Text of the provision
Art. 174. Legitimate children shall have the right:
(1) To bear the surnames of the father and the mother, in conformity with the provisions of the Civil Code on Surnames;
(2) To receive support from their parents, their ascendants, and in proper cases, their brothers and sisters, in conformity with the provisions of this Code on Support; and
(3) To be entitled to the legitimate and other successional rights granted to them by the Civil Code.
(264a)
Family Code of the Philippines, Executive Order No. 209, approved July 6, 1987. The Code took effect on August 3, 1988 (Republic v. Orbecido III, G.R. No. 154380, October 5, 2005). Reproduced in full.
What this article means
This article spells out the three core rights that flow from legitimacy:
- Surnames — a legitimate child may bear both the father's and the mother's surnames, under the Civil Code rules on surnames;
- Support — from parents, ascendants, and in proper cases siblings, under the Code's rules on Support; and
- Succession — the legitime and other successional rights the Civil Code grants.
These are exactly the rights whose extent differs for illegitimate children — which is why establishing status under this Title carries real consequences.
Questions about this provision
Related provisions
- Article 164 — who is a legitimate child.
- Article 175 — how illegitimate children establish filiation.
Cases citing this article
- In Re: Petition for Change of Name and/or Correction/Cancellation of Entry in Civil Registry of Julian Lin Carulasan Wang vs. Cebu City Civil Registrar. P.E.T. Case No. 002 March 29, 2005 Ronald Allan Poe vs. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, G.R. No. 159966, March 30, 2005 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Anacleto Ballaho Alanis III vs. Court of Appeals, Cagayan de Oro City and Hon, G.R. No. 216425, November 11, 2020 — read the decision on LawPhil →
Compiled automatically from Supreme Court decisions published on LawPhil that expressly cite this article, most frequently cited first. A listing means the decision cites the provision — it is not a statement that the case is the leading authority, and it does not show whether a ruling has since been modified or abandoned. Always read the decision itself.