Short answer. Yes. The Family Code gives parents, and others exercising parental authority, the right and duty to represent their unemancipated children in all matters affecting the children's interests. It is listed among rights and duties together, so the authority comes bundled with obligations to the child.
What the law says
To represent them in all matters affecting their interests
Family Code, Article 220 — Rights and Duties of Parents Over the Child. Read the full provision →
The wording is broad on purpose
The clause says in all matters affecting their interests. It is not confined to a particular kind of transaction or forum. The reason is practical: an unemancipated child cannot act for themselves in most dealings that affect them, so a gap in the parent's representative capacity would simply leave the child unrepresented. Framing it broadly closes that gap rather than requiring a specific authority to be found for each situation as it comes up.
It belongs to whoever exercises parental authority
The article addresses the parents and those exercising parental authority, which is wider than parenthood alone. Where parental authority is being exercised by someone other than a parent, the representative capacity in this clause travels with it. Its outer edge is the word unemancipated: the article speaks to the period during which parental authority subsists, and it does not purport to govern the relationship after that.
Representation is listed as a duty as well as a right
Article 220 presents its items as rights and duties in a single list, and that framing carries real weight here. Representation is not merely a power a parent may use when convenient. It sits alongside the obligations to support, educate and instruct the child, to provide moral and spiritual guidance, and to supervise the child's activities and associations. The capacity to act for the child exists because the child's interests have to be looked after, and it is answerable to that purpose.
The article gives capacity, not a procedure
What this clause supplies is the parent's standing to act on the child's behalf. It does not set out how any particular matter is to be handled, and it does not displace requirements that other provisions or other statutes impose in specific settings — several of which call for court involvement where a child's property or status is concerned. This is general information about the source of the parent's authority to represent, not advice on any particular matter.
Cases citing this provision
These Supreme Court decisions cite the provision above. We list them so you can read them yourself; the summaries of what each decided are not ours to give.
- Sps. Melchor and Yolanda Dorao vs. Sps. BBB and CCC, By Themselves and as Natural Guardians of Their Minor Daughter Aaa, G.R. No. 235737, April 26, 2023 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Rosanna L. Tan-Andal vs. Mario Victor M. Andal, G.R. No. 196359, May 11, 2021 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Jeffrey M. Calma vs. Mari Kris Santos-Calma, G.R. No. 242070, August 24, 2020 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Caravan Travel and Tours International, Inc. vs. Ermilinda R. Abejar, G.R. No. 170631, February 10, 2016 — read the decision on LawPhil →