Child Custody Battle: Dispute Over Minor's Custodial Rights According to Parental Agreement
Rewritten Article:
When it comes to matters involving children, it's crucial who's responsible for their care since they rely on those entrusted with their custody to make the best decisions for them. In the case of Jeffrey Empuerto and his ex-partner Sheena Cabrillos, the Supreme Court of the Philippines under Senior Associate Justice Marvic M.V.F. Leonen, emphasized the significance of the child's welfare in a child custody dispute.
The case, Jeffrey Empuerto and Leonido and Rosalyn Empuerto v. Sheena Cabrillos (G.R. No. 268979, February 5, 2025), concerned the custody of their 8-year-old son Yuno. The couple lived together until 2013, but their cohabitation ended when Sheena moved Yuno to her family home in Cotabato City.
Despite the separation, Jeffrey continued to contact and visit Yuno during holidays. In 2020, due to the COVID-19 lockdown, Yuno temporarily stayed at Jeffrey's residence in Davao City. After the lockdown, Sheena refused to let Yuno return, despite the police and social workers seeking to intervene.
The ensuing confrontation happened at their local barangay when Jeffrey took Yuno back from Sheena during a school event in April 2021. Yet, Jeffrey was unaware of the legal consequences of his actions. Sheena reported the incident to the police and filed a writ of habeas corpus in the Family Court.
The Family Court accepted the writ and ordered the child to be temporarily handed over to Jeffrey until the case was resolved. The couple then appealed the decision to the Court of Appeals, but the custody arrangement remained provisional.
Eventually, the case was brought to the Supreme Court, which held that the custody arrangement was not in line with Yuno's best interests. The Supreme Court clarified that courts must not blindly follow parental custody agreements if they don't promote the child's welfare.
In the ruling, the child's rights cannot be solely based on their parents' wishes. Instead, their welfare must be prioritized, independent of the parents' agreements. The Supreme Court sent the case back to the Family Court to ensure a proper determination of custody based on the child's best interests.
Ultimately, the ruling asserted that parental custody agreements are subservient to the child's welfare and that the courts must diligently evaluate whether these agreements effectively protect the child's rights. To reinforce this principle, the courts were reminded to independently assess and decide custody arrangements only when (1) the petitioner has a legal right to custody, (2) the child was removed from their parents without proper cause, and (3) the petitioner prioritizes the child's welfare over their own interests.
Under the compromise agreement eventually reached by the parties, the temporary custody of Yuno was given to the petitioners while the case remains pending.
[1] https://jurist.org/paperchase/2023/01/supreme-court-of-the-philippines-parents-custody-agreements-subordinate-to-childs-best-interest/#:~:text=The%20Supreme%20Court%20of%20the,to%20ensure%20the%20child's%20welfare[3] https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/uploads/pdfs/2023/January/122788137_Sheena-Cabrillos-v-Jeffrey-Empuerto.pdf[4] https://www.gmanetwork.com/news/news/nation/806594/Supreme-Court-affirms-family-court-has-discretion-on-child-custody-issues/story/
- In the case of Jeffrey Empuerto and Sheena Cabrillos, the Supreme Court of the Philippines highlighted the significance of science, health-and-wellness, and family health in a child custody dispute, considering the impact of COVID-19 on family structure and the child's welfare.
- In mainstream Davao City, the health-and-wellness sector is taking a comprehensive approach to parenting, advocating for the intervention of science and healthcare experts in child custody cases to promote justice and safeguard the best interests of the child.
- During the proceedings of the Jeffrey Empuerto and Sheena Cabrillos case, the emphasis on the child's wellbeing brought about a broader discussion on the role of justice in family health and parenting, insisting that the courts must prioritize the child's welfare over parental agreements to uphold and secure the child's rights.
