Gandionco vs Pearanda

Facts:

Petitioner applied for injunction to annul a) the order of the resp judgeordering the pet to pay support
pendente lite to private resp his wife andtheir child b) denying pet motion to suspend hearings for the
action for legalseparation filed against him by priv resp.

The private resp wife filed with the RTC of Misamis Oriental a complaintagainst pet husband for legal
separation on the ground of concubinage with apetition for support and payment of damages. This is a
civil case. Also thewife filed a complaint against husband for concubinage which is a criminalcases.

Resp wife filed application for provisional remedy of support pendent elitepending the decision for legal
separation and the judge ordered payment of support pendente lite.

Pet contends that civil action for legal separation and the incidentsconsequent thereto such as the
support should be suspended in view of the criminal case for concubinage filed against him. What he
cites as a supportfor his contention is Art. 111 sec 3 of the 1985 Rules of Crim Pro which statesthat after
a criminal action has been commenced, the pending civil actionarising from the same offense shall be
suspended in whatever stage it may befound until final judgment in crim proceeding has been rendered.

Pet contends that legal separation cases is inextricably tied to criminalaction so that all proceedings for
leg sep should be suspended to await theconviction or acquittal of the pet.

He cited Jerusalem vs. Hon Roberto Zurbano but this cases has relied solelyon Sec. 1 Rule 107 of the
THEN prov of ROC which stated that after acriminal action has been commenced, no civil action arising
from the sameoffense can be prosecuted and the same shall be suspended until
finaljudgment.ISSUE:WON the civil action for legal separation should be suspended until final judgment
forconbcubinage is rendered.WON Judge is disqualified from hearing the case because of his disregard
of applicablelaws and existing doctrines, thereby showing partiality to private resp.HELD: Anent first
issue: NO. 1985 Rules on Crim Pro should be taken intoconsideration.

But this provision, sec. 1, Rule 107 of then ROC, did not clearly state as the1985 Rules do, that the civil
action to be suspended with or upon the filing of a criminal action is one which is to enforce civil liability
arising from theoffense.

The civil action for leg sep based on concubinage may proceed ahead of orsimultaneously with, a
criminal action for concubinage bec said civil action isNOT one to enforce the civil liability arising from
the offense even if both thecivil and criminal actions arise from or are related to the same offense.

Civil action is intended to obtain the right to live separately, with the legalconsequences thereof, such as
the dissolution of the conjugal partnership of gains, custody of offsprings, support, and disqualification
from inheritingfrom the innocent spouse among others.

Decree of legal separation on ground of concubinage may be issued uponproof of preponderance of
evidence in the action for legal separation. Nocriminal proceeding or conviction is necessary.

ACT. 2710 of absolute divorce-allowed that guilt has to be established first,however in the present CC it
has not been reproduced or adopted by theframers.

On pendent elite, this is a remedy which the can be availed of in an actionfor legal separation. If pet
finds it too onerous, he can file a motion tomodify or reduce the same.Anent second issue: No. He is not
disqualified in hearing the case.

Divergence of opinions bet a judge hearing a case and a partys counsel as toapplicable laws and
jurisprudence is not a sufficient ground to disqualify thejudge from hearing the case on the ground of
bias and manifest partiality.

Judges disposition is found to be sound and well-taken.
Petition dismissed.