Mere breach of promise to marry is not an actionable wrong.

To be
actionable, there must be some act independent of the breach of
promise to marry such as carnal knowledge.

The Supreme Court ruled that damages could not be awarded if sexual
intercourse is a product of voluntariness and mutual desire.

Article 21, not because of such promise to marry but because of the
fraud and deceit behind it and the willful injury to her honor and
reputation which followed thereafter. It is essential, however, that such
injury should have been committed in a manner contrary to morals,
good customs or public policy.

Statement made by Hendry was baseless. The imputation of guilt

without basis and the pattern of harassment during the investigation of
Tobias transgress the standards of human conduct set forth in Article
19 of the Civil Code. The scornful remark about Filipinos are clear
violations of Tobias personal dignity. Fact that he failed to gain
employment renders the petitioners liable for damages consistent with
Art. 2176 of the Civil Code.

QUESTION:
o Can the Office of the Ombudsman be compelled by mandamus to
file a case against a town mayor for a crime committed?

ANSWER:
o The filing of a case depends on whether there is a probable
cause or whether there is a prima facie case, based on the
evidence in its possession. This is a discretionary function, not a
ministerial function, and the Ombudsman cannot therefore be
compelled to file a case if in its honest evaluation, there is no
sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case.

Zapanta vs. Mendoza (L-14534, February 28, 1962)

o Accused was the one who was intimidated or forced by the
second spouse to enter into the bigamous marriage, his consent
to the second marriage would be involuntary and cannot be the
basis of his conviction for bigamy and, in which case, the civil
case for the annulment of the second marriage is a prejudicial
question to warrant the suspension of the criminal case for
bigamy.

Beltran vs. People (G.R. No. 137567, June 20, 2000)

o In the case at bar it must also be held that parties to the

marriage should not be permitted to judge for themselves its
nullity, for the same must be submitted to the judgment of the
competent courts and only when the nullity of the marriage is so
declared can it be held as void, and so long as there is no such
declaration the presumption is that the marriage exists for all
intents and purposes. Therefore, he who cohabits with a woman
not his wife before the judicial declaration of nullity of the
marriage assumes the risk of being prosecuted for concubinage.

A conceived child, although as yet unborn, is given by law a provisional

personality of its own for all purposes favorable to it, as explicitly
provided in Article 40 of the Civil Code of the Philippines. The unborn
child, therefore, has a right to support from its progenitors. Even if the
said child is only en ventre de sa mere just as a conceived child,
even if as yet unborn may receive donations. And its being ignored by
the parent in his testament may result in preterition of a forced heir
that annuls the institution of the testamentary heir, even if such child
should be born after the death of the testator

Article 50. For the exercise of civil rights and the fulfillment of civil
obligations, the domicile of natural persons is the place of their
habitual residence.

The Court upheld the qualification of Mrs. Imelda Romualdez Marcos,

despite her own declaration in her certificate of candidacy

A minor follows the domicile of his parents;

Domicile of origin is lost only when there is actual removal or change of

domicile, a bonafide intention of abandoning the former residence and
establishing a new one, and acts which correspond with the purpose; in
the absence of clear and positive proof of the concurrence of all these,
the domicile of origin should be deemed to continue

The wife does not automatically gain the husbands domicile because
the term residence in Civil Law does not mean the same thing in
Political Law;

Even assuming that she gained a new domicile after her marriage and
acquired the right to choose a new one after her husband died, her
acts following her return to the country clearly indicate that she chose
Tacloban, her domicile of origin, as her domicile of choice

MARRIAGE

A persons sex is an essential factor in marriage and family relations,

it is a part of a persons legal capacity and civil status. There is no such
special law in the Philippines governing sex re-assignment and its
effects.

To enable him to validly remarry a Filipino, he was required to either

present proof of his legal capacity issued by his Embassy or have the
Australian divorce decree recognized by a Philippine court, otherwise
his second marriage is void-bigamous.

Validity of that foreign divorce must be proven in a court of competent

jurisdiction in the Philippines otherwise, a second marriage is voidbigamous.

Extraordinarily, while the Supreme Court ruled that Article 26

paragraph 2 was not applicable to foreigners, the Court still required
the foreigner to seek recognition of his divorce decree before the same
could be registered with the civil registrar as a matter of
housekeeping. Further, for recognition of a foreign divorce decree, the
following documents must be submitted: a copy of the divorce decree,
the required certificates proving its authenticity, and a copy of the
foreign law on divorce.

Marriage for immigration purpose and ruled that under Article 2 for
consent to be valid, it must be (1) freely given and (2) made in the
presence of a solemnizing officer. There was clear intention to enter
into a real and valid marriage so as to fully comply with the
requirements of an application for citizenship. There was a full and
complete understanding of the legal tie that would be created between
them, since it was that precise legal tie which was necessary to
accomplish their goal.

General Rule: ABSENCE of any of the Essential or Formal requisites of

marriage shall render the marriage void ab initio;

Exception: Though the solemnizing officer is not legally authorized to

perform marriages, either or both parties believed in good faith that
the solemnizing officer had the legal authority to solemnize their
marriage.

DEFECTS in the essential requirements / requites of marriage make the

marriage merely annullable or voidable.

An IRREGULARITY in the formal requisites shall not affect the validity of

the marriage but the party or parties responsible for the irregularity
shall be;
1) civilly liable;
2) criminally liable; and
3) administratively liable.

Judge: The authority of judges to solemnize marriages is confined to

their territorial jurisdiction. Thus, where a judge solemnizes a marriage
outside his courts jurisdiction, there is an irregularity in a formal
requisite of marriage.

No Ceremony: The mere private act of signing a marriage contract

bears no semblance to a valid marriage and thus, needs no judicial
declaration of nullity. Such act alone, without more, cannot be deemed
to constitute as ostensibly valid marriage for which petitioner might be
held liable for bigamy unless he first secures a judicial declaration of
nullity before he contacts a subsequent marriage.

False Allegations: The falsity of the allegation in the sworn affidavit

relating to the period of cohabitation, which would have qualified a
marriage as an exception to the requirement for marriage license,
cannot be a mere irregularity, for it refers to a quintessential fact that
the law precisely required to be deposed and attested to by the parties
under oath. If the essential matter in the sworn affidavit is a lie, then it
is but a mere scrap of paper, without force and effect. Hence, it is as if
there was no affidavit at all.

Requirements in the marriage application before the local civil registrar

in case either of the contracting parties has been previously married:
(a) Death Certificate of the deceased spouse;

(b) Affidavit setting forth the circumstance of the current status of the
applicant and date of death of the deceased spouse just in case the
Death certificate cannot be secured.

Failure to obtain an advice or an unfavorable advice will defer the

issuance of a marriage license till after 3 months from the completion
of the publication of the application. This does not affect the marriage.

INVESTIGATIVE POWER OF THE LOCAL CIVIL REGISTRAR AND COURT

INTERVENTION: local civil registrar must note down the particulars
thereof and his findings in the application for a marriage license. He /
she is nonetheless duty bound to issue said license after payment of
the necessary fees unless exempted due to indigence, the completion
of the period of publication, or after a period of 3 months from the
completion of publication in case where parental advice was not
secured. Only court intervention directing the non-issuance of the
marriage license can empower the local civil registrar to validly refused
to issue a marriage license.

Marriage license is valid only within the Philippines and not abroad.

The Filipino spouse should likewise be allowed to remarry as if the

other party were a foreigner at the time of the solemnization of the
marriage. To rule otherwise would be to sanction absurdity and
injustice. Where the interpretation of a statute according to its exact
and literal import would lead to mischievous results or contravene the
clear purpose of the legislature, it should be construed according to its
spirit and reason, disregarding as far as necessary the letter of the law.

As a general rule, good faith and bad faith are immaterial in

determining whether or not a marriage is null and void. Hence, even if
a woman believed in good faith that she married a man not related to
her but who in truth and in fact was her long-lost brother, her good
faith will not cure the infirmity even if she willingly and freely cohabited
with him for a reasonable length of time after discovering the

relationship.

EXCEPTIONS:

(a) If either of the contracting parties is in good faith in believing that a

(b)

solemnizing officer has authority to solemnize a marriage though he

or she actually has none, the marriage will be considered valid;
In case of a person whose spouse disappeared for 4 or 2 years and he
she was able to secure a judicial declaration of presumptive death.

Below 18: An individual below 18 years old is declared by law as not

possessing the legal capacity to contract marriage. The consent of the
parents is immaterial in the sense that, even if present, it will not make
the marriage valid. Neither can subsequent parental consent ratify
such a void marriage.

It was duly established that no marriage license was issued to them

and that Marriage License No. N-07568 did not match the marriage
license numbers issued by the local civil registrar of Pasig City for the
month of February 1982. The case clearly falls under Section 3 of
Article 35 which made their marriage void ab initio. Applying the
general rules on void or inexistent contracts under Article 1409 of the
Civil Code, contracts which are absolutely simulated or fictitious are
inexistent and void from the beginning.

Not Bigamous but void for non-compliance: Essentially, Article 40

states that a judicial declaration of nullity must first be obtained before
any of the contracting parties is to remarry and, in accordance with
Article 52, such judicial declaration of nullity must be recorded with the
local civil registrar also before any subsequent marriage. Nonobservance of Article 40 in relation to Article 52 shall make the
subsequent marriage void pursuant to the express provision of Article
53.

Such marriage though void still needs a judicial declaration of such fact
and for all legal intents and purposes she would still be regarded
woman at the time she contracted her marriage; accordingly, the
marriage of petitioner and respondent would be regarded VOID under

the law.

Belated Declaration: judicial declaration of nullity of a previous

marriage is necessary before a subsequent one can be legally
contracted. One who enters into a subsequent marriage without first
obtaining such judicial declaration is guilty of bigamy. This principle
applies even if the earlier union is characterized by statute as void.
That he subsequently obtained a judicial declaration of the nullity of
the first marriage was immaterial. The Court said that the crime had
already been consummated by then. The declaration does not retroact
to the celebration of marriage, especially when concerning
psychological incapacity. Still criminally liable for bigamy,
notwithstanding the subsequent declaration that the second marriage
is void ab initio on the ground of psychological incapacity.

Precedence of filing of civil case is material in determination of liability

for a criminal case for bigamy. Because like in the Morigo case, prior to
being charged for bigamy, he already filed a petition for declaration of
nullity. SC overturned the conviction. Under the principle of
retroactivity of a marriage being declared void ab initio, the two were
never married from the beginning. The contract of marriage is null; it
bears no legal effect. The existence and the validity of the first
marriage being an essential element of the crime of bigamy, it is but
logical that a conviction for said offense cannot be sustained where
there is no first marriage to speak of.

Mistake in identity: Mistake in identity as a ground for nullity covers

only those situations in which there has been a mistake on the part of
the party seeking the nullity of marriage as to actual physical identity
of the other party. It does not include mistake in the name, the
character of the person, or in his or her attributes, his age, religion,
social standing, pedigree, pecuniary means, temperaments,
acquirements, condition in life or previous habits.

52 and 53: For persons whose marriages have been annulled or

declared null and void to be able to validly marry again, they must
undertake the liquidation, partition and distribution of their properties,
if any and only in proper cases the delivery of the childrens
presumptive legitimes and thereafter all these requirements, including
the degree of annulment or nullity, should be recorded in the
appropriate civil registry and the registries of property. Non-compliance
with these requirements will render any subsequent marriage void.
(Arts. 52 & 53 of FC)

PSYCH INC should refer to no less than a mental (not physical)

incapacity that causes a party to be truly incognitive of the basic
marital covenants that concomitantly must be assumed and
discharged by the parties to the marriage which, as so expressed by
Article 68 of the Family Code, include their mutual obligations to live
together, observe love, respect and fidelity and render help and
support. Confined to the most serious cases of personality disorders
clearly demonstrative of an utter insensitivity or inability to give
meaning and significance to the marriage. It must exist at the time the
marriage is celebrated.

There is no distinction between an alien spouse and a Filipino spouse,

Hence, the norms used for determining psychological incapacity should
apply to any person, regardless of nationality.

SC: Sorry guys harsh gali sang Molina ruling. the Court, in
conveniently applying Molina has allowed diagnosed sociopaths,
schizophrenics, nymphomaniacs, narcissists and the like, to
continuously debase and pervert the sanctity of marriage. And
declared that dependent personality disorder and antisocial personality
disorder are psychological incapacity. Here, the Court apologized for
Pesca.

While the person sought to be declared psychologically incapacitated

need not be examined by the psychologist as a condition precedent
before arriving at a conclusion, the incapacity should be proven by
independent means.

RP vs CA

(a) a true inability to commit oneself to the essentials of marriage;

(b) the inability must refer to the essential obligations of marriage, that
(c)

is, the conjugal act, the community of life and love, the rendering of
mutual help, and the procreation and education of offspring; and
the inability must be tantamount to a psychological abnormality

2 consecutive years, if the disappearance occurred under the following

circumstances?? Really, 2 yrs?

Subsequent marriage and then may reappearance: Children conceived

during the subsequent marriage in cases of presumptive death of one
of the spouses and before termination of the same shall be considered
legitimate. The status of the children will be maintained even if one of
the contracting parties is in bad faith. It must be noted that such
subsequent marriage in cases of presumptive death can only be
considered void if, both spouses were in bad faith in contracting the
subsequent marriage (Art. 44). If only one is in bad faith, the marriage
would still be valid and hence, the children born inside such marriage
are legitimate.

Donation: Donations are essentially gratuitous, hence, if both parties

are in good faith, the donation by reason of marriage shall be valid
even in the event that the subsequent marriage has been terminated.
It shall also be valid even if the donor acted in bad faith in contracting
the marriage.

Supreme Court discussed the difference between mental incapacity, a

ground for annulment of marriage being a vice of consent , and
psychological incapacity, a ground for nullity of marriage....novel in
our body of laws, which does not affect the consent to the marriage

The enumeration constituting fraud is exclusive and that nondisclosure of a husbands pre-marital relationship with another woman
is not one of the enumerated circumstances that would constitute a
ground for annulment.

When a woman was only four months pregnant at the time of her
marriage, her pregnancy would not be readily apparent, especially
since she was naturally plump or fat and because she must have
attempted to conceal the true state of affairs.

The nature of the gravity is irrelevant in order to invoke this ground. It

is enough that there was concealment of the sexually transmissible
disease at the time of the marriage ceremony to warrant annulment of
such marriage on the ground of fraud.

It is not necessary that the coercion or force be such as a person of

ordinary physical and mental stability would be unable to resist, and
that if either party is mentally incapable of resisting the improper
pressure applied, there is no consent such as the law requires. Violence
constituting duress may be physical or moral that is, it may consist of
the coercion of the person continuing down to the moment of the
celebration of marriage, or of the coercion of the will by antecedent
threats of bodily harm. In the latter case, the person is forced to elect
between consenting to marry and exposure to the threatened evils.

Mental block or disturbance has the result of making the spouse

physically incapable of performing the marriage act. Al so, it has been
held that excessive sensibility, if medically and sufficiently proven on
the part of the wife, rendering sexual intercourse practically impossible
on account of the pain it must inflict, may be sufficient to show
incapacity.

If the venereal disease or sexually transmissible disease were obtained

after the marriage ceremony, it cannot be a ground for annulment. The
law would require the existence of this ground (fraud) at the time of
the celebration of the marriage.

See: Ratification of Annullable Marriages

If the ground relied upon is either the incurable physical incapacity to

consummate the marriage by either party or the affliction of either
party with an incurable sexually transmissible disease, both existing at
the time of the marriage ceremony, the mere free cohabitation as
husband and wife of the parties will not ratify the annullable marriage.

A petition for declaration of absolute nullity of void marriage may be

filed solely by the husband or the wife.

Venue: The Petition shall be filed in the Family Court of the province or
city where the petitioner or the respondent has been residing for at
least six months prior to the date of filing. Or in the case of non-

resident respondent, where he may be found in the Philippines, at the

election of the petitioner.

NOTE: No Motion to Dismiss is allowed except on the ground of lack of

jurisdiction over the subject matter or over the parties.

Where no answer is filed or if the answer does not tender an issue, the
court shall order the public prosecutor to investigate whether collusion
exists between the parties.
Effect of failure to appear at the pre-trial.
(a) If the petitioner fails to appear personally, the case shall be
dismissed unless his counsel or a duly authorized representative
appears in court and proves a valid excuse for the non-appearance
of the petitioner.

(b) If the respondent has filed his answer but fails to appear, the court
shall proceed with the pre-trial and require the public prosecutor to
investigate the non-appearance of the respondent and submit within
fifteen days thereafter a report to the court stating whether his nonappearance is due to any collusion between the parties. If there Is no
collusion, the court shall require the public prosecutor to intervene for
the State during the trial on the merits to prevent suppression or
fabrication of evidence.

Trial: The presiding judge shall personally conduct the trial of the case.
No delegation of the reception of evidence to a commissioner shall be
allowed except as to matters involving property relations of the
spouses.

Effect of Death
(a) In case a party dies at any stage of the proceedings before the
entry of judgment, the court shall order the case closed and
terminated, without prejudice to the settlement of the estate in proper
proceedings in the regular courts.
(b) If the party dies after the entry of judgment of nullity or annulment,
the judgment shall be binding upon the parties and their successors in
interest in the settlement of the estate in the regular courts.

Court shall issue the Decree AFTER:

1. Registration of the entry of judgment granting the petition
2. Registration of the approved partition and distribution of the
properties
3. delivery of the children's presumptive legitimes in cash, property,

or sound securities
4. court shall quote in the Decree the dispositive portion of the
judgment entered and attach to the Decree the approved deed of
partition

LEGAL SEPARATION

Decree is terminable at the will of the parties by merely filing a

manifestation in court, the marriage continuing in regard to everything
not necessarily withdrawn from its operation.

The extrajudicial dissolution of the conjugal partnership without judicial

approval is void . A notary public should not facilitate the disintegration
of a marriage and the family by encouraging the separation of the
spouses and extra- judicially dissolving the conjugal partnership.
The grounds may or may not exist at the time of the marriage
ceremony. As a general rule, they usually occur after the celebration of
the marriage. No other grounds can be invoked by any party other than
those stated under the law.

Grossly abusive conduct has no exact definition and therefore is

determined on a case to case basis. Hence, a singular but serious act
of squeezing of neck, pulling of hair and the like without the intent to
kill may be included. Also, the continued manifestation by one spouse
of indifference or aversion to the other coupled with persistent neglect
of the duties incident to the marital relation has been declared by
American jurisprudence as cruelty enough to warrant a decree of
divorce.

The fact that respondent got married and had children is not proof
against his claim of homosexuality. As pointed out by the investigating
judge, it is possible that respondent was only suppressing or hiding his
true sexuality.

Although adultery and concubinage are included in acts of sexual

infidelity, other acts of sexual infidelity short of adultery and
concubinage are enough so long as the said acts committed by one
spouse would constitute a clear betrayal of the trust of his or her
spouse by having intimate love affairs with other persons.

A civil action for legal separation, based on concubinage, may proceed

ahead of, or simultaneously with, a criminal action for concubinage.

No previous criminal conviction is required for the legal separation

case to prosper. The criminal attempt can be proven by preponderance
of evidence in the civil case for legal separation.

Physical separation alone is not the full meaning of the term

abandonment, if the husband or the wife , despite his or her voluntary
departure from the society of his or her spouse, neither neglects the
management of the conjugal partnership nor ceases to give support to
his wife or her husband.

Condition of Future Good Behavior: It has been held that condonation

implies a condition of future good behavior by the offending spouse.
Condonation of the violation of the marital duties and obligations being
conditional on the future good conduct of the offending spouse,
subsequent offense on his or her part revokes or nullifies the
condonation and revives the original offense.

There is consent when either of the spouses agreed to or did not

object, despite full knowledge, to the act giving rise to a ground for
legal separation, before such act was in fact committed. Though it may
be void, it is nevertheless an expression of their clear consent to the
commission of the offense.

Long Absence: By his long absence, despite his knowledge of the

adultery of his wife, a husband is deemed to have consented to the
adulterous relations of his wife and is barred from instituting a case for
adultery, since the sole purpose of filing the charge is to use it as a
ground for legal separation.

EQUAL GUILT: The reason for this rule lies in the equitable maxim that
he who comes into equity must come with clean hands. Also, it is also
a rule that, when two persons acted in bad faith, they should be
considered as having acted in good faith. They are in pari delicto.

Hence, the plaintiff-spouse cannot invoke the guilt of the other if such
plaintiff-spouse is guilty of giving grounds for legal separation.

COLLUSION: agreement between husband and wife for one of them to

commit, or to appear to commit, or to be represented in court as
having committed, a matrimonial offense, or to suppress evidence of a
valid defense, for the purpose of enabling the other to obtain a divorce.

CONTINUED USE OF SURNANE: This is so because her married status is

unaffected by the separation, there being no severance of the
vinculum. It seems to be the policy of the law that the wife should
continue to use the name indicative of her unchanged status for the
benefit of all concerned.

Being personal in character, it follows that the death of one party to

the action causes the death of the action itself: actio personalis moritur
cum persona.

EFFECTS OF RECONCILIATION:
1. pending: terminated in whatever stage
2. final decree set aside but separation of property and forfeiture of share
of guilty spouse shall subsist

Participation of a Social Worker. The court may require a social

worker to conduct a case study and to submit the corresponding
report at least three days before the pre-trial. The court may also
require a case study at any stage of the case whenever necessary

Decree of Legal Separation shall be issued by the court only after

full compliance with liquidation under the Family Code

SSS: A spouse who claims entitlement to death benefits as a

primary beneficiary under the Social Security Law must establish
two qualifying factors, to wit: (1) that he/she is the legitimate
spouse; and (2) that he/she is dependent upon the member for
support.

While it is true that the personal stakes of each spouse in their

conjugal assets are inchoate or unclear prior to the liquidation of the
conjugal partnership of gains and, therefore, none of them can be
said to have acquired vested rights in specific assets, it is evident
that Article 256 of the Family Code does not intend to reach back
and automatically convert into absolute community of property
relation all conjugal partnerships of gains that existed before 1988
excepting only those with prenuptial agreements.

An oral marriage settlement, therefore is void and cannot be ratified

by any claim of partial execution or absence of objection.

NO, parties cannot stipulate that the conjugal partnership of gains

or absolute community of property will start at a time other than the
precise moment of the celebration of marriage because such
agreement is void under Articles 88 (Absolute Community of
Property) and Art. 107 (Conjugal Partnership of Gains).

In the absence of a contrary stipulation in a marriage settlement,

the property relations of the spouses shall be governed by Philippine
laws, regardless of the place of the celebration of the marriage and
their residence

XP:
1. both aliens
2. extrinsic validity affecting property not situated in the Philippines
and executed in country where property is located
3. extrinsic validity of contracts entered into in the Phils but affecting
property in a foreign country

Giving a donation propter nuptias to a would-be spouse prior to the

marriage is useless if the property regime that will govern their
marriage is the absolute community of property.

If you want to donate to your own future spouse, dapat and property
regime uh, any regime other than ACP, and it must not exceed 1/5 of
your present property. Funny gani kay kun ACP wala prohibition which
is ridiculous because once you get married, your properties are
merged. Also, basic sa donations that it must be accepted.

Hirap, teh. In the event the marriage is not celebrated, the donor has
the option to revoke or maintain the donation. If, however, the
donation propter nuptias is contained in a marriage settlement
executed prior to the marriage and the marriage ceremony does not
take place, such donation shall be considered void. If the donation is
void as it is contained in a marriage settlement, the period within
which to declare the donation void does not prescribe.

GR: Donor must not be too excited. The mere fact that a marriage is
provided by law as void is not enough for the donor to have the right to
revoke the donation. There must first be a judicial declaration that the
marriage is void.

XP:
1. marriage contracted prior JDNM and the donee-spouse is in BF:
revoked by operation of law
2. BF on part of both spouses in presumptive death case, under A. 44
subsequent marriage is void and all donations are revoked by
operation of law
3. All other cases where marriage judic declared void on grounds other
than 40 in relation to 52&53. GF or BF becomes irrelevant
4. Bigamous
5. Guilty of adultery or concubinage
6. Failure to comply with mandatory recording and distribution of
properties under A. 52. Hw, good faith may be invoked in revocation
of donations

The prohibitions apply to a couple living as husband and wife without

the benefit of marriage. Otherwise, the condition of those who incurred
guilt would turn out better than those in legal union. Applicable man ni
sa beneficiary in an insurance policy case.

At the very least, cohabitation is public assumption by a man and a

woman of the marital relation, and dwelling together as man and wife,
thereby holding themselves out to the public as such. Secret meetings
or nights clandestinely spent together, even if often repeated, do not
constitute such kind of cohabitation; they are merely meretricious.
Donation made by patient to his caregiver is void pursuant to A. 87

Kay diba, property from previous marriage excluded na kun may

legitimate descendants from a previous marriage. It must be noted

that the law uses the word descendants, not merely children. Hence,
it would include grandchildren, great-grandchildren and all other
descendants. Likewise, the descendants must be legitimate.

Ang separate property nakisawsaw pa: The accountability of the

absolute community of property for expenditures incurred for purposes
of preservation of the separate property of any of the spouses is
premised on the fact that such separate property has been used or is
being used by the family during the marriage.

Donation para sa self-improvement sinyo bata: The donation must be

made by both spouses. If only one of the spouse donate, this may fall
under the prohibition making donation between spouses, direct or
indirect void. Except for moderate gifts which spouses may give each
other on the occasion of any family rejoicing.

CRIME/ QD: The absolute community property shall not be liable to pay
the obligation or debt arising from crime or quasi-delict of a particular
spouse. The separate property of the erring spouse shall be liable.
However, in case of absence or insufficiency of the exclusive property

FORUM SHOP SIGNATURE: signature of the husband or wife alone is

substantial compliance with this requirement in cases involving
community or conjugal property, even if both parties are petitioners in
the case.

WILL: Considering that an absolute community of property is a coownership, the spouse can only dispose his or her interest in the
community property and not in a specific property.

JUDICIAL RELIEF FOR ALL: Considering that an absolute community of

property is a co-ownership, the spouse can only dispose his or her
interest in the community property and not in a specific property.

Upon the termination of the marriage by death, the community

property shall be liquidated in the same proceeding for the settlement
of the estate of the deceased.

Or liquidate within SIX MONTHS (6M) otherwise, void any

encumberance or disposition of community property

"married to" is merely descriptive of the civil status of the wife and
cannot be interpreted to mean that the husband is also a registered
owner. Because it is likewise possible that the property was acquired
by the wife while she was still single and registered only after her
marriage, neither would registration thereof in said manner constitute
proof that the same was acquired during the marriage and, for said
reason, to be presumed conjugal in nature. "Since there is no showing
as to when the property in question was acquired, the fact that the title
is in the name of the wife alone is determinative of its nature as
paraphernal, i.e., belonging exclusively to said spouse."

ESTOPPEL: Estoppel is effective even on successors in interest.

Moreover, when the question is exclusively between husband and wife,
or between one of them and the heirs of the other, the admission or
acknowledgment of one spouse that the money used to purchase the
property came from the other spouse, is evidence against the party
making the admission or his heirs. Likewise, where the husband has
been a party to an act of purchase of immovable property in the name
of his wife, which recited that the purchase was made with paraphernal
funds, and that the property was to be and remain paraphernal
property, neither he nor his heirs can be permitted to go behind the
deed and contest the wife's title to the property by claiming that it is
conjugal.

Property was only registered under the name of true and exclusive
owner-spouse and wherein the name of the other was included therein,
such property is still the exclusive property of the spouse who bought it
by his or her exclusive funds prior to the marriage and the registration
after the marriage of the certificate of title under co-ownership of the
spouses to both spouse creates a trust, thereby necessitating the
restoration to the real owner-spouse of the subject property upon
liquidation

spouse making the redemption through conjugal funds shall be liable

to the conjugal partnership for the reimbursement of the amount used
to redeem his or her exclusive property

However, if the separate property of a spouse is used as part of the

purchased price of a new property in addition to the conjugal funds
spent for the said purchase, the new property shall be considered
conjugal.

NEW CAR IS CONJUGAL: While it may be true that at the time of their
marriage, the wife had an automobile, that automobile has long since
passed out of existence, and the mere fact that each successive car
was turned in as part of the purchase price of a new car, would not
make every automobile in the future paraphernal, but on the contrary,
it becomes conjugal and responsible for the debts of the partnership.

There is no right of accretion unless expressly so provided. One of the

exception is when the joint donation is in favor of the husband and
wife.

Lol daw para kay Mareya: A transfer of a property by the husbands

parents, which was merely an accommodation so that husband
petitioner could acquire loan for a special rate and then use the
property as collateral, does not form part of the CPG.

Damages kay na aksidente sa eroplano: laintiffs have paid their fare

with funds presumably belonging to the conjugal partnership, said
damages fall under the classification of conjugal property that has
been acquired by onerous title during the marriage. Galing naman, ang
tickets daw presumably bought using conju funds.

Conjugal property cannot be held liable for the personal obligation

contracted by one spouse, unless some advantage or benefit is shown
to have accrued to the conjugal partnership.

Ahay negosyo ni wife, expenses chargeable to conju: After all,

whatever profits earned by the wife from her business go to the
conjugal partnership. It would only be just and equitable that the
obligations contracted by the wife in connection with her business may
also be chargeable not only against her paraphernal property, but also
agianst the conjugal property of the spouses.

THIS IS A STRONG PRESUMTION OK: presumption applies even when

the manner in which the property was acquired does not appear.

Written consent is written consent: Even if the other spouse actively

participated in negotiating for the sale of the property, that the other
spouses written consent to the sale is still required by law for its
validity.

ALIEN! aliens are absolutely not allowed to acquire public or private

lands in the Philippines, save only in constitutionally recognized
exceptions. We had cases where aliens wanted that a particular
property be declared as part of their fathers estate; that they be
reimbursed the funds used in purchasing a property titled in the name
of another; that an implied trust be declared in their (aliens) favor;
and that a contract of sale be nullified for their lack of consent.

By entering into such contract knowing that it was illegal, no implied

trust was created in his favor; no reimbursement for his expenses can
be allowed; and no declaration can be made that the subject property
was part of the conjugal/community property of the spouses. If the
property were to be declared conjugal, this would accord the alien
husband a substantial interest and right over the land, as he would
then have a decisive vote as to its transfer or disposition. This is a right
that the Constitution does not permit him to have.

To him who moves in deliberation and premeditation, the law is

unyielding. The law will not aid either party to an illegal contract or
agreement; it leaves the parties where it finds them.

Not even an ownership in trust is allowed. Besides, where the purchase

is made in violation of an existing statute and in evasion of its express
provision, no trust can result in favor of the party who is guilty of the
fraud. To hold otherwise would allow circumvention of the
constitutional prohibition.

If land is invalidly transferred to an alien who subsequently becomes a

Filipino citizen or transfers it to a Filipino citizen, the flaw in the original
transaction is considered cured and the transfer of the transferee is
rendered valid.

Compromise Agreement which was judicially approved, is exactly such

a separation of property allowed under the law. This conclusion holds
true even if the proceeding for the declaration of nullity of marriage
was still pending.

The final decision of the court rendered against the erring spouse
embodying the penalty of civil interdiction is enough for the court to
approve a judicial separation of property.

The judicial declaration of absence shall not take effect until 6 months
after its publication in a newspaper of general circulation. The final
decision of the court declaring the spouse absent is enough for the
court to approve judicial separation of property.

147: The foregoing rules on forfeiture shall likewise apply even if both
parties are in both faith.

Nicdao vs. Cario: The Supreme Court held that that Carino-Nicdao
marriage is void ab initio on account of the absence of a marriage
license. Thus, the property regime of Nicdao and the deceased is
governed by Art. 147 of the FC. This article applies to unions of parties
who are legally capacitated and not barred by any impediment to
contract marriage, but whose marriage is nonetheless void for other
reasons, like absence of a marriage license.

The marriage of Carino-Yee was likewise declared void, the Court

declaring it to be a bigamous marriage under Art. 40 of the FC. For

purposes of remarriage, the deceased should have first secured a prior
judicial declaration of the nullity of his marriage. Though his first
marriage is void for lack of marriage license, his failure to have
obtained a prior judicial declaration of nullity rendered his second
marriage void. Their marriage being voi-bigamous, the property
relationship between Yee and the deceased is Art. 148 of the FC.

Pamily: The requirement applies only to suits between or among

members of the same family. A brother-in-law is not included in the
enumeration of who are members of the same family. Consequently, in
so far as he is concerned, he is a stranger with respect to the family of
his wife and as such, the mandatory requirement of earnest effort
toward a compromise does not apply to him.

Once a stranger becomes a party to a suit involving members of the

same family, the law no longer makes it a condition precedent that
earnest efforts be made towards a compromise before the action can
prosper. Thus, Art. 151 of the FC applies to cover when the suit is
exclusively between or among family members.

A family home cannot be constituted by a husband or a wife alone.

Constitution must be done jointly by both husband and the wife. An
unmarried head of the family, however, can constitute by himself or
herself. The occupancy of any of the beneficiaries can likewise
constitute a home as a family home.

Actual occupancy is the operative act of constitution

The claim for exemption should be set up and proved to the Sheriff
before the sale of the property at public auction. Failure to do so would
estop the party from later claiming the exemption.

APO: Here, the grandchild sought to be referred to as the minor

beneficiary does not fulfill the requisite of support. He cannot demand
support from his grandparents when he has parents capable of
supporting him. Pertinently, the law first imposes the obligation of legal
support upon the shoulders of the parents, especially the father, and
only in their default is the obligation imposed on the grandparents

Can be established partly on community property, or conjugal property

and partly on the exclusive property of either spouse with the consent
of the latter.

artificial insemination, as a legitimate child of the husband and wife

provided that both of them authorized or ratified such insemination in
a written instrument executed and signed by them before the birth of
the child and that instrument is recorded in the civil registry together
with the birth certificate of the child. If the written authorization or
ratification contained in the public instrument was obtained through
mistake, farud, violence, intimidation or undue influence, the husband
may impugn the legitimacy of the child on these grounds.

It is a settled rule that only legitimate children follow the citizenship of

the father and that illegitimate children are under the parental
authority of the mother and follow her nationality. An illegitimate child
of Filipina need not perform any act to confer upon him all the rights
and privileges attached to citizens of the Philippines; he automatically
becomes a citizen himself. But in the case of respondent, for her to be
considered a Filipino citizen, she must have validly elected Philippine
citizenship upon reaching the age of majority.

An illegitimate child as in the case at bar is under the parental

authority of the mother, who as a consequence of such authority, is
entitled to have the custody of the child. The fact that the father has
recognized the minor child may be a ground for giving him to give
support to the latter, but not for giving him custody of the child. Nor is
the fact that the father is well-off a reason for depriving the mother of
the custody of her children, especially considering that she has been
able to rear and support them on her own since they were born. That
the mother receives help from her parents and sister for the support of
the three children should be taken against her.

Insurance Beneficiaries: No legal proscription exists naming as

beneficiaries the children of illicit relationships by the insured. The
shares of the concubine in the insurance proceeds, whether forfeited
by the court in view of the prohibition on donations under Art. 739 of
the NCC 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 the wife and
legitimate children. 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.

In an action for compulsory recognition and support, DNA Testing was

ordered by the Court. The policy of the FC to liberalize the rule on the
investigation of the paternity and filiation of children especially of
illegitimate children, is without prejudice to the right of the putative
parent to claim his or her own defenses. Where the evidence to aid this
investigation is obtainable through the facilities of modern science and
technology, such evidence should be considered subject to the limits
established by the law, rules and jurisprudence.

The death of the putative father does not preclude DNA testing for as
long as there are biological samples available.

When a party contests paternity and refuses to undergo a blood test,

the court may conduct a show-cause hearing to determine whether
there is sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case which
warrants issuance of a court order for blood testing.

preliminary showing must be made before a court can constitutionally

order compulsory blood testing in paternity cases.

The case was dismissed because her second husband did not join the
petition. Even if the children were already of age, there was still a need
for joint adoption. Even if Moninas husband had already filed for
divorce, for as long as there was no decree yet, the Court ruled that
they should file jointly.

The adopted or the adoptee does not have the right of representation
in the law of succession. Representation is a right created by fiction of
law, by virtue of which the representative is raised to the place and the
degree of the person represented, and acquires the rights which the
latter would have if he were living or if he could have inherited. It must
be importantly emphasized however that the representative is called
to the succession by the law and not by the person represented. The
representative does not succeed the person represented but the one
whom the person represented would have succeeded.

Support is a mandatory obligation. The very nature of support as a

mandatory and essential obligation demands that the same cannot be
waived, renounced, transmitted or compensated as such obligation is
necessary for the existence, survival and well-being of the individual
ought to be supported.

Such agreement is likewise in the nature of a compromise which

cannot be countenanced as it violates the prohibition against any
compromise of the right to future support. The Supreme Court likewise
stated that if paternity is at issue in a case, its existence or absence
must be judicially established and cannot be left to the will or
agreement of the parties.

It has been held that the adultery of the wife is a valid defense against
an action for support. Also a spouse who leaves the conjugal home or
refuses to live therein, without just cause, shall not have the right to be
supported from the conjugal properties or the absolute community
property.

All members of the family in the direct legitimate ascending and

descending line are obliged to support each other. The purpose of the
provisions on support is to ensure that members of a family do not
allow any member of the same family to become a burden to society. If
the relationship between the one to be supported and the one to
support is in issue, the status of the parties should be established first
before support can be made.

This is premised on the principle that as long as one is related by blood

to the person who is supposed to give support, there is no reason why the
obligation to support him shall fall on society and not on his family. However,
the persons obliged to support each other are limited from the grandparents
to the grandchildren only and vice-versa.
Parents are likewise obliged to support their illegitimate children and
their grandchildren whether legitimately or illegitimately related to their
illegitimate children and vice versa.

The collateral blood relatives obliged to support each other are limited
to legitimate brothers and sisters, whether of the full or half-blood.
Hence, uncles, aunts, nephews and nieces are not obliged to support

each other.

Brothers and sisters, illegitimately related, whether of the full or halfblood, are also entitled to support each other. However, if an
illegitimate brother or sister is of age and the need for his or her
support is due to his or her fault or negligence, support does not
become a demandable right and, therefore, may not be given at all.

When the person obliged to support another unjustly refuses or fails to

give support when urgently needed by the latter, any third person may
furnish support to the needy individual, with right of reimbursement
from the person obliged to give support. This particularly applies when
the father or mother of a child under the age of majority unjustly
refuses to support or fails to give support to the child when urgently
needed

The death of one of the parents will not terminate the parental
authority of the surviving parent over their children. Upon remarriage
of the surviving parent, the parental authority over the children shall
likewise not be affected. The new spouse, by virtue of his or her
marrying the surviving parent does not automatically possess parental
authority over the children of the surviving parent unless such new
spouse adopts the children.

FILIAL PRIVILEGE:
No descendant shall be compelled, in a criminal case, to testify against
his parents and grandparents, except when such testimony is
indispensable in a crime against the descendant or by one parent
against the other.