Silva vs CA and Gonzales, 275 SCRA 604

[G.R. No. 114742. July 17, 1997]

FACTS:

Carlitos E. Silva, a married businessman, and Suzanne T. Gonzales, an unmarried local actress, cohabited without the benefit of marriage. The union saw the birth of two children: Ramon Carlos and Rica Natalia. Not very long after, a rift in their relationship surfaced. It began, according to Silva, when Gonzales decided to resume her acting career over his vigorous objections. The assertion was quickly refuted by Gonzales who claimed that she, in fact, had never stopped working throughout their relationship. At any rate, the two eventually parted ways. Gonzales refused to allow Silva, in apparent contravention of a previous understanding, to have the children in his company on weekends. Silva filed a petition for custodial rights over the children before the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 78, of Quezon City. The petition was opposed by Gonzales who averred that Silva often engaged in "gambling and womanizing" which she feared could affect the moral and social values of the children.

The Trial Court judgment is rendered directing respondent to allow herein petitioner visitorial rights to his children during Saturdays and/or Sundays, but in no case should he take out the children without the written consent of the mother or respondent herein. No pronouncement as to costs. Silva appeared somehow satisfied with the judgment for only Gonzales interposed an appeal from the RTCs order to the Court of Appeals. In the meantime, Gonzales got married to a Dutch national. The newly weds emigrated to Holland with Ramon Carlos and Rica Natalia.

On 23 September 1993, the appellate tribunal ruled in favor of Gonzales. The RTC decision had been reversed and Petitioner-appellee's petition for visitorial rights is denied as the children concerned are still in their early formative years of life. The molding of the character of the child starts at home. A home with only one parent is more normal than two separate houses.

ISSUE:

Whether or not the father is entitled to visitorial rights to his children?

(The right to access of anoncustodial parent to his or her child/children)

HELD:

The biological father has visitorial right over his illegitimate children in view of the constitutionally protected inherent and natural right of parents over their children). This right is personal to the father; no other person, like grandparents, can exercise this right for him.

Article 150 of the Family Code expresses that "(f)amily relations include those between parents and children; Article 209, in relation to Article 220, of the Code states that it is the natural right and duty of parents and those exercising parental authority to, among other things, keep children in their company and to give them love and affection, advice and counsel, companionship and understanding. The Constitution itself speaks in terms of the "natural and primary rights of parents in the rearing of the youth.

Although the Supreme Court’s granted Silva (the father) the visitation rights, but this favorable decision did not prevent Suzanne (the mother), in the exercise of her parental authority, from immigrating to Holland with her two children.