Dilemna 2 and - Discussion

8/12/2019 Dilemna 2 and - Discussion

1/4

Dilemna 2 and 3

The legal issues in the case:

I. Whether or not an agreement between parents regarding the support and

custody of their illegitimate child is valid.

II. The legal consequences of a simulated birth certificate.

III. Lawyer-client relationship in an informal setting and the duty of confidentiality

therein.

I.

Relevant laws to consider:

1. Executive Order No. 209Art. 210, Art. 213

2. Silva vs CA 84 SCAD 651

3. 275 SCRA 604

Discussion

By virtue of E.O. no 209, otherwise known as The Family Code of the

Philippines, parental authority and responsibility may not be renounced or transferred

except in the cases authorized by law. The law further provides that in case of

separation of the parents, parental authority shall be exercised by the parent designated

by the court. The court shall take into account all relevant considerations especially the

choice of the child over seven years of age unless the parent chosen is unfit and that

no child under seven years of age shall be separated from the mother, unless the court

finds compelling reasons to order otherwise.

The law clearly states that parental authority cannot be a subject of agreement

unless it is authorized by law. Support and custody arises from the exercise of parental

authority over our children. The Supreme Court stated in a case, that it is a parents

natural right, as well as the moral and legal duty to care for their children, see to their

proper upbringing and safeguard their best interest and welfare. This authority and

responsibility may not be unduly denied to parents; neither may it be renounced by


2/4

them. Even when the parents are estranged and their affection for each other is lost, the

attachment and feeling for their offspring invariably remain unchanged. Neither the law

nor the courts allow this affinity to suffer absent, of course, any real, grave and imminent

threat to the well-being of the child.

It is therefore our humble opinion that an agreement renouncing parental

authority, as exemplified in the case, is not valid.

II.

Pertinent provisions of law applicable in the issue:

1. Revised Penal CodeArt. 347348

2. Domestic Adoption Act of 1998 (RA 8552)

Discussion

Simulation of birth or the tampering of the Civil Registry making it appear in the

birth records that a certain child was born to a person who is not his or her biological

mother, causing such child to lose his/her identity and status is punishable under Art.

347 of the Revised Penal Code and Sec 21(b) of the Domestic Adoption Act. The latter

provision states tha any person the fict itious registration of the birth of the child under

the name(s) of a person(s) who is not his/her biological parent(s) shall be guilty of

simulation of birth and shall be punished by prision mayor in its medium period and a

fine not exceeding Php50,000.00. However, under Sec 22 of the Domestic Adoption

Act, the parents could legitimize the relationship by finally adopting the child and asking

for Rectification of Simulated Birth at the same time and by doing so, avoid criminal

liability.

The proper remedy Louis should do is not to resort to simulation of birth because

it is illegal. However, he can either confess to Wendy that the child is his and he wants

to adopt the baby. In that case, the proceeding for adoption will not be difficult and

punishment will be avoided. If he wants to conceal his filial relationship with the child, he

can adopt the baby but will be faced with several burdens in the procedure and difficulty

in the process of adoption which will cost him much of time and finances. The effect of


3/4

resorting to the latter remedy will be his lifetime guilt and depriving the childs right for

his real parents.

III.

Pertinent provisions of law related to the issue:

1. Canon 14, Code of Professional Responsibility

2. Rule 2.01, CPR

3. Rule 2.02, CPR

4. Rule 15.08, CPR

5. Rule 19.02

Discussion

In the case at hand, Manuel consulted Louis regarding his problem of simulating

the birth of Baby Ben. Their transaction is apparently informal. Louis even gave advice

through e-mail only. The question that arises now is whether there is a lawyer-client

relationship between Manuel and Louis. It is submitted that there is a lawyer-client

relationship between them. According to jurisprudence (Santiago vs Fojas, 248 SCRA

68), a lawyer has the right to decline employment, subject to Canon 14 of the CPR

which states that a lawyer shall not refuse his services to the needy. This means that

indeed a lawyer has a choice in whether to render legal services or not. Louis did not

refuse to give legal advice to Manuel. He rendered services to the latter. In another

case (Hilado vs David, 84 Phil 569), it was provided that an attorney-client relationship

exists when an attorney is employed to give advice upon a legal point. It is not

necessary that there should be a formal agreement between Manuel and Louis to

establish their lawyer-client relationship. In the problem, Louis was informed by Manuel

himself that Baby Ben is his illegitimate child from another woman and that he simulatedthe birth certificate of the child which is a penalized act. Having obtained such

knowledge, Louis is bound by Rule 19.02 of the CPR to call upon Manuel to rectify the

same and if he fails, he should terminate the relationship with such client in accordance

with the Rules of Court.


4/4

IV.

Provisions of law relevant to the issue:

1. Rule 15.02

2. Rule 21.01

Discussion

Since it is already established in the previous issue that an attorney-client

relationship exists between Louis and Manuel even if it was informal, it is logical that the

duty of confidentiality of a lawyer in a formal contract between him and his client also

extends to it. Hence, Louis is bound by the rule on privileged communication regarding

matters disclosed to him by his client(Rule 15.02, CPR). Hence, Louis cannot inform a

third person anything about the simulation of the birth certificate of Baby Ben nor the

truth of his illegitimacy.

Documents

Dilemna 2 and - Discussion