107 Phil 783

EN BANC

[G.R. No. L-13172. April 28, 1960.]

GILBERT RILLON and MARCELINA RILLON,

plaintiffs and appellants, v. FILEMON RILLON,
defendant and appellee.

Hermenegildo Gualberto for Appellants.

Paulino Monongdo and Enrique D. Caloob

for Appellee.

SYLLABUS

1. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE; CIVIL LIABILITY IN RAPE;

NOT DETERMINABLE IN CRIMINAL ACTION ONLY. —
Contrary to the provisions of Article 135 of the Civil Code
of Spain, to the effect that in cases of rape the provisions
of the Penal Code regarding the acknowledgment of the
issue is to be observed, Article 283 of the Civil Code of
the Philippines, does not make the civil liability of the
offender in a case of rape determinable in a criminal
action only. Article 30 of the same code also implies the
right of an offended party to bring a separate civil action
for the criminal act without instituting the criminal
proceedings for the prosecution of the offense.

2. ID.; ID.; INSTITUTION OF CRIMINAL ACTION

UNNECESSARY; RULE 107 OF THE RULES OF COURT
REPEALED. — The provisions of Rule 107 of the Rules of
Court are no longer in force because a civil action may
now be instituted and prosecuted to final judgment
without waiting the institution and termination of a
criminal action (Arts. 30 and 283 of the Civil Code of the
Philippines). These new provisions are inconsistent with
the provisions of Rule 107 of the Rules of Court and the
latter must give way thereto. In consequence, it is not
now necessary that a criminal prosecution for rape be
first instituted and presented to final judgment before a
civil action based on said offense in favor of the offended
woman and recognition of the offspring can be instituted
and presented to final judgment. The provisions of Rule
107 of the present Rules promulgated in 1940, are,
therefore, considered repealed or modified pro tanto by
Articles 30 and 283 of the Civil Code of the Philippines.

DECISION

LABRADOR, J . :

This is a civil action instituted by the minor Gilbert Rillon,

assisted by his mother, Marcelina Rillon, as his guardian
ad litem, alleging the following facts: jgc:
chanrobles.com.ph

"3. That on or towards the 10th of September In 1953, in

the municipality of San Fernando, La Union, the
aforementioned defendant, using force and cohabiting
intimidation, lay with the plaintiff Marcelina Rillon against
or without her will, holding her, and threatening her; and
as a consequence of such town council The
aforementioned minor Gilbert Rillon was conceived and
the aforementioned minor Gilbert Rillon, being the
plaintiff Marcelina Rillon and the aforementioned
defendant are single and unmarried respectively at the
time of the aforementioned conception, capable of
marrying without any legal impediment, and remain in
the same marital status until the date.

"4. That the aforementioned minor Gilbert Rillon was

born on or around April 12, 1954 in San Fernando, La
Union, that is, after 180 days, from the carnal or
intercourse site and within 300 days." cralaw virtua1aw
library

In other paragraphs of the complaint it is further alleged

that the minor needs food for subsistence as he is living
with his mother who has no means to support him; that
his mother has asked the defendant to recognize the
minor as a natural child and provide him with support,
but these demands were refused by defendant; that the
illegal act of defendant has caused the mother mental
anguish, physical and mental inconvenience, degradation
and shame, and has caused her moral damages in the
amount of P5,000 and a right to support for the amount
of P200; that the plaintiff mother was a student of the
Normal School in Manila and needed only three months
to complete her studies when her misfortune occurred
and by reason of the acts of the defendant she has been
caused actual damages in the amount of P30,000. In
conclusion plaintiffs pray that the defendant be ordered
to recognized the minor as his natural child, declaring the
latter entitled to the rights of a natural child and to
receive the sum of P20.00 a month for his maintenance
and support, and that the defendant be further ordered
to pay the plaintiff mother P30,000 as actual damages,
P5,000 as moral damages and P200 as the expenses
during the delivery and birth of the child.

In his answer the defendant denies the material

allegations of the complaint and, by way of special
defense, alleges that the minor is the son of plaintiff
Marcelina Rillon by another man with whom she had
carnal knowledge long before September 10, 1952; that
her failure to finish her studies was due to her amorous
relations with her "boy friend," her failure to pay her
tuition fees and her poor and unsatisfactory scholastic
record. By way of counterclaim he alleges that plaintiffs’
complaint is false, fictitious and malicious, made in
evident and wilful bad faith, and has caused the
defendant moral damages in the amount of P40,000.

After the filing of a reply to defendant’s counterclaim,

defendant moved to dismiss the complaint or proceeding
on the ground that the action is premature as there is no
final judgment in a criminal case for rape against the
defendant; and that no cause of action has accrued
against him. The court, Hon. Juan O. Reyes, presiding,
dismissed the case without prejudice, in order that a
decision may first be had on the prejudicial question, that
is, whether or not defendant committed the crime as
alleged in plaintiffs’ complaint. Failing to obtain a
reconsideration of this order, plaintiffs have appealed to
us.

The legal question squarely presented is whether or not a

civil action for recognition and support and for moral
damages filed by an offended party, under allegations of
facts constituting the crime of rape, can proceed even
without the institution of a criminal action for rape
against the defendant and a judgment thereon convicting
him of such crime.

Under Article 135 of the Civil Code of Spain enforced in

the islands prior to the adoption of the Civil Code of the
Philippines, the civil responsibility that devolves upon a
man accused of rape is to be governed by the provisions
of the Penal Code. Article 135 of the former Civil Code is
as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"Art. 135. The father is obliged to acknowledge the

natural child in the following cases:chanrob1es virtual
1aw library

1. When there exists an indubitable writing of his in

which he expressly acknowledges his paternity.

2. When the child is in the continuous possession of the

status of a natural child of the defendant father, justified
by direct acts of the father himself or of his family.

In cases of rape, seduction, or abduction, the provisions

of the Penal Code with regard to the acknowledgment of
the issue shall be observed."cralaw virtua1aw library
The provisions of the Revised Penal Code regarding the
civil liability arising from the crime of rape is embodied in
Article 345, which is follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"Art. 345. Civil liability of persons guilty of crimes against

chastity. — Persons guilty of rape, seduction or
abduction, shall also be sentenced:chanrob1es virtual
1aw library

1. To indemnify the offended woman.

2. To acknowledge the offspring, unless the law should

prevent him from so doing.

3. In every case to support the offspring.

To carry out the above provisions of the civil law, when

General Orders No. 58 was issued, Section 107 thereof
provided that a person claiming to be injured by the
commission of an offense may take part in the
prosecution thereof and may recover damages for the
injury sustained by reason of the said offense. Said
Section 107 reads:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"Sec. 107. The previleges now secured by law to the

person claiming to be injured by the commission of an
offense to take part in the prosecution of the offense and
to recover damages for the injury sustained by reason of
the same shall not be held to be abridged by the
provisions of this order; but such person may appear and
shall be heard either individually or by attorney at all
stages of the case, and the court upon conviction of the
accused may enter judgment against him for the
damages occasioned by his wrongful act. It shall,
however, be the duty of the promotor fiscal to direct the
prosecution, subject to the right of the person injured to
appeal from any decision of the court denying him a legal
right."cralaw virtua1aw library

The rights of an offended party to take part in the

criminal case, as recognized in the above-quoted section,
are defined in Article 742 and Article 114 of the Law of
Criminal Procedure of Spain of 1882, as
follows:red:chanrobles.com.ph

"In said judgment there shall be decided all questions

arising in the trial, and the accused shall be condemned
or acquitted not only of the principal offense and offenses
connected therewith but also of any incidental
misdemeanors which may have been proven in the case;
and the tribunal, at this stage of the proceedings, can not
dismiss the case in respect to the accused persons who
ought not to be condemned.

"All questions referring to civil liability and responsibility

which arise in the trial shall also be decided in the said
judgment." (Art. 712).

"When a criminal proceeding is instituted for the judicial

investigation of a crime or misdemeanor, no civil action
arising from the same act can be prosecuted; but the
same shall be suspended, if there be one, in whatever
stage or state it may be found, until final sentence in the
criminal proceeding is pronounced." (Art. 114).

Following the above provisions we have

held:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"Instituting a criminal action only, it will be understood,

brings the civil action as well, unless the damaged or
prejudiced person waives the same or expressly reserves
the right to institute the civil action after the termination
of the criminal case, if there be any reason therefor. (Art.
112 of the Law of Criminal Procedure.)" Almeida, Et. Al.
v. Abaroa, 8 Phil. 178, 182.)

Therefore, all questions referring to civil liability and

responsibility which arise in the trial (of the criminal
case) shall be decided in the judgment in the criminal
case.

Interpreting the above-quoted provisions, this Court

further said in the case of Almeida, Et. Al. v. Abaroa,
supra, that the Supreme Court of Spain had decided that
in any criminal case, the civil liability or responsibility
must arise as a consequence of the criminal liability and
that, therefore, if the accused has been acquitted of the
crime, the court cannot order payment of indemnity
therefore. To the same effect is the decision of this Court
in U. S. v. Heery, 25 Phil., 600:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"In this jurisdiction it is well settled that the civil liability

of the accused must be determined in the criminal action,
unless the injured party expressly waives such liability or
reserves his right to have the civil damages determined
in a separate action. Section 107 of General Orders No.
58 reads: . . .

"The procedure under the Spanish Code of Criminal

Procedure for determining the civil liability of persons
accused of crime, referred to in the above quoted
section, has been discussed by this court a number of
times.

"In Springer v. Odlin (3 Phil. Rep., 344), it was said: ‘By

General Orders, No. 58, section 107, the privileges
secured by the Spanish law to persons claiming to be
injured by the commission of an offense to take part in
the prosecution of the offense and to recover damages
for the injury sustained by reason of the same, are
preserved and remain in force, and it is therein expressly
provided that the court, upon conviction of the accused,
may enter judgment in favor of the injured person,
against the defendant in the criminal case for the
damage occasioned by the wrongful act:chanrob1es
virtual 1aw library
x          x          x

"Almeida v. Abaroa (8 Phil Rep. 178), was a civil action

for damages brought by the plaintiff against a person
who had been previously acquitted on a criminal charge.
It was held that his acquittal in the criminal action was a
complete bar to a civil action for damages based upon
the alleged criminal act of which the defendant had been
accused. In the course of this decision it was
said:red:chanrobles.com.ph

"‘Instituting a criminal action only, it will be understood,

brings the civil action as well, unless the damaged or
prejudiced person waives the same or expressly reserves
the right to institute the civil action after the termination
of the criminal case, if there be any reason therefore.
(Art. 112 of the said Law of Criminal Procedure.)

"‘The right to bring the civil action, as reserved by the

person damaged or prejudiced, after the termination of
the criminal case, is only permitted, if there be any
reason therefore, and so says the law, in the event that
the judgment rendered in the criminal cause is a finding
of guilt against the accused; but if the accused be
acquitted, then the complaint in the civil action must be
based on some fact and or cause distinct and separate
from the criminal act itself.’"

When the present Rules of Court was promulgated, the

above provisions contained in the Spanish Code of
Criminal Procedure of 1882 and applied in the cases of
Almeida, Et. Al. v. Abaroa, supra, and U.S. v. Heery,
supra, and others, were recast into the provisions of
Section 1 of Rule 107, as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"Section 1. Rules governing civil actions arising from

offenses. — Except as otherwise provided by law, the
following rules shall be observed:chanrob1es virtual 1aw
library

(a) When a criminal action is instituted, the civil action

for recovery of civil liability arising from the offense
charged is impliedly instituted with the criminal action,
unless the offended party expressly waives the civil
action or reserves his right to institute is separately;

(b) Criminal and civil actions arising from the same

offense may be instituted separately, but after the
criminal action has been commenced the civil action can
not be instituted until final judgment has been rendered
in the criminal action;

(c) After a criminal action has been commenced, no civil

action arising from the same offense can be prosecuted;
and the same shall be suspended, in whatever stage it
may be found, until final judgment in the criminal
proceeding has been rendered;

(d) Extinction of the penal action does not carry with it

extinction of the civil, unless the extinction proceeds from
a declaration in a final judgment that the fact from which
the civil might arise did not exist. In the other cases, the
person entitled to the civil action may institute it in the
jurisdiction and in the manner provided by law against
the person who may be liable for restitution of the thing
and reparation or indemnity for the damages suffered;

(e) A final judgment rendered in a civil action absolving

the defendant from civil liability, is no bar to a criminal
action.’

The above provisions were in force on August 30, 1950

when the Civil Code of the Philippines was enacted. The
Civil Code of the Philippines contains the following
provisions:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"ART. 283. In any of the following cases, the father is

obliged to recognize the child as his natural
child:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
(1) In cases of rape, abduction or seduction, when the
period of the offense coincides more or less with that of
the conception;

(2)When the child is in continuous possession of status of

a child of the allged father by the direct acts of the latter
or of his family;

(3) When the child was conceived during the time when
the mother cohabited with the supposed father;

(4) When the child has in his favor any evidence or proof
that the defendant is his father."cralaw virtua1aw library

It will be noted that contrary to the provisions of Article

135 of the Civil Code of Spain, to the effect that in cases
of rape the provisions of the Penal Code regarding the
acknowledgment of the issue is to be observed, Article
283 of the Civil Code of the Philippines does not make
the civil liability of the offender in a case of rape
determinable in a criminal action only. This is also to be
inferred from Article 30, which
provides:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"ART. 30. When a separate civil action is brought to

demand civil liability arising from a criminal offense, and
no criminal proceedings are instituted during the
pendency of the civil case, a preponderance of evidence
shall likewise be sufficient to prove the act complained
of."cralaw virtua1aw library

This last article implies the right of an offended party to

bring a separate civil action for the criminal act without
instituting the criminal proceedings for the prosecution of
the offense. This is the opposite of the provisions of the
old Criminal Procedure of Spain of 1882 and of Rule 107
of the present Rules of Court. For, whereas under Rule
107 the civil action for damages for an offense has to
await the results of the criminal action, and if a civil
action is first intituted, the same shall be suspended until
after the criminal action has been instituted and decided,
which provisions of the present Rules of Court are based
on the old Spanish Law of Criminal Procedure, said
provisions are no longer in force because a civil action
may not be instituted and prosecuted to final judgment
without awaiting the institution and termination of a
criminal action, as expressly declared in Articles 30 and
283 of the Civil Code of the Philippines. These new
provisions are inconsistent with the provisions of Rule
107 of the Rules of Court and the latter must give way
thereto. In consequence, it is not now necessary that a
criminal prosecution for rape be first instituted and
prosecuted to final judgment before a civil action based
on said offense in favor of the offended woman and the
recognition of the offspring can be instituted and
prosecuted to final judgment. The provisions of Rule 107
of the present Rules promulgated in 1940 are, therefore,
considered repealed or modified pro tanto by the above-
mentioned articles of the Civil Code and, as above stated,
the offended woman in the rape and the child born out of
the crime may institute a civil action for damages and for
recognition and support without a previous action and
judgment in a criminal case for rape against the offender.

For the foregoing considerations, the order of the court,

dismissing the case provisionally for the purpose of
awaiting the results of the criminal action for rape against
defendant, is hereby set aside and the case is hereby
remanded to the court below for further proceedings in
accordance with this decision. With costs against
defendant-appellee. So ordered.

Paras, C.J., Bengzon, Montemayor, Bautista Angelo,

Concepción, Barrera, and Gutiérrez David, JJ., concur.
Order set aside.