This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2012-11-12 |
DEL CASTILLO, J. |
||||
| Respondents presented the Certificate of Live Birth of Randy identifying Antonio as the father. However, said certificate has no probative value to establish Randy's filiation to Antonio since the latter had not signed the same.[60] It is settled that "[a] certificate of live birth purportedly identifying the putative father is not competent evidence of paternity when there is no showing that the putative father had a hand in the preparation of said certificate."[61] We also cannot lend credence to Mirasol's claim that Antonio supplied certain information through Erlinda. Aside from Antonio's denial in having any participation in the preparation of the document as well as the absence of his signature thereon, respondents did not present Erlinda to confirm that Antonio indeed supplied certain entries in Randy's birth certificate. Besides, the several unexplained discrepancies in Antonio's personal circumstances as reflected in the subject birth certificate are manifestations of Antonio's non-participation in its preparation. Most important, it was Mirasol who signed as informant thereon which she confirmed on the witness stand. | |||||
|
2010-12-15 |
ABAD, J. |
||||
| While the Court is mindful of the best interests of the child in cases involving paternity and filiation, it is just as aware of the disturbance that unfounded paternity suits cause to the privacy and peace of the putative father's legitimate family.[12] Vallecera disowns Dolina's child and denies having a hand in the preparation and signing of its certificate of birth. This issue has to be resolved in an appropriate case. | |||||