Ilehitimong anak, may karapatan sa insurance

ni PAO Chief Persida Rueda-Acosta @Magtanong Kay Attorney | May 13, 2026

Dear Chief Acosta,

Isa akong ilehitimong anak na lumaki sa pangangalaga ng aking ina sapagkat may legal na pamilya ang aking ama. Kamakailan lang ay pumanaw ang ama ko at natuklasan namin na ginawa niya akong benepisyaryo sa kanyang life insurance policy. Sa ngayon ay naghahabol ang mga kapatid ko sa ama at nais nila na mapunta sa ari-arian ng aking ama ang benepisyo na makukuha mula sa nasabing insurance at mula roon ay saka diumano namin paghahatihatian. Tama po ba ito? O, marapat lang na sa akin lamang mapunta ang nasabing insurance proceeds? — Faye

---

Dear Faye,

Sang-ayon sa Section 53 ng Presidential Decree (P.D.) No. 1460 na inamyendahan ng Republic Act (R.A.) No. 10607 o mas kilala sa tawag na Insurance Code of the Philippines: “The insurance proceeds shall be applied exclusively to the proper interest of the person in whose name or for whose benefit it is made unless otherwise specified in the policy.” Samakatuwid, ang may karapatan sa benepisyo mula sa isang insurance policy ay walang iba kundi ang tao na inilagay na benepisyaryo nito, maliban kung ang huli ay diskwalipikado sa bisa ng probisyon ng ibang umiiral na batas. 

Kung sakaling walang nakalagay na benepisyaryo o naunang namatay ang benepisyaryo o di kaya ay diskwalipikado ito, ay saka pa lamang mapupunta ang nasabing benepisyo sa ari-arian (estate) ng namatay. Ang iyong sitwasyon ay maaaring kahalintulad sa isang kaso na dinesisyunan ng ating Kataas-taasang Hukuman na may pamagat na Heirs of Loreto Maramag vs. Eva Verna De Guzman Maramag (G.R. No. 181132, June 05, 2009, sa panulat ni Honorable Associate Justice Antonio Eduardo Nachura), dito ay ipinaliwanag ng Korte Suprema na:  

“Pursuant thereto, it is obvious that the only persons entitled to claim the insurance proceeds are either the insured, if still alive; or the beneficiary, if the insured is already deceased, upon the maturation of the policy.  The exception to this rule is a situation where the insurance contract was intended to benefit third persons who are not parties to the same in the form of favorable stipulations or indemnity.  In such a case, third parties may directly sue and claim from the insurer.

Petitioners are third parties to the insurance contracts with Insular and Grepalife and, thus, are not entitled to the proceeds thereof.  Accordingly, respondents Insular and Grepalife have no legal obligation to turn over the insurance proceeds to petitioners.  The revocation of Eva as a beneficiary in one policy and her disqualification as such in another are of no moment considering that the designation of the illegitimate children as beneficiaries in Loreto's insurance policies remains valid.  Because no legal proscription exists in naming as beneficiaries the children of illicit relationships by the insured, the shares of Eva in the insurance proceeds, whether forfeited by the court in view of the prohibition on donations under Article 739 of the Civil Code or by the insurers themselves for reasons based on the insurance contracts, must be awarded to the said illegitimate children, the designated beneficiaries, to the exclusion of petitioners.  It is only in cases where the insured has not designated any beneficiary, or when the designated beneficiary is disqualified by law to receive the proceeds, that the insurance policy proceeds shall redound to the benefit of the estate of the insured.”

Sana ay nabigyan namin ng linaw ang iyong katanungan. Ang payong aming ibinigay ay base lamang sa mga impormasyon na iyong inilahad at maaaring magbago kung mababawasan o madaragdagan ang mga detalye ng iyong salaysay.

Maraming salamat sa iyong patuloy na pagtitiwala.