Chua v.

Cabangbang
G.R.No. L-23253 ll Mar. 28, 1969 ll Castro, J.
321 332
Dilag
Persons and Family Relations
KEYWORDS:
Hostess, Betty the adopted child
DOCTRINE:
Abandonment terminates parentalauthority
NATURE OF PETITION
:Appeal from the decision of the Court of First Instance of
Rizal
dismissing Pacita Chuas
petition for habeas corpus for the custody of her daughter
Betty from respondents.
FACTS:

Petitioner, when she was still at the primeof youth, worked

as a hostess in nightclubs

She slept with different men, but she gotpregnant with 2

children from a certain SySia Lay and 1 daughter with
Victor TanVillareal

She gave her youngest daughter to acomadre in Cebu

The custody of the other daughter, Betty,was acquired by

Mr. and Mrs. Cabangbang
during the formers early years (4 month
sold)They christened her Grace Cabangbang

Petitioner now wants to get custody of BettyShe contends that Villareal took thechild away and gave
her to the coupleThe couple avers that they found thebaby, wrapped in a
bundle, at the gateof their residence
ISSUE:
WON the custody of the child can begranted back to the
mother
HELD:
NO
, petitioner abandoned the child, thusshe has lost her
parental authority over thechild
RATIO:

CFI ruled that the mother was unfit to haveparental

authority, as she is not an uprightwoman.But SC ruled that it was more of anabandonment rather
than fitness thatdivests the mother with
parentalauthorityArt. 332 of the Civil CodeThe courts may
deprive the parents of their parental authority or suspend
theexercise of the same if they should treattheir children
with excessive harshnessor should give them corrupting
orders,counsels or examples, or should makethem beg or
abandon them.

Therefore, abandonment is one of thegrounds for

depriving authority over theparentMere acquiescence to the giving byVillareal to the spouses
is not sufficientto constitute abandonmentBut since she waited for a period of 5years before she filed
the petition forcustody, it is more believable that shedid
abandon the childMore proof that she doesnt really love
the childShe admitted under oath that shewants the child back so
that Sy SiaLay, the alleged father, wouldresume providing
the petitionerand the child support which heperemptorily
withheld and ceasedto give when she gave the childawayAlso, she expressed her willingnessto drop the case if the
spouses paidher in cash and a jeepNot to mention that she gave herother child to a comadre
in Cebu
because she couldnt support her
SIDE ISSUE:

Petitioner contends that no child under 7years of age shall

be taken away from hermother.Moot and academic, as she is already11 years old
We therefore affirm the lower courts decision,
not on the grounds cited by it, but upon a

Chua v. Cabangbang
G.R.No. L-23253 ll Mar. 28, 1969 ll Castro, J.
322 332
Dilag
Persons and Family Relations
ground which the court overlooked

i.e., abandonment by the petitioner of her child