If you delayed challenging paternity, you must accept a child even if it is not yours
The high court affirmed that the 140-day period is not a mere formality, but is mandatory, since it is linked to good faith and legal certainty.
Photo:istock
PHOTO:istock
After the period of 140 days from the DNA test, returns are not accepted.
Related:judges
DNA
paternity
cuts
Demand
true content
Find the validation of El Cazamentiras at the end of the news.
January 18, 2021, 09:55 PMJU JusticeJanuary 18, 2021, 09:55 PMRegardless of what the DNA test says, if a person has knowledge that he is not the father of a minor and takes longer than is permitted to contest that paternity, he will not be able to relinquish those filial responsibilities.
The Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice reiterated that, according to article 248 of the Civil Code, the term that exists to challenge paternity since, without any doubt, it is known that he is not the parent of a minor is 140 days. , and that this period is not optional and must be required by the judges. After that time, said the Court, the challenge expires and the father – even if he is not – can no longer be released from responsibility. (We recommend: $90,000 for child support: the case that opened debate) This statement is important considering Keep in mind that, according to William Usaquén Martínez, director of the Population Genetics and Identification Group (GPI), which is one of the 10 laboratories authorized to carry out these filiation tests, some 11,000 paternity tests are carried out each year. The reason, explained the Supreme Court, is that in this type of situation not only the rights of the alleged father are involved, but also those of the minor.
A father cannot claim when he feels like it, but he will have to stick to 140 days
Thus, because the interest of minors is superior, even when a DNA test says that a man is not the father of a boy or girl, in order to get rid of the minor, he must file the lawsuit "in due course" because after the deadline there is no going back and the situation of who passes for father and his alleged son becomes definitive, "even when it does not correspond to biological reality," said the ruling. (You may be interested: Judges must find out who is the true father of minors: Court) The high court assured that the term of 140 days is not a mere formality, but is mandatory, since it is linked to good faith and legal certainty. It has to do with good faith and consistency because if a person takes more than the indicated time to challenge paternity, they are creating an “expectation in who would be called to face their claims (the child), in the sense that they have voluntarily declined of the prerogative to make his claim”. And it has to do with legal certainty, says the high court, because this type of decision generates legal effects that cannot remain undefined and, therefore, as time passes, its effects become definitive and it is no longer It is possible to knock them down, since the rights of the child to have a name, a family, their marital status, their legal personality, affiliation and dignity are at stake. (Also: If you earn more than the minimum: must your employer raise your salary every year?) Precisely, the Court says that the term of 140 days is so short because since 2000 it has been saying in its jurisprudence that the marital status of a person – which enables the individual to exercise certain rights and contract obligations – cannot be indeterminate nor be clouded by uncertainty. That is why, "no matter how altruistic the reason given may seem or may be ," said the corporation, a parent cannot claim when it seems to him, but will have to stick to 140 days because, after that period, they are not accepted. returns. On the contrary, the Court said, if it is the son who is claiming because he has an interest in knowing who his true family is, in that case the current laws do not establish any term and he can challenge paternity at any time.
Man took 21 months to claimThe Court made this clarification when evaluating the case of a man who had asked it to declare that he was not the father of a minor child, and to overturn a 2015 ruling of the Civil Chamber of the Superior Court of Cundinamarca that had acknowledged his paternity. (Also read: Stable courtship cannot be considered a de facto marital union) In the process, the man stated that he had sporadic sexual relations with the child's mother , after which he found out that she was pregnant. The boy was born on October 4, 2003, and both her and his family insisted that she recognize him. According to what she told the Court, her mother –excited to have a grandson– told her to register it before the Second Notary of Soacha. But later, the man said, he discovered that the boy's mother had relationships with other people, for which he requested that a DNA test be carried out at the Arthur Stanley Gillow Foundation. The test excluded him as the biological father of the minor. (Also read: Court says that infidelity does not end a de facto marital union). Although the man learned of these results on October 26, 2009, he delayed submitting the filiation claim until July 15, 2011. That was the reason why the court rejected his claims, stating that the deadline for 140 days to file suit, and thus the paternity challenge had expired. The man objected, stating that this decision violated the Constitution, specifically the article that indicates that substantial law must prevail over formal law. In other words, his rights mattered to him as he was not the biological father and he should take precedence over the rigidity of the 140-day period. But the Court reminded him that this period is not a mere formality, but that the rights of the minor to his marital status and family stability are at stake, and therefore the judges must be strict when taking into account count that time. JUSTICE
January 18, 2021, 09:55 PMJUJusticeJanuary 18, 2021, 09:55 PMRelated:judges
DNA
paternity
cuts
Demand
DOWNLOAD THE WEATHER APP
Personalize, discover and inform yourself.
Our world
Horoscope
He finds here all the signs of the zodiac. We have for you advice on love, finances and much more.
Crossword
Test your knowledge with the TIME crossword
Up date
most seen
The possible new side effect that the Moderna vaccine would have
Candidates for the presidency: this is the voting intention
Yina Calderón is in the emergency room due to relapse after cosmetic surgery
The two key photos of Jhonier Leal in a bank analyzed by the Prosecutor's Office
The shocking video that shows a 'dead' rising in the morgue
Receive the best information in your email from national news and the world
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 contents of EL TIEMPO in your inbox
there was an error in the request
