul Jabhar
    175 views2 pages
    1. Carlitos Silva and Suzanne Gonzales had two children together but later separated. Gonzales refused to allow Silva visitation rights on weekends, so Silva filed a petition in court. 2. The trial court granted Silva visitation rights but Gonzales appealed. The appellate court denied Silva's visitation rights. 3. The Supreme Court reinstated the trial court's decision, granting Silva visitation rights. The Court found no evidence that Silva would not act in the children's best interests during visits. Parents have a right to visit children they do not have custody of under the Family Code.

    Original Description:

    Case Diges

    Original Title

    Silva vs CA, Gonzales

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1. Carlitos Silva and Suzanne Gonzales had two children together but later separated. Gonzales refused to allow Silva visitation rights on weekends, so Silva filed a petition in court. 2. The trial court granted Silva visitation rights but Gonzales appealed. The appellate court denied Silva's visitation rights. 3. The Supreme Court reinstated the trial court's decision, granting Silva visitation rights. The Court found no evidence that Silva would not act in the children's best interests during visits. Parents have a right to visit children they do not have custody of under the Family Code.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    175 views2 pages

    Silva Vs CA, Gonzales

    Uploaded by

    Elvis Jagger Abdul Jabhar
    1. Carlitos Silva and Suzanne Gonzales had two children together but later separated. Gonzales refused to allow Silva visitation rights on weekends, so Silva filed a petition in court. 2. The trial court granted Silva visitation rights but Gonzales appealed. The appellate court denied Silva's visitation rights. 3. The Supreme Court reinstated the trial court's decision, granting Silva visitation rights. The Court found no evidence that Silva would not act in the children's best interests during visits. Parents have a right to visit children they do not have custody of under the Family Code.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    Silva vs CA, Gonzales

    GR 114742, July 17, 1997

    VITUG, J.:

    Facts:

    The parties involved are Carlitos E. Silva and Suzanne T. Gonzles, their union brought about the
    birth of two children: Ramon Carlos and Rica Natalia. After a while, a rift in their relationship surfaced,
    according to Silva, it began when Gonzales decided to resume her acting career despite his objections;
    and got worse Gonzales claimed that she in fact never stopped working through out their relationship,
    and they eventually parted ways.

    It was on February 1986, where the situation escalated because of the refusal of Gonzales to
    allow Silva to have the children in his company on weekends, Silva filed a petition for custodial rights
    over the children before the RTC, which rendered the decision directing Suzanne T. Gonzales to allow
    visitation rights to Carlitos E. Silva during Satrudays and or Sundays, but he cannot take the children out
    without written consent of the mother; Gonzales interposed an filed an appeal to the Court of Appeal
    for decision; and during which Gonzales got married to a Dutch National, they emigrated to Holland with
    the children.

    It was on September 23 1993 where the appellate tribunal ruled in favor of Gonzalez, denying
    Silva his visitation rights and reversing the decision made by the RTC; Hence this petition.

    ISSUES:

    1. (CIVIL) Whether or not should Carlistos E. Silva be granted visitation rights?

    Ruling:

    1. Yes. Ms. Gonzales’s allegations against Silva even assuming its truth cannot be taken as sufficient basis
    to render Silva as unfit father; while the court appreciates the apprehensions of Gonzales, it is unlikely
    that Silva would have anything but the best interests for his children and only wishes to see his children
    even briefly if allowed to; it is provided under Art 49 of the Family Code that visitation rights are granted
    to those parents who are given custody of their children.

    Disposition:

    In its decision dated July 17, 1997, the Court reinstates the decision of the RTC, and sets aside
    the decision of the Court of Appeals; no costs to either party.

    Quick Digest:

    Every parent has a right to visit their children to whom they have no custody of, as the children
    also wishes to see their biological parent; as it is also provided in the Family Code under Art 220 that
    “the natural right and duty of parents, keep their children in their company and to give them love and
    affection, advice and counsel, companionship and understanding.”; each child has right to be tended to
    by their parents as there are no other example than those who reared them.

    You might also like