Banaag vs.

Espeleta
Case Digest
Subject: extra-marital cohabitation as a ground for immoral conduct
FACTS:
This is an administrative complaint filed by Evelina Banaag (wife) before the Office of the Court Administrator
(OCA) charging respondent Olivia Espeleta (mistress) with Gross Immorality and Conduct Prejudicial to the Best
Interest of the Service for engaging in an illicit and immoral relationship with her husband, Avelino C. Banaag.
Evelina (wife) and Olivia (mistress) met through a mutual friend. Olivia introduced herself as a court interpreter
in the RTC of Quezon City. Believing that Olivia could assist her and her husband in their pending cases before
the court, Evelina introduced Olivia to her husband Avelino. This meeting would eventually blossom into an illicit
affair between Olivia and Avelino.
Evelina found out about the affair a year later. Avelino asked to withdraw P180K from their joint bank account for
him to lend to his brother who was confined in the hospital. Evelina then found out from her husbands brothers
wife that Avelino gave his brother only P80K.
Evelina also discovered that for the past three years, her husband, using their conjugal funds had been depositing
money (allegedly more than P3M) not only to Olivias bank account, but also to that of her (Olivias) daughter,
and co-employees. Her husband had also been giving Olivia money from the rentals of the family-owned JB
Crystal Building (which is their conjugal property).
Olivia was given a chance by the OCA to be heard and to refute the claims against her. Instead, she filed a letter of
resignation and fled to the United States.
ISSUE:
WON respondent Olivia Espeleta is guilty of immoral conduct.
RULING:
The Court finds respondent GUILTY of disgraceful and immoral conduct which pursuant to the Administrative
Code of 1987 is defined in a resolution by the Civil Service Commission as:
an act which violates the basic norm of decency, morality and decorum abhorred and condemned by the society and
conduct which is willful, flagrant or shameless, and which shows a moral indifference to the opinions of the good and
respectable members of the community.
Respondents act of maintaining an illicit relationship with a married man comes within the purview of
disgraceful and immoral conduct, which is classified as a grave offense punishable with suspension (first
offense) or dismissal (second offense).
The Court cited several other cases
o Sealana-Abbu vs. Laurenciana-Hurano
o Elape vs. Elape
o Regir vs. Regir
o Babante-Caples vs. Caples
wherein respondents where either suspended or made to pay fines for engaging in illicit relationships with people
that were not their spouses.
Resignation should not be used as a means to escape administrative liability. Respondents resignation is to be
taken as a strong indication of her guilt. Because of this, instead of mere suspension, she should be fined.
CONCLUSION:
Respondent guilty. Fine of P50K.