Famcode, 8552, 8043
Famcode, 8552, 8043
Famcode, 8552, 8043
Family Code
1. Under
the
Family
Code,
foreigners, subject to certain
exceptions,
are
already
prohibited from adopting.
NOTE: The court may allow
aliens to adopt under the Child
and Youth Welfare Code.
8552
2. Common RA 8552
The first is that the adopter must be at
least 16 years older than the adopted,
subject to certain exceptions:
a. adopter is the biological parent
b. spouse of such parent
1
1
Halila Sudagar
Other common provision is if married,
husband and wife must jointly adopt.
Under RA 8552:
a. if one spouse seeks to adopt
the legitimate child of the other
b. when one spouse his or her
illegitimate spouse provided the
other signifies his consent
thereto
c. (not found in the Family Code) if
both spouses are legally
separated.
Then, there is no need for a joint
adoption.
Only the prospective
adopter may file the petition for
adoption
Halila Sudagar
Halila Sudagar
relative a relative within the 4th
degree of consanguinity or
affinity of the Filipino spouse.
Under
child.
below
below.
-
ARTICLE 188.
The
written
consent of the following to the adoption
shall be necessary:
(1) The person to be adopted, if ten
Halila Sudagar
years of age or over;
(2) The parents by nature of the child,
the legal guardian, or the proper
government instrumentality;
(3) The
legitimate
and
adopted
children, ten years of age or over, of
the adopting parent or parents;
(4) The illegitimate children, ten years
of age or over, of the adopting
parent, if living with said parent and
the latter's spouse, if any; and
(5) The spouse, if any, of the person
adopting or to be adopted.
In RA 8043, it can be filed here in the In both cases in Family Code as well
Philippines before the Family Court or as RA 8552, with the Family Court.
In both cases in Family Code as with the Inter-Country Adoption Board,
well as RA 8552, with the Family through an intermediate agency in the
Court.
country of the prospective parent.
Under RA 8043, there are 2 options
available to the adoptive parent. The
petition can be filed before our Family
Courts or it can be filed before the
Inter-Country Adoption Board.
Halila Sudagar
What are the effects?
Under the Family Code:
a. the adopted becomes the
legitimate child of the adopter
b. parental authority of the parents
by nature is terminated
and is now vested with the adoptive
parents
Under RA 8552:
a. the parental authority of the
parents by nature is terminated
and is now vested upon the
adoptive parents
b. the legitimate child of the
adopter is entitled to all the
rights and obligations provided
by law to legitimate children
without discrimination of any
kind
c. in
legal
and
intestate
succession, the adopter and the
adopted shall have reciprocal
rights of succession without
distinction
from
legitimate
filiation.
This is not true under RA 8552. The
person given the right to file a petition
for rescission of the decree of adoption
is only the adopted child. The adoptive
parent is no longer given the right to
rescind.
- At most, as in the case of
LAHOM vs. SIBULO (406
SCRA 135), the recourse of the
adoptive parent is to disinherit
the
child
for
purposes
mentioned under the law on
Rescission
Under the Family Code, both the
adoptive parent and the adopted child
may file a petition for rescission of the
decree of adoption.
Halila Sudagar
succession.
Halila Sudagar
known.
This means that it has retroactive
effect. When shall it retroact? As of
the date of the filing of the original
petition. So, there is that retroactive
effect.
What is the meaning of that
retroactive effect? This was answered
in the case of:
TAMARGO vs. COURT OF APPEALS
(June 3, 1992)
The decree of adoption was
already issued by the court. But the
adopting parents, at the time the
adoption was issued, were not in the
Philippines. They were in abroad. The
custody of the child has to remain with
the parents by nature.
While staying with the parents by
nature, the child committed an act,
which gave rise to damages.
Who shall be liable for the
damages caused by the act of the
child?
The parents by nature said that it
should be the adopting parents
because of the retroactive effect of that
8
Halila Sudagar
decree of adoption.
Are the parents by nature correct?
The Supreme Court said in the
case of Tamargo, we do not consider
that retroactive effect may be given to
the decree of adoption so as to impose
a liability upon the adopting parents
accruing at a time when adopting
parents had no actual or physically
custody over the adopted child.
Retroactive affect may perhaps be
given to the granting of the petition for
adoption where such is essential to
permit the accrual of some benefit or
advantage in favor of the adopted
child. Put a little differently, no
presumption of parental dereliction on
the part of the adopting parents could
have arisen since Adelberto was not in
fact subject to their control at the time
the tort was committed.
Inasmuch that there was absence
of actual or physical custody, the
adoptive parent cannot be held liable
for damages. The one answerable for
it would be the parents by nature
inasmuch as they were the one who
had actual and physical custody over
the adopted child.
9
Halila Sudagar
Halila Sudagar
survived by ascendants, the ascendants
must be legitimate. With the parents,
there is no question whether legitimate or
illegitimate.
But if ascendants or
grandparents, it must be legitimate.
(3) When the surviving spouse or the
illegitimate children of the adopted
concur with the adopters, they shall
divide the entire estate in equal
shares, one-half to be inherited by the
spouse or the illegitimate
children
of
the adopted and the other half, by the
adopters;
(4) When the adopters concur with the
illegitimate children and the surviving
spouse of the adopted, they shall divide
the entire estate in
equal shares, onethird to be inherited by the illegitimate
children,
one-third by the surviving
spouse, and one-third by the adopters;
(5) When only the adopters survive, they
shall inherit the entire estate; and
(6) When only collateral blood relatives of
the adopted survive, then the
ordinary rules of legal or intestate
succession shall apply.
That is one provision not carried over
by RA 8552.
11