Case Name Ordoña v Local Civil Registrar
GR No. | Date G.R. No. 215370 | November 9, 2021
Topic Entries in the Civil Register
Doctrine Article 167 provides that "[t]he child shall be considered legitimate although the mother may
have declared against its legitimacy or may have been sentenced as an adulteress."
Therefore, there is no remedy available to the mother to dispute presumption legitimacy of a
child.
Parties involved RICHELLE BUSQUE ORDOÑA, petitioner, vs. THE LOCAL CIVIL REGISTRAR OF PASIG CITY and
ALLAN D. FULGUERAS, respondents.
Ponente Inting, J.
General Summary Petitioner Richelle Ordoña and her husband Ariel were separated-in-fact. Petitioner then met
Allan Fulgueras. She and Allan engaged in an intimate relationship where she got pregnant. On
January 26, 2010, petitioner gave birth to a son. In the Certificate of LiveBirth, the child was
given the name “Alrich Paul Ordona Fulgueras” with "Allan Demen Fulgueras" as the purported
father.
Thus, on September 7, 2011, petitioner filed before the RTC the Rule 108 petition seeking the
following corrections: (1) change of last name of Alrich Paul in Item No. 1 from"Fulgueras" to
"Ordona," petitioner's maiden name; and (2) deletion of entries in the paternal. She alleged
that it was not Allan who signed the Affidavit of Acknowledgment/Admission of Paternity
attached to the Certificate of Live Birth considering that Allan was not in the Philippines when
she gave birth to Alrich Paul.
Facts:
• Richelle Busque Ordoña (petitioner) was married to a certain Ariel O. Libut on October 10, 2000 in Las Piñas City.
• In December 2005, petitioner went to Qatar for work until 2008 when she discovered that Ariel had an illicit
relationship. This prompted her to return to the Philippines and separate from him. Despite their eventual
separation, petitioner has not yet filed a petition for annulment of her marriage to Ariel.
• Thereafter, in April 2008, petitioner applied for another work in Abu Dhabi, UAE where she met Allan D. Fulgueras,
her former colleague in Qatar. She and Allan which resulted in petitioner's pregnancy with Allan as the purported
father. Thus, petitioner went back to the Philippines sometime in September 2009.
• On January 26, 2010, petitioner gave birth to a son in a hospital in Pasig City. In the Certificate of Live Birth,the
child was given the name "Alrich Paul Ordoña Fulgueras” with "Allan Demen Fulgueras" as the purported father.
• Thus, on September 7, 2011, petitioner filed before the RTC the Rule 108 petition seeking the following
corrections: (1) change of last name of Alrich Paul from "Fulgueras" to "Ordoña," petitioner's maiden name; and
(2) deletion of entries in the paternal information. She alleged that it was not Allan who signed the Affidavit of
Acknowledgment/Admission of Paternity attached to the Certificate of Live Birth (Affidavit of Acknowledgment)
considering that Allan was not in the Philippines when she gave birth to Alrich Paul.
• The RTC denied the petition for lack of merit, and the CA also denied the petition.
Issue/s:
• Whether the petitioner, Richelle Ordona, can impune the child’s legitimacy
UP Law - 1 BGC Eve 2 (2027) / LAW 100
Ruling:
• No.
WHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED. The Decision dated April 10, 2014 and the Resolution dated October 14, 2014 of the
Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CV No. 99381 are REVERSED AND SET ASIDE. A new judgment is hereby entered DISMISSING
the verified petition for correction of entries in the Certificate of Live Birth of Alrich Paul Ordoña Fulgueras.
Reasoning:
Petitioner is barred from impugning Alrich Paul's presumed legitimacy considering the prohibition under Article 167 of the
Family Code. Article 167 provides that "[t]he child shall be considered legitimate although the mother may have declared
against its legitimacy or may have been sentenced as an adulteress." To elucidate, the presumption of legitimacy under
Article 164 of the Family Code is not conclusive. It may be disputed based on the grounds and manner provided under
Articles 166, 170, and 171 of the same law.
Moreover, petitioner's declaration in the birth certificate and in the Rule 108 petition that Alrich Paul is illegitimate cannot
be countenanced as it runs counter to Article 167 of the Family Code. The presumption that Alrich Paul is legitimate stands
in the absence of a direct action timely filed by the proper party.
In the case, Ariel, the presumed father of Alrich Paul, has an interest that would be affected if the trial court were to grant
the reliefs sought by petitioner. His hereditary rights would be adversely affected if the Court were to declare that Alrich
Paul is not his legitimate child but Allan's illegitimate child.
ln light of these, the Court finds the present case as an opportune moment to highlight the absence of a remedy in favor
of a mother in establishing the true filiation of her child. Ultimately, the Court's observations are directed to the Legislature
inasmuch as the Court is careful not to tread on the realm of judicial legislation.
However, there is no remedy under the law available to petitioner to dispute the presumption of legitimacy accorded to
Alrich Paul - not in a Rule 108 petition which must be dismissed primarily for being a collateral attack and not in any other
action by reason of her being the mother of Alrich Paul.
UP Law - 1 BGC Eve 2 (2027) / LAW 100
