**Facts:**
In May 1991, Yolanda Cadacio Granada met Cyrus Granada, and they married on March 3, 1993. They had a son, Cyborg Dean Cadacio Granada. In May 1994, Cyrus went to Taiwan for employment after Sumida Electric Philippines closed down. Despite efforts, including inquiries by her brother with Cyrus’ relatives, Yolanda received no communication from her husband. After nine years of waiting, she filed a Petition for Declaration of Presumptive Death of Cyrus with the RTC of Lipa City, Branch 85.
The RTC granted the petition on February 7, 2005. The Republic of the Philippines, represented by the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), filed a Motion for Reconsideration, arguing that Yolanda failed to demonstrate earnest efforts to find Cyrus. The RTC denied the motion on June 29, 2007. The Republic filed a Notice of Appeal with the Court of Appeals (CA).
Yolanda filed a Motion to Dismiss, arguing that the decision in a summary proceeding for presumptive death under Article 41 of the Family Code was immediately final and executory, thus not appealable. On January 23, 2009, the CA granted the Motion to Dismiss. The Republic’s motion for reconsideration was denied on April 3, 2009.
Thus, the Republic filed a Rule 45 Petition with the Supreme Court, seeking to reverse the CA’s resolutions.
**Issues:**
1. Whether the CA erred in dismissing the Republic’s appeal on the ground that the RTC decision was immediately final and executory and not subject to ordinary appeal.
2. Whether the CA erred in affirming the RTC’s grant of the Petition for Declaration of Presumptive Death based on the evidence presented by Yolanda.
**Court’s Decision:**
The Supreme Court affirmed the CA decision, tackling the issues as follows:
1. **Finality and Non-Appealability of RTC Decision:**
– Under Article 41 of the Family Code, a declaration of presumptive death is a summary proceeding.
– Article 247 of the Family Code stipulates that judgments in these proceedings are immediately final and executory.
– The Supreme Court reinforced that ordinary appeal under Rule 41 is improper. The Republic should have filed a certiorari petition under Rule 65 to challenge the RTC decision.
– Precedent cases such as Republic v. Bermudez-Lorino and Republic v. Tango were cited, establishing that only certiorari petitions are appropriate for challenging summary decisions under the Family Code.
2. **Affirmation of RTC’s Grant of Petition for Presumptive Death:**
– Despite questioning the sufficiency of evidence regarding Yolanda’s efforts to locate Cyrus, the Supreme Court emphasized the finality of the RTC’s judgment post-denial of the Motion for Reconsideration.
– Citing principles of immutability of final judgments, the Court stated that the RTC’s ruling could no longer be altered, even if it might have been an erroneous conclusion.
**Doctrine:**
– Judgments in summary proceedings under the Family Code (Article 247) are immediately final and executory and not subject to ordinary appeal. Only a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 is allowed to contest such judgments.
– The immutable nature of final judgments, which cannot be modified even for correcting potential errors in fact or law.
**Class Notes:**
– **Summary Proceedings (Family Code):** Judgments in summary proceedings under Articles 41, 51, 69, 73, 96, 124, and 217 become immediately final and executory (Article 247, Family Code).
– **Certiorari under Rule 65:** The appropriate remedy for challenging decisions in summary proceedings.
– **Immutability of Final Judgments:** Once a judgment attains finality, it becomes unchangeable and conclusive upon the parties.
**Historical Background:**
The case comes in the backdrop of comprehensive reforms in the Family Code of the Philippines, which aimed to simplify certain judicial proceedings, including the declaration of presumptive death for the purpose of remarriage. Firming rules around finality seek to expedite judicial processes and reduce prolonged litigation, aligning procedural practices in family law with substantive legal requirements.
Leave a Reply