Gallego Rule 93and94
Gallego Rule 93and94
Gallego Rule 93and94
RULE 93
PETITION FOR APPOINTMENT OF A GUARDIAN
Q:
DIFFERENTIATE
INCOMPETENCY
OF
GUARDIAN
INCOMPTENCY OF PERSON UNDER GUARDIANSHIP.
FROM
PARENTS AS GUARDIANS
The father and the mother shall jointly exercise legal guardianship over the
person and property of their minor without the necessity of a court
appointment. In such case, Rules of Court shall be suppletory to the
provisions of the Family Code on Guardianship.
Where the value of the property or the annual income of the child exceeds
50, 000 Php, the parent concerned shall be required to furnish a bond in such
amount as the court may determine but not less than 10% of the value or
annual income, to guarantee the performance of the obligations prescribed
for general guardians. ( Article 225, Family Code)
INCOMPETENT
f)
Rule 93)
HEARING
When a petition is filed, the court shall fix a time and place for hearing. The
court shall cause notice to be given to the persons mentioned in the petition
residing in the province, including the incompetent himself. [Rule 93, Sec. 3]
Notice to the wards relatives is a jurisdictional requirement. [Yangco v. CFI]
Procedure:
a.
filing of petition
b.
court shall set the case for hearing
c.
cause notices to be served to the persons mentioned in the petition,
including minor,
if 14 years and above
d.
court shall receive evidence
e.
declaration of the propriety of the petition
f.
issue letters of guardianship
GUARDIANS APPOINTMENT
The alleged incompetent must be present at the hearing, if able to attend.
It must also be shown that the required notice was given. The court shall
then hear parties evidences. If the person in question is an incompetent, the
court shall appoint a suitable guardian of his person/estate/both. [Rule 93,
Sec. 5]
The guardians appointment is good until set aside; and, despite and
appeal therefrom, theguardian can do what is necessary (under courts
direction) for the protection of the ward/estate. [Zafra-Sarte v. CA (1970)]
CONSIDERATIONS IN THE CHOICE OF THE GUARDIAN [Francisco v. CA
(1984)]
The court may consider the financial situation, the physical condition and
sound judgment, prudence and trustworthiness, the morals, character and
conduct, and the present and past history of a prospective appointee, as well
as the probability of his being able to exercise the powers and duties of a
guardian for the full period during which guardianship will be necessary.
The courts should not appoint as a guardian any person who is not
personally subject to
their jurisdiction (e.g. non-residents). [Guerrero v. Teran]
The best interests of a ward can override procedural rules and even the
rights of parents
to the custody of their children.
SERVICE OF JUDGMENT
The final order or judgment shall be served upon the civil registrar of the
municipality/city where the incompetent resides or where his property is
situated. [Rule 93, Sec. 8]
CASES
ALAMAYRI v. PABALE
April 30, 2008
Facts:
1. Almayri petitions the court for the setting aside of the CA decision.
2. Cesnando Fernando, representing S.M. Fernando Realty Corp filed an
action for Specific Performance with Damages (Civil Case) against Nelly Nave
who owns a parcel of land which the former alleged was the subject of a
'Kasunduan ng Pagbibilihan'. However, Nave allegedly reneged on their
agreement when she refused to accept the partial payment of Fernando. The
said lot was instead sold to the Pabale siblings.
3. Subsequently, the civil proceedings were suspended by virtue of a
guardianship proceedings. In June 1988, Nave was declared therein to be
incompetent.
4. The lower court declared the nullity of the two sale agreements on the
ground that Nave was found incompetent since 1980. The Pabale siblings
intervened. The Court of Appeals granted the appeals of both Fernando and
the Pabale siblings and upheld the validity of the Deed of Sale executed by
Nelly Nave dated February 20, 1984. Hence this petition.
4. Petitioner alleged that since Nave was judicially determined to be an
incompetent, all contracts that she subsequently entered into should be
declared null and void.
Issue: Is conclusiveness of judgment applicable in special proceedings?
Held: No. There was no identity of parties and issues between the special
proceeding on the guardianship of Nave and the civil case. The decision on
the former on her incompetency should not therefore bar by conclusiveness
of judgement the finding in the latter case (civil case) that Nave was
competent and had capacity when she entered into the contract of sale over
the subject lot in favor of the Pabale siblings.
VANCIL VS BELMES
June 19, 2001
FACTS: The RTC appointed Bonifacia Vancil, an American citizen, as legal and
judicial guardian over the persons and estate of Valerie and Vincent, the
children of her deceased son Reeder. Helen Belmes, the natural mother of
the minor children, instituted a motion for removal of Guardianship and
Appointment of Vancil, asserting that she is the natural mother in custody of
and exercising parental authority over the subject minors. Trial court rejected
Belmes'petition. The CA reversed the RTC order. Since Valerie had reached
the age of majority at the time the case reached the SC, the Court resolves
to determine who between the mother and grandmother of minor Vincent
should be his guardian.
Issue: Who between the mother and grandmother of the minor should be his
guardian.
Held: Belmes, being the natural mother of Vincent, has the preferential right
to be his guardian. Art. 211 of the FC states: "The father and the mother
shall jointly exercise parental authority over the persons of their common
RULE 94
GUARDIANS BOND
Before an appointed guardian enters upon the execution of his trust, he shall
give a BOND (Sec. 1 Rule 94).
Conditions on the bond: [Rule 94, Sec. 1]
1) To make and return, within 3 months, the estates inventory;
2) To faithfully execute the duties of his trust, to manage and dispose of the
estate according to wards best interests, and to provide for the wards
proper care/custody/education;
3) To account for the estate and all proceeds/interest derived therefrom;
4) At the expiration of his trust, to settle his accounts with the court and
deliver the remaining estate to the person lawfully entitled thereto;
5) To perform all court orders.
In case of breach of the bonds conditions, the bond may be prosecuted in
the same proceeding or in a separate action, for the use and benefit of the
ward or of any person legally interested in the estate. [Rule 94, Sec. 3]
NEW BOND
Whenever necessary, the court may require a new bond to be given by the
guardian. After notice to interested persons, the sureties on the old bond
may then be discharged from further liability when no injury will result to
interested parties. [Rule 94, Sec. 2]