Short answer. The Family Code fixes a sequence: the spouse first, then descendants in the nearest degree, then ascendants in the nearest degree, and last the brothers and sisters. Liability devolves down that list, so a more distant relative is reached only when the nearer one cannot provide.
What the law says
Whenever two or more persons are obliged to give support, the liability shall devolve upon the following persons in the order herein provided
Family Code, Article 199 — Order of Those Liable to Give Support. Read the full provision →
The order is prescribed, not chosen
Article 199 of the Family Code addresses the situation where more than one relative could be liable, and it answers it with a ranking rather than a discretion: Whenever two or more persons are obliged to give support, the liability shall devolve upon the following persons in the order herein provided. The order runs spouse, descendants in the nearest degree, ascendants in the nearest degree, brothers and sisters. A claimant does not get to select the relative best able to pay, and a relative further down the list is not liable simply because they are the easiest to reach.
"Nearest degree" filters within a category
Two of the four categories are qualified by nearness of degree, and that qualification does real work. Among descendants, children come before grandchildren; among ascendants, parents come before grandparents. So a grandparent's exposure to a claim is doubly conditional — the whole descendant category must be exhausted first, and within the ascendant category the child's own parents come ahead of them. This is why claims against grandparents succeed only where the parents' inability to provide is actually established, not merely asserted.
What the sequence means when a claim is being made
In practice the ordering shapes what has to be proved. Establishing the family relationship is only half the case; a claimant reaching past the first-ranked relative must also show why that person cannot furnish support. It also explains a common outcome — a parent with no means does not simply transfer the burden to the grandparents, because the amount of support itself is measured against the resources of the person obliged and the necessities of the recipient. If several relatives are in the picture, working out where in Article 199's order each one sits is the first step, not a detail.
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.
- Ma. Belen B. Mangonon etc. vs. Hon. Court of Appeals, et al, G.R. No. 125041, June 30, 2006 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Jesus Nicardo M. Falcis, III vs. Civil Registrar General, G.R. No. 217910, September 3, 2019 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Fe Floro Valino vs. Rosario D. Adriano, et al, G.R. No. 182894, April 22, 2014 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Richelle Busque Ordoña vs. The Local Civil Registrar of Pasig City and Allan D, G.R. No. 215370, November 9, 2021 — read the decision on LawPhil →
Related provisions
- Family Code, Article 199 — Order of Those Liable to Give Support
- Family Code, Article 196 — Support Between Siblings