Acknowledgment of paternity is not enough in inheritance cases
The Supreme Court of Justice established that if a father who acknowledges the paternity of a minor, knowing that it is not his son, and later regrets it, must compensate the affected boy or girl.
Photo:123rf
PHOTO:123 rf
The Court analyzed the case of brothers and a young man who refused a DNA test to prove a family relationship.
Related:Antioquia
DNA
paternity
Supreme Court
True content
Find the validation of El Cazamentiras at the end of the news.
February 5, 2019, 09:04 AM JJusticia February 5, 2019, 09:04 AMIn processes involving a disputed inheritance between children and heirs, repeatedly refusing to take a DNA test to verify paternity is taken as a sign of bad faith and, since this is the way to prove the blood relationship, it is enough to determine that there is no blood affiliation and therefore, you are not entitled to an inheritance. This is how a decision of the Supreme Court of Justice reveals it when resolving a lawsuit in which three children and heirs challenged the extramarital recognition of paternity that their father made of another young man while alive.
Court sent information on Besaile to JEP but will continue to investigate himWith review of the process against Parody and Álvarez makes his debut as an 'ad hoc' prosecutorSupreme Court confirmed the first challenged sentence with new rulesSpecifically, the high court studied the case of the children of L.A.P. who died on May 7, 2002, who, upon the death of their father, demanded the acknowledgment of paternity that he made of J.C.P.C. Given this, the young man's mother, who was a minor at the time, objected and said that the legal term had already expired. to file these types of appeals. The judge who heard the case found no evidence that the time to make this claim had expired, but the woman appealed the ruling and the Superior Court of Antioquia modified the decision. Given this, the brothers P.A. They challenged the ruling and the Supreme Court of Justice annulled the sentence, but before issuing a decision, it decreed that DNA tests be carried out to determine "scientifically and with a probability index greater than 99.9 percent extramarital paternity." However, both the mother and J.C. refused the test, despite the fact that the plaintiffs said that they would accept the results of the test if it favored him, but if it was shown that he was not the son of L.A.P. the ruling that did not grant the brothers the acknowledgment of paternity that their father had made of J.C. mother and son that biological paternity does not correspond, thus preventing the truth from shining through"
The disloyalty of the counterparty by avoiding the taking of the blood sample is only explained in the knowledge of mother and son that the biological paternity does not correspond
The high court indicated that in the event of discussions or doubts about someone's parentage, it is essential to carry out a scientific test with the aim of verifying the existence of a genetic coincidence. Given the importance of this test, it is a situation "that cannot be evaded or circumvented for any reason."
"The way in which they assumed the lawsuit denotes an obstinacy to prevent the scientific opinion from being carried out that would leave no doubt as to whether he was the biological father (...) this generates a high degree of probability that the claims ( that he is not his father) are true", says the ruling of the high court. It was convenient for her, as well as for her son, to remove the cloak of doubt that there were rumors and comments about who J.C.'s father was. Her reluctance in this regard was such that at one stage the Supreme Court itself commissioned the President of the Family Chamber of the Superior Court of Antioquia so that they could obtain the evidence without being able to even locate J.C. and his mother.
The way in which they assumed the lawsuit denotes an obstinacy to prevent the scientific opinion from being carried out (...) this generates a high degree of probability that the claims are true
After finding his whereabouts, the Court asked a local family court to have the genetic test carried out and was also unsuccessful. The two reiterated their refusal to take the tests "indicating that they would assume the consequences" and then changed their position again. address. In another attempt, the Police and telephone companies were even asked to help establish the whereabouts of both and it was not possible.In its decision, the Supreme Court of Justice upheld the denials of the defendants and other unjustified obstructions lead to an inference that both knew that the results of the genetic test would be unfavorable for them. For all this, the Court revoked the ruling that denied the brothers' request to invalidate the acknowledgment of paternity that had made his father of J.C. and declared that this is not the son of L.A.P. Thus, J.C could not claim its inheritance either.
JUSTICE
February 5, 2019, 09:04 AM JJusticia February 5, 2019, 09:04 AM Related:Antioquia
DNA
paternity
Supreme Court< /h2>DOWNLOAD THE WEATHER APP
Customise, discover and get informed.
Our World
Horoscope
Find here all the signs of the zodiac. We have advice on love, finances and much more for you.
Crossword Puzzle
Test your knowledge with the EL TIEMPO crossword puzzle
Keep up to date
Most Viewed
The possible new side effect of Moderna's vaccine
Aspiring to the presidency: this is the intention to vote
Yina Calderón is in the emergency room due to relapse after cosmetic surgeries
The two key photos of Jhonier Leal in a bank being analyzed by the Prosecutor's Office
Days without VAT: two of the three days would be hours before the elections
Receive the best information in your national and world news email
MORE NEWSLETTERS*Successful registration.
*This is not a valid email.
*You must accept the Terms, Conditions and Policies.
Congratulations! Your registration has been successful.You can now see the latest content of EL TIEMPO in your inbox
an error occurred in the request
