Rights Over the Remains of the Deceased in the Philippines

Common-Law Spouse vs. Parents

1. Statutory Framework

Source	Key rule
Civil Code, Title X (Funerals) – Arts. 305-310	Art. 305 gives the duty and right to arrange the funeral to the persons who, in law, owe the deceased support; Art. 307 says the deceased’s expressed wishes control, but only “in the absence of doubt” and subject to Art. 305; Art. 308 forbids interment, exhumation or disposal without the consent of those listed in Art. 305; Arts. 309-310 impose liability for interference and classify tombstones as funeral expenses. (AMSLAW)
Family Code, Art. 199 (superseding the Civil Code’s old Art. 294)	Sets the modern order of support, which the Civil Code expressly borrows for funerals: (1) spouse, (2) descendants in the nearest degree, (3) ascendants in the nearest degree (i.e., parents/grandparents), (4) brothers and sisters. (PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS)
Code on Sanitation (PD 856), Ch. XXI & 2021 DOH IRR	Regulates permits, embalming, cremation, time limits (e.g., 24 h burial/cremation for highly infectious deaths), and says the nearest kin bears the burial cost when able. It does not disturb the Civil/Family Code hierarchy, but LGUs may give free funeral aid to indigents. (Legaldex, Jur.ph)

Important: The Civil Code speaks of spouse, descendant, ascendant, brother/sister. A common-law partner is none of these. Philippine law still does not recognize common-law marriage, whether opposite-sex or same-sex. (Respicio & Co.)

2. Where the Common-Law Spouse Stands

No automatic priority. Because the partner is not within Art. 199, parents outrank a live-in partner whenever there is no legal spouse and no children. (Philstar)
Possible—but fragile—paths to authority:
- Written funeral directive / Last Will (Art. 307). Courts will honour a clear, specific instruction, provided it is not contrary to custom, public policy, or the legitime of compulsory heirs.
- Special Power of Attorney executed before death, designating the partner as “funeral agent.” This is persuasive, but parents may still contest on public-policy grounds.
- Appointment as Executor/Administrator in a probate proceeding gives temporary control of the body as an incident of estate administration.
- Local ordinances: Quezon City’s 2023 “Right-to-Care” card, for instance, lets registered partners make health-care (not automatically funeral) decisions; it is persuasive evidence of the deceased’s wishes but not binding outside QC.
If none of the above exists, parents prevail as ascendants (§ Art. 199) once they agree on the arrangements (the father is preferred if the parents disagree). (Philippine Law Firm)

3. Jurisprudence

Case	Lesson
Valino v. Adriano, G.R. 182894 (22 Apr 2014)	SC ordered the common-law partner to exhume the body and surrender it to the legal wife, holding that the partner “is not contemplated by Article 305” and that long-time cohabitation or the alleged wishes of the deceased cannot defeat the statutory hierarchy absent “clear and satisfactory proof.” (Jur.ph, Inquirer News)
Marawi Marantao Gen. Hospital v. CA, 402 Phil 356 (2001)	Reiterated that waiver of the Art. 305 right “is never presumed”; silence or distance from the deceased does not amount to waiver. The same principle protects parents when they are next in line.
Thomson v. CA, 358 Phil 761 (1998)	Courts resolve doubts in favour of the statutory next-of-kin, not the person currently in possession of the corpse.

No Supreme Court decision has yet placed parents against a common-law partner head-on, but the reasoning in these cases—and the unbroken Civil Code language—predicts that parents will be favoured whenever they fall next in the Art. 199 ladder.

4. Muslim & Indigenous Exceptions

PD 1083 (Muslim Code) recognises subsequent marriages solemnised under Islamic law; a valid Muslim spouse will outrank parents.
For recognised indigenous peoples’ rites, the express choice of the deceased or customary leaders may control, but only if not in conflict with national law on public health and order.

5. Practical Road-Map for Common-Law Couples

Put wishes in writing (notarised directive or will). State who will claim, where to inter/cremate, who pays.
Execute an SPA naming the partner as attorney-in-fact “for funeral and burial matters.”
Plan estate documents (will, insurance, memorial plan) to fund the chosen arrangements.
Register for local schemes like QC’s Right-to-Care card or execute a health-care proxy.
Keep the family informed; undisputed evidence of the deceased’s intent greatly reduces litigation.
If a dispute breaks out the partner can file:
- An urgent TRO in the RTC to stop burial/cremation.
- A special civil action to enforce the written directive or will.
- A claim for damages if parents dispose of the body in bad faith (Art. 309).

6. Obligations & Liability

Who pays? The person with the Art. 305 duty must shoulder reasonable expenses; if insolvent, the estate and then the LGU (under PD 856) ultimately cover the minimum burial. (Jur.ph)
Interference. Wrongful possession or disposal exposes the offender to damages under Art. 309 and criminal charges under the Revised Penal Code (e.g., Art. disrespect of the dead).
Exhumation/transfer always requires the consent of the statutory next-of-kin or a court order (Art. 308, PD 856 IRR).

7. Pending Legislative Reform

Several civil-partnership bills (House Bills 1015 & 6782, 19th Congress) propose to give registered partners the same priority as a legal spouse for medical and funeral decisions; as of May 2025 none has been enacted. (chr2bucket.storage.googleapis.com)

Conclusion

Under present Philippine law the parents of the deceased outrank a common-law spouse in deciding what happens to the body whenever (1) the deceased left no legal spouse and (2) no descendants assert their right. A live-in partner can prevail only by clear, pre-death documentation of the deceased’s wishes, or by future statutory reform. Until then, couples who choose not (or are unable) to marry must rely on robust advance planning to avoid wrenching disputes at life’s end.