FERNANDEZ-Guy Vs CA G.R. No. 163707

CASE G.R. No.
163707 September 15, 2006

TITLE: MICHAEL C. GUY, petitioner, vs. HON. COURT OF APPEALS, HON.
SIXTO MARELLA, JR., Presiding Judge, RTC, Branch 138, Makati
City and minors, KAREN DANES WEI and KAMILLE DANES WEI,
represented by their mother, REMEDIOS OANES,
respondents.
Doctrine/ 1. To be valid and effective, a waiver must be couched in clear and

Concepts: unequivocal terms which leave no doubt as to the intention of a party to
give up a right or benefit which legally pertains to him. A waiver may not
be attributed to a person when its terms do not explicitly and clearly
evince an intent to abandon a right.
2. Article 1044 of the Civil Code which requires judicial approval for
parents to repudiate the inheritance of their children.
3. It must be emphasized that waiver is the intentional relinquishment

of a known right. In the present case, private respondents could not
have possibly waived their successional rights because they are yet to
prove their status as acknowledged illegitimate children of the
deceased.
4. Under the Family Code, when filiation of an illegitimate child is

established by a record of birth appearing in the civil register or a final
judgment, or an admission of filiation in a public document or a private
handwritten instrument signed by the parent concerned, the action for
recognition may be brought by the child during his or her lifetime.
However, if the action is based upon open and continuous possession
of the status of an illegitimate child, or any other means allowed by the
rules or special laws, it may only be brought during the lifetime of the
alleged parent.
5. Regional Trial Court jurisdiction extends to matters incidental and

collateral to the exercise of its recognized powers in handling the
settlement of the estate, including the determination of the status of
each heir.
6. Natural child having a right to compel acknowledgment, but who has

not been in fact acknowledged, may maintain partition proceedings for
the division of the inheritance against his coheirs and the same person
may intervene in proceedings for the distribution of the estate of his
deceased natural father, or mother.
Facts:
Private respondent-minors Karen Oanes Wei and Kamille Oanes Wei, represented by
their mother Remedios Oanes (Remedios), filed a petition for letters of administration
before the Regional Trial Court of Makati City.
They alleged that they are the duly acknowledged illegitimate children of Sima Wei,
who died intestate in Makati City, leaving an estate valued at P10,000,000.00 consisting
of real and personal properties. His known heirs are his surviving spouse Shirley Guy
and children, Emy, Jeanne, Cristina, George and Michael, all surnamed Guy. Private
respondents prayed for the appointment of a regular administrator for the orderly
settlement of Sima Wei's estate. They likewise prayed that, in the meantime, petitioner
Michael C.Guy, son of the decedent, be appointed as Special Administrator of the
estate.
Petitioner however, prayed for the dismissal of the petition. He asserted that his
deceased father left no debts and that his estate can be settled without securing letters
of administration pursuant to Section 1, Rule74 of the Rules of Court. He further argued
that private respondents should have established their status as illegitimate children
during the lifetime of Sima Wei pursuant to Article 175 of the Family Code. Moreover,
they alleged that private respondents' claim had been paid, waived, abandoned or
otherwise extinguished by reason of Remedios' June 7, 1993 Release and Waiver of
Claim stating that in exchange for the financial and educational assistance received
from petitioner, Remedios and her minor children discharge the estate of Sima Wei
from any and all liabilities.
The Regional Trial Court denied the Joint Motion to Dismiss as well as the
Supplemental Motion to Dismiss. It ruled that while the Release and Waiver of Claim
was signed by Remedios, it had not been established that she was the duly constituted
guardian of her minor daughters. Thus, no renunciation of right occurred.
Petitioner moved for reconsideration but was denied. He filed a petition for certiorari
before the Court of Appeals which affirmed the orders of the Regional Trial Court. The
Court of Appeals denied petitioner's motion for reconsideration, hence, this petition.
Issue 1) Whether the Release and Waiver of Claim precludes private

(related to respondents from claiming their successional rights; 2) whether
topic): private respondents are barred by prescription from proving their
filiation; 3) Whether or not the trial court is precluded from receiving
Answer evidence on filiation on petition for letters of administration.
(Yes/No):
1.) NO 2.) Ruling of which is premature as respondents are yet to
present evidence. 3.) NO
Ruling:
1. Remedios' Release and Waiver of Claim, the same does not bar private respondents
from claiming successional rights. To be valid and effective, a waiver must be couched
in clear and unequivocal terms which leave no doubt as to the intention of a party to
give up a right or benefit which legally pertains to him. A waiver may not be attributed
to a person when its terms do not explicitly and clearly evince an intent to abandon a
right.
However, in this case, the Supreme Court finds that there was no waiver of hereditary
rights. The Release and Waiver of Claim does not state with clarity the purpose of its
execution. It merely states that Remedios received P300,000.00 and an educational
plan for her minor daughters "by way of financial assistance and in full settlement of
any and all claims of whatsoever nature and kind x x x against the estate of the late
Rufino Guy Susim." Considering that the document did not specifically mention private
respondents' hereditary share in the estate of Sima Wei, it cannot be construed as a
waiver of successional rights.
Even assuming that Remedios truly waived the hereditary rights of private respondents,
such waiver will not bar the latter's claim. Article 1044 of the Civil Code which requires
judicial approval for parents to repudiate the inheritance of their children. The Release
and Waiver of Claim in the instant case is void and will not bar private respondents from
asserting their rights as heirs of the deceased for the lack of judicial approval.
Furthermore, it must be emphasized that waiver is the intentional relinquishment of a

known right. In the present case, private respondents could not have possibly waived
their successional rights because they are yet to prove their status as acknowledged
illegitimate children of the deceased. Petitioner himself has consistently denied that
private respondents are his co-heirs. It would thus be inconsistent to rule that they
waived their hereditary rights when petitioner claims that they do not have such right.
2. Supreme Court agreed with the Court of Appeals that a ruling on the same would be
premature considering that private respondents have yet to present evidence.
Under the Family Code, when filiation of an illegitimate child is established by a record
of birth appearing in the civil register or a final judgment, or an admission of filiation in
a public document or a private handwritten instrument signed by the parent concerned,
the action for recognition may be brought by the child during his or her lifetime.
However, if the action is based upon open and continuous possession of the status of
an illegitimate child, or any other means allowed by the rules or special laws, it may
only be brought during the lifetime of the alleged parent.
It is clear therefore that the resolution of the issue of prescription depends on the type
of evidence to be adduced by private respondents in proving their filiation. However, it
would be impossible to determine the same in this case as there has been no reception
of evidence yet. This Court is not a trier of facts. Such matters may be resolved only by
the Regional Trial Court after a full-blown trial.
3. While the original action filed by private respondents was a petition for letters of
administration, the trial court is not precluded from receiving evidence on private
respondents' filiation. Its jurisdiction extends to matters incidental and collateral to the
exercise of its recognized powers in handling the settlement of the estate, including the
determination of the status of each heir. That the two causes of action, one to compel
recognition and the other to claim inheritance, may be joined in one complaint is not
new in our jurisprudence.
Supreme Court held in numerous cases that a natural child having a right to compel
acknowledgment, but who has not been in fact acknowledged, may maintain partition
proceedings for the division of the inheritance against his coheirs and the same person
may intervene in proceedings for the distribution of the estate of his deceased natural
father, or mother. In neither of these situations has it been thought necessary for the
plaintiff to show a prior decree compelling acknowledgment. The obvious reason is that
in partition suits and distribution proceedings the other persons who might take by
inheritance are before the court; and the declaration of heirship is appropriate to such
proceedings.

FERNANDEZ-Guy Vs CA G.R. No. 163707

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

FERNANDEZ-Guy Vs CA G.R. No. 163707

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CASE G.R. No.

163707 September 15, 2006

Doctrine/ 1. To be valid and effective, a waiver must be couched in clear and

3. It must be emphasized that waiver is the intentional relinquishment

4. Under the Family Code, when filiation of an illegitimate child is

5. Regional Trial Court jurisdiction extends to matters incidental and

6. Natural child having a right to compel acknowledgment, but who has

Issue 1) Whether the Release and Waiver of Claim precludes private

Furthermore, it must be emphasized that waiver is the intentional relinquishment of a

You might also like