Professional Documents
Culture Documents
KATRINA LEGARDA | 1
NCC1-18
Revised Administrative Code (RAC) Secs. 18-24 [1987]
NCC2
Pesigan v. Angeles
129 SCRA 174
Nature: Petition to review the order of the Caloocan
City RTC
Facts:
Anselmo and Marcelo Pesigan transported in the
evening of April 2, 1982 twenty-six carabaos and a
calf from Camarines Sur with Batangas as their
destination. They were provided with three
certificates: 1) a health certificate from the provincial
veterinarian, 2) permit to transfer/transport from the
provincial commander; and 3) three certificates of
inspections. In spite of the papers, the carabaos were
confiscated by the provincial veterinarian and the
WRZQV SROLFH VWDWLRQ FRPPDQGHU ZKLOH SDVVLQJ
through Camarines Norte. Confiscation was based on
EO No. 626-A which prohibits transportation of
carabaos & carabeef from one province to another.
Issue:
WON EO No. 626-A, providing for the confiscation
and forfeiture by the government of carabaos
transported from one province to another, dated
October 25, 1980 is enforceable before publication in
the Official Gazette on June 14, 1982
Held:
1R 7KH VDLG RUGHU LVQW HQIRUFHDEOH DJDLQVW WKH
3HVLJDQV RQ $SULO EHFDXVH LWV D SHQDO
regulation published more than 2 mos. later in the
OG. It became effective only fifteen days thereafter as
provided in A2 of the CC & 11 of the Revised
$GPLQLVWUDWLYH &RGH 7KH ZRUG ODZV LQ DUWLFOH
includes circulars & regulations which prescribe
penalties. Publication is necessary to apprise the
Taada v. Tuvera
136 SCRA 27
FACTS:
Invoking the right of the people to be informed on
matters of public concern as well as the principle that
laws to be valid and enforceable must be published in
the Official Gazette, petitioners filed for writ of
mandamus to compel respondent public officials to
publish and/or cause to publish various presidential
decrees, letters of instructions, general orders,
proclamations,
executive
orders,
letters
of
implementations and administrative orders.
The Solicitor General, representing the respondents,
moved for the dismissal of the case, contending that
petitioners have no legal personality to bring the
instant petition.
ISSUE:
infringed.
NCC3
Kasilag vs. Rodriguez
69 PHIL 217
F: Responds, Rafaela Rodriguez, et al., children and
heirs of the deceased Emiliana Ambrosio,
commenced a civil case to recover from the petitioner
the possession of the land and its improvements
granted by way of homestead to Emiliana Ambrosio
(EA).
The parties entered into a contract of mortgage of the
improvements on the land acquired as homestead to
secure the payment of the indebtedness for P1,000
plus interest. In clause V, the parties stipulated that
EA was to pay, w/in 4 1/2 yrs, the debt w/ interest
thereon, in w/c event the mortgage would not have
any effect; in clause VI, the parties agreed that the tax
:213D\DRDQG'DYLGVPDUULDJHLVYDOLG
Held/Ratio:
No. Although the couple had lived together for seven
years (as the affidavit shows and which the Judge
relied on in crafting his decision), Article 34 of the FC
also requires that there must be no legal impediment
to marry each other. Also in their marriage contract, it
ZDV LQGLFDWHG WKDW ERWK ZHUH VHSDUDWHG 7KH MXGJH
ought to know that a subsisting previous marriage
(regardless of the couple being separated) is a
diriment impediment which would make the
subsequent marriage null and void. And besides, free
and voluntary cohabitation with another for at least
five years does not severe the tie of a subsisting
previous marriage.
Gregorio vs. CA
G.R. No. L-22802 (November 29, 1968)
Retroactive effect of procedural law; General Rule: exception
The retroactive effect of a procedural law is not violative of any right of a party who may feel that he is adversely
affected.
Aruego vs CA
254 SCRA 711
Facts:
x
x
Jose M. Aruego, a married man, was alleged
to have an amorous relationship with Luz
Fabian in 1969 until his death in 1982. Out of
this relationship came two daughters,
respondents Antonia and Evelyn Aruego.
Complaint for compulsory recognition and
enforcement of successional rights
x
x
Cang vs CA
296 SCRA 128
A256 of the FC provides for its retroactivity insofar as it does not prejudice or impair vested or actual rights in
accordance to the CC and other laws.
FC August 3, 1988: A188; consent of adoption: SHUVRQWREHDGRSWHGLIparents by nature
Francisco vs CA
299 SCRA 188
Facts:
Petitioner Teresita Francisco is the wife of respondent
(XVHELR)UDQFLVR(XVHELRVFKLOGUHQE\WKHILUVW
marriage are also respondents in the case. The
spouses have acquired a sari-sari store, a residential
house and lot, an apartment house, and an additional
house and lot, which were all administered by
Eusebio until he was invalidated by tuberculosis,
KHDUWGLVHDVHDQGFDQFHU(XVHELRVFKLOGUHQE\WKH
first marriage succeeded in securing a general power
of attorney from their father which authorized
Conchita (one of the children) to administer the house
and lot and the apartment. Petitioner filed a case for
the annulment of the general power of attorney and to
be declared administratix of the properties. Trial court
rendered judgment in favor of the private
respondents, saying that petitioner failed to prove that
the properties were acquired during the marriage. CA
affirmed the decision of the trial court.
Issue: WON CA erred in ruling that the properties are
not conjugal but capital
NCC6
PEFTOK Integrated Services vs. NLRC
G.R. No. 124841 (July 31, 1998)
Quitclaims were prepared and readied by PEFTOK and employees were forced to sign the same for fear that they
would not be given their salary on pay day, and worse, their services would be terminated if they did not sign the said
quitclaims under controversy.
NO VOLUNTARINESS
Valderama vs. Macaide
470 SCRA 168
The claims for damages sustained by workers in the course of their employment could be filed only under the
Workmens Compensation Law, to the exclusion of all further claims under other laws. The CA held that the case at
bar came under exception because private respondent was unaware of petitioners negligence when she filed her
claim for death benefits from the State Insurance Fund.
NCC7
cf. 1987 Constitution, Art. XVIII Sec. 3
Mecano vs. COA
G.R. No. 103982 (December 11, 1992)
NO implied repeal. Two categories of implied repel:
where provisions in the two acts on the same subject matter are in an irreconcilable conflict, the later act to the extent
of the conflict constitutes an implied repeal.
if the later act covers the whole subject of the earlier one and is clearly intended as a substitute, it will operate to
repeal the earlier law. Both are not applicable to the RAC and the Administrative Code of 1987.
Solangon vs. Salazar
G.R. No. 125944 (June 29, 2001)
Rationale of CA: Upon the repeal of the Usury Law by Central Bank Circular No. 905 on 22 December 1982, there is
no more interest ceiling or maximum rate of interest, and the rate will just depend on the mutual agreement of the
parties.
,QWHUHVWDWSHUPRQWKRUSHUDQQXPLVLQLTXLWRXVRUXQFRQVFLRQDEOHDQGKHQFHFRQWUDU\WRPRUDOVFRQWUD
ERQRVPRUHVLIQRWDJDLQVWWKHODZ
It is more consonant with justice that the said interest rate be reduced equitably.
An interest of 12% per annum is deemed fair and reasonable.
The appealed decision of the Court of Appeals is AFFIRMED subject to the MODIFICATION that the interest rate of
72% per annum is ordered reduced to 12 % per annum
Thornton vs. Thornton
(August 16, 2004)
SC holds that the Family Code Act of 1997 did not empower the family courts to exclusively issue writs of habeas
corpus and it did not revoke the capacity of SC and CA to issue writs of habeas corpus. In relation to the word
H[FOXVLYHDOWKRXJKLWLVDVVXmed that the language of the laws should follow common understanding, the spirit of
the law and intention of the lawmakers come first than legal technicalities.
The petition may likewise be filed with the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, or with any of its members and, if so
granted, the writ shall be enforceable anywhere in the Philippines.
NCC8
De Roy vs. CA
157 SCRA 757
Non-publication of the Habaluyas decision in the OG
There is no law requiring the the publication of SC decisions in the OG before they can be binding
Duty of lawyer in active la practice to keep abreast of SC decisions particularly where issuances have been clarified,
consistently reiterated, and published in the advanced reports of GRs and in such publications as the SCRA and law
journals.
Pesca vs. Pesca
Prohibitive
laws
concerning persons, their
acts, or property and those
which have for their object
public order, policy, and
good customs shall not be
rendered ineffective by
laws
or
judgments
promulgated,
or
by
determinations
or
conventions agreed upon
in foreign country.
! Would also discriminate in favor of
wealthy persons who can get
divorced elsewhere.
Would not make difference if Tenchavez was
also in court of Nevada when divorce was
ILOHG VLQFH PHUH DSSHDUDQFH FDQW FRQIHU
jurisdiction on court which had none.
Tenchavez now has grounds to divorce
respondent since she had intercourse with
someone other than her husband, entitling
him to ask for legal separation under basis of
adultery
Result: Petitioner has grounds to file for legal
separation, recover 25,000 by way of moral
damages and fees
Geluz v. CA
2 SCRA 801
a. Dead child has no right
b. Against the 1987 Constitution and PD603
c. Legal capacity e.g. inheritance
d. LIFE at BIRTH: absolute precedent of rights
Quimiging v. Icao
34 SCRA 134
Nature: Appeal from order of the Zamboanga del
Norte CFI. Reyes, J.B.L., J.:
Facts: Icao, a married man, succeeded in having sex
with Quimiguing several times by force and
intimidation and without her consent (rape!); as a
result Quimiguing became pregnant, despite efforts
and drugs supplied by Icao. Quimiguing claims
support at Php 120.00/month, damages and
DWWRUQH\V IHHV ,FDR PRYHG WR GLVPLVV WKH FRPSODLQW
for lack of cause of action since complainant did not
allege that the child had indeed been born; trial judge
VXVWDLQHGGHIHQGDQWVPRWLRQ+HQFHWKLVDSSHDO
Issue: WON the case merits the protection of Art. 40
NCC and if so then does the child have the rights,
through the mother, to claim support.
Held: YES.
Ratio: Plaintiff, through an amended complaint, avers
that as a result of the intercourse, she had later given
birth to a baby girl. The SC says that since, as
provided in Article 40 NCC (the conceived child shall
be considered born for all purposes favorable to it,
provided, it be born later with the conditions specified
LQ IROORZLQJ DUWLFOH SHWLWLRQHU 4XLPLJXLQJV FKLOG
since time of conception, and as having fulfilled the
requirement of having been born later, has a right to
support from its progenitors, particularly of the
defendant-appellee.
Disposition: Orders of the lower court reversed and
set aside and case remanded to lower court for
further proceedings.
De Jesus v. Syquia
58 Phil 866
Facts: Antonia de Jesus went to court for the purpose
of recovering damages from Cesar Syquia stemming
from a breach of a promise to marry and to compel
the defendant to recognize and support her two
children. Cesar Syquia had an affair with Antonia de
Jesus which resulted in de Jesus giving birth to a
baby boy on June 17, 1931. For a year or so, Syquia
supported de Jesus and his child. He, however, lost
interest in the relationship when De Jesus became
pregnant with their second child. Syquia left and
eventually married another woman. De Jesus now
claims that Syquia broke his promise to marry her.
NCC 42
Limjoco v Intestate Estate of Pio Fragante
80 Phil 776
Estate continues personality
The state or the mass of property, rights and assts left by the decedent, instead of the heirs directly, become vested
and charged with his rights and obligations which survive after his demise. Under the present legal system, rights and
obligations which survive after death have to be exercised and fulfilled only by the estate of the deceased.
Dumlao v. Quality Plastics
70 SCRA 472
Service of summons on a dead person is void. He had no more civil personality. His juridical capacity, which is the
fitness to be the subject of legal relations, was lost through death.
Eugenio v. Velez
!" #$%&" !'()" *&+,-./" 01" 2--3" .4" ,5&" #&6-*&7" #$%&*" .4" 8.$9,"
UHDGV:KHQWZRSHUVRQVSHULVKLQWKHVDPHFDODPLW\VXFK
:*";9&+<)"=:,,%&)".9"+./4%:>9:,-./)":/7"-,"-*"/.,"2!3"*5.;/";5."
7-&7"4-9*,)":/7",5&9&":9&"/."2'3"?:9,-+$%:9"+-9+$@*,:/+&*"49.@"
;5-+5" -," +:/" =&" -/4&99&7)" ,5&" *$96-6.9*5-?" -*" ?9&*$@&7" 49.@"
,5&" ?9.=:=-%-,-&*" 9&*$%,-/>" 49.@" ,5&" *,9&/>,5" :/7" :>&" .4" ,5&"
VH[HVDFFRUGLQJWRWKHIROORZLQJUXOHV"
"
$UWLFOH RI WKH && LV RI WKH IROORZLQJ WHQRU :5&/&6&9" :"
7.$=," :9-*&*" :*" ,." ;5-+5" ;:*" ,5&" 4-9*," ,." 7-&" .4" ,5&" ,;." .9"
@.9&" ?&9*./*" ;5." ;.$%7" -/5&9-," ./&" 49.@" ,5&" .,5&9)" ,5&"
?&9*./";5.":%%&>&*",5&"?9-.9"7&:,5".4"&-,5&9"@$*,"?9.6&",5&"
:%%&>:,-./A" -/",5&" :=*&/+&" .4" ?9..4" ,5&" ?9&*$@?,-./" *5:%%" =&"
,5:,",5&B"7-&7":,",5&"*:@&",-@&)":/7"/.",9:/*@-**-./".4"9->5,*"
IURPRQHWRWKHRWKHUVKDOOWDNHSODFH"
NCC 44-47
Batas Pambansa Blg. 68 (Corp. Code), Secs. 2, 4, 17
NCC 1767-1768
Barlin v. Ramirez
7 Phil 41
Nature: Appeal from a judgment of the CFI of
Camarines. Willard, J.:
Facts: Ramirez, having been appointed parish priest
by the plaintiff Barlin, took possession of the Church
in 1901 until a successor had been appointed in 1902.
Defendant Ramirez refused to surrender the Church
and Barlin filed a suit; the municipality of Lagonoy
joined Ramirez as defendants, claiming possession
DQG RZQHUVKLS RI WKH &KXUFK DQG FRQWHVWLQJ %DUOLQV
authority and capacity to order that Ramirez be
replaced and surrender the Church to the appointed
successor.
$FFRUGLQJWRWKH'HIHQGDQWWKHSODLQWLIIVPRWKHUKDG
sold a portion of the original land to the defendant for
D VXP LQVWUXPHQW H[KLELW 7KH SODLQWLIIV IDWKHU
subsequently, mortgaged the remaining parcel to the
GHIHQGDQW IRU D VXP WR FRYHU KLV FKLOGUHQV ZHOIDUH
DIWHU KLV ZLIHV GHDWK 3DFWR GH UHWUR LQVWUXPHQW
exhibit 2) The plaintiffs had alleged themselves of
legal age and ratified the absolute and perpetual sale
of the land in consideration of the P400 (instrument
exhibit 3). Cross-complaint filed for damages due to
plaintiffs.
Bambalan v. Maramba
51 Phil 417
Facts:
-Petitioner Isidro Bambalan, a minor, owned a piece
of land
-Isidro was forced by his mother Paula Prado to sell
the land to Genovena Muerong, since she was
threatening Paula of imprisonment due to the load
Genoveva gave Paula.
-To have the document of the sale acknowledged, the
respondent even purchased the cedula of the
petitioner
-,VLGUR GLGQW WU\ WR FRQFHDO KLV DJH LQ IDFW WKH
respondent was well aware that Isidro was a minor.
-Decision in Mercado vs. Espiritu cannot be used
VLQFHWKHSHWLWLRQHUGLGQWWU\WRKLGHKLVDJH
7KH ODQG LQ TXHVWLRQ ZDVQW HYHQ UHJLVWHUHG LQ WKH
Register of Deeds; the sale of the land cannot be
executed without registration as provided in section
50 of Act. 496
Issue: Was the sale of the land valid or void, since
Isidro was a minor at the execution of the alleged
sale?
Held: The sale of the land is void. 1.) because Isidro
is incapacitated to enter into such contracts, 2.)
RPC 12(2)-(3)
Republic Act No. 9344, Juvenile Justi~ and Welfare Law
RPC13(2)
PD 603 Sees. 189 204
Also see: Rule 3, Section 5 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure
FC 45 (2)
NCC 1327 (1), 1328
RPC 12(1)
Rule 101, Rules of Court
US v. Vaquilar
27 Phil 88
Facts: Evaristo Vaquilar was found guilty of killing his
wife and his daughter, as well as injuring other
persons with a bolo. Eyewitnesses testified that the
defendant appeared to be insane prior to the
commission of the crimes. They also testified that the
appellant was complaining of pains in his head and
VWRPDFK SULRU WR WKH NLOOLQJ 7KH ZLWQHVVHV HYLGHQFH
for insanity include:
x
DSSHOOants eyes were very big and red with
his sight penetrating at the time he was
NLOOLQJKLVZLIH
x
KHORRNHGDWPHKHZDVFUD]\EHFDXVHLIKH
ZDVQRWKHZRXOGQWKDYHNLOOHGKLVIDPLO\
x
DW WKH PRPHQW RI FXWWLQJ WKRVH SHRSOH KH
looked like a madman; crazy because he
ZRXOGFXWDQ\ERG\DWUDQGRP
x
VLVWHU VDLG WKHQ KH SXUVXHG PHKH
PXVWKDYHEHHQFUD]\EHFDXVHKHFXWPH
Issue: Whether or not these pieces of evidence are
sufficient to declare the accused as insane, therefore
exempt from criminal liability.
People v. Rafanan
204 SCRA 65
Standard of Legal insanity by People v Formigones (2 distinguishable tests):
i. Test of cognition complete deprivation of intelligence in committing the [criminal] act.
ii. Test of violation that there be a total deprivation of the will
The law presumes every man to be sane. A person accused of a crime has the burden of proving his affirmative
allegation of insanity.
Standard Oil v. Arenas
Facts: The SOCNY sued the 5 debtors for payment,
including the appellant Vicente Villanueva who acted
as surety to the loan. The CFI of Manila ordered the
defendants to pay jointly and severally to the plaintiffs
SOCNY. While the judgment was in the course of
execution, Elisa Villanueva, wife of Vicente appeared
and alleged that her husband was declared insane on
July 24, 1909, and that on Oct. 11, she was
authorized by the court as guardian to institute the
proper legal proceedings for the annulment of several
bonds given by her husband while in a state of
insanity.
Issues: (1)Whether or not suffering from monomania
of wealth necessarily warrants the conclusion that the
person does not have capacity to act. (2) Whether or
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
352',*$/ JDPEOHUDZD\IURPKRPHVOLJKWO\LQFRPSHWHQW
Husband and wife cannot sell or donate to each other
Affinity by blood
Always start from self
Parents 1st degree
Brothers/Sisters 2nd
Cousins 4th
Grandparents 2nd
Aunts/Uncles 3rd
<RXUEURWKHUVZLIHLVQRW\RXUUHODWLYHE\EORRGRUDIILQLW\
Marcos
filed
an
Amended/Corrected Certificate of Candidacy in the
&20(/(&V KHDG RIILFH LQ ,QWUDPXURV FODLPLQJ WKDW
her error in the first certificate was the result of an
KRQHVW PLVUHSUHVHQWDWLRQ DQG WKDW VKH KDV DOZD\V
PDLQWDLQHG 7DFOREDQ &LW\ DV KHU GRPLFLOH RU
UHVLGHQFH
Issue:
WON the judge can contract a second marriage
without a judicial declaration of nullity.
Held/Ratio:
No. Article 40 is applicable to remarriages entered
into after the effectivity of the Family Code in 1988
regardless of the date of the first marriage. Besides,
under Article 256 of the FC, said Article is given
UHWURDFWLYH HIIHFW VLQFH LW GRHV QRW SUHMXGLFH RU
impair any vested right. His failure to secure a
marriage license on two possible occasions betrays
his sinister motives and bad faith as a lawyer and
judge.
Dismissed from service.
In re Santiago
70 Phil 66
Facts: Respondent lawyer prepared for a married
couple (who had bee separated for 9 years) a
document wherein it was stipulated, inter alia, that
they authorize each other to marry again, at the same
time renouncing whatever right of action one might
have against the other. When the husband inquired if
there could be no trouble, respondent lawyer pointed
to his diploma which was hanging on the wall and
VDLG , ZRXOG WHDU WKDW RII LI WKLV GRFXPHQW WXUQV RXW
QRWWREHYDOLG7KHKXVEDQGUHPDUULHG
Selanova v. Mendoza
64 SCRA 69
FACTS: The case stems from a document prepared
and ratified by Judge Alejandro Mendoza which
extrajudicially divided the assets of the Selanova
couple, effectively authorized the spouses to commit
marital infidelity and ratified their personal separation
without the express and prior approval of the court.
ISSUE: WON the private contract is valid.
HELD: No. Even before the enactment of the New
Civil Code, the law prohibits extrajudicial dissolution
Lichauco-de Leon v. CA
186 SCRA 345
The issue in this case is whether or not a letter pardoning one spouse is valid. In this case it waVQW VLQFH WKH
consent of de Leon was vitiated as the girl threatened to file cases against the guy, scandalizing their entire family.
NCC 19 - 21; NCC 2176; NCC 1403 2(c)
MC22
Domalagan v. Bolifer
33 Phil 471
Facts:
x
x
x
x
Issue:
WON the verbal contract entered into in regard to the
delivery of the money by reason of a prospective
marriage valid and effective?
Held:
Yes. Par. 3 Sec 335 of the Code of Procedure in Civil
Action does not render oral contracts invalid. A
contract may be valid and yet, by virtue of the said
section, that parties will be unable to prove it. Said
section simply provides the method by which the
contracts mentioned therein may be proved. It does
not declare that said contracts are invalid. A contract
may be a perfectly valid contract even though it is not
clothed with the necessary form. If the parties to an
action make no objection to the admissibility of oral
evidence to support contracts like the one in question
and permit the contract to be proved, by evidence
Cabague v. Auxilio
92 Phil 294
The verbal agreement to marry must be proven by the proper party: the person involved in the agreement
(one of the people getting married)
Hermosisima v. CA
109 Phil 629
Action for breach of promise to marry has no standing apart from right to recover money or property
advanced upon faith of such promise. Damages can be claim if seduction was involved though, in this case the
dude being 10 years younger than the girl, seduction could not have been present says the SC.
Wassmer v. Velez
12 SCRA 648
FACTS:
Francisco Velez and Beatriz Wassmer
applied for a Marriage License on August 23, 1954.
The wedding was to take place on September 4,
1954. As expected, all the necessary preparations
were undertaken for the said event. However, two
days before the wedding, Francisco Velez left a note
for Beatriz informing her that the wedding will not
push through because his mother opposed the union.
The following day, he sent her another note stating
that the wedding will push through as planned.
Francisco Velez never showed up and has not been
heard since then. Beatriz subsequently filed suit for
damages.
ISSUE: WON Beatriz Wassmer has a right to file for
damages for breach of promise to marry?
HELD:
Yes.
Beatriz Wassmer can claim for
damages. Under Art. 21 of the Civil Code, Beatriz
can claim damages for the actions of Francisco Velez.
While it is true that breach of promise to marry is not
actionable per se, the court reasoned that what Velez
committed could hardly be described as a simple
breach of promise to marry. To leave the bride two
days before the wedding, after making all the
necessary preparations, with no justifiable reason, is
morally reprehensible. His behavior is verily against
VRFLHW\V FRQFHSW RI JRRG PRUDOV DQG FXVWRPV
Beatriz Wassmer can collect compensation for
GDPDJHVDULVLQJIURP9HOH]UHFNOHVVRSSUHVVLYHDQG
malevolent actions.
Tanjanco v. CA
18 SCRA 994
FACTS: Araceli Santos filed suit against Apolonio
Tanjanco for breach of promise to marry. Santos
claims that she began living with Tanjanco in
December 1957 and consented to having sexual
relations with him only because of his protestations of
love and promise of marrLDJH 6DQWRV VH[XDO
relations with Tanjanco lasted until December 1959
when Santos became pregnant. Consequently,
Santos filed suit against Tanjanco for emotional
distress, mental anguish and humiliation arising from
7DQMDQFRV EUHDFK RI SURPLVH WR PDUU\ her
compounded by the embarrassment she suffered
when she resigned from her job.
Action was
premised by the Court of Appeals on Art.21of the Civil
Code.
FACTS:
Characters
! (Private Respondent) Marilou Gonzales:
Filipina,
working
iat
Mabuhay
Luncheonette
in
Dagupan
City
Pangasinan, 22 years old
! (Petitioner) Gashem Shookat Baksh:
Iranian, student of Medicine in thr Lyceum
of Northwestern Colleges in Dagupan City.
Gasham and Marilou met at the Mabuhay
Luncheonette in Dagupan City where Marilou
is working and Gasham frequently eats.
Gasham courted Marilou and promised to
marry her (end of semester October 1987).
Gasham even went to Baaga, Bugallon,
3DQJDVLQDQ WR PHHW 0DULORXV SDUHQWV DQG
family.
Marilou lived with Gasham in the Lozano
Apartments in Dagupan City.
Respondent
! %HFDXVH RI *DVKDPV SURPLVH WR PDUU\
Marilou, she consented to sexual
congress.
! After a week, Gasham started maltreating
her, and she decided to leave.
! During an intervention conducted by a
representative of the Barangay Captain
Gasham said that he was not going to
marry Marilou anymore and that he was
married to someone in Bacolod City
already.
! In his appeal: he is not familiar with
Filipino customs, not accustomed to
Christian or Catholic rites, common-law
wife is now his legal wife, and the mere
breach of promise to marry is not
actionable.
Petitioner
! He never proposed marriage to or agreed
to be married to Marilou and did not seek
the consent and approval of her parents.
! He did not maltreat her, and he asked her
to stop going to his apartment because
she was stealing money and passport.
! No confrontation with a representative of
the Barangay Captain took place.
Trial Court favored Marilou, using Article 21 of
the Civil Code as basis and ordered Gasham
to pay damages to Marilou
! Parties were lovers
! Marilou was not a woman of loose morals
or questionable virtue who readily submits
to sexual advances
! Gasham through deceit, machinations and
false pretenses promised to marry Marilou.
! 0DULORX EHFDXVH RI *DVKDPV SURPLVH WR
marry her agreed to have sex with
Gasham
! %HFDXVHRIWKHSURPLVH0DULORXVSDUHQWV
made preparations for the wedding
! Gasham did not fulfill his promise to marry
Marilou
HELD/DECISION:
Yes. If applied in a breach of promise to marry where
the woman is a victim of moral seduction. Petition
denied!
RATIO:
The existing rule is that a breach of promise to
marry per se is not an actionable wrong. It was
deliberately eliminated in the New Civil Code
because it is prone to abuse. Art. 21 was
instead put in place that would put into place a
legal remedy for that untold number of moral
wrongs which is impossible for human foresight
to provide for specifically in the statutes.
Quasi-delict (Spanish culpa aquiliana): limited
to negligent acts that causes damage to
another
Torts (American): includes negligent acts and
also intentional criminal acts, assault and
battery, false imprisonment and deceit.
Sec. 2176 of the Civil Code is limited to Quasidelicts
Intentional and malicious acts with certain
exemptions shall be governed by the Revised
Penal Code, while negligent acts or omissions
shall be covered by Art. 2176 of the Civil Code.
Sec. 21, together with Sec. 19 and 20
broadened the scope of the law on civil wrongs
$ PDQV SURPLVH WR PDUU\ LV WKH FDXVH RI WKH
acceptance of love by a woman, and it is the
reason why the woman consented to a sexual
congress, and when there is proof that he had
no intention of fulfilling the promise, and it was
a mere deception to obtain her consent to the
sexual act, can justify the award for damages
under Sec. 21, not because of the breach of
Te vs. Choa
G.R. No. 149530 (October 22, 2001)
2XWFRPH RI DQQXOPHQW FDVH KDG QR EHDULQJ RQ WKH GHWHUPLQDWLRQ RI $UWKXUV LQQRFence or guilt in bigamy case.
Ground for annulment cited by petitioner was for voidable marriage. Therefore, at the time he committed the
crime of bigamy, marriage was still valid and subsisting.
FC 14, FC 45 cf NCC 61 & 95 (1)
Anaya vs Palaroan
(November 26, 1970)
Facts:
After one month of marriage to Anaya, Fernando
Palaroan filed a complaint to annul it on the ground
that his consent was obtained through force and
intimidation. Complaint was dismissed. However,
during the negotiation of the amount fURP $QD\DV
counterclaim, Fernando allegedly divulged that
several months prior to the marriage, he had premarital relationships with a close relative. Anaya filed
suit to annul on the ground that the marriage
solemnized between them constituted fraud in
obtained her consent. Fernando denied the allegation
and counter claimed for damages for the malicious
filing of the suit; he did not pray for a dismissal of the
FRPSODLQWEXWLWVGLVPLVVDOZLWKUHVSHFWWRWKHDOOHJHG
PRUDOGDPDJHV$XURUDUHSOLHGVWDWLQg that Fernando
Villanueva vs CA
505 Scra 564
)RUFHDQGLQWLPLGDWLRQLVQRPRPHQWVLQFHKHZDVDVHFXULW\JXDUG,QWKHOLJKWRIDSSHOODQWVDGPLVVLRQWKDWKHKDGD
sexual intercourse with his wife in January 1988, and his fDLOXUHWRDWWULEXWHWKHODWWHUVSUHJQDQF\WRDQ\RWKHU
man, appellant cannot complain that he was deceived by the appellee into marrying her.
FC 35: The following marriages shall be void from the beginning:
(5) Those contracted through mistake of one contracting party as to the identity of the other
FC 35 (5); NCC 86 (1)
FC 45 (2)
FC45(3);FC46,NCC13381344
FC45(4);NCC13351337
FC 45 (5)
FC45(6)
Jimenez v. Caizares
109 Phil 27
Facts:
!
26 April 1957 the city attorney filed a motion for
!
Aug 3, 1950 Joel Jimenez and Remedios
reconsideration since impotency was never really
Canizares wed
established. Rather than nullifying marriage Court
should have compelled her to undergo and
!
7 June 1955 the plaintiff Joel Jimenez prays for a
examination
decree annulling his marriage in the Court of First
ISSUE: WON marriage may be annulled on sole
Instance of Zamboanga. This was because her
testimony of husband that his wife is impotent
vagina was too small for his member and thus
HELD: NO
WKH\FRXOGQWFRSXODWHDQGWKXVVKHLVLPSRWHQW
!
law specifically enumerates the legal grounds,
!
14 June 1955 - wife was summoned and served
that must be proved to exist by indubitable
a copy of the complaint. She did not file an
evidence, to annul a marriage.
answer
Republic v. CA
236 SCRA 257
The duty of the civil registrar is to keep record of all applications for marriages. Thus, its certification is valuable. Their
PDUULDJHZDVVHFUHW, thus there is failure to offer other witnesses to corroborate her testimony. Also, Edwin failed to
answer and was declared in default.
Cosca v. Palaypayan
237 SCRA 249
Illegal Solemnization of marriage: He solemnized marriage without the requisite of marriage license. He did not
sign their marriage contracts.
Sy vs. CA
G.R. No. 127263 (April 12, 2000)
Filipina did not expressly state in her petition the incongruity between the date of issuance of marriage license and
date of marriage ceremony. License was issued a year after marriage ceremony. Thus, marriage was contracted
without marriage license. Thus under Art 80 of NCC, marriage is void.
Alcantara vs. Alcantara
G.R. No. 167746 (Aug. 28, 2007)
A valid marriage license is a requisite of marriage under Art 53 of NCC. Their marriage contract reflects a
marriage license number. A certification was also issued by the local civil registrar of Carmona, Cavite. The
certification is precise since it specifically identified the parties to whom the marriage license was issued. Issuance of
a marriage license where none of the parties is resident, is just an irregularity.
marriage is still valid even if the marriage license is issued in a place not the domicile of the parties
FC9-10
PC 11
FC 12-14; FC 21 cf. NCC 84
Sevilla vs Cardenas
497 SCRA 429
FACTS:
Jaime O. Sevilla claims that he and
Carmelita N. Cardenas appeared before
Rev. Cirilio Gonzales at the Makati City Hall
where they executed a marriage contract.
Marriage license number 2770792 from San
Juan, Rizal was indicated in the contract,
which Jaime never applied for
A church ceremony was conducted on May
31, 1969 before Monsignor Juan Veloso at
the Most Holy Redeemer Parish using the
same license.
They lived as husband and wife; went to
Spain for JaLPHV PHGLFDO HGXFDWLRQ
VXSSRUWHGE\-DLPHVSDUHQWV
When in Spain their marriage turned bad
since Jaime was having a hard time
balancing marriage and medical studies;
REVHVVLRQ RI -DLPH ZLWK &DUPHOLWDV NQHHV
LQIHPXUDOVH[DQG-DLPHVGUXJDGGLFWLRQ
Upon return to the Philippines, they started
to live separately but were attending family
counseling until 1976
They separated in 1978.
Jaime went to the US to get a divorce in
1981 and a judicial separation in 1983
He was also married to another woman while
in the US
3 certifications from the Local Civil Registrar
of San Juan states that the marriage license
with that number cannot be found
The parish where they were wed presented
a Certified copy of a Marriage certificate
dated April 11, 1994
RTC:
marriage is null due to lack of
marriage license
ISSUE:
Whether marriage is valid or not
HELD/DECISION:
Valid. Decision of the CA affirmed
RATIO:
Marriage license is an essential requisite for
the validity of marriage
Despite diligent search, a particular
document does not exist in his office or that
a particular entry of a specified tenor was not
to be found in a register
Civil registrar could not exert its best efforts
to locate and determine the existence of
license #2770792 due to its loaded work
Absence of logbook is not a conclusive proof
of non-existence of license.
EVERY INTENDMENT OF THE LAW OR
FACT LEANS TOWARD THE VALIDITY OF
THE MARRIAGE, THE INDISSOLUBILITY
OF THE MARRIAGE BONDS
Constitution: policy of strengthening the
family; marriage not a mere contract but a
social institution, protected by the State
Persons dwelling together in apparent
matrimony are presumed, in the absence of
any counter-presumption or evidence special
to the case, to be in fact married
ALWAYS PRESUME MARRIAGE
and said that she had filed the case in a fit of rage but
Court still decided the case.
Issue:
WON the marriage was valid with regards to the lack
RI D PDUULDJH OLFHQVH DQG WKH ODFN RI WKH MXGJHV
jurisdiction.
Held/Ratio:
No. Judges can only solemnize marriage within their
territorial jurisdiction. Marriage license is a requisite
for marriage and without it, marriage is void. It is the
marriage license that gives the solemnizing officer the
authority to solemnize a marriage. And since there
was no license, Occiano GLGQW KDYH WKH DXWKRULW\ WR
officiate the ceremony
Navarro v. Domagtoy
S.C. A.M. MTJ-96-1088 (July 19, 1996)
Facts:
Dapa, Surigao del Norte Municipal Mayor Navarro
filed charges against Judge Domagtoy for gross
misconduct and inefficiency in office and ignorance of
the law. He solemnized the wedding of a couple
despite knowing that the groom was merely separated
IURP KLV ZLIH +H SUHVXPHG WKDW PDQV ILUVW ZLIH ZDV
already dead because the would-be groom has not
Held/Ratio:
Yes. The first marriage was bigamous. Presumption
of death for purposes of marriage requires a summary
proceeding (Art. 41 FC). Affidavits claiming that a
person has not been heard of for more than seven
\HDUV DUH QRW VXIILFLHQW SURRI RI WKH SHUVRQV GHDWK
The second marriage, on the other hand, is beyond
MXGJHVMXULVGLFWLRQ0DUULDJHFDQRQO\EHKHOGRXWVLGH
Issue:
WON the marriage is valid.
Held/Ratio:
Yes. They were married since there was an
expression of mutual consent and both of them
appeared before the justice of the peace. Court ruled
WKDW *HQHUDO 2UGHUV 1R 6HF VWDWHV 1R
particular form for the ceremony of marriage is
required, but the parties must declare in the presence
solemnizing the marriage that they take each other as
KXVEDQG DQG ZLIH /HWWHUV RI 0DUWLQH] WR 7DQ
regarding the marriage and asking for her parents
consent are proof that marriage took place and is
valid. Parties ratified their petition under oath. They
both understood Spanish thus they knew the contents
of the document they were signing.
FC 8; FC 28-29; FC 32-33
FC6;FC22
Madridejo v. De Leon
55 Phil 1
Facts:
Flaviana Perez, a widow from a previous marriage to
de Leon, lived with Pedro Madridejo and a son named
Melecio was born to them. Three years later, the
couple got married under circumstances of articulo
mortis. The priest who solemnized the marriage failed
People v. Borromeo
133 SCRA 106
Facts:
Elias Borromeo was convicted beyond reasonable
doubt of the crime of parricide after killing his wife.
There were witnesses and police officers who testified
against him. He claims that he cannot be charged
with parricide (and thus, only homicide) since he was
never legally married to the victim because (a)
officiating priest testified against it and (b) no
marriage contract was executed.
Issue:
WON Borromeo can be considered married to the
victim.
Held/Ratio:
Yes. Mere fact that no record of the marriage exists in
the marriage registry does not invalidate the marriage,
provided all requisites for its validity are present.
People living together in apparent matrimony are
presumed, in the absence of any counter presumption
or evidence special to the case, to be in fact married.
The reason is that such is the common order of
society, and if the parties were not what they thus
hold themselves out as being, they would be living in
constant violation of decency and law.
NCC 17
NCC15&17
FC 26; FC 21, FC 10
Yao Kee v Sy-Gonzales
167 SCRA 786
Aside from failure to show the documents of marriage, Chinese customs on marriage were not proven by Yao
Kee.
Republic vs. Orbecido III
G.R. No. 154380 (October 5, 2005)
Facts:
Orbecido married Villanueva in the Philippines and
had two children. Villanueva, wife, left for the US, was
naturalized and eventually remarried. Orbecido
petitioned for authority to remarry using Par. 2 of
$UWLFOH )& 1R RSSRVLWLRQ 26*V PRWLRQ IRU
reconsideration was denied, hence this appeal
stating: that the questioned provision only applies to
valid mixed marriages between Filipinos and aliens;
that the remedy is annulment or legal separation; and
WKDW WKHUH LV QR ODZ WKDW JRYHUQV UHVSRQGHQWV
situation.
Issue:
Given a valid marriage between two Filipino citizens,
where one party is later naturalized as a foreign
citizen and obtains a valid divorce decree capacitating
him or her to remarry, can the Filipino spouse likewise
remarry under Philippine law?
FC26inrelation to:
FC 35(1), 35(4), 35(5), 36, 37 & 38
cf. NCC 71
DOJ Opinion No. 11 S. 1990 (Jan. 17, 1990)
Held/Ratio:
Taking into consideration legislative intent and
applying the rule of reason, Par. 2 Art 26 should be
interpreted to include cases involving parties, who at
the time of the celebration of the marriage were
Filipino citizens, but later on, one of them becomes
naturalized as a foreign citizen and obtains a divorce
degree. 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.
The reckoning point in the provision is not the
citizenship of the parties at the time of the celebration
of the marriage, but their citizenship at the time a valid
divorce is obtained abroad by the alien spouse
capacitating the latter to remarry.
FC 147,cf.RPC 350
Rule 131 Sec. 3, 1989 Rules on Evidence cf.NCC 220
FC 26 par. I
NCC Book II, Title III (484-50 1)
Lesaca v. Lesaca
91 Phil 135
Baldomero sold properties before the second marriage but bought it again after the said marriage. There was no
proof that the money spent was from the CPG.
Yaptinchay v. Torres
28 SCRA 489
Common-law wife was not able to prove that they jointly bought the property in Forbes Park so it belonged to the
legal marriage.
Eugenio v. Velez (supra)
FC4
cf. VII (D) of Outline
FC35cf. FC234, RA6809
FC 35(4), 39, 40, 41,44
RPC 344, 349
Mercado vs Tan
337 SCRA 122
Ty vs. CA
G.R. No.127406 (November 27, 2000)
FACTS:
March and August 1977: Edgardo Reyes
married Anna Maria Regina Villanueva
August 1980: marriage was declared null
and void for lack of marriage license (civil),
null and void ab ignition for lack of consent of
the parties (church)
April 1979 (before declaration of nullity):
Edgardo Reyes married Ofelia Ty; April 1982
church wedding
January 1991: Edgardo filed a Civil case
praying for the declaration of his marriage
with Ofelia null and void due to lack of
marriage license and because he was still
married to Anna Maria
Ofelia submitted their marriage license and
WKHFHUWLILFDWLRQWKDW(GJDUGRVPDUULDJHZLWK
Anna Maria is declared null and void
RTC: marriage to Ofelia null and void ab
initio
&$DIILUPHGWULDOFRXUWVGHFLVLRQ
ISSUES:
Whether the decree of nullity of the 1st marriage is
required before a subsequent marriage can be
entered into validly
HELD/DECISION:
Morigo vs Morigo
5)
6)
7)
8)
SEPARATE OPINION
VITUG, J.
x
Would the absolute nullity of either first or
second marriage prior to its judicial
Deceased
Aurelio
Camacho
married Luisita Camacho while still
married to Consejo Velasco. He
then had another relationship with
Nenita Bienvenido with whom he
bought a house on Delgado St
where they have been leaving for
the past 14 years
However
cannot
be
invoked in this case since
it was Aurelio who actually
left Luisita.
x
First
exception
refers
to
subsequent
marriage
of
abandoned
spouse and not
remarriage
of
deserting spouse
Art. 739(1) of the Civil Code declares
donations made between persons who are
guilty of adultery or concubinage at the time
of the donation to be void
!
can only be brought by the
innocent spouse, perhaps in this
case by the first wife, but certainly
not by Luisita whose marriage to
Aurelio is itself void. The last
!
RESULT: property belongs to Nenita Bienvenido who
properly showed she paid for house with Aurelio.
Armas vs Calisterio
330 SCRA 201 (April 6, 2000)
Facts:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
3)
4)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
SEPARATE STATEMENT:
PADILLA, J
x
Each case must be judged, not on the basis
of a priori assumptions, predilections or
generalizations but according to its own
factsthe facts in this case does not support
conclusion of psychological incapacity
SEPARATE OPINION
ROMERO, J.
x
Not mere refusal and neglect or difficulty
x
Neither should the incapacity be the result of
mental illness. For if it were due to insanity
or defects in the mental faculties short of
insanity, there is the resultant defect of vice
of consent, thus rendering the marriage
annullable (Art 45 family Code)
x
Psychological incapacity does not refer to
mental faculties and has nothing to do with
consent, it refers to obligations attendant to
marriage
x
Psychological incapacity is insanity of a
lesser degree
x
Remedy was to allow the afflicted spouse to
remarry
x
Bases for determining void marriages:
a) Lack of one or more of the essential
requisites of marriage as contract
b) Reasons of public policy
c) Special cases and special situations
(includes psychological incapacity)
x
Canon Law- valid and void marriage only
x
,Q WKH FDVH FRQIOLFWLQJ DQG RSSRVLQJ
personalities of the spouses were not
considered equivalent to psychological
incapacity
x
Senseless and protracted refusal is
equivalent to psychological incapacity (Chi
Ming Tsoi vs CA)
x
Concurs that this marriage remains
subsisting and valid
CONCURRING OPINION
VITUG, J.
x
Should give much value to Canon Law
jurisprudence as an aid to the interpretation
and construction of the statutory enactment
x
Marriage void ab initio, Art 45- merely
voidable, Art 55- legal separation
x
The term psychological incapacity to be
ground for the nullity of the marriage under
Art 36 of the FC must pass the following
tests:
a) Incapacity must be psychological or
mental not physical in nature
b) Psychological incapacity must relate to
the inability, not mere refusal to
understand, assume and discharge the
basic marital obligations of living
together, observing love and respect
Facts:
Erlinda Matias (16) married Avelino Dagdag (20),
Sept. 1, 1975 and had two children. A week after the
wedding, husband would oftentimes disappear for
months, indulge in drinking sprees, would return
home drunk and force his wife to submit to sexual
intercourse with him. If she did not comply, she was
beaten. The last time Erlinda saw him was on Oct.
1993. She later learned that he was imprisoned but
escaped from jail and was now a fugitive. A certificate
issued by the Jail Warden on Feb. 14, 1990 declared
that he was still at-large.
Held/Ratio:
No. Erlinda failed to comply with the evidentiary
requirements5: particularly guideline no. 2 which
requires the root cause of psychological incapacity to
be medically or clinically identified and sufficiently
proven by experts, since no psychiatrist or medical
doctor testified as to the alleged psychological
incapacity of her husband. Furthermore, the allegation
that her husband is a fugitive was not sufficiently
proven.
4)
5)
RP vs. Quintero-Hamano
G.R. No. 149498 (May 20, 2004)
-DSDQHVHKXVEDQGVabandonment not psychological incapacity
Dedel vs.CA
G.R. No. 151867 (January 29, 2004)
ZLIHVLQILGHOLW\ZKLFKGLGQWH[LVWSULRUWKHPDUULDJH; her abandonment; that she had sexual affairs with several
men not psychological incapacity
Antonio vs.Reyes
G.R. No. 155800 (March 10,2005)
FACTS:
December 1990: Leonilo Antonio and Marie
Ivonne Reyes were married
March 1993: Leonilo filed a petition for
declaration of nullity on the grounds of psych
incapacity
Marie was psych incapacitated
! She concealed the fact that she
previously gave birth to an
illegitimate
son
and
instead
introduced the boy to Leonilo as the
adopted child of her family
! She fabricated a story that her
brother-in-law,
Edwin
David
attempted to rape and kill her when
in fact no such incident happened
! She misrepresented herself as a
psychiatrist to her obstetrician Dr.
Consuelo Gardiner
! She claimed to be a singer or a
free-lance voice teacher affiliated
with
Blackgold
Recording
Company; and that a luncheon
show was held at the Philippine
Village Hotel in her honor
! She invented friends named Babes
Santos and Via Marques and sent
ISSUES:
Whether or
incapacitated
not
HELD/DECISION:
Marie
was
psychologically
7)
ISSUES:
Whether or not the behavior of Reynaldo constitutes
psychological incapacity
HELD/DECISION:
No.
RATIO:
Psych incapacity (Vitug in Santos): no less
WKDQDPHQWDOQRWSK\VLFDOLQFDSDFLW\DQG
that there is hardly any doubt that the
intendment of the law has been to confine
the meaning of psych incapacity to the most
serious cases of personality disorders clearly
demonstrative of an utter insensitivity or
inability to give meaning and significance to
marriage. This psychologic condition must
exist at the time the marriage is celebrated
Dr. Gerardo Veloso (Judge Metropolitan
Marriage Tribunal of the Catholic
Archdiocese of Manila): gravity, juridical
antecedence, incurability
Mere showing of irreconcilable differences
and conflicting personalities in no wise
constitute psych incapacity. It is not enough
to prove that the parties failed to meet their
responsibilities and duties as married
persons; it is essential that they must be
shown to be incapable of doing so, due to
some psychological (not physical) illness.
Art. 36 guidelines
(1) The burden of proof to show nullity of
the marriage belongs to the plaintiff.
Any doubt should be resolved in favor of
the existence and continuation of the
marriage and against its dissolution and
nullity
(2) The root cause of the psych incapacity
must be (a) medically or clinically
identified, (b) alleged in the complaint,
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
2)
CA affirming the decision of RTC which
dismissed the petition for annulment of
marriage filed by petitioner
6)
Held/Ratio:
Yes. It is important for the State to participate in the
proceedings as exemplified in Republic v. Dagdag
wherein the decision of the trial court was said to be
prematurely rendered since the investigating
!
!
!
!
Carino vs Carino
351 SCRA 127
nd
SC: absent a judicial decree declaring the 1st marriage void, it remains valid (pursuant to Art. 140 of the FC) and 2
marriage is bigamous. Resp. gets nothing except what she can prove as her property via individual income by
Art.148 of FC.
Morigo vs Morigo
422 SCRA 376
He was acquitted via the retroactive application of his declaration of nullity w/c rendered his first marriage void
ab initio. Lacking one element of the crime of bigamy (the first marriage has not been legally dissolved, or in case his
or her spouse is absent, the absent spouse has not been judicially declared presumptively dead) he was rightfully
acquitted. DGGWOSULQFLSOHYRLGDEOHPDUULDJHVQRWGHIHQVHIRUELJDP\
FC 50, FC 43(2) cf. FC 102(4)
Compare with FC 147-148
Valdes v. QC-RTC
G.R. No. 122749 (July 31, 1996)
Facts:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
1)
Held/Ratio:
The petition is devoid of merit. There is no need to
prove that her marriage was vitiated by force.
Assuming, however that this is so, it would still be
LUUHOHYDQWVLQFHWKHSUHYLRXVPDUULDJHZDVQWYRLGEXW
merely voidable (therefore valid, until annulled). Since
no annulment was made, her current marriage is
therefore void.
Issue:
WON an action for judicial declaration of nullity of the
prior marriage is necessary before entering a
subsequent marriage.
Held/Ratio:
Yes. Even if the first mistake was contracted in good
faith, the lawyer would still be liable for bigamy after
he contracted his second one. It was deemed that the
moral character of the respondent was deeply flawed
and thus, should be disbarred and struck out from the
Roll of Attorneys.
Held/Ratio:
The Court upheld the decision of the CFI Baguio in
favor of the respondent because they saw no reason
to reverse it. They got married when the woman was
seven months pregnant. It is an incredible allegation
that the wife's advanced pre-natal state was not
suspected by the husband. There was no fraud
involved.
Aquino v Delizo
108 Phil 21
Facts:
Fernando Aquino claimed that his wife deceived him
before their marriage by concealing the fact that she
was pregnant by another man. The baby was born
four months after the marriage. The lower court and
the appellate court dismissed the complaint on the
JURXQGWKDWWKHFKLOGFRXOGYHEHHQERUQRXWRIODZIXO
wedlock between the spouses. Aquino brought new
Anaya v. Palaroan
36 SCRA 97
Facts:
After one month of marriage to Anaya, Fernando
Palaroan filed a complaint to annul it on the ground
that his consent was obtained through force and
intimidation. Complaint was dismissed. However,
GXULQJ WKH QHJRWLDWLRQ RI WKH DPRXQW IURP $QD\DV
counterclaim, Fernando allegedly divulged that
several months prior to the marriage, he had premarital relationships with a close relative. Anaya filed
suit to annul on the ground that the marriage
solemnized between them constituted fraud in
obtained her consent. Fernando denied the allegation
and counter claimed for damages for the malicious
filing of the suit; he did not pray for a dismissal of the
FRPSODLQWEXWLWVGLVPLVVDOZLWKUHVSHFWWRWKHDOOHJHG
PRUDOGDPDJHV$XURUDUHSOLHGVWDWLQJWKDW)HUQDQGR
Macarrubo vs Macarrubo
424 SCRA 42
Facts: Atty. Macarrubo married thrice and thrice had reasons for a void marriage: 1st marriage: psychological
incapacity, 2nd marriage: consent by fraud, 3rd marriage: for lack of a marriage license (pending)
Held: Disbarred for lack of good moral character.
Almelor vs. RTC of Las Piflas
G.R. No. 179620 (August 26, 2008)
Homosexuality in itself is not grounds for annulment, but consent vitiated by fraud as manifested in a
concealment of homosexuality is sufficient grounds. However in this case homosexuality before and at the time
of the celebration of the marriage was not proven and thus the petition for annulment is denied.
FC 45(4), 47(4)
NCC 1335-1337
RPC 344, last paragraph
FC 45(5), 47(5)
Jimenez v. Caizares
109 Phil 273
Facts:
!
Aug 3, 1950 Joel Jimenez and Remedios
Canizares wed
!
7 June 1955 the plaintiff Joel Jimenez prays for a
decree annulling his marriage in the Court of First
Instance of Zamboanga. This was because her
vagina was too small for his member and thus
WKH\FRXOGQWFRSXODWHDQGWKXVVKHLVimpotent
!
14 June 1955 - wife was summoned and served
a copy of the complaint. She did not file an
answer
!
17 December 1956 the Court entered an order
requiring the defendant to submit to a physical
examination by a competent lady physician to
determine her physical capacity for copulation
!
11 April 1957 the Court entered a decree
annulling the marriage between the plaintiff and
the defendant since plaintiff had no response
whatsoever
!
respondent Tadeo and petitioner Diana were
legally married union begot five children
On 29 March 1995, private respondent
7DGHR 5 %HQJ]RQ UHVSRQGHQW 7DGHR
filed a Petition for Annulment of Marriage
against petitioner Diana M. Barcelona
SHWLWLRQHU'LDQD
Petition further alleged that petitioner Diana
was psychologically incapacitated at the time
of the celebration of their marriage to comply
with the essential obligations of marriage
and such incapacity subsists up to the
present time. The petition alleged the noncomplied marital obligations:
! During their marriage, they had
frequent quarrels due to their varied
upbringing. Respondent,
coming
from a rich family, was a
disorganized housekeeper and was
frequently out of the house. She
ZRXOG JR WR KHU VLVWHUV KRXVH RU
would play tennis the whole day
!
!
!
!
Marriage
between
Escano
and
Hortiguela was null and void
Lukban v. Republic
Pon: Montemayor, J
Nature: appeal from order of Court of First Instance in
Manila
Facts:
-Oct 1944- when they got married
-Jan 1946 husband went to Shanghai , she followed
but came back on 1949
!
Afterwards never came back
!
ISSUE: WON husband can be declared
presumably dead through Art 390 of CC
!
HELD: no cause for action since he will only be
presumed dead and this will never become final.
May however be used to obtain divorce.
Gue v. Republic
107 Phil 381
Facts:
1)
dead.
HELD: NO
2nd marriage is valid more than 1st marriage and
SS had no jurisdiction to say that 1st marriage
was the valid marriage
1st wife is deemed absent until action for annulment is
filed.
!
!
NCC 15, 17
FC26
Benedicto v Dela Rama
(December 8, 1903)
Facts:
7)
8)
9)
10)
11)
12)
13)
14)
15)
16)
17)
18)
!
!
!
!
!
!
Arca vs Javier
(July 31, 1954)
Tenchavez v. Escao (supra)
Van Dorn v. Romillo
139 SCRA 139
!
Facts:
!
Somera v. Pilapil
174 SCRA 663
FACTS
!
Sept 7, 1979 Imelda Pilapil a Filipino
married Erich Geiling German in Federal
Republic Germany. They later resided in
Malate, Manila
!
Jan 1983 asked for divorce which was
obtained on Jan 15 1986
!
June 27, 1986 Geiling filed two complaints
of adultery with William Chia and Jesus
Chua
ISSUE: WON he can still file for adultery after
German divorce
HELD: NO
Quita vs CA
300 SCRA 406
Facts:
Llorente vs CA
345 SCRA 592
Facts:
Lorenzo, serviceman of the US Navy, visited his wife
in the Philippines and discovered her pregnant and
having an adulterous relationship with his brother.
Wife, Paula, gave birth to a baby boy whose
certificate stated that the child was illegitimate and the
OLQHRIWKHIDWKHUVQDPHZDVOHIWEODQN/RUHQ]R
refused to forgive Paula and the couple drew a written
agreement wherein: (1) support for Paula would be
suspended, (2) marital union would be dissolved in
accordance with judicial proceedings, (3) a separate
agreement would be made re: conjugal property, and
(4) Lorenzo would not prosecute Paula for her
adulterous acts. Lorenzo returned to the US and filed
for divorce; wife was represented by counsel. Divorce
was granted on 1952. He returned to the Philippines
and on 1958 he married Alicia Llorente. Alicia lived in
WKHVDPHWRZQDV/RUHQ]RVH[-wife but did not know
RIWKHODWWHUVSUHYLRXVUHODWLRQVZLWKKHUQHZ
husband. Regardless, their 25-year union produced 3
children. On March of 1981, he wrote a will which was
notarized which bequeathed all his property to Alicia
and their three children. On January 1984, the court,
finding that the will was duly executed, admitted the
will to probate. However before the proceedings could
be terminated, Lorenzo died. Paula then filed with the
same court a petition for letters of administration over
/RUHQ]RVHVWDWHLQKHUIDYRU$OWKRXJK$OLFLDILOHGD
Garcia vs Recio
366 SCRA 437
Facts:
A Filipino (Recio) was married to Editha Samson, an
Australian citizen in 1987. In 1989, a decree of
divorce purportedly dissolving the marriage was
issued by an Australian family court. On 1992, Recio
became an Australian citizen and married a Filipina
(Garcia) in Cabanatuan City. The application for
PDUULDJHOLFHQVHVKRZHGWKDW5HFLRZDVVLQJOHDQG
)LOLSLQR/DWHFRXSOHVWDUWHGOLYLQJVHSDUDWHO\
On May 1996, conjugal assets were divided in
accordance with Statutory Declarations secured in
Diego vs Castillo
436 SCRA 67
RP vs. Orbecido
G.R.No. 154380 (October 5,2005)
Facts:
Orbecido married Villanueva in the Philippines and
had two children. Villanueva, wife, left for the US, was
naturalized and eventually remarried. Orbecido
petitioned for authority to remarry using Par. 2 of
$UWLFOH)&1RRSSRVLWLRQ26*VPRWLRQIRU
reconsideration was denied, hence this appeal
stating: that the questioned provision only applies to
valid mixed marriages between Filipinos and aliens;
that the remedy is annulment or legal separation; and
WKDWWKHUHLVQRODZWKDWJRYHUQVUHVSRQGHQWV
situation.
Issue:
Given a valid marriage between two Filipino citizens,
where one party is later naturalized as a foreign
citizen and obtains a valid divorce decree capacitating
him or her to remarry, can the Filipino spouse likewise
remarry under Philippine law?
Held/Ratio:
Taking into consideration legislative intent and
applying the rule of reason, Par. 2 Art 26 should be
interpreted to include cases involving parties, who at
the time of the celebration of the marriage were
Filipino citizens, but later on, one of them becomes
naturalized as a foreign citizen and obtains a divorce
degree. 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.
The reckoning point in the provision is not the
citizenship of the parties at the time of the celebration
of the marriage, but their citizenship at the time a valid
divorce is obtained abroad by the alien spouse
capacitating the latter to remarry.
Facts:
1)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
AMOR-CATALAN vs. CA
G.R. No. 167109 (February 6,2007)
Bayot vs CA
G.R. No. 155635 (Nov. 27, 2008)
FC4,FC16,
NCC84,
RPC351-352
R.A. 6955, $Q $FW WR 'HFODUH 8QODZIXO WKH 3UDFWLFH RI 0DWFKLQJ )LOLSLQR :RPHQ IRU 0DUULDJH WR )RUHLJQ
1DWLRQDOV
R.A. 9208, Anti-Trafficking in Persons Act of 2003
Facts:
!
Facts:
November 10, 1975 notarized
an
Agreement executed by the spouses
Gonzalo Baltazar and Luisa Sorongon
wherein the they agreed that "in case
anyone of them will remarry both parties
offer no objection and waive all civil and
criminal actions against them
! Allow them to have concubine,
extra-marital affairs
Defense: said to have been prepared by his
clerk and he only signed it out of negligence
FC 26 paragraph 2
Tenchavez v. Escao, supra
Van Dorn v. Romillo (supra)
Somera v, Pilapil, (supra)
Muslim Code 45-5 5
NCC97
A.M. No. 02-11-11-SC. March 4, 2003
FC 55(8)
RPC 333 & 334
RPC 247
Goitia v. Campos-Rueda
35 Phil 252
Facts:
!
!
Gandionco v. Peflaranda
155 SCRA 725
!
Facts:
!
Ong vs Ong
505 SCRA 76
Facts:
!
!
February 25, 1976 petitioner Imelda Ong
executed in favor of private respondent
Sandra Maruzzo, then a minor, a Quitclaim
Deed transferring ! parcel of land to Sandra
On November 19, 1980 petitioner then
revoked such quitclaim and donated it to son
Rex Ong Jimenez on Jan 20, 1982
!
!
!
!
!
!
ISSUE:
WON death of the plaintiff before final decree, in
an action for legal separation, abate the action? If
it does,
WON abatement also applies if the action
involves property rights?
HELD:
(1) YES,
action for legal separation is purely personal (1)
made by innocent spouse (2) can still stop
proceedings if they reconcile
the death of one party to the action causes the
death of the action itself
(2) YES
solely the effect of the decree of legal separation;
hence, they can not survive the death of the
plaintiff if it occurs prior to the decree
Art 106 of civil code provides for rights and
disabilities that, by the very terms of the Civil
Code article, are vested exclusively in the
persons of the spouses thus cannot be
transferred to anyone after their death
rights are mere effects of decree of separation,
their source being the decree itself; without the
decree such rights do not come into existence, so
that before the finality of a decree, these claims
are merely rights in expectation.
enumeration of the actions that survive for or
against administrators in Section 1, Rule 87, of
the Revised Rules of Court do not enumerate
actions for legal separation or for annulment of
marriage
even actions of bigamy, when one has died all
actions cease.
the action for annulment should be brought
during the lifetime of any one of the parties
involved
proceedings.
Matubis v. Praxedes
109 Phil 789
Facts: Socorro MatubisZoilo Praxedes (1/10/43).
But from 5/30/44 they lived separately from each
other. They had an agreement on4/3/48 where:
x
They relinquish their rights over each other
as h & w
x
That they cannot prosecute each other for
concubinage or adultery (condonation)
x
That each is no longer entitled to support
from the other spouse
x
Neither can claim anything from each other
On Jan 1955, Zoilo cohabited with Asuncion
Rebulado who gave birth on Sept. 1955 and recorded
DV=RLORVWKH\DOVRSXEOLFO\DSSHDUHGDVK Z
Socorro then filed on 4/24/56 @CFI CamSur for
legsep and change of surname against husband due
to abandonment and concubinage.
7& GHFODUHG WKDW =RLORV DFWV FRQVWLWXWHV
concubinage but dismissed complaint due to:
x
CC 102 said action for legsep can only be
filed a year after such grounds have arisen.
Socorro said to have known cohab of Zoilo
since Jan 1955 but action was filed on
FC 58-60;
Sec 19, RA 9262
A.M. No. 02-11-11-SC. March 4, 2003
Araneta vs Concepcion
99 Phil 709
FACTS:
1) Petitioner filed action against his wife for
legal sep ground: adultery
2) Defendant filed an omnibus petition to
secure custody of their three minor children,
a monthly support of P5000 for herself and
said children and the return of her passport
to enjoin plaintiff from ordering his hirelings
from harassing and molesting her as well as
SD\IRUDWWRUQH\VIHHV
3) Plaintiff denied misconduct imputed to him
and alleging that defendant has abandoned
the childrenconjugal properties were worth
only P80,000
!
contends defendant is not entitled to the
custody of the children as she has
abandoned them and had committed
adultery, that by her conduct she had
become unfit to educate her children,
being unstable in her emotions and
unable to give the children to love,
respect and care of a true mother and
w/o means to educate them
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
Ocampo v Florenciano
107 Phil 35
!
!
1938 - marriage
1951 - plaintiff discovered on several
occasions that his wife maintaining illicit
relations with Jose Arcalas
!
June 1951 - sent her to Manila study beauty
culture, where she stayed for one year;
!
1952 - defendant had finished studying her
course, she left plaintiff and since then they
had lived separately
!
June 18, 1955 - wife in the act of having
illicit relations with another man by the name
of Nelson Orzame; signified his intention of
filing a petition for legal separation, to which
defendant
manifested
her
conformity
provided she is not charged with adultery in
a criminal action
!
July 5, 1955 - the complaint for legal
separation was filed
ISSUE: WON husband can file for legal separation
based on adultery when (1) wife confessed to the
adultery (2) did not actively search for wife when she
left conjugal home
HELD: YES on both instances
!
1. what is prohibited is using ONLY the
confession as grounds for legal separation
since this may be evidence of collusion
between the two. However in this case, there
is strong evidence other than the confession
to prove the adultery of the wife
! def of collusion: the agreement
between husband and wife for one
Pacete v. Cariaga
231 SCRA 321
Priv Resp Concepcion AlanisPetitioner Enrico
Pacete on 4/30/38 which produced a daughter
(Consuelo). Pacete contracted 2nd marriage in
1948 with Clarita de la Concepcion. She learned
of such marriage only in 8/1/79. She averred that
during their union, Pacete acquired vast
properties (lands, fishponds, several motor
vehicles), that he fraudulently placed several
SURSHUWLHVXQGHUKLVQDPHRU&ODULWDVRUFKLOGUHQ
ZLWK&ODULWDVDQGRWKHUGXPPLHV
On 10/29/79 Alanis filed @ CFI Cotabato for
the dec of nullity of the marriage b/w Enrico and
Clarita dela Concepcion as well s for their legal
separation, accounting and separation of their
properties.
PAcete filed beyond the original period
given. Plaintiff filed for motion to declare PAchete
in default which the court granted.
On 3/17/80 CFI Cotabato I decreed legsep of
enrico and concepcion alanis and held marriage
between clarita and enrico as null and void.
ISSUE: WON petition for certiorari can rightfully
be claimed by petitioner who missed the deadline
for submission of answer.
HELD: YES
!
As stated in Art 101, at the non-appearance
of defendant the court shall order the
prosecuting attorney to inquire whether or
not a collusion between the parties exists. If
there is no collusion, the prosecuting
attorney shall intervene for the State in order
to take care that the evidence for the plaintiff
is not fabricated.
! In this case there was no state
intervention
thus
petition
for
certiorari
is
granted
and
proceedings before it are set aside
! Need for state intervention and
compliance with other statutory
requirements when legal separation
is filed for even when other
remedies such as of land are
attached to it.
petition for certiorari is allowed when the default order
is improperly declared, or even when it is properly
declared, where grave abuse of discretion attended
such declaration
FC58
FC 61 par. 1
FC 61 par. 2
De Ia Via v. Villareal
41 Phil 13
Narcisa Geopano filed a complaint in the Court of
First Instance: divorce; partition of the conjugal
property, and alimony pendente lite in the sum of
P400/month
1) adultery;
husband ejected her from
conjugal home and thus she established her
residence in Iloilo, that she had no means of support
and was only living at the expense of one of her
daughters
Sabalones v. CA
230 SCRA 79
!
!
!
!
!
!
FC 56(1)
Ginez v. Bugayong
100 Phil 616
FACTS:
condonation is implied
from sexual intercourse
after knowledge of the
other infidelity. such acts
necessary
implied
forgiveness. It is entirely
consonant with reason and
justice that if the wife
freely consents to sexual
intercourse after she has
full knowledge of the
husband's
guilt,
her
consent should operate as
a pardon of his wrong."
!
In this case slept with her for 2 nights and 1
day after almost ten months after he came to
know of the acts of infidelity amounting to
adultery.
Thus falls under exemptions in Article 100 of NCC:
The legal separation may be claimed only by the
innocent spouse, provided there has been no
condonation of or consent to the adultery or
concubinage
Arroyo v. CA
203 SCRA 753
Facts:
!
!
!
FC56(4)
FC6O
FC 5 6(3), (5), compare with NCC 101 and 221(3)
Brown v. Yambao
102 Phil 168
FACTS:
July 14, 1955: Brown filed suit for legal
separation from Yambao
Alleged under oath:
While he interned by the Japanese
invaders from 1942 5o 1945 at
UST interment camp, Yambao
engaged in adulterous relations
with one Carlos Field of whom
she begot a baby girl
WKDW %URZQ OHDUQHG RI KLV ZLIHV
misconduct only in 1945, upon
his release from internment
that thereafter the spouse lived
separately and later executed a
document
liquidating
their
conjugal
partnership
and
assigning certain properties to
the erring wife as her share.
Complaint prayed for confirmation of the
liquidation agreement; for custody of the
children; that the defendant be declared
disqualified to succeed the plaintiff; and
for their remedy as might be just and
equitable.
Court directed City Fiscal or his
representatives to investigate (CC101)
7KURXJKWKH&LW\)LVFDOVTXHVWLRQLQJLWZDV
revealed that after liberation, Brown
lived maritally with another woman and
had begotten children by her
Court denied petition for legal separation
on the ground
WKDW ZKLOH WKH ZLIHV DGXOWHU\ ZDV
established,
Brown
had
incurred in a misconduct of
similar nature that barred his
right of action under CC100
:KHUH ERWK VSRXVHV DUH
offenders, a legal separation
cannot be claimed by either of
them)
!
Armado Medel filed legal separation form
Rosario Matute after finding out her
relationship with his brother, Ernesto Medel.
Custody of children was granted to him
When he left for US, he left children to care
of sister. Rosario also lived there too.
Issue:
WON a wife can use her maiden name after a decree
of legal separation has been granted.
Held/Ratio:
No. LHJDO6HSDUDWLRQDORQHLVQRWDJURXQGIRUZLIHV
change of name. Art 372 specifically mandates the
wife to continue using name and surname employed
before the legal separation. Her marriage status is
unaffected by the separation. Rule 103 (provision for
a change of name in general) does not prevail over
the mandatory provision of Art. 372.
FC 63(4)
Solo Parents Act
FC 65-67
Lapuz vs. Eufemio (supra
Macadangdang vs. CA (supra)
Lacson v. Lacson
24 SCRA 837
Facts:
!
HELD: YES
!
RPC is suppletory to RA no 9262 as found in
Sec 47 of RA no 9262 thus conspiracy can
be part of RA 9262
! conspiracy or action in concert to
achieve a criminal design is shown,
the act of one is the act of all the
conspirators, and the precise extent
or modality of participation of each
of them becomes secondary, since
all the conspirators are principals
Sec 5 of RA 9262 also recognizes that violence may
be committed by an offender through another
FC1;FC76
FC 66, 67, 128, 135, 136
FC77
FC81
FC78
FC 79, in rel. to NCC 3 8-39
FC81
FC 80 (2) and (3) in rel. To NCC 16
FC (3) in rel. To NCC 17
FC82
Solis vs Solis
53 Phil 912 [1928]
Facts:
!
FC84
FC 84; NCC 761
FC85
FC8T
FC87
Matabuena v. Cervantes
38 SCRA 284
Facts:
!
20 February 1956, Felix Matabuena
executed a Deed of Donation inter vivos in
favor of Petronila Cervantes during the time
they were living as husband and wife in a
common law relationship.
!
They were later married on 28 March 1962.
Felix died intestate on 13 September 1962.
!
Cornelia Matabuena, being the sole sister
and nearest and nearest relative to Felix,
questioned the validity of the donation
claiming that the ban on donation between
spouses during a marriage applies to a
common-law relationship. She had the land
declared on her name and paid the estate
and inheritance taxes thereon on virtue of an
affidavit of self-adjudication executed by her
in 1962. On 23 November 1965, the lower
court upheld the validity of the donation as it
was made before CeUYDQWHVPDUULDJHWRWKH
donor. Hence, the appeal.
!
Issue: Whether the Article 133 of the civil
code apply to donations between live-in
partners.
!
Held: While Article 133 of the Civil Code
FRQVLGHUV DV YRLG D GRQDWLRQ EHWZHHQ WKH
spouses during the marriage SROLF\
considerations of the most exigent character
1936 *HRUJH7DLWVZLIH$JDWDGLHG
!
!
!
!
FC 48; 44; 61
FC75
FC88
FC89
FC 89 par. 2
FC 90; of NCC 484-501
FC91
FC as of NCC 164
FC 93 of NCC 160
FC92;FC95
FC94
Luzon Surety Co., Inc. vs De Garcia
30 SCRA 111
Facts:
!
!
!
!
!
Gelano vs CA
103 SCRA 90
Facts:
!
G-Tractors, Inc., vs CA
135 SCRA 192
-Luis Narciso is married to Josefina Narciso. He owns
a logginc company
- Feb 1973 Luis Narciso entered into Contract o
Hire of heavey Equipment with petitioner G-Tractors
where G-tractors leased former tractors. Co tract
VWLSXODWHG SD\PHQW IRU UHQWDO +RZHYHU /XLV ZDVQW
able to pay
-Property of Luis was sold to pay for his debt, one of
which was conjugal property of land.
ISSUE: WON land that is owned by both spouses can
EHVROGWRSD\IRU/XLVGHEW
HELD: YES
!
all debts and obligations contracted by the
husband for the benefit of the conjugal
partnership "do not require that actual profit
or benefit must accrue to the conjugal
FC96
FC 100(3)
FC 101
FC61
FC 96-98
FC 100; cf. FC 239
FC 104
Delizo v. Delizo
69 SCRA 216
facts:
!
!
!
Belcodero v. CA
227 SCRA 303
Facts:
!
!
!
!
!
Jocson v. CA
170 SCRA 333
Facts:
!
!
!
Ansaldo v. Sheriff
64 Phil 115
Facts:
!
!
!
Sps. Estonina v. CA
G.R. No. 111547, Jan. 27, 1997
Facts:
!
!
!
!
!
!
Facts:
Moises and Miat bought 2 parcels of land
(one in Pque and one in Paco)
Moises then wanted the Paranaque property
to himself but would leave the 2 properties to
his sons.
Moises and Concordia bought the property
on installment basis on 1977, and it was only
on 1984 it was finished.
Alexander agreed to sell the said lot to
Romeo.
However, Romeo found out that the property
was sold to Castro by Moises.
Moises bought the property through
mortgage from Castro
Alexander received 2/3, Moises 1/3, Romeo
NONE
FC 105 of FC 74-74
Malang vs Moson
338 SCRA 393
FC 108 cf. NCC 1767-1768
PNB v. Quintos
Confined to properties
stated in Art 1401 of CC -
Guaranteed by absolute
separation of capitals
ISSUE: WON they are jointly liable for the debts
incurred through conjugal partnership
HELD: YES
!
CC 1698 = partners are not solidarily liable
with respect to the debt of the partnership.
!
CC 1137 - solidarity will exist only when it is
expressly determined
!
partner cannot be solidarity liable for the
debts of the partnership, because,there is no
legal provision imposing such burden upon
one.
RESULT: properties of the conjugal partnership of the
defendants are liable for the debt to the plaintiff, and
in default thereof, they are jointly liable for the
payment thereof.
!
Appeal from decision of CFI of Manila
declaring property to be the paraphernal
property of defendant-appelle Evelina Kalwa.
The appellants maintain that it should be
considered as conjugal property
Laperals sought for recovery of money
evidenced by promissory notes made by
Katigbak and for the recovery of jewelry that
katigbak was supposed to sell.
!
!
Berciles v. GSIS
128 SCRA 53
Facts:
-GSIS recognized Pascual Berciles as an
acknowledged natural child and other private
respondents Maria Luisa Berciles Vallreal, mercy
Berciles Patacsil and Rhoda Berciles as illegitimate
children of Judge Pascual Berciles with Flor
Fuentebella and thus have rights to his retirement
benefits
- this was contested by his wife Iluminada Ponce and
their children.
ISSUE: WON GSIS was correct in upholding their
status as a natural child and illegitimate children
HELD: NO
!
Art 287 pf NCC illegitimate children other
than natural are entitled to support and such
successional rights are granted in the code,
but for this article to be applicable, there
must be admission or recognition of paternity
of illegitimate child.
!
No evidence of admission
! (X)There was no evidence that he
intervened when his name was put
in the birth certificate of Pascual
MXGJPHQWDJDLQVWWKHKXVEDQGDORQHGRHVQW
affect the paraphernal property of Amalia.
Thus she had a right to ignore the judgment
of eviction against her husband.
5(68/7 FDQW GHFLGH DW WKH PRPHQW ZKHWKHU
property is validly conveyed to Cesarea and Gregorio.
Up to CFI of QC.
Lim v. Garcia
7 Phil 320
!
!
!
!
!
Facts:
Hilario Lim died intestate in 1903, with an
estate valued at P50k. It was alleged in the
inventory by the administrator, Luis Lim, that
everything but a house and lot, P10k
(paraphernalia) and P700 (acquired as
payment for the land that he sold) were the
conjugal property of Hilario and his wife,
Isabel Garcia.
The administrator contends that the said
properties were the separate properties of
Hilario because he allegedly brought them
into the marriage alone. The 3 parcels of
land were only conveyed to Isabel as a gift
or for valuable consideration by Hilario
during the coverture; hence, it is a void
donation. The P700 was the price he had
received for the sale of a certain lot.
Issue: WON the parcels of land were
conjugal property
Held: No, the evidence show that the
properties were not acquired by Isabel by
conveyance from Hilario but by third parties
by way of exchange for a certain property
FC 109(4);ofFC 118-119
FC 110
FC 110 2nd par.;
FC 142, FC 75
Veloso v. Martinez, supra
Manotok Realty v. CA
149 SCRA 372
!
!
Facts:
Authorized as the special co-administrator of
the testate estate of Clara Tambunting de
Legarda, Vicente Legarda sold 280 sq.m. of
the Legarda Tambunting Subdivision to Dr.
Abelardo Lucero for P30/sq.m., payable on
an instalment basis. Lucero paid the initial
amount of P200 and Legarda issued a
receipt and delivered the property to him.
Although he was ordered by the CFI to sell
the Subdivision, Legarda failed to execute
the necessary document/s and to submit the
same to the Court for approval as he was
ordered. He did not execute and register a
deed of sale in a public instrument.
!
Ong vs CA
204 SCRA 297
!
!
!
!
Facts:
Teodora B. Ong and obtained a loan from
Francisco Boix in the course of her own
logging business in CamSur.
But due to management, she defaulted in
her obligations and Boix consequently filed
for the collection of the sum due.
CFI declared Teodora and her husband,
Ramon (who was enjoined in the petition for
the payment of interests by Boix), in default
and the Sheriff levied and auctioned the
parcel of land, which was in the name of
Teodora B. Ong in the Tax Declaration. Title
was transferred to Boix as the highest
bidder; the same was registered
Ramon, however, later contends that the
property was conjugal because Teodora
XVHG KLV VXUQDPH 2QJ LQ WKH 7D[
Declaration; it was clearly an indication that
she had acquired it during their marriage and
hence, it was conjugal and unenforceable to
7HRGRUDVREOLJDWLRQV
!
!
Facts:
Emiliano Boncan Yap borrowed P14k from
the International Banking Corporation in
order to construct a house. He then
conveyed the house to his wife, Alejandra
Palanca de Boncan, on Sept. 20, 1904,
!
!
SURSHUW\
LV
$OHMDQGUDV
x
x
x
x
x
x
FC 106
FC 116
Torela v. Torela
3 SCRA 391
Facts:
x
Issue:
Whether or not the parcel of land herein
involved is a conjugal property of the spouses
Felimon Torela and Graciana Gallego (plaintiffs'
mother)
Held:
Magallon v. Montejo
146 SCRA 282
FACTS:
Case was instituted against Martin Lucerna to
compel partition of parcel of land in Magsaysay
(homestead)
Respondents claimed to be the common children of
Martin Lucerno and Eustaquia Pichan (who died in
1953)
Respondents asserted right to ! of the land as their
motherVVKDUHLQKHUFRQMXJDOSDUWQHUVKLSZLWK0DUWLQ
Martin denied being married to Eustaquia but
admitted living with her without the benefit of marriage
until she allegedly abandoned him
Martin denied the paternity of two of the respondents
who, he claimed, were father by other men
RTC:
Martin and Eustaquia were married
Respondents are their common children
Martin had begun working the homestead, and his
right to a patent to the land accrued, during his
coverture with Eustaquia
Entitled respondents to ! the land
IAC affirmed
Original certificate of land was issued only on Nov.
22, 1978
&HUWLILFDWH RI 7LWOH LVVXHG LQ WKH QDPH RI 0DUWLQ
/DFHUQDPDUULHGWR(SLIDQLD0DJDOORQ
ISSUE:
WON the respondents should be given the
title for ! of the land
HELD:
YES
Parcel of land was part of the
conjugal partnership of Martin
and Eustaquia
Land has been titled through fraud
or mistake in such a
Cuenca v. Cuenca
168 SCRA 335
FACTS:
Respondents
- legitimate children of Agripino Cuenca and Maria
Bangahon, both deceased, owners of the subject
parcels of land
HELD:
<HV
Engracia was entitled to inherit from Agripino Cuenca
together with the respondents (legit children by Maria)
in accordance with Art. 892 of the NCC
Appellate Court declared Engracia as surviving
spouse QRQHHGWRSURYHOHJDOLW\RIPDUULDJHPXFK
less to prove the legitimacy of the other petitioners
12
oArt. 160 of NCC: all property of the marriage is
presumed to belong to the conjugal partnership,
unless it be proved that it pertains exclusively to the
husband or the wife
oPresumption refers only to the property acquired
GXULQJPDUULDJHDQGGRHVQWRSHUDWHZKHQWKHUHLVQR
showing as to when property alleged to be conjugal
was acquired
oDocuments sought to be presented do not show that
the claims to the subject parcles consisting of
homestead lands were perfected during the marriage
of Agripino and Engracia
oPresumption cannot prevail when the title is in the
name of only one spouse and the rights of innocent
third parties are involved
'RFXPHQWVVKRZWhat 5 out of 8 parcels covered are
titled in the name of either respondent Meladora or
Retituto
oPresumption cannot prevail
Petition Dismissed
FC117
Cheesman vs IAC
193 SCRA 93
FACTS:
Thomas Cheesman and Criselda Cheesman were
married (1970) but separated (1981)
June 4, 1947: Deed of Sale and Transfer of
Possessory rights executed by Armande Alteras in
favor of Criselda Cheesman
Thomas Cheesman was aware of the deed and did
not object to the transfer being made only to his wife
Tax declarations for the property purchased were
issued in the name of Criselda with knowledge of
Thomas and without his objection)
against
constitution
HELD:
NO
Constitutional provision (Sec. 14,
Art. XIV of 1973 Consti)
prohibits sale to aliens of
residential land
Thomas acquired no right over the
property by virtue of the land
NO
Against constitution
NO
Thomas had, and has no capacity
or personality to question the
Petition Denied
Villanueva vs CA
427 SCRA 439
FACTS:
Oct 7, 1926 - Plaintiff Eusebia is the legal wife of
defendant Nicolas 5 children
During their marriage, they acquired real properties
and all improvements situated in Mandue City and
Consolacion (22 properties)
Nicolas is co-owner of a parcel of land in Mandaue
which he inherited from his parents as well as the
purchasers of hereditary shares of approximately 8
parcels of land in Mandaue City earns income
(Nicolas only one to receive)
1945: Nicolas no longer lived with legitimate family
and cohabited with Pacita (1 illegitimate son)
Pacita has no occupation, no properties of her own
1985: Nicolas suffered a stroke
1985-present: Illegitimate child Procopio has been
receiving the income of said properties
Defendants asked for settlement but no such thing
was reached
RTC judgment in favor of respondents (legit family)
Art. 116 (presumption) Eusebia presented solid
evidence, petitioners failed to meet standard proof
required to maintain their claim that the subject
properties are paraphernal properties of Nicolas
Appeal was made
Eusebia died on 1996 heirs substituted
1996: Pacita and Nicolas married
CA affirmed RTC decision
ISSUES:
WON subject properties are conjugal
HELD:
YES
Family Code provisions on conjugal
partnerships
govern
the
property relations between
Nicolas and Eusebia even if
they were married before the
effectivity of FC (Art. 105)
Under FC, if the properties are
acquired during the marriage,
the presumption is that they
are conjugal
Burden of proof party claiming
that they are not conjugal
Subject properties were acquired
during the marriage of Nicolas
and Eusebia
Petition Denied
Zulueta v. Pan-Am
49 SCRA 1
FACTS:
Altercation between Zulueta and Capt. Zentner of
Pan-Am led to the off-loading of Mr. Zulueta, Mrs.
Zulueta, and Miss Zulueta
Plane trip from Wake Islands to Philippines
Mr. Zulueta was 20 to 30 minutes late in boarding
because he had to relieve himself at the beach
(HAHAHA)
Previous decision:
5HO\LQJXSRQ$UWRI&&ZKLFKSURYLGHVWKDWWKH
wife cannot bind the conjugal partnership without the
KXVEDQGVFRQVHQWH[FHSWLQFDVHVSURYLGHGE\ ODZ
and it is not claimed that this is one of such cases
SC denied a motion filed by Mrs. Zulueta for the
dismissal of this case, insofar as she is concerned
(she having settled all her differences with the
defendant) without prejudice to this sum (P50,000
awarded to her) being deducted from the award made
in said decision
Compromise Agreement between petitioner and
defendant
PAN-AM maintains that the damages involved are not
among those forming part of conjugal property under
Art. 153 of CC
ISSUES:
WON the damages claimed form part of the
conjugal partnership
HELD:
YES
Award was made in favor of the
petitioners collectively
Presumption is that the money to
purchase plane tickets had
come from the conjugal funds
Considering that the damages in
question have arisen from a
EUHDFK RI SODLQWLIIV FRQWUDFW RI
carriage with the defendant, for
which the plaintiffs paid their
fare with fund presumably
belonging to the conjugal
partnership, we hold that said
damages fall under paragraph
1 of Art. 153, the right thereto
KDYLQJ EHHQ DFTXLUHG E\
onerous
title
during
the
PDUULDJH
Motion Denied
Mendoza v. Reyes
124 SCRA 154
FACTS:
NO
o
Art. 135. (1) that which is acquire by onerous
title during the marriage at the expense of the
common fund, whether acquisition be for the
partnership or for only one of the spouses.
Common fund?
-XOLDVWHVWLPRQ\LVZLWKRXWPHULW
o
The fact that the land is later registered in
the name of only one of the spouses does not destroy
its conjugal nature
Under NCC:
Castillo v. Pasco
11 SCRA 102
FACTS:
Payment of installments:
o
1,000 = 600 Gabriel Gonzales owed to
Pasco + 400 cash from proceeds of sale of one of
0DFDULDVQLSDKXWV
o
2,000 = proceeds of loan from Dr. Nicanor
Jacinto, to whom the fishpond was mortgaged by both
spouses
o
3,000 = loan secured by a mortgage on 2
parcels of land assessed in the name of Macaria and
one of which she had inherited from a former
husband, while the other lot encumbered was
assessed in her exclusive name
PARTLY
o
WKHDSSOLFDEOHODZZDV6SDQLVK&LYLO
Code of 1889
1/6 is paraphernal
5/6 is conjugal
o
Payment of Macaria of mortgage debt to Dr.
Jacinto does not result in increasing her share in the
property
Dismissal of original complaint is revoked and set
aside and record remanded to court of origin for
further proceedings
FC 119
FC 120
Padilla vs Padilla
74 Phil 377
FACTS:
Liquidation of conjugal property required before
settlement of will of deceased Narciso Padilla
Widow, Concepcion Paterno Vda. De Padilla
commenced instant proceedings by filing a petition
wherein she prayed that her paraphernal property be
segregated from the inventoried estate and delivered
to
her
together
with
the
corresponding
reimbursements and indemnities; that she be given !
Judgment affirmed
Caltex vs Felias
108 Phil 873
Spouses Juliano and Eulalia Felias donated Lot No.
107 to their daughter, Felisa Felias (Private
Respondent) on March 31, 1928.
March 26, 1941: Trial court held that in a
case against respRQGHQWV KXVEDQG
(Simeon Sawamoto), he had to pay
Texas Company (Phil.) Inc. a sum of
P661.94 plus legal interest and
DWWRUQH\VIHHV
A writ of execution was issued to
the provincial sheriff who levied
upon Lot No. 107 together with
the improvements and a small
parcel of coconut land and sold
these at a public auction to
Calimlim v. Fortun
129 SCRA 675
Facts:
Mercedes Calimlim-Canullas and Fernando Canullas
were married on Dec. 19, 1962. The land were their
Maramba v. Lozano
20 SCRA 474
Facts:
1948: Plaintiff Maramba files a complaint for the
collection of a sum of money from spouses Nieves
and Pascual Lozano. This was granted by the court.
1960: Not satisfied with the judgment, LOZANO
appealed to the CA who dismissed appeal because it
was not filed on time.
Embrado v. CA
233 SCRA 335
Facts:
Lot 564 was sold to Lucia Embrado, as can be proven
LQ D 9HQWD 'HILQLWLYD E\ VSRXVHV &DUSLWDQRV 7KH
deed was prepared and signed on July 2, 1946,
although it was effective since 1941.
FC 121
Mariano vs CA
174 SCRA 59
6)
Facts:
1)
Ayala vs CA
286 SCRA 272
Facts:
1) DVVDLOVWKH&$GHFLVLRQDIILUPLQJWKH57&
decision holding the Conjugal partnership
RI &KLQJ QRW OLDEOH IRU WKH GHEWV
incurred.
15) On DSSHDODUJXHWKDWWKHUHLVQRQHHGWR
prove the benefit since the mere nature of
the transaction is sufficient to prove liability
of a party.
Issues:
WON a surety agreement entered into by
the husband in favor of his employer incurs
civil liability on the conjugal partnership of
the former.
Held: NOT NECESSARILY, given that the
agreement was entered in to not primarily to
benefit of the family of the husband it cannot
be said that his conjugal partnership is
automatically liable, in any case the burden of
proof to confirm the benefit and subsequently
the liability of the conjugal property rests with
the debtor who in this case did not sufficiently
prove the said fact.
!
Art 121 of FC shows that conjugal
partnership shall be liable for all debts and
obligations contracted during marriage by
the designated admin-spouse for benefit of
conjugal partnership of gains
! Read together with Art 161 where
benefit is understood to not actually
accrue but to be the reason for the
admin-spouse to enter into such a
deal
! Difference between one where
husband contracted obligation for
his own business that is for benefit
of his family and where the
husband merely acted as surety ofr
loan contracted by another for the
ODWWHU EXVLQHVV 0$,1 UHDVRQ IRU
obligation is not for family)
Benefits contemplated in Art 121 is one resulting
directly from the loan and not just a by-product of it
which the latter example is.
Ching vs CA
423 SCRA 356
1) Same Chings in Ayala vs. CA properties
wrongfully levied. Same deal another loan
not paid and conjugal partnership not held
liable.
2) PBMCI (Philippine Blooming Mills Company,
inc.) takes a P9m loan from Allied Banking
Corporation (ABC) Ching signs a
promissory note.
3) As added security Ching w/ Tanedo and Kiat
Hua executed a continuing guarantee w/
ABC binding them to guarantee the
payment of all PBMCI obligations
amounting to P38m (w/ subsequent loans
of 12m and 13m).
Javier v. Osmea
34 Phil 336
FACTS:
x
Florentino Collantes, husband of Petrona
Javier, became indebted to the estate of
Tomas Osmena
x
Sheriff executed judgment of debt by selling
at public auction all the right, title, interest or
share which the Collates had or might have
in 2 parcels of improved real estate and
especially the usufructuary interest therein of
Pascuala Santos, the surviving widow of
Felix Javier, which interest was acquired by
Petrona Javier (wife)
! Land inherited by Petrona from her
parents
! Usufructuary right acquired from
3HWURQDV IDWKHUV nd wife for the
sum of P3,000 (amount was
borrowed giving as security for the
loan an mortgage on the property
she had inherited)
x
Successful bidder: Osmena estate
x
Petrona Javier claimed that Collantes had no
rights in said properties or in the
usufructuary interest filed for annulment of
sale
x
Osmena estate: admitted exclusive right of
ownership; claimed that the money which
which said usufructuary interest was
x
x
x
x
x
x
G-Tractors v. CA (supra)
DBP v. Adil
161 SCRA 307
FACTS:
x
Spouses Patricio Confesor and Jovita
Villafuerte obtained an agricultural loan from
the DBP in the sum of P2,000.00 in a
promissory note whereby they bound
themselves jointly and severally to pay the
account in ten (10) equal yearly
amortizations
x
Obligation remained outstanding and unpaid
x
Confesor, who was by then a member of the
Congress of the Philippines, executed a
second promissory note on April 11, 1961
expressly acknowledging said loan and
promising to pay the same on or before June
15, 1961
x
Defaulted in payment DBP filed complaint
x
Inferior court ordered payment
x
CFI of Iloilo reversed order
Mariano v. CA (supra)
Wong et al. v. CA (supra) 200 SCRA 792
Ong V. CA (supra) 204 SCRA 297
Ayala Investment vs. CA
(February 12, 1998)
Facts:
16) DVVDLOV WKH &$ GHFLVLRQ DIILUPLQJ WKH
RTC decision holding the Conjugal
SDUWQHUVKLS RI &KLQJ QRW OLDEOH IRU WKH
GHEWVLQFXUUHG
17) Philippine Blooming Mills (PBM) takes a
3 ORDQ IURP $,'& &KLQJ
Ramones vs Agbayani
137808, Sept 30, 2005
Facts:
!
!
!
!
!
ISSUE:
!
(1) WON deed of sale should be nullified
since it waas without the consent of the wife
!
(2) WON conjugal partnership should be
made liable for payment of hospital and
FC122
People v. Lagrimas
29 SCRA 153
Facts:
1)
2)
3)
October11, 1962 Judgment finding Froilan
Lagrimas guilty of murder becomes final.
Writ of execution to cover the civil indemnity
in the case was issued and 11 parcels of
land in the name of the accused were
scheduled for auction on Jan. 5, 1965
Go vs Yamane
489 SCRA 107
Facts:
1) :LIHRI<DPDQHLVLQYROYHGLQDVXLWHQWLWOHG
Florence Pucay De Gomez et al. v. Cypress
Corporation for this she hires a certain Atty.
Guillermo De Guzman.
2) Atty. De Guzman files for writ of execution on
D SURSHUW\ RI WKH ZLIH RI DV SD\PHQW IRU
attorneyV
IHHV
DZDUGHG
LQ
WKH
aforementioned suit amounting to P10,000
the auction of the property is scheduled on
Aug 11, 1981.
3) On Aug. 8, 1981, WKHILOHVDWKLUGSDUW\FODLP
on the property claiming that it is conjugal in
nature and thus not liable for the wiIHV
personal obligations
4) Sheriff however proceeds w/ the auction and
WKH SURSHUW\ LV VROG WR VSRXVHV *R 2QH
year later the sale becomes final as no
redemption is filed and the deed of certificate
RIVDOHLVLVVXHGWRWKHRQ$XJ
5) Sept. 4, 198 ILOHV IRU DQQXOPHQW DQG
cancellation of the auction sale on same
grounds as before (3)
6) DQVZHUFRQWHQGLQJUHVMXGLFFDWDQRFDXVH
of action, lack of lawful remedy, and absence
RILUUHJXODULW\LQWKHVDOHRQWKHRWKHUKDQG
file a complaint for damages contending fraud
and misrepresentation for selling a P200,000
SURSHUW\WRSD\3LQDWWRUQH\VIHHV
7) 57& GHFLGHV LQ IDYRU RI VWDWLQJ KDG QR
cause of action since the property was
deemed not conjugal as it was registered in
KLVZLIHVQDPH
8) CA reverses RTC decision: presumption of
conjugality attaches to property acquired
during the marriage, unless proof that
exclusive funds were used in purchase are
FC 123
FC 124
Guiang vs CA
291 SCRA 372
Facts:
1) *LOGD&RUSX]PDUULHV-XGLH&RUSX['HF
1968. In Feb 14, 1983 they buy Koronadal lot
(lot in contention) for P14,735 from Manuel
Callejo.
2) Apr 22, 1988 Corpuz spouses sell half of the
property WR VSRXVHV *XLDQJ EXLOG WKHLU
house and live next to neighbors, the
Corpuzes.
3) ,Q Z FRQVHQW IURP KHU KXVEDQG
Gilda left for Manila to secure work abroad,
became victim of illegal recruiter but stayed in
Manila till Mar 11, 1990 when she went back
to Koronadal.
4) ,Q -DQ GDXJKWHU OHDUQV RI KHU IDWKHUV
plans to sell the family home in Koronadal to
WKH RZQHU RI WKH DGMRLQLQJ ORW WKH
Guiang)and writes to her mother about it who
replies objecting to the sale.
5) The daughter gives her mothers reply to their
QHLJKERU/X]YLPLQGD*XLDQJIRUWKWHODWWHU
to advise her father accordingly.
6) In the absence and w/o the consent of his
wife the sale pushes through. Judie Corpuz
VHOOVWR/X]YLPLQGD*XLDQJIRU3
7) 4 days later to cure the defect of the previous
contract Luzviminda Guiang goes to the
widow of the previous owner of the lot
(Callejo) and signs an agreement for the sale
of the lot
8) 0DUFK FRPHV KRPH ILQGV NLGV
living separately in different places and
husband is nowhere to be found. He is said to
Heirs vs Mijares
410 SCRA 97
Lot 4349-B-2 is a 396 m2 covered by TCT 205445 in
Balintawak QC registered under Spouses Vicente and
Ignacia Aguilar-Reyes, purchased using conjugal
funds during converture (inc. apartments in the CPG).
Vicente married Ignacia in 1960 but were de
facto separated since 1974. In 1984, Ignacia learned
that on 3/1/83 Vicente sold 4349-B-2 to Mijares
spouses (resps) for 40k and therefore new TCT
306087 was issued. She also found out that Vicente
filed for admin and appointment as guardian of their 5
minor children @MTC QC XXI where he misrep that
Ignacia died on 3/22/82 and that he and the 5 kids are
the sole heirs.
Roxas v. CA
198 SCRA 541
Melania (pet) is married to Antonio Roxas but is now
living separately . Melania then found out that
estranged husband Antonio Roxas entered into a
contract of lease w/ Cayetano on 3/30/87 involving
CPG in Nova QC TCT 378197.
Melania planned to a flea market w/ 20 stalls
for grocery and dry goods in said area and invested
N IRU WKH SUHS DQG FRQVWUXFWLRQ 0D\RUV SHUPLW
and Municipal license was already issued for 1986 but
when she attempted to renew for said year, it was
blocked by Antonio Cayetano. She therefore seek
redress saying that there was unlawful deprivation
from her operating her business as conjugal owner.
On 7/31/89 Cayetano moved to dismiss
saying that there was no cause of action. TC
dismissed said complaint and CA affirmed TC.
ISSUE: WON a lease is an encumberance and/or
alienation within scope of Art 166 of NCC
HELD: YES
!
Defintions:
! Lease Art 1643 of NCC one of
the parties binds himself to give to
another the enjoyment or use of a
thing for a price certain, and for a
period which may be definite or
Grant
of
use
and
possession.
! Encumberance includes not only
liens but also attachment, LEASES,
and other restrictions
Ysasi v. Fernandez
23 SCRA 1079
Facts: Juan Ysasi (pet) married Maria Aldecoa de
Ysasi (resp). Juan conceded that Hacienda ManucaoA is CPG. Since 1948 spouse have been shuttling
back and forth from PI to Spain (where they also own
real estate) but Juan travels more frequently.
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
FC 124
Uy vs. CA
346 SCRA 246
Facts:
! Dr. Ernesto Jardeleza suffers a stroke on March
25, 1991
! A piece of property was planned on being sold
! Upon knowledge of the planned selling, Teodoro
(Ernesto's son) files for petition praying for a
court appointed guardian to administer the
property given the present physical and mental
incapacity of Ernesto
! Gilda (Ernesto's wife) files for petition praying for
sole powers of administration of conjugal
properties and authorization to sell the same
! Alleging that the her husband's medical
treatment's bills needed to be paid, hence the
need to sell
! RTC awards petition to Gilda, pursuant to FC Art.
124 and governed by the rules on summary
proceedings of Art. 253
! Teodoro files for Motion of Reconsideration
! While above case was pending, Gilda sells the
property to Jose and Glenda Uy
! Teodoro files opposition to the motion for
approval of the deed of sale
! TC approves sale / CA reverses the decision
ordering the TC to dismiss the proceedings to
approve the deed of sale
ISSUE: WON Gilda Jardelez may assume sole
powers of administration of conjugal property and sell
land since her husband is incapacitated with a stroke
to do so.
HELD: NO
!
Art 124 contemplates a situation where
spouse is absent, separated, or abandoned
the other or where consent is withheld of
FDQQRW EH REWDLQHG 6XFK UXOHV GRQW DSSO\
FC 100(3)
FC1O1
FC61
Sabalones v. CA (supra)
FC 124-125
Felipe v. Heirs of Aldon
120 SCRA 628
Cheeseman v. IAC 193 SCRA 93 (supra)
Frenzel vs. Catito
G.R. No. 143958, July 11, 2003
!
Facts:
!
Alfred (Australian, German descent)
pilot with New Guinea airlines. Started
business in Philippines in 1974 and married
Teresita Santos (Fil). They separated without
divorce in 1981.
!
1983 He met Ederlina Catito (Fil) a
masseuse in Australia. Unknown to him she is
married to Klaus Muller (German) and lived in
Germany for a while. She is fluent in German
and Alfred enjoyed talking to her.
!
Alfred offered Ederlina to
stay in Phil and engage in business. She put
up a beauty parlor. Alfred decided to stay in the
Philippines for good and live with Ederlina.
They acquired properties in the name of
Ederlina which Alfred consented to since he
plans on marrying Ederlina. Klaus wrote Alfred
about his marriage with Ederlina and begged
Alfred to return Ederlina. When Alfred
confronted Ederlina, she admitted that she and
Klaus were married but she assured Alfred that
she would divorce Klaus. He agreed to
continue the amorous relationship and wait for
WKH RXWFRPH RI (GHUOLQDV SHWLWLRQ IRU GLYRUFH
Alfred hired the lawyer. Alfred acquired more
propertiHV LQ WKH QDPH RI (GHUOLQD (GHUOLQDV
petition for divorce was denied because Klaus
opposed the same. A second petition filed by
her met the same fate. Klaus wanted half of all
the properties owned by Ederlina in the
Philippines before he would agree to a divorce.
Worse, Klaus threatened to file a bigamy case
against Ederlina
!
$OIUHG DQG (GHUOLQDV UHODWLRQVKLS
started deteriorating. He demanded the return
of all the properties acquired by him and
Ederlina during their coverture.
!
Alfred filed a Complaint on October
28, 1985 with the Regional Trial Court of
Quezon City, for recovery of real and personal
Ayuste vs.CA
GR no. 118784, Sept. 2, 1999
!
!
Facts:
Christina Ayuste married Rafael
Ayuste on September 24, 1961. They
bought a machine shop (managed by
Rafael) in Lucena and bought a parcel
!
!
!
!
!
Facts:
Land was left to Vicente Villaranda and
Honorio Villaranda and their siblings by
their parents. In 1976 Honorio and Vicente
executed the deed of exchange where
Vicente agreed to convey his 64.22square-meter portion to Honorio, in
exchange for a property in Macasandig,
Cagayan de Oro City. After the execution
of the Deed, Honorio took possession of
the
64.22-square-meter
lot
and
constructed a building thereon.
On April 6, 1992, a subdivision plan was
completed, in pursuit of which TCT No. T65893 for the 64.22 square-meter share of
Vicente was issued in his name.
Honorio and Ana brought an action before
the RTC to compel Vicente to comply with
his obligations under the Deed of
Exchange. They want Vicente to identify
and delineate his undivided portion of the
property and convey to them the 64.22square-meter Divisoria lot, in compliance
with his obligations under the Deed.
During the pendency of the case, Honorio
conditionally sold the Divisoria lot to
Colorhouse Laboratories, Inc.
Vicente contends that because the
property had not been delivered, the Deed
had not been consummated. Moreover, he
claimed that the Deed had already been
revoked by both parties.
RTC: in favor of Honorio, contract valid
CA: upheld RTC
The provisions of the Civil Code were
applicable to the case at bar, since the
Deed of Exchange had been entered into
prior to the enactment of the Family
Code. 7KXV WKH DEVHQFH RI WKH ZLIHV
signature on the Deed made it only
voidable, not void.
!
!
Ainza vs.CA
G.R. No. 165420. June 30, 2005
!
!
Facts:
Antonio and Eugenia owned a lot with an
unfinished residential house located in
Quezon City. In April 1987Concepcion
bought one-half of an undivided portion of
the property from her daughter, Eugenia
DQGWKHODWWHUVKXVEDQG$QWRQLRIRU2QH
Hundred Thousand Pesos (P100,000.00).
No Deed of Absolute Sale was executed to
evidence the transaction, but cash
payment was received by the respondents,
and ownership was transferred to
Concepcion through physical delivery to
her
attorney-in-fact
and
daughter,
Natividad Tuliao (Natividad). Concepcion
DXWKRUL]HG 1DWLYLGDG DQG WKH ODWWHUV
husband, Ceferino Tuliao (Ceferino) to
occupy
the
premises,
and
make
improvements on the unfinished building.
Respondents caused the subdivision of
the property. Antonio said that he bought
the property in 1980 and introduced
improvements thereon. That he and his
wife allowed Natividad and Ceferino to
occupy the premises temporarily. Antonio
requested Natividad to vacate the
premises but the latter refused and
claimed that Concepcion owned the
property. Antonio filed an ejectment suit
on April 1, 1999. Concepcion, represented
also filed on May 4, 1999 a civil case for
partition of real property and annulment of
titles with damages.
Antonio claimed that his wife, Eugenia,
admitted that Concepcion offered to buy
one third (1/3) of the property who gave
her small amounts over several years
which totaled P100,000.00 by 1987 and for
which she signed a receipt.
RTC: Sale is valid. In favor of
Concepcion.( sale was consummated
when both contracting parties complied
with their respective obligations. Eugenia
transferred possession by delivering the
property to Concepcion who in turn paid
the purchase price. )
CA: sale is null and void. (Applying Article
124 of the Family Code, the Court of
!
!
!
!
FACTS:
-
HELD/RATIO:
-
FC 126 (10
FC 63 (2), FC 66
FC 50 in rd. To FC 43 (2)
FC 134-138
FC129
Metropolitan Bank vs Pascual
GR No. 163744, Feb. 29, 2008
FACTS:
Nicholson Pascual m. Florencia
Nevalga on 19Jan1985. During the
union, they bought a 250-square
meter lot in Makati from Clarito and
Belen Sering.
In 1994, Florencia filed a suit for
declaration of nullity of marriage on
the
ground
of
psycholohical
incapacity. 31July1995, RTC ordered
dissolution and liquidation of exVSRXVHV FRQMXJDO SDUWQHUVKLS RI
gains, however, they failed to liquidate
it.
30April1997, Florencia, with Norberto
and Elvira Oliveros obtained a 58
Million Peso loan from Metrobank. To
secure obligation, they mortgaged
their properties, including the lot in
Makati. Florencia gave Metrobank a
ISSUE/S:
W/N the property is conjugal
W/N the Mortgage was valid
HELD:
The disputed property is conjugal.
Metrobank virtually recognized the
conjugal nature of the property when it
UHIHUHG WR WKHP DV VSRXVHV FRPRUWJDJRU LQ DWKH SHWLWLRQ IRU
extrajudicial foreclosure b) published
notice for foreclosure and c) demand
letter to vacate premises of the
property.
&RQWUDUW\ WR 0HWUREDQNV VXEPLVVLRQ
the matter of the use of conjugal
funds as an essential requirement
for the presumption of conjugal
ownership to arise is WRONG. only proof acquisition during the
marriage is needed to raise
presumption.
The declaration of nullity of
marriage, without more, does not
FC 129
FC 129; FC 43(2)
FC 63(2)
FC 130 (cf. FC 104)
FC131
FC132
Santero v. CFI
153 SCRA 728
Facts:
Private respondents are requesting for
a Motion for Allowance from the
estate
of
deceased
Pablo
Pascual (legitimate father of
private respondents) which was
granted by the CFI.
Petitioners (also legitimate children of
Pascual with another woman)
oppose the motion on the
grounds that most of the private
respondents are already of age.
NOTE: neither of the women
are legally married to
Pablo Pascual.
Issue:
FC 143-146
FC 103 &FC 130
FC 66(2)
FC144
FC145
FC 142
FC 146
FC 87, NCC 1490
FC 134
Maquilan vs Maquilan
Domingo v. CA
226 SCRA 572 (All Opinions)
Facts:
!
!
!
!
!
Roberto
was
the
administrator
1983 when Delia knew of first
marriage
1989 when she discovered he had
another woman and was also selling
her property without her consent.
! Thus asked lower court for
(1) a temporary
restraining
order
stopping
Roberto
from exercising any
(2) fomarriage to be
declared null and
void
HELD: YES
!
Distribution and separation of property
of spouses is one of the reasons why
WKHUHVDQHHGWRMXGLFLDOO\GHclare that
a marriage is void.
!
Court that declares a marriage void
will also provide for the liquidation,
partition, and distribution of properties
of spouses. It is a necessary
consequence of judicial declaration of
absolute nullity of marriage
! Rules that apply: FC Art 43
and 44
! Separation of property will be
according to regime of
property relations governing
them.
CONCURRING BY VITUG
When a void marriage is still in existence
(without judical declaration of nullity) neither
the CPG or ACP will apply instead, property
relations shall be governed by co-ownership
rules under Art 147 or Art 148 of FC.
Belcodero v. CA (supra)
Valds v. QC RTC, supra
Carino vs. Carino, supra
Fehr vs. Fehr
G.R. No. 152716. October 23, 2003
Facts:
!
legal
capacity of party to contract
marriage
! presumed that property was
obtained through joint efforts.
!
Evidence clearly shows that condo
unit was obtained when they were
living exclusively together thus is
considered COMMON PROPERTY of
petitioner and respondent
Civil code provisions on co-ownership should
thus should thus apply to answer property
regime of the parties.
Joaquino vs Reyes
434 SCRA 260
Facts:
!
,Q WHUPV RI WKH LOOHJLWLPDWH FKLOGUHQV ULJKW WR
RodolfoV HVWDWH WKHLU ULJKWV PXVW EH
determined in a special proceeding instituted
for that purpose. The issue was not raised or
presented in the original and supplemental
complaints for reconveyance of property and
damages, in the answers of Milagros and her
memorandum. Hence, the illegitimate filiation
of her children could not have been duly
established in the case at bar.
Gonzales vs Gonzales
478 SCRA 327
Facts:
(X)
applied
to
adultery/concubinag
e
ART 148 does when
common-law couple have a
legal
impediment,
only
property acquired by them
through ACTUAL, JOINT
CONTRIBUTION
OF
MONEY, PROEPRTY OR
INDUSTRY, shall be owned
by them in common and in
proportion to their respective
properties
HELD:
x
NO
!
Co-ownership contemplated
in Art. 144 of the Civil Code
requires that the man and
the woman living together
must not in any way be
incapacitated to contract
marriage
NO
Gomez v. Lipana
33 SCRA 615
FACTS:
x
Lipana contracted two marriages:
(1) Maria
1930
Loreto
Ancino-
x
x
ISSUES:
x
WON Art. 1417 of the old Civil Code is
applicable
HELD:
x
NO
! 6LQFH /LSDQDV st marriage
KDVQW EHHQ GLVVROYHG RU
When
did
the
conjugal partnership
formed by virtue of
2nd
marriage
WHUPLQDWH" ,VLGUDV
death in 1958
x
Art. 1417
was
no
longer in
force
changed
by
NCC
(took effect
1950
! No action lies under Art.
1417 for the forfeiture of the
KXVEDQGVVKDUH
RESULT: recognize right of 2nd wife to her
husband while other half is conjugal
partnership of first marriage. Thus decision is
reversed.
Yap v. CA
145 SCRA 229
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Ruling: Petition is granted.
Bienvenido v. Court of Appeals (supra)
Agapay vs Agapay
276 SCRA 340
Facts:
x
x
x
x
x
Issue
Who is the owner of the two pieces of property
Held: Carlina, the first wife
x
Under FC Article 148, only the
properties acquired by both of the
parties through their actual joint
contribution of money, property or
Issue:
A.
B.
Held:
x
Malilin vs Castillo
333 SCRA 628
Facts:
x
Saguid vs. CA
G.R. No. 150611, June 10, 2003
Facts:
-Seventeen-year old Gina S. Rey was married
but separated de facto from her husband, when
she met petitioner Jacinto Saguid in
Marinduque, sometime in July 1987
-the two decided to cohabit as husband and
wife in a house built on a lot owned by
-DFLQWRVIDWKHU
-In 1996, the couple decided to separate and
end up their 9-year cohabitation.
-On January 9, 1997, private respondent Gina
Rey filed a complaint for Partition and
Recovery
of
Personal
Property
with
Receivership against the petitioner with the
Regional Trial Court of Boac, Marinduque
-She alleged that from her salary of $1,500.00
a month as entertainer in Japan, she was able
to contribute P70,000.00 in the completion of
their unfinished house. Also, from her own
earnings as an entertainer and fish dealer, she
was able to acquire and accumulate
appliances, pieces of furniture and household
effects, with a total value of P111,375.00. She
prayed that she be declared the sole owner of
these personal properties and that the amount
of P70,000.00, representing her contribution to
the construction of their house, be reimbursed
to her.
-Petitioner Jacinto Saguid claims that expenses
for the construction of their house were
defrayed solely from his income as a captain of
their fishing vessel. He averred that private
UHVSRQGHQWV PHDJHU LQFRPH DV ILVK GHDOHU
rendered her unable to contribute in the
construction of said house; Gina did not work
continuously in Japan from 1992 to 1994, but
only for a 6-month duration each year. When
their house was repaired and improved
sometime in 1995-1996, private respondent did
not share in the expenses because her
earnings as entertainer were spent on the daily
needs and business of her parents
-RTC rendered judgment in favor of Gina Rey
-CA affirmed RTC ruling
ISSUE: whether or not the parties can be
considered as co-owners of the properties
Held: YES
!
!
!
Acre vs Yutikki
2007
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Signey v SSS
GR No. 173582, Jan. 28, 2008
Facts:
!
Rodolfo Signey, SSS member, died on
May 21 2001, in the records he had
designated Yolanda as primary beneficiary
and his 4 children with her as secondary
beneficiaries.
!
3 women started claiming his death
benefits from SSS (in order)
1. Yolanda Signey (petitioner)
! Claimed death benefits first (July 6 2001)
2. Gina Servano (respondent)
! Claimed death benefits (July 13 2001)
! Has 2 minor children with Rodolfo
! Claims that she and Yolanda were
common law-wives, while Editha is the
legal wife.
3. Editha Espinosa (respondent)
! Claimed death benefits (Oct 2001)
! Claims that she is the legal wife
!
666 GHQLHV <RODQGD VD\LQJ *LQDV
children are the primary beneficiaries
under the SSS Law
!
Says also that the marriage between
Yolanda and Rodolfo is null and void
because Rodolfo was still married with
Editha
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Yolanda
files a petition with Social
Security Commission (SSC) along with a
waiver of rights by Editha wherein Editha
waived all claims of benefits from SSS
because she (Editha) was married to a diff
person
SSC affirms the SSS Decision
Despite the new waiver by Editha, SSC
gave more weight to the confirmed
marriage of Rodolfo and Editha
SSC: Mere designation by Rodolfo in the
records of who his beneficiaries were is
not a controlling factor
SSC then applies SSS Law (RA 8282)
where it says that dependent legit / illegit
children may be primary beneficiaries, and
they have to be minors.
Rodolfo had one legitimate child who died
earlier than he did
His children with Yolanda are all over 21
years old
His children with Gina are qualified (them
being minors)
Issue:
1. :Q SHWLWLRQHUV
deceased is valid?
PDUULDJH
ZLWK
WKH
Legal Spouse
!
!
!
Issue:
3. :Q SHWLWLRQHUV PDUULDJH ZLWK WKH
deceased is valid?
4. W/n petitioner has the right to the benefits
against the illegitimate children?
Held: No. There is no merit to the petition
3. The existence of a prior marriage between
Editha and Rodolfa is supported by
evidence
4. Section 8(e) and (k) of RA 8282 is very
clear (found in the case pg. 638):
! It defines who are dependents:
Legal Spouse
Borromeo vs Descallar
GR No. 159310, Feb. 24, 2009
Facts:
1) Wilhelm
2)
3)
Jambrich, an Austrian,
arrived in the Philippines in 1983. In
1984, he met respondent Antonietta
Opalla-Descallar, a separated mother
of two boys who was working as a
waitress at St. Moritz Hotel. Jambrich
and respondent fell in love and
decided to live together.
In the Contracts to Sell dated
November 18, 19851 and March 10,
19862 and A Deed of Absolute Sale
dated November 16, 1987 covering
the
properties
in
Agro-Macro
Subdivision, Cabancalan, Mandaue
City, Jambrich and respondent were
referred to as the buyers.
However, when the Deed of Absolute
Sale was presented for registration
before the Register of Deeds,
registration was refused on the
ground that Jambrich was an alien
4)
5)
6)
7)
FAMILY RELATIONS
FC 149
Alavado v. City of Tacloban
139 SCRA 230
Facts:
-Ricardo was employed as a carpenterIRUHPDQ E\ WKH &LW\ (QJLQHHUV 2IILFH RI
Tacloban City
-Last day of service was August 19, 1974. (On
leave from April 23 to May 23, 1974). On
August 6, he went to work only to supervise
laborers but he suffered sever headache. Died
on August 7, the day after of Cerebral
Hemorrage.
-W filed claim for death benefits, in her own
behalf and of minor children.
-The hearing officer in Tacloban City issued an
award granting W 5200php as death benefits
and 200php as burial reimbursement.
-Tacloban City appealed. On Nov 29, 1975,
:&& GLVPLVVHG :V FODLP IRU GHDWK EHQHILWV
RQ WKH JURXQG RI ODFN RI ILOLDWLRQ EHWZHHQ
claimant and deceDVHG
-According to WCC, Matilde only presented a
marriage certificate. MC is not an authentic
proof of marital status. She should show
original Marriage Contract or MCertificate
issued by the Local Civil Registrar. For filiation,
her presentation of birth certificate is not
enough. BC is not authentic proof of kinship of
the person baptized.
--WCC said W failed to prove that she was
leggaly married to deceased because of a lack
Arroyo v. CA
FC 150- 151
NCC 2035
ROC Rules 6 Sec. 1(j)
RPC 20, 247 and 332
Gayon v. Gayon
36 SCRA 104
Wainwright v. Versoza
26 SCRA 78
Magbaleta vs Gonong
76 SCRA 511
De Guzman vs genato
89 SCRA 674
2/Do vs Co Cho Chit
220 SCRA 656
Tribiana vs.Tribiana
G.R. No. 137359, Sept. 13, 2004
Hiyas Savings and Loan Bank, Inc. vs. Acua
G.R. NO. 154132, August 31, 2006
FC 152,FC 161
Taneo vs CA
304 SCRA 308
FC 153, compare withFC 159
FC154
Patricio vs. Dario
G.R. No. 170829, November 20, 2006
FC 155, FC 160
Modequillo v. Breva
185 SCRA 766
Sian Valley v. Lucasan
109 Phil 294
Honrado vs.CA
G.R. No. 166333, Nov. 25, 2005
Cabang vs Basay
GR No. 180587, March 20, 2009
Ching vs CA (supra)
Modequillo vs Breva
185 SCRA 756
Facts:
As liability for a vehicular accident on March
16, 1976 which killed Audie Salinas and which
injured Renato Culan, Jose Modequillo and
Benito Malubay were ordered to pay indemnity
for damages to spouses Salinas and to
Juanito. Consequently on July 7, 1988, a writ of
execution and levy were issued against a
parcel of residential lot and an agricultural land,
the titles of which were under the name of
Modequillo. Modequillo then motioned to
quash, alleging that the residential lot was their
family home that had been constituted since
1969, prior to the case and hence exempt from
liability by virtue of FC 155.
Held:
The family home is not exempt from liability.
0RGHTXLOORVKRXVHDQGORWZHUHFRQVWLWXWHGDV
!
!
Facts:
April 1971 when as Felicidad said, Galileo
Trocio raped her which begot a son, Jewel
'LGQW LPPHGLDWHO\ WHOO WKH SROLFH VLQFH 7URFLR
was thereatening to have her alien husband
and to tell authrorities that she was violating
the Anti-Dummy Law in operation of her
vocational school
Nov 1979 Felicidad filed case of disbarment
against Atty. Trocio
Trocio denied allegation of rape, only testifying
WKDW KH GHDOW KHU DQG KHU IDPLO\V FDVHV DQG
said she was only doing this because he
declined on her request to increase his fee so
that she may get the extra.
Feb 13 1986 since Trocio failed to attend the
hearings etc, Provincial fiscal of Lanao Del
Norte, on prima facie evidence presented, held
Trocio administratively liable.
ISSUE: WON Trocio should be disbarred for
gross immoral conduct
HELD: NO, there is lack of evidence
After incident, she still asked him to be the
lawyer for her cases such as a robbery case
Angeles vs Maglaya
469 SCRA 363
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Facts:
Nov 20, 1939 when Aleli Maglaya was born
1948 when deceased Francisco married
Belen Angeles
1988 when her mother Genoveva died
March 1998 when Aleli Maglaya filed in Rtv
Caloocan petition to be made administratix of
ODWH)UDQFLVFR$QJHOHVHVWDWHVLQFHVKHLVVROH
legitimate daughter of Francisco. This was
contested by his wife Belen Angeles.
RTC: Aleli failed to prove filiation
CA: reversed decision and said that Aleli was
indeed a legitimate child of Francisco and
Genoveva
ISSUE: WON CA erred in declaring Aleli as a
legitimate child
HELD: YES
Law applied: FC 164 children conceived or
born during the marriage of parents are
legitimate
Aleli never showed any evidence of a marriage
existing between Francisco and Genoveva. In
fact, if they did marry, it would have rendered
)UDQFLVFRV PDUULDJH WR %HOHQ DV ELJDPRXVH
However, Aleli herself recognized Belen as the
surviving spouse in her petition for letters of
administration
:LWKRXW HYLGHQFH RI PDUULDJH RQH FDQW
presume Aleli to be legitimate child
CA erred in declaring that birth certificate
indubitably establishes legitimacy
!
!
!
be a beneficiary.
Naldoza v. Republic
112 SCRA 658
Facts: Zosima Naldoza married Dionesio
Divinagracia on 5/30/70. They had 2 children:
Jr. and Bombi Roberto. Dionesio abandoned
conjugal home after Zosima confronted him
about his previous marriage. Also, he allegedly
swindled 50k from Rep. Maglana and 10k from
a certain Galagar, etc.
Classmates of Jr. and Bombi were
teasing them because of their swindler father.
To obliterate any connection between her
children and Dionesio (thereby relieving the
kids of the remarks of classmates), Zosima
filed @ CFI Bohol on 4/10/78 a petition to
change surname of her 2 children from
Divinagracia into Naldoza (her maiden name).
TC dismissed pet. saying that
aforementioned
reasons
(swindling,
abandoning, previous marriage of Dionesio
<but their marriage has not yet been annulled
nor declared bigamous> ) were not sufficient
grounds to invoke such change of surname.
Furthermore, change of name would give false
impression of family relations.
Marquino vs IAC
233 SCRA 348
Ong vs CA
272 SCRA 725
FACTS:
-Respondents Alferdo Ong Jr. and Robert Ong
are children of Saturnina Caballes allegedly by
Manuel Ong.
-Manuel (representing himself as Alfredo Go)
was introduced to Saturnina by Vicente Sy and
Constancia Lim (in 1953 at a night club in
cebu). They had a relationship and lived
together for 4 months. It was also established
that prior to meeting Manuel, Saturnina
cohabited with a paralytic.
-Alfredo Ong Jr. (registered as Alfredo Go Jr.)
was born in 1955 and Robert Ong (registered
Roberto
are
Held/Ratio:
Yes. Alfredo and Roberto are sons of Manuel.
Using Article 283 Paragraph. 4 (The father is
obliged to recognize) When the child has in his
favor any evidence or proof that the defendant
is his father .
Art. 283 operates as a blanket provision
covering all cases in the preceding ones, so
that evidence, even though insufficient to
constitute proof under the other paragraphs,
may nonetheless be enough to qualify the case
under par. 4.
In this case, the testimony of Saturnina
Caballes that she had illicit sexual relation with
Manuel Ong over a long period (1954-1957)
which, had it been openly done, would have
FC 165, 175476
Osmea de Valencia v. Rodriguez
84 Phil 222
!
!
Facts:
Plaintiffs say that they are the legitimate
children of the defendant Pio Valencia in the
ODWWHUV ODZIXO ZHGORFN ZLWK SODLQWLII &DWDOLQD
Osmena
Defendants on the otherhand are the
illegitimate children of defendant Pio Valencia
with Emilia Rodriguez his common-law wife.
Plaintiffs allege that they alone have the right to
WKHVXUQDPH9DOHQFLD
Jao vs CA
152 SCRA 359
Facts:
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Uyguangco vs CA
178 SCRA 684
Facts: Apolinario Uyguangco died intestate in
1975, leaving his wife, four legitimate children
and properties which they divided among
themselves. Graciano Uyguangco filed a
complaint for partition against the petitioners,
claiming that as the illegitimate son of the
deceased and a Anastacia Bacjao, he must not
be left out of the extrajudicial settlement of the
estate. He also claims that he received support
from his father while in high school and was
also assigned by his father as storekeeper at
the Uyguangco store.
Petitioners moved to dismiss the case on the
ground that Graciano could not prove his
alleged filiation having none of the documents
required in Art. 278 of the NCC (i.e. record of
birth, a will, a statement before a court of
record or in any authentic writing. Neither may
he resort to Art. 285 of the NCC because he
was already an adult when his alleged dad
died.
*UDFLDQR LQVLVWV KRZHYHU WKDW KH LV LQ
continuous possession of the status of a child
of his alleged father by the direct acts of the
ODWWHURURIKLVIDPLO\DVLVXQGHU$UWRIWKH
NCC.
Issue: WON Graciano may adequately prove
filiation.
Held: NO
Ratio:
The Civil Code provisions they invoke have
been superseded or at least modified by the
corresponding articles n the FC.
Mangulabnan v. IAC
185 SCRA 760
Held: NO
Toring, says that petitioner is only his halfsister because she has a different father.
He substitutes for Mendoza in this case after
petitioner died.
RTC: rules for petitioner because private
respondent failed to show enough evidence to
prove of her filiation.
CA: reversed decision. The two witnesses
showed truthfulness, there is no reason for
them to testify falsely. Vicente Toring would
obviously have more to lose if petitioner wins
this case so he has a motive.
Issue: :1 7HRSLVWD LV &DVLPLUR 0HQGR]DV
illegitimate child?
Held: YES.
Ratio:
Although Teopista failed to show that she was
in an open and continuous possession of the
status of an illegitimate child of Casimiro, she
has nevertheless established that status by
another method.
FC 175 grants the right of illegitimate children
to establish their filiation in the same way as
legitimate children. FC 172(2) allows them to
SURYH ILOLDWLRQ E\ DQ\ RWKHU PHDQV DOORZHG E\
WKH5XOHVRI&RXUWDQGVSHFLDOODZV
In the case at bar, the RTC failed to consider
the testimony of Isaac Mendoza as another
method of establishing status.
Rule 130, Sec. 39, of the Rules of Court
discusses the act or declarations about
pedigree being allowed as evidence. It has to
conform to 4 requisites VR LW ZRQW EH
considered hearsay:
Facts:
Feb. 7, 1941: Dr. Antonio Santos m Sofia
Bona, had one daughter: Maria (petitioner)
Antonio fell in love with another woman, private
respondent Conchita Talag
1949: obtained a divorce decree in Nevada.
1951: married Conchita in Tokyo (obviously
knowing their marriage would be invalid here),
had 11 children.
Mar. 30, 1967: Sofia died
Apr. 23, 1967: Antionio m Conchita in Tagaytay
City
Mar. 8, 1981: Antonio died intestate leaving
P15 million worth of properties
May 15, 1981: PR went to court, asking for
letters of administration in her favor to settle
KHU KXVEDQGV HVWDte. Alleged that decedent
was survived by 12 heirs; herself, petitioner,
and her 10 surviving children with Antonio.
Petition was granted.
November 1987: Petitioner filed a motion
arguing that the 10 children were illegitimate.
November 1991: Court declared the 10
children legitimated.
FACTS:
0DULEHOV6WRU\
Maribel met Raymond during her first night as
DUHFHSWLRQLVWDW7RQLJKWV&OXEDQG5HVWKRXVH
along Roxas Blvd.
Petitioner wooed her and they soon lived
together, with petitioner paying the rentals in a
succession of apartments
Maribel left for Japan in July 1981, already
pregnant
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
x
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
x
x
x
x
!
!
!
!
!
CA affirmed
ISSUES:
WON Raymond is the father of Joanna Rose
HELD:
Yes
Letter 1
,Q UHWXUQ , SURPLVH WR EH D ORYLQJ FDULQJ
husband & father to both of you
Raymond considered himself to be the father of
Joanna
Contrary to his vehement assertion that he
Maribel were just friends
Letter 2 (Aug. 11, 1981)
Petitioner lovingly told Maribel to take care of
KHUVHOI EHFDXVH RI KHU VLWXDWLRQ REYLRXVO\
referring to the state of pregnancy
It was only after Raymond separated from
Maribel that he started to deny paternity of
Joanna Rose
+H GLGQW REMHFW WR EHLQJ LGHQWLILHG DV -RDQQD
5RVHV IDWKHU DV GLVFORVHG LQ WKH &HUWLILFDWH RI
Live Birth
Art. 175: Illegitimate filiation may be
established in the same way and on the same
evidence as legit children
Art. 172(1): The filiation of legitimate children is
established by (1) The record of birth
appearing in the civil register
Other evidences: Pictures of Raymond
cuddling Joanna Rose
Tijing vs CA
2001
x
x
!
!
!
x
!
FACTS:
Petitioners are husband and wife with 6
children, the youngest is Edgardo Tijing, Jr.
(born April 27, 1989)
Bienvenida:
August 1989 Angelita Diamante went to her
house to fetch her for an urgent laundry job;
made Bienvenida wait while she went to the
market; left her 4-month-old son Edgardo, Jr.
under the care of Angelita; when she returned,
both Angelita and Edgardo Jr. were gone
Oct. 1993 Bienvenida read in a tabloid about
the death of Tomas Lopez, allegedly the
common-law husband of Angelita, and whose
remains were lying in state in Hagonoy,
Bulacan; Bienvenida went to Bulacan and
allegedly saw Edgardo, Jr. for the first time in 4
years
Claims that her son was already named John
Thomas Lopez
Avers that Angelita refused to return the boy to
her despite her demand
Bienvenida and Edgardo filed their petition for
habeas corpus
Two witnesses: (1) Vasquez, who assisted in
the delivery of Edgardo, Jr.; and (2) Benjamin
Lopez (brother of Tomas Lopez), who testified
WKDW KLV EURWKHU FRXOGQW KDYH SRVVLEO\ father
John Thomas Lopez as the latter was sterile
and that Tomas admitted to him that John
Thomas Lopez was only an adopted son
Angelita claimed that she is the natural mother
of the child
!
!
!
x
x
x
x
x
!
x
!
x
x
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
Facts:
Certiorari of CA affirmation of RTC ruling
DZDUGLQJ SRUWLRQ RI GLVSXWHG SURSHUW\ WR
illegitimate daughter Ma. Theresa Eceta.
Rosalina Eceta marries Isaac Eceta in 1926,
they acquire several properties including
disputed property in Cubao. They also have a
legitimate son Vicente.
,VDDFGLHVLQOHDYLQJSURSHUWLHVWR5RVDOLQD
and Vicente
9LFHQWD GLHV LQ OHDYLQJ DQ illegitimate
FKLOG 0D 7KHresa (Ma. Theresa
illegitimate for being born to unmarried
parents).
9LFHQWHVKHLUVDUHKLVPRWKHU5RVDOLQDDQGKLV
illegitimate daughter Ma. Theresa.
0D 7KHUHVD ILOHV IRU 3DUWLWLRQ DQG
Accounting w/ damages for the Cubao property
citing her co-ownership thereof by being an
heir to Vicente.
Rosalina avers that the property is her
exclusive property.
During the pre-trial parties admitted their
relationship as grandmother and grand
daughter.
RTC rules for Ma. Theresa awarding her " of
the property
2)
3)
4)
5)
Facts:
Review of CA decision awarding custody of
minor child to mother (custody til child reaches
age 10 then he is to choose w/c parent he
ZDQWVWRVWD\ ZLWK ZYLVLWDWLRQULJKWVWRWKH
Father, Joey D. Briones.
0DU ILOHV IRU +DEHDV &RUSXV FODLPLQJ
WKH FKLOG ZDV YLVLWHG E\ V 0DULFHO DQG
Francisca Miguel relatives of the mother of the
FKLOG /RUHWD 0LJXHO XQGHU WKH SUHWH[W RI
taking the child to SM, then they did not return.
claims that he extensively looked for the
child but failed so he was compelled to file for
habeas corpus.
PRWKHU/RUHWDDOOHges that the child was not
WDNHQ DV KH ZDV IHWFKHG E\ KHU Z WKH
consent.
DQG PHW LQ -DSDQ DQG KDG D UHODWLRQVKLS
together w/c bore the child Michael Kevin
3LQHGD UHODWLRQVKLS HYHQWXDOO\ VRXUHG DFFGJ
WR /RUHWD EHFDXVH RI LOOLFLW UHODWLRQVKLS Z
DQRWKHU ZRPDQ QRZ PDUULHG WR -DSDQHVH
national).
6)
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Facts:
Respondents Fe Angela and her son Martin
3UROODPDQWHVXHG0DUWLQVDOOHJHGELRORJLFDO
father, petitioner Arnel L. Agustin, for support
and support pendente lite
Arnel supposedly impregnated Fe on her 34th
birthday on November 10, 1999
7KHEDE\VELUWKFHUWLILFDWHZDV purportedly
signed by Arnel as the father. Arnel shouldered
the pre-natal and hospital expenses but later
UHIXVHG)HVUHSHDWHGUHTXHVWVIRU0DUWLQV
support despite his adequate financial capacity
and even suggested to have the child
committed for adoption. Arnel also denied
having fathered the child
x
x
x
x
x
!
!
(1)
Facts:
(2)
14 May 1998, then thirteen-year-old Rosendo
Alba, represented by his mother Armi Alba
before the trial court a petition for compulsory
recognition, support and damages against
(1)
petitioner (Rosendo Herrera)
Rosendo Herrera denied that he is the
biological father of respondent. Petitioner also (2)
GHQLHG SK\VLFDO FRQWDFW ZLWK UHVSRQGHQWV
mother
Respondent filed a motion to direct the taking
of DNA paternity. respondent presented the
testimony of Saturnina C. Halos, Ph.D who
testified that the test is 99.99% accurate
Petitioner opposed DNA paternity testing and
contended that it has not gained acceptability.
Petitioner further argued that DNA paternity
testing violates his right against selfincrimination
trial court and CA granted the motion to
conduct DNA paternity testing
Issue:
Petitioner raises the issue of whether a DNA
test is a valid probative tool in this jurisdiction
to determine filiation. Petitioner asks for the
conditions under which DNA technology may
be integrated into our judicial system and the
prerequisites for the admissibility of DNA test
results in a paternity suit
Relevant Provisions
The relevant provisions of the Family Code
provide as follows:
ART. 175. Illegitimate children may establish
their illegitimate filiation in the same way and
on the same evidence as legitimate children.
xxx
ART. 172. The filiation of legitimate children is
established by any of the following:
The record of birth appearing in the civil register
x
or a final judgment; or
x
x
x
!
x
x
x
x
Facts:
The reason for this case is that Aleli Maglaya
filed a petition for appointment as administratrix
of the intestate estate of Francisco M. Angeles
because she (respondent) is the sole legitimate
child of the deceased and Genoveva Mercado,
and, together with petitioner, Belen S. Angeles,
GHFHGHQWV ZLIH E\ his second marriage, are
the surviving heirs of the decedent
Belen, the second wife averred that Aleli is not
the daughter of Francisco because the birth
certificate was not signed by him. Furthermore,
she alleges that Aleli has not presented the
marriage contract between her supposed
parents or produced any acceptable document
to prove such union
Respondent testified having been born on
November 20, 1939 as the legitimate child of
Francisco M. Angeles and Genoveva Mercado,
who died in January 1988
She also testified having been in open and
continuous possession of the status of a
legitimate child.
Four (4) other witnesses testified on her behalf,
namely:
Tomas
Angeles,[6]
Francisco
Yaya,[7] Jose O. Carreon[8] and Paulita
Angeles de la Cruz.[9] Respondent also
offered in evidence her birth certificate which
contained an entry stating that she was born at
the Mary Johnston Hospital, Tondo, Manila, to
Francisco Angeles and Genoveva Mercado
DQG ZKHUHRQ WKH KDQGZULWWHQ ZRUG Yes
appears on the space below the question
Legitimate? (Legitimo?)SLFWXUHVWDNHQGXULQJ
UHVSRQGHQWV ZHGGLQJ DV EULGH WR $WW\
Guillermo T. Maglaya; and a copy of her
marriage contract. Likewise offered were her
scholastic and government service records
Petitioner moved to dismiss on the ground that
filiation was not fully proved
Trial court ruled that respondent failed to prove
filiation
x
x
x
x
DVVHUWLRQWKDWKHUPRWKHUDQGIDWKHUZHUHLQD
valid marriage
Respondent had declared that her mother
Genoveva died in 1988, implying, quite clearly,
that when Francisco contracted marriage with
petitioner Belen S. Angeles in 1948, Genoveva
DQG )UDQFLVFR ZHUH DOUHDG\ spouses 1RZ
then, if, as respondent maintained despite utter
Guy vs CA
GR No. 163707, Sept. 15, 2006
Facts
x
June 13, 1997: Karen Oanes Wei and
Kamille Oanes Wei, represented by their
mother Remedio Oanes, filed petition for
letters of administration before the Makati
RTC.
x
Karen and Kamille allege that they are the
duly acknowledged illegitimate children of
Sima Wei (a.k.a. Rufino Guy Susim).
x
October 29, 2009: Sima Wei died
intestate, leaving behind an estate valued
at PhP10M in real and personal properties.
His known heirs include his surviving
spouse Shirley Guy and children Emy,
Jeanne, Cristina, George and Michael, all
surnamed Guy. (Michael is herein
petitioner).
x
Karen and Kamille prayed for the
appointment of a regular administrator for
WKH RUGHUO\ VHWWOHPHQW RI 6LPD :HLV
estate, but for the meantime, prayed for
the appointment of petitioner Michael as
Special Administrator of the estate.
x
Michael prayed for the dismissal of the
petition. He contends there is no need for
letters of administration being prayed for
by Karen and Kamille because Sima Wei
left no debts. Also, Karen and Kamille
should have established their status as
illegitimate children during the lifetime of
Sima Wei according to FC175.
x
Before Sima Wei died, Remedios received
P300,000.00 and an educational plan for
KHU PLQRU GDXJKWHUV E\ ZD\ RI ILQDQFLDO
assistance and in full settlement of any
and all claims of whatsoever nature and
kind x x x against the estate of the late
6LPD :HL 0LFKDHO QRZ FRQWHQGV WKDW
because of this Release and Waiver of
Claim, respondents are now estopped
from making claims from the estate of the
decedent.
Pertinent Issues
1. W/N Remedios is deemed to have waived
KHU GDXJKWHUV OHJLWLPH E\ YLUWXH RI WKH
Release and Waiver of Claim between her
and the decedent
2. W/N Karen and Kamille are barred by
prescription from proving their filiation
in view of FC175
Held
1. NO
2. No decision on this issue
Ratio
1. As we already know now, the law prohibits
implicit waivers of rights. Although the
document is titled Release and Waiver of
Claim, there is nothing in the document
that states unequivocally a waiver of
hereditary rights. It merely states that
Remedios received PhP300,000.00 for the
education of Karen and Kamille. Also,
under NCC1044, parents or guardians
may repudiate the inheritance left to their
wards only by judicial authorization. In the
case at bar, such an authorization is not
present. The Release and Waiver of Claim
is therefore null and void.
2. The court did not decide on this issue
yet and decided to remand the case to
the trial court for reception of evidence.
A ruling on this issue would be
premature considering the respondents
have yet to present evidence, not
before the SC, but before the trial court.
Under the Family Code, when filiation of
an illegitimate child is established by a
record of birth appearing in the civil
register or a final judgment, or an
admission of filiation in a public document
or a private handwritten instrument signed
by the parent concerned, the action for
recognition may be brought by the child
during his or her lifetime. However, if the
action is based upon open and
continuous possession of the status of
an illegitimate child, or any other
means allowed by the rules or special
laws, it may only be brought during the
lifetime of the alleged parent (FC175). It
is clear therefore that the resolution of the
issue of prescription depends on the type
of evidence to be adduced by private
respondents in proving their filiation.
However, it would be impossible to
determine the same in this case as there
has been no reception of evidence yet.
Petition denied; remanded as to the third issue.
Facts
x
Maria Clarissa Posada was employed in
the office of Mayor Teofisto Verceles, a
close family friend.
x
November 11, 1986: Teofisto tried to flirt
with Clarissa while in a hotel restaurant
when they were supposedly attending a
conference, but Clarissa managed to
escape and leave the hotel immediately.
x
December 22, 1986: Teofisto requested
Clarissa to brief him on the progress of
barangay projects in his hotel. Once again,
Teofisto made his advances, offered her a
position. This time, Clarissa succumbed.
x
September 23, 1987: Verna Aiza Posada
was born to Clarissa.
x
October 23, 1987: Clarissa and her
parents sued Teofisto for damages.
Pertinent Issue
1. W/N filiation of Verna was sufficiently
established
2. W/N filiation can be resolved in an action
for damages with support pendente lite
Held
1. YES
2. YES
Ratio
1. Any authentic writing is a ground for
compulsory recognition and is in itself a
voluntary recognition of filiation that does
People vs Umanito
GR No. 172607, Oct. 26, 2007
Facts:
On July 15, 1989, Rufino Umanito allegedly
raped AAA (name withheld), for which he was
on October 15, 1997. Although AAA was an
unmarried woman, 12-18 years of age and of
good reputation, Rufino contended that she
was actually impregnated by her married lover;
that her mother only prodded her to accuse
him; that he was at home the whole day of July
15, 1989, working in their picture frame family
business; that he courted AAA but they were
not sweethearts. On the other hand, AAA
claimed that she met Rufino only on the day of
the rape but later claimed that they were
actually friends, and later, that they were
actually close friends.
Issue:
Held:
5HOHYDQW WR WKH GHWHUPLQDWLRQ RI 5XILQRV JXLOW
LVWKHILOLDWLRQRI$$$VFKLOGZKRZDVERUQRXW
RI WKH DOOHJHG UDSH +HQFH 5XILQRV SDWHUQLW\
over the child is key to his acquittal. SC thus
ordered Rufino, AAA and child to subject
themselves to DNA testing and remanded the
case to the RTC for reception of DNA evidence
under the New Rule on DNA Evidence,
Sections 4, 5, 7, and 8. (The New Rule on DNA
Evidence took effect on October 15, 2007.)
By doing so, SC acknowledges the strong
weight of DNA testing as exculpatory evidence
in determining filiation, reiterating its rulings in
People v. Yalar, Tijing v. CA, Herrera v. Alba,
and Tecson v. COMELEC. This is because
DNA is composed of two copies: one copy from
each parent, and each DNA configuration is
unique to a person.
but
not
Presumptive Held:
No. As a consequence of the declaration of
nullity of their marriage, their child is illegitimate
because the child was born outside of a valid
marriage
Montefalcon v Vasquez
GR No. 165016, June 17, 2008
Facts:
1999 Dolores Montefalcon filed with RTCNaga for acknowledgment and support by
Ronnie Vasquez of their son Laurence as his
illegitimate child
3 summons were delivered to Vasquez all of
which remained unanswered
2001 FRXUW WDNLQJ 9DVTXH] VLOHQFH DV WUXWK
to the allegations, declared Laurence as his
illegitimate child and ordered him to support the
child. Vasquez resurfaced after this decision
and appealed it. Thus the case.
ISSUE: WON Laurence is the illegitimate child
of Vasquez
HELD: YES, and is thus entitled to support.
FC Article 172, the filiation of legitimate
children is established by any of the following:
(1) through record of birth appearing in the civil
register or a final order
7KLV LV HYLGHQFHG E\ /DXUHQFH UHFRUG RI OLYH
birth which Vasquez signed and supplied the
data.
FC Article 195 - parent is obliged to support his
illegitimate child.
Support comprises everything indispensable
for sustenance, dwelling, clothing, medical
attendance, education and transportation, in
keeping with the financial capacity of the family
!
!
!
!
Facts:
Jan 1941 Emiliano Andal ,who was married
to Maria Duenas, became sick with
tuberculosis. His brother Felix went to live with
them to help them with the farm.
Sept 10 1942, Maria eloped with Felix and lived
together from 1942-1943
-DQ(PLOLDQRGLHG0DULDGLGQWDWWHQG
the funeral /
June 17, 1943 Maria gave birth to Mariano
Andal
Maria then filed for recovery of land that was
originally given to Emiliano by his mother upon
his marriage to Maria. Maria said that the land
LV KHU VRQV VLQFH KH LV WKH OHJLWLPDWH KHLU RI
Emiliano.
!
!
HELD: YES
Art 108 of NCC - Children born after the one
hundred and eighty days next following that of
the celebration of marriage or within the three
hundred days next following its dissolution or
the separation of the spouses shall be
presumed to be legitimate.
Emiliano is presumed to be legitimate sine he
was born within 300 days following the
dissolution of marriage.
Evidence did not show that Emiliano, even
when he was sick of tuberculosis, could not
sexually perform so even if Maria was having
an affair even before eloping with Felix, it is still
presumed that Mariano LV(PLOLDQRVVRQ
RESULT: son is the legit heir and thus inherits
the land of his father
!
!
!
FACTS:
Mejias is married to Anahaw
Majias allegedly had intercourse with
Macadangdang sometime in March 1967
Due to the affair, she and her husband
separated in 1967
October 30, 1967: Mejias gave birthday to a
boy (Rolando Macadangdang)
April 25, 1972: Mejias filed a complaint for
recognition and support against
Macadangdang
Macadangdang opposed claim and prayed for
its dismissal
Court dismissed the complaint
CA reversed the judgment and declared
Rolando to be an illegitimate son of Antonio
Macadangdang.
ISSUES:
Whether or not the child Rolando is
conclusively presumed the legitimate issue of
the spouses Elizabeth Mejias and Crispin
Anahaw; and
Whether or not the wife may institute an action
that would bastardize her child without giving
her husband, the legally presumed father, an
opportunity to be heard.
HELD:
YES
The birth of Rolando came more than one
hundred eighty 180 days following the
celebration of the said marriage and before 300
days following the alleged separation between
aforenamed spouses. Art. 255: Rolando is
conclusively presumed to be the legitimate son
of Mejias and Anahaw
Rolando was born on October 30, 1967.
Between March, 1967 and October 30, 1967,
x
x
x
JUDGMENT
Concepcion vs. CA
G.R. No. 123450, Aug. 31, 2005
Article 167. The child shall be considered
legitimate althouh the mother may have
declared against its legitimacy or may have
been sentenced as an adulteress.
Thus even if it is clear that she also married
Gerardo, this does not negate the legitimacy of
Jose as son of Mario.
Article 166 (1)(b) of the Family Code, it must be
shown beyond reasonable doubt that there was
no access that could have enabled the
husband to father the child
No evidence to show that there was no way
that they could have had contact within the first
120 days of the 300 days which immediately
preceded the birth of the child since they only
lived four kilometres apart, she in Fairview QC
and he in Loyola Heights QC
Assertion of Ma. Theresa that Jose is the son
RI*HUDUGRFDQWEHXVHGVLQFHODZLVFOHDUWKDW
an assertion by the mother against the
legitimacy of her child cannot affect the
legitimacy of a child born or conceived within a
valid marriage.
Birth certificate carries no weight since proof of
filiation is necessary only when the legitimacy
of the child is being questioned, or when the
status of a child born after 300 days following
the termination of marriage is sought to be
established. In this case, legitimacy is certain.
Facts:
Dec 29, 1989 Gerardo married Ma. Theresa.
One year later
Dec 1990 - their son Jose Gerardo was born.
December 19, 1991 - Gerardo filed a petition to
have his marriage to Ma. Theresa annulled on
the ground of bigamy since she was still
married to Mario Gopiao who she married on
Dec 10, 1980 and which was never annulled.
This was granted
Ma. Theresa then filed for action to change
-RVH VXUQDPH IURP *HUDUGR WR KHUV DQG WR
disallow Gerardo visitation rights since Jose is
now just his illegitimate son. Both TC and CA
dismissed her petition.
Ma. Theresa then filed for a motion for
reconsideration where she said that Jose was
not actually the illegitimate son of Gerardo but
the legitimate son of Mario. CA thus reversed
its ruling and declared Mario to be the father of
Jose. Thus the case filed by Gerardo.
ISSUE: WON Jose is the legitimate child of
Mario
HELD: YES
Article 164 of the Family Code is clear. A child
who is conceived or born during the marriage
of his parents is legitimate.
It is clear that Ma. Theresa and Mario were
married when she gave birth to Jose. , Article
167 of the Family Code provides:
A.M. No. 06-11-5-SC (RULE ON DNA Evidence) effective October 15, 2007
Jao v. CA
152 SCRA 359
People v. Tumimpad
235 SCRA 483
!
!
!
!
Facts:
Victim is Sandra Salcedo, a 15 yo Mongoloid
with the mental capacity of a 5 year old, and
daughter of Lt. Teofisto and Pastora Salcedo
August 7, 1989 Sandra complains of
constipation, the following day she points at
7XPLPSDG DQG VD\V 0DPD SDWD\LQ PR \DQ
EDVWRV
Due to repeated vomiting, lack of appetite, and
mood swings, Sandra is brought to a doctor
where she it is discovered that she is pregnant
January 11, 1990 Sandra gives birth to a boy,
Jacob.
Pastora (mother) files complaint alleging that
Sandra was raped by Constable Tumimpad
and Constable Prieto sometime between
March and April 1989. Hence, trial ensued
During trial:
Sandra is able to single out Tumimpad and
Prieto as the perpetrators when she was
shown pictures and during a police line-up
!
!
guilt.
TIJING (supra)
Herrera vs. Alba (supra)
AGUSTIN (supra)
Estate of Rogelio Ong v. Minor Joanne Diaz
G.R. No. 171713, Dec. 17, 2007
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Facts:
Nov 1993 Rogelio and Jinky got acquainted,
and the friendship blossomed into love.
Jinky however, was already married to
Hasegawa Katsuo, a Japanese national, in
spite of this, the lovers lived together out of
which Joanne Diaz was born on Feb 25, 1998
Rogelio initially recognized Joanne as his, only
to abandon the family on Sept 1998, Jinky
thereafter files a complaint
Judgment rendered in favor of Jinky , Rogelio
files a new motion and is granted
57& DJDLQ UXOHV IRU -LQN\ JLYHQ WKH 5RJHOLRV
admission that he was the one who shouldered
KRVSLWDO ELOOV GXULQJ -RDQQHV ELUWK DQG WKDW RQ
some instances he continued visiting Jinky
after the birth of Joanne
Rogelio goes to the Court of Appeals, during
the pendency of the trial, however he dies, and
is substituted by the Estate of Rogelio Ong.
CA remands the case to the RTC for DNA
analysis to finally determine the paternity of
Joanne, hence the petition
!
!
!
!
!
FACTS:
Quitoriano was charged of the crime of rape.
He allegedly raped the victim, Edna Pergis, on
December 24, 1992
in June 1993, her aunt, Teresa Pergis,
discovered that Edna was pregnant.
On August 2, 1993, private complainant filed a
complaint for rape against accused-appellant
She gave birth on October 31, 1993.
CONTENTIONS:
Accused:
private complainant gave birth more than ten
months after the alleged rape; therefore, the
child FRXOGQRWKDYHEHHQWKHDFFXVHGV
ISSUE:
FC 166(3)
FC167
Chua Keng Giap v. JAC
158 SCRA 18
FACTS:
2.
a.
Respondent:
Res judicata: The latter, it was claimed, had
been declared as not the son of the spouses
Chua Bing Guan and Sy Kao in S.P. No. Q12592, for the settlement of the estate of the
late Chua Bing Guan.
b.
a.
Rodriguez v CA
245 SCRA 150
1.
2.
3.
4.
FACTS:
On October 15, 1986, an action for
compulsory recognition and support was
brought before court, by respondent Alarito
(Clarito)
Agbulos
against
Bienvenido
Rodriguez, petitioner herein
At the trial, the plaintiff presented his mother,
Felicitas Agbulos Haber, as first witness.
In the course of her direct examination, she
was asked by counsel to reveal the identity of
the plaintiff's father but the defendant's counsel
raised a timely objection which the court
sustained.
The petitioner now comes to this court
questioning the act of the lower court in
sustaining the objection
HELD:
Yes.
REASON 1:
Private respondent cannot invoke our decision
in Navarro v. Bacalla, 15 SCRA 114 (1965).
While we ruled in Navarro that the testimony of
the mother of the plaintiff in said case, could be
used to established his paternity, such
testimony was admitted during the trial without
objection and the defendant accepted the
finding of the trial court that he was the
father of the plaintiff.
Contentions:
Petitioner:
Felicitas Agbulos Haber should not be allowed
to reveal the name of the father of private
respondent because such revelation was
prohibited by Article 280 of the Civil Code of
the Philippines. Said Article provided:
"When the father or the mother makes the
recognition separately, he or she shall not
reveal the name of the person with whom he or
she had the child; neither shall he or she state
any circumstance whereby the other party may
be indentified."
Respondent:
Navarro v. Bacalla: the testimony of the mother
of the plaintiff in said case, could be used to
established his paternity
ISSUE:
Was the Lower Court correct in sustaining the
objection?
REASON2:
No similar prohibition found in Article 280 of the
Civil Code of the Philippines has been
replicated in the present Family Code. This
undoubtedly discloses the intention of the
legislative authority to uphold the Code
Commission's stand to liberalize the rule on
the investigation of the paternity of
illegitimate children.
Articles 276, 277, 278, 279 and 280 of the Civil
Code of the Philippines were repealed by the
Family Code, which now allows the
establishment of illegitimate filiation in the
same way and on the same evidence as
legitimate children (Art. 175).
Under Article 172 of the Family Code, filiation
of legitimate children is by any of the following:
FC 168, 169
FC 170, 171
Cobatbat-Lim vs IAC
166 SCRA 451
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Gaspay v. CA
238 SCRA 163
Facts: Flaviano Gaspay died intestate on
10/14/83, then married to Agueda Denoso
(childless). On 7/6/88 priv resp Guadalupe
*DVSD\ $OIDUR DOOHJHG # 7& WKDW VKHV
acknowledged IC of Flaviano with Claudia
Pason, prayed for issuance of letters of admin
RI)ODYLDQRVHVWDWH
Petitioners are Jr. (adopted son) and
Eriberta (next of kin) who filed for an MTD
x
x
x
Benitez-Badua v. CA
229 SCRA 468
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
FC 172-173
Diaz vs. Court of Appeals
129 SCRA 621, June 22, 1984
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
Facts:
In 1911 Isidro Azarraga dies leaving 10
children the first 7 of who are illegitimate born
to his mistress Valentina Abarracoso.
The legitimacy of the 8th child is in question in
this suit namely Leodegario, (the 9th Filomena
was the only one established as legitimate
being born to the valid marriage of Isidro and
his lawful wife Calixta Lozada)
6HSW /HRGHJDULR GLHV LQWHVWDWHQR ZLOO
in an accident in Manila he leaves behind no
spouse and no children to inherit his property
amounting to P28,000 worth of real estate in
Capiz.
2FW RULJLQDO 0DULD 'LD] GDXJKWHU RI
WKH GHFHGHQWV VLVWHU )LORPHQD VKH GLHG
during the pendency of the case and was
replaced by her heirs) files for letters of
Administration w/ the CFI.
2FW $PDGRU $]DUUDJD th illegitimate
child of Isidro, half brother of decedent) files an
opposition to the petition citing that the
deceased is an illegitimate son of Isidro via
Valentina Abarracoso and thus is his brother
UDWKHUWKDQWKHPRWKHUV
0DU&),UXOHVLQIDYRURI
$XJ\HDUVDIWHUJUDQWHGDGPLQ
Eduardo Azarraga (heir of Amador) files for the
UHPRYDORIDGPLQIURPFLWLQJIDLOXUHWRUHQGHU
a final accounting of the estate and a project of
partition. He also requests to be granted
admin.
8) V FLWH WKDW WKH GHFHGHQW LV QRW D OHJLWLPDWH
child of Isidro and thus is not the full blooded
VLEOLQJ RI WKH PRWKHU ZKR ZDV D OHJLWLPDWH
child.
9) asserts the opposite, that decedent
Leodegario is legitimate
10) &),DJDLQUXOHVIRU
11) ILOHV ZLWK &$ DQG LV XSKHOG DQG LV JUDQWHG
DGPLQWRWKHSUHMXGLFHRI
Issues:
WON Leodegario is a legitimate child of
Isidro and his legal wife Calixta Lozada
Held:
YES, WKH SURYed the legitimacy of
Leodegario through his school records (UST
/DZ ZKLFK FLWHG WKH GHFHGHQWV QDPH DV
Leodegario Azarraga y Lozada. It was further
strengthened by the preponderance of the will
of Pastora Azarraga which stated that the
GHFHGHQW DQG WKH mother Filiomena are full
blooded siblings. Moreover the court order of
7)
Reyes v. CA
135 SCRA 439
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
Facts:
Certiorari of CA decision reversing CFI
GLVPLVVDORIDFWLRQIRUUHFRQYH\DQFHE\WKH
ILOH Z &), IRU RUGHU FRPSHOOLQJ WKH ,UHQH
Reyes aka Irene Ramero to execute a deed of
UHFRQYH\DQFH RQ VHYHUDO SURSV WR WKH
DOOHJH WKDW DFTXLUHG WKH SURSV LQ TXHVWLRQ
through fraud, deceit and misrepresentation by
registering herself as the sole child of decedent
Franciscoo Delgado and thus entitled to inherit.
ZKR DUH WKH VLVWHUV DQG EURWKHU RI WKH
decedent claim otherwise since they allege the
was born during the legal marriage of her
mother GeQRYHYD 5DPHUR DQG WKH ODWWHUV
husband Justino Reyes.
claims that she was the fruit of the
cohabitation b/w her mother and the decedent
during the time subsequent to the separation of
her mother w/ Justino Reyes. She also claims
continuous possession of the status of
illegitimate child since she mentions that
decedent supported her financially through her
education.
&), UXOHV DJDLQVW GLVPLVVLQJ WKH RUGHU IRU
reconveyance.
DSSHDO WR &$ ZKLFK UXOHV LQ WKHLU IDYRU
reversing the CFI declaring that the TCTs of
WKHRQWKHVDLGSURSVDUHQXOODQGYRLG
&$UXOHVWKDWWKRXJKZDVDVSXULRXVFKLOGRI
the decedent she was never recognized and
thus cannot inherit.
LQ KHU PRWLRQ IRU UHFRQVLGHUDWLRQ Z WKH &$
cites how she was in fact acknowledged by the
2)
3)
4)
5)
Facts:
0DU7HRGRUD'H]ROOHU*XHUHURGLHVZQR
children leaving the prop in question to her
husband and the heirs of her brother(who died
LQWKH
-DQ$IWHUKHUGHDWKKHUKXVEDQG0DUWLQ
Guerero adjudicates the house to him and sells
LWWR7HRGRUD'RPLQJR
0DUWLQ GLHV RQ 2FW DQG V 7LVRQ DQG
Dezoller file for reconveyance Nov. 2, 88 for
1/2share of the prop.
During WKH KHDULQJ WKH ELUWK FHUWV PDUULDJH
cert.s w/c prove the filiation to the decedent
Teodora through their common link to their
IDWKHU7HRGRUDVEURWKHU+HUPRJHQHV'H]ROOHU
More importantly they present the testimony of
RQH RI WKH &RUD]RQ 'H]ROOHU 7Lson attesting
that some time in 1946 the decedent had
actually acknowledged her as her niece
(declaration of filiation).
ILOHV D GHPXUUHU WR WKH HYLGHQFH FLWLQJ WKDW
they fall short of the requirements set by Art
172 of the Family Code and that the testimony
6)
7)
1.
Issue:
WON Arturio is the legitimate
child of Inocentes
Held:
Yes
The parents of Arturio, Inocentes and
Felicidad, were validly married
a.
b.
i.
ii.
2.
a.
3.
a.
b.
i.
c.
i.
Facts:
Francisco Jison was married to Lilia Lopez
Jison in 1945 and together, they had
Lourdes
Francisco impregnated Esperanza F.
$PRODU/RXUGHVQDQQ\ZKRJDYHELUWKWR
Monina Joson on August 4, 1946
d.
1.
i.
ii.
1.
a.
b.
c.
1.
The
preponderance
of
evidence
mentioned above sufficiently established
her filiation despite
a. the Affidavit dated Sept. 21, 1971,
attesting that Francisco is not her father,
because it would not have been necessary
if it were not true; Francisco had gone to
such great lengths in order that Monina
denounce her filiation
b. 0RQLQDV ELUWK DQG EDSWLVPDO FHUWLILFDWHV
were not signed by Francisco because
these are not conclusive evidence of
filiation
c. 1RWHV RI )UDQFLVFRV UHODWLYHV DWWHVWLQJ WR
0RQLQDVILOLDWLRQDUHZLWKRXWPHULWVLQFH
i. they are not shown to be dead or unable to
testify
ii. they are not family possessions
Rule 130, Secs. 39, 40 require that family
possessions to be regarded as evidence of
pedigree should be articles representing, in
HIIHFW WKH IDPLO\V MRLQW VWDWHPHQW RI LWV EHOLHI
as to the pedigree of a person
iv.
1.
2.
3.
a.
i.
ii.
iii.
Facts:
Siblings Nicolasa, Amanda and Jose Santiago
owned a parcel of land, which was registered in
-RVHVQDPHDORQH
February 6, 1984: Jose died intestate
Nicolasa and Amanda, as his legal heirs,
sought the recovery of title, ownership, and
possession of his 1/3 share in the property
The case was filed against Ida C. Labagala
who claimed
7R EH -RVHV OHJLWLPDWH FKLOG ZLWK (VSHUDQ]D
Cabrigas
His income tax return listed Ida as his daughter
To have been the donee of his 1/3 share of the
property
A Deed of Sale, covering the entire parcel of
the property, was executed on March 1979 in
,GDVIDYRXU%87
The sale was actually a donation
To had caused the issuance of a title in her
name over the entire parcel of land by virtue of
the sale in order to prevent the property from
being sold by public auction for Nicolasa and
$PDQGDVIDLOXUHWRSD\LWVUHDOW\WD[HV
To have always been staying on the property
Previous ejectment cases by Nicolasa and
Amanda were instituted against her in 1985
&DVHVZHUHUHVROYHGLQ,GDVIDYRXU
Contentions of Nicolasa and Amanda
Ida is a child of Leo Labagala and Cornelia
Cabrigas
Leo Labagala signed and prepared the birth
certificate of Isa Santiago as her father
Birth certificate of Ida Santiago had the same
birth date and place as the claimed day and
place of Ida Labagala (1969, Manila)
,GDGLGQRWSUHVHQWDELUWKFHUWLILFDWHRIDQ,GD
6DQWLDJR DQG RQO\ DOOHJHG WKDW VKH KDG EHHQ
using the surname since her childhood
iv.
b.
i.
ii.
iii.
1.
a.
b.
2.
a.
b.
c.
3.
4.
a.
Facts:
Aug 23, 1964 Danilo Jesus and Carolina
Jesus were married. Their union produced two
children, Jacqueline (March 1, 1979) and Jinky
Jesus (July 6, 1982).
June 7 1991, Juan G. Dizon acknowledged
Jacqueline and Jinkie de Jesus as his own
illegitimate children with Carolina Aves de
Jesus
12 March 1992 Juan Dizon died. Jacqueline
and Jinky then filed an action to be part of the
heirs of his estate as his illegitimate children in
a notarized document.
TC: ulitimately dismissed the complaint for lack
of cause of action and for being improper since
LWV QRW WKH SURSHU IRUXP WR TXHVWLRQ WKHLU
paternity and filiation. Thus the present case
ISSUE: WON Jinky and Jacquelin are the
illegitimate children of Juan Dizon
HELD: NO
Presumption of law is that of legitimacy. Those
who are born in wedlock without conclusive
!
!
!
Facts:
Nov 1993 Rogelio and Jinky got acquainted,
and the friendship blossomed into love.
Jinky however, was already married to
Hasegawa Katsuo, a Japanese national, in
spite of this, the lovers lived together out of
which Joanne Diaz was born on Feb 25, 1998
Rogelio initially recognized Joanne as his, only
to abandon the family on Sept 1998, Jinky
thereafter files a complaint
Judgment rendered in favor of Jinky , Rogelio
files a new motion and is granted
57& DJDLQ UXOHV IRU -LQN\ JLYHQ WKH 5RJHOLRV
admission that he was the one who shouldered
hospital bills during JoanneV ELUWK DQG WKDW RQ
some instances he continued visiting Jinky
after the birth of Joanne
Rogelio goes to the Court of Appeals, during
the pendency of the trial, however he dies, and
is substituted by the Estate of Rogelio Ong.
!
!
FC175
Castro v. CA
173 SCRA 656
Facts:
Background love story: Pricola Maregmen
after marrying one Felix de Maya on May 23,
1913 realized the mistake she made and went
back to her real love, Eustaquio Castro whom
she lived with until her death on Sept 11, 1924.
Their illicit affair bore them a daughter , Benita
Castro on May 27, 1919.
Two earlier civil cases were filed against Benita
Castro. The first by her uncle and aunt Juan
and Feliciano Castro that they and not Benita
should be the forced heirs of Pedro Castro who
died on May 27, 1923 and the second by
Marcelina Bautista, the wife of her alleged
father Eustaquio Castro who died on August
24, 1961. Marcelina also alleges that she and
not Benita should be the compulsory heir of the
property of Euestaquio.
TC: consolidated the cases and ruled Benita is
indeed the acknowledged and recognized child
of Eustaquio Castro and is entitled to
participate in the partition of the properties left
by him.
CA: affirmed the decision of TC and held that
Eustaquio Castro voluntarily recognized Benita
through the records of birth he registered
himself.
ISSUE: WON Benita Castro Naval is the
acknowledged and recognized illegitimate child
of Eustaquio Castro
HELD: YES
Since FC is now the law being used and no
vested rights will be prejudiced, FC 172 can be
used to prove that Benita possessed an open
and continuous possession of the status of an
legitimate child which action can be brought in
her lifetime
Evidence:
lived with Eustaquio for 42 years, even when
she was already married
Aunt and Uncle Juan Castro and Feliciana
Castro admitted that she was the daughter in
Civil Case no 3762.
Eustaquio himself reported and registered
%HQLWDVELUWK3OXVWKHUHZDVQRLQGLFDWLRQWKDW
he should have signed certificate or taken
judicial action in order for her to be recognized
as his illegitimate child
Eustaquio gave away Benita during her
wedding to Cipriano Naval
certificate of baptism and the picture of the
Castro family during the wake for Eustaqui
rule on separating the legitimate from the
LOOHJLWLPDWH IDPLO\ LVQW QHFHVVDU\ EHFDXVH
Benita and her mother Pricola Maregmen were
the only immediate family of Eustaquio.
OBITER: Unless she asks about NCC
diff between voluntary and compulsory
recognition IN THIS CASE, Eustaquio
voluntarily recognized her since he himself took
!
!
Lim v. CA
65 SCRA 160
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Facts:
Francisco Uy executed an affidavit that said he
was the son and sole heir of deceased Susana
Lim and her property now belongs to him
Felisa Lim, the alleged natural daughter of
Susana Lim, filed a suit in CFI against
Francisco to nullify the said affidavit. She
presented the ff. evidence to show that she is
the acknowledged natural daughter of Susana:
Certificate of baptism which states that Felisa
LV6XVDQDVGDXJKWHU
Marriage contract which shows consent of
Susana to the marriage of her daughter.
On the other hand, Francisco provided the ff.
evidence
Application for alien registration which lists
Susana as his mother
Order of Bureau of Immigration cancelling
application stating that Susana is his mother
Identification certificate issued by Bureau of
Immigration describing his Filipino citizenship
taken from his mother Susana Lim
TC: recognized Susana as the natural child
Baas v. Baas
134 SCRA 260
Facts:
WAS
SON
AN
OF
HELD: NO
7KH QRWH Z VX SDGUH Xnreliable,
DVVXPLQJ LWV DXWKHQWLF WKH VDPH GRHVQW
constitute a sufficient proof of a valid
recognition
Formalities of voluntary recognition
under Article 278 of the New Civil Code is that
recognition shall be express and made either in
the record of birth, in a will, in a statement in a
court of record, or in any authentic writing
1RWH Z VX SDGUH LV D PHUH
indication of paternal solicitude.The Filipinos
are known for having very close family ties.
Extended families are a common set-up among
them, sometimes to the extent that strangers
are also considered as part of the family.
Tthe
rule
of
incidental
acknowledgment does not apply to plaintiffsDSSHOODQWV
QRWHZVXSDGUHVLQFHLWLVQRWD
public document where a father would
ordinarily be more careful about what he says
Even if the evidence presented by the
plaintiffs-appellants constitute a sufficient proof
of a voluntary recognition, still their complaint
will not prosper since it is evident that if there
was acknowledgment on the part of Bibiano, he
had rectified or repudiated the same by his
sworn statement
Considering that Raymundo was born
in 1894, and was already of majority age in
1915, long before Bibiano's death in 1954, he
should and could have filed such action either
under Article 135 of the Old Civil Code, or
Article 283 of the New Civil Code
Such action for the acknowledgment of a
natural child is not transmissible to the natural
child's heirs; the right is purely a personal one
to the natural child
In re Christensen
102 Phil 1055
Bernarda was generally known to be carrying
relations with 3 different men and during the
lifetime of the decedent, he verbally disavowed
relationship w/ Helen
Facts:
HELD: YES
Helen was born in 1934, during the
period when Bernarda was publicly known to
have been living as common-law wife of
Christensen (Bernarda testified in favor of
Helen)
Christensen spent the weekends
with Bernarda and their child Lucy in the
Christensen plantation. Even granting that
Zosimo Silva (alleged lover of Bernarda who
testified to that effect) at his stage fitted himself
Ilano v. CA
231 SCRA 242
VXSSRUW LV HUURQHRXV VLQFH WKH FRPSODLQW
against him has been dismissed by the trial
court, therefore was absolutely no obligation on
his part to give support to Merceditas
FACTS:
HELD: YES
The role played by Melencio S. Reyes
(alleged lover of Leoncia) in the relationship
between Leoncia and appellant was that of a
man Friday
The belated denial of paternity after
the action has been filed against the putative
father is not the denial that would destroy the
paternity of the child which had already been
recognized by defendant by various positive
acts clearly evidencing that he is plaintiff's
father. A recognition once validly made is
irrevocable. It cannot be withdrawn
It
was
Artemio
who
made
arrangement for the delivery of Merceditas (sic)
at the Manila Sanitarium and Hospital. Prior to
the delivery, Leoncia underwent prenatal
examination by Artemio
Artemio run as a candidate in the
Provincial Board of Cavite, Artemio gave
Leoncia his picture with the following
dedication: "To Nene, with best regards,
Temiong".
Any other evidence or proof" (last par
of A283) that the defendant is the father is
broad enough to render unnecessary the other
paragraphs of this article.
The obligation to give support shall be
demandable from the time the person who has
a right to recover the same needs it for
maintenance, but it shall not be paid except
from the date of judicial or extrajudicial
demand. (Article 203, Family Code of the
Philippines.)
Baluyut v. Baluyut
186 SCRA 506
Facts:
Victoria, Ma. Theresa and Ma. Flordeliza were
minors when they filed this petition. They were
represented by their mother and guardian ad
litem, Norma Urbano.
The petition is filed against Felicidad Baluyut
and the CA. Felicidad is the wife of the
deceased, who had an illegal relationship with
Norma Urbano because he was already
married at the time. The petition states that the
minors are his illegitimate children and
therefore have a legal interest on the estate of
the deceased Enrique Baluyut.
They further allege that they were in
continuous possession and enjoyment of the
status of children of the decease during his
lifetime b direct overt acts. (he supported them
and maintained them.
They added to having been deliberately
excluded from the estate of Enrique Baluyut.
Felicidad, who is the widow and appointed
administratrix of the estate, opposed the
petition.
Trial Court: declared that the minors were the
forced heirs of the deceased (under NCC
887(5)) and ordered Felicidad to provide
monthly support for the minors.
CA: reversed the decision; the petition was
dismissed (although the CA did recognize them
DV(QULTXHVLOOHJLWLPDWHFKLOGUHQ
Issue:
W/N the petitioners are the illegitimate children
of the deceased and are therefore entitiled to
monthly support.
Held: Proof of filiation is not sufficient to confer
upon them any hereditary rights in the estate of
the deceased. The decision appealed from is
affirmed.
Ratio
The illegitimate child must be acknowledged
by the putative parent. (as was decided by SC
in a previous case: Reyes, et al. v.
Zuzuarregul, et al.)
The illegitimate child, to be entitled to support
and successional rights from his parents, must
prove his filiation through this means Voluntary or compulsory (NCC 283) recognition
through:
Record of birth
3DUHQWVZLOO
Statement before a court of record
Any authentic writing (NCC 278)
In the case at bar, there was no evidence to
show voluntary recognition.
The records of birth were not signed by the
father even if it was in the name of Enrique
Baluyut
There is no evidence of authentic writing or
statement before a court
With regard to compulsory recognition, the
petitioners relied on testimonies by the mother
and another witness:
7KH FRPELQHG WHVWLPRQ\ RI 1RUPD 8UEDQR
and her witness Liberata Vasquez insofar as
the issue of recognition is concerned tends to
show that Norma was kept by the late Enrique
M. Baluyut as his mistress first in the house of
Liberata and then in a house supposedly
rented from one Lacuna. But this Lacuna was
not even presented to testify in support of the
claim of Norma and Liberate that Baluyut
rented his house for Norma. And, according to
Norma and Liberata, Baluyut visited Norma
some twice a week in the house where she
kept her as his mistress; that Baluyut paid the
hospital bills for the delivery of the two younger
children of Norma. But, according to Liberata
herself, it was not Baluyut who personally paid
the hospital bills but he gave the money for the
payment of the hospital bills to Liberato and he
requested her to pay the money to the hospital.
This only shows that Baluyut was hiding his
Identity as the father of the children of
Norma, an act which is inconsistent with
recognizing such children as his own.
The SC is very strict in applying the law for
compulsory recognition, much more than with
voluntary recognition.
NCC 283 enumerates the cases where the
father is obliged to recognize the child:
b.) when the child is in continuous possession
of the status of a child of the alleged father by
the direct acts of the latter or his family.
c.) when the child was conceived during the
time when the mother cohabited with the
supposed father
WKHVH HQXPHUDWLRQV DUH LQFRQVLVWHQW ZLWK
the testimonies of the witnesses. Baluyut
appeared to be hiding the fact that he was the
father of the minors.
Mendoza v. CA
201 SCRA 675
Marquino v. IAC
233 SCRA 348 (1994)
Fernandez v. CA
230 SCRA 130
Facts:
Ratio:
Documentary evidence provided for by the
petitioners are insufficient.
Photos are unreliable
Baptismal certificates cannot be held as a
voluntary recognition of parentage
%LUWKFHUWLILFDWHVZHUHQWSUHSDUHG6,*1('E\
Carlito himself and cannot be used as
evidence.
The testimony by the priest was misleading. He
GLGQW UHDOO\ UHPHPEHU WKH IDce of Carlito and
had to be shown a picture by Violeta first.
Jison vs. CA
286 SCRA 495
Eceta vs. Eceta (supra)
David vs. Court of Appeals
250 SCRA 82, November 16, 1995
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
FACTS:
Petitioner Daisie T. David worked as secretary
of private respondent Ramon R. Villar, a rich
businessman.
Private respondent is a married man and a
father.
However, despite this, Daisie and Ramon
cohabited
Out of this union, Christopher J., was born (on
March 9, 1985).
Christopher J. was followed by two more
children, both girls, namely Christine, born on
June 9, 1986, and Cathy Mae on April 24,
1988.
The relationship became known to private
respondent's wife when Daisie took
Christopher J, to Villar's house at Villa Teresa
in Angeles City sometime in 1986 and
introduced him to Villar's legal wife.
the children of Daisie were freely brought by
Villar to his house as they were eventually
accepted by his legal family.
In the summer of 1991, Villar asked Daisie to
allow Christopher J., then six years of age, to
go with his family to Boracay.
Daisie agreed.
10. but after the trip, Villar refused to give back the
child.
11. Daisie filed a petition for habeas corpus.
a.
b.
Respondents:
Law and jurisprudence wherein the question of
custody of a minor child may be decided in a
habeas corpus case contemplate a situation
where the parents are married to each other
but are separated
respondent-appellant is financially well-off, he
being a very rich businessman; whereas,
petitioner-appellee depends upon her sisters
and parents for support. In fact, he financially
supported petitioner-appellee and her three
minor children. It is, therefore, for the best
interest of Christopher J that he should
temporarily remain under the custody of
respondent-appellant
ISSUE:
Whether or not the child should be given back
to Daisie.
HELD:
Yes.
REASON 1:
Christopher J. is an illegitimate child since at
the time of his conception, his father, private
respondent Ramon R. Villar, was married to
another woman other than the child's mother.
As such, pursuant to Art. 176 of the Family
Code, Christopher J. is under the parental
authority of his mother, the herein petitioner,
who, as a consequence of such authority, is
entitled to have custody of him.
The fact that private respondent has
recognized the minor child may be a ground for
ordering him to give support to the latter, but
not for giving him custody of the child.
REASON 2:
Under Art. 213 of the Family Code, "no child
under seven years of age shall be separated
from the mother unless the court finds
compelling reasons to order otherwise." 3
In the case at bar, as has already been pointed
out, Christopher J., being less than seven
years of age at least at the time the case was
decided by the RTC (reckoning time), cannot
be taken from the mother's custody.
Even now that the child is over seven years of
age, the mother's custody over him will have to
be upheld because the child categorically
expressed preference to live with his mother.
Under Art. 213 of the Family Code, courts must
respect the "choice of the child over seven
years of age, unless the parent chosen is unfit"
and here it has not been shown that the mother
is in any way `unfit to have custody of her child.
5HEXWWDOVRIUHVSRQGQHWVDUJXPHQWV
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
1.
2.
FACTS:
Ramon Yulo and Corazon Garcia are married
but are legally separated
They have two children, Enrique and
Bernadette
William Liyao and Respondent Juanita Liyao
are also married.
William and Juanita have two daughter, Tita
and Linda Christine
While their marriages were subsisting, Corazon
DQG:LOOLDPFRKDELWHGXQWLOWKHODWWHUVGHDWK
Out of this union, petitioner William Jr, was
born.
William Junior claimed to be the illegitimate son
of William.
Contentions of petitioner
SHWLWLRQHUwas in continuous possession and
enjoyment of the status of the child of said
William LiyaoSHWLWLRQHUKDYLQJEHHQ
recognized and acknowledged as such child
by the decedent during his lifetime."
He presented witnesses including the
children of Ramon Yulo and Corazon
Garcia, saying that William always recognizes
him as his son and that when there were
JXHVWV:LOOLDPZRXOGVD\Hey, look I am still
young, I can still make a good looking son."
his mother, Corazo Garcia, had been living
separately for ten (10) years from her husband,
Ramon Yulo, at the time that she cohabited
with the late William Liyao and it was physically
impossible for her to have sexual relations with
Ramon Yulo when petitioner was conceived
and born
ISSUE:
Is the evidence presented sufficient to prove
that William Jr. is the illegitimate son of William
Sr.?
HELD:
There is no need for the court to go to the
substantive issues because from the onset,
petitioner lacks the required personality to file
the suit.
the grounds for impugning the legitimacy of the
child mentioned in Article 255 of the Civil Code
may only be invoked by the husband, or in
proper cases, his heirs under the conditions set
forth under Article 262 of the Civil Code.
Impugning the legitimacy of the child is a
strictly personal right of the husband, or in
exceptional cases, his heirs for the simple
reason that he is the one directly confronted
with the scandal and ridicule which the infidelity
of his wife produces and he should be the one
to decide whether to conceal that infidelity or
expose it in view of the moral and economic
interest involved. It is only in exceptional cases
the
his
the
the
the
!
!
Facts:
Petitioner Ann Brigit Leonardo was born in
Manila to common-law spouses Eddie
Fernandez and Gloria Leonardo. In her Birth
Certificate Leonardo was her surname.
Wanting to change her surname to that of her
father, they sent a letter to the Local Civil
Registrar on August 1, 1994.
The Local Civil Registrar denied their request
citing FC 176 which states that petitioner, being
illegitimate, should carry the surname of the
mother.
Facts:
Respondent Trinidad Capote filed a petition to
change the name of her ward from GIOVANNI
GALLAMASO to GIOVANNI NADORES.
Minor GIOVANNI is the illegitimate child of
Corazon Nadores and Diosdado Gallamaso.
He was born in 1982 before the Family Code.
His father failed to take up responsibilities on
matters of financial, physical and emotional
support to GIOVANNI.
!
!
!
!
Facts:
On September 16, 1996, Juan Locsin Jr. was
appointed as the sole administrator of the
Intestate estate of Juan Locsin (JHONNY
LOCSIN)
Juan Locsin Jr. claims to be the acknowledged
natural child of JHONNY.
Petitioners said that Juan Locsin Jr. is not an
acknowledged natural child of JHONNY since
WKHUHLVQR6ULQ-+211<VQDPH
A Birth Certificate from the Civil Registrar of
Iloilo City was submitted by Respondent,
which states that -XDQ/RFVLQ6ULVKLVIDWKHU
Petitioners on the otherhand submitted a Birth
Certificate from the Civil Registrar General
where it shows that the signature of the father
was not there. They also presented handwriting
experts saying that the Birth Certificate of
Respondent is a FAKE.
RTC and CA sided with respondent. Hence this
Petition
Issues: WON the record of birth of respondent
is authentic
Held: NO IT IS A FAAAAAKE!
Pp vs. Delantar
G.R. No. 169143, February 2, 2007
Facts:
On August 27, 1996, an information was filed
against Simplicio Delantar saying that he
violated RA 7610 for willfully, feloniously,
and unlawfully promoting and inducing
AAA, a female child below 12 years of age,
!
!
Gapusan v. CA
183 SCRA 160
x
x
x
!
!
!
Facts:
Felisa Gapusan Parcon died intestate and
without legitimate issue on April 6, 1966
Neither her surviving spouse, Prospero Parcon,
nor her other known relatives three (3)
sisters and a nephew made any move to
settle her estate judicially
Ligaya Gapusan-Chua, claiming to be an
acknowledged natural daughter of Felisa
Gapusan
Parcon,
instituted
judicial
proceedings for the settlement of the latter's
estate. The court appointed her administratrix
of the estate
On April 22, 1968, Prospero Parcon, Felisa
Parcon's surviving husband, filed a motion for
reconsideration of the Order of January 16,
1968. He denied that Ligaya was an
acknowledged natural child of his deceased
wife, and applied for his own appointment
as administrator of his wife's estate
Ligaya presented the ff. evidence
a) Felisa Parcon's sworn statement of assets
and liabilities wherein Ligaya is named and
described as the daughter of Felisa (Exh. 4);
b) Felisa Parcon's application for GSIS life
insurance in which Ligaya is set out as her
(Felisa's) daughter (Exh. 3);
c) Check No. 44046 of the Government
Service Insurance System in the sum of
P505.50 paid to her (Ligaya) as her share in
the death benefits due the heirs of Felisa
Parcon (Exh. 2); and
d) a family photograph, showing Ligaya
beside the deceased
Held:
Recognition of natural children may be
voluntary or compulsory
Compulsory recognition is sometimes also
called judicial recognition. It is recognition
decreed by final judgment of a competent
court.
Art 281 (NCC) provides that judicial approval
is needful if the recognition of the minor is
effected, not through a record of birth or in
a will but through a statement in a court of
record or an authentic document
x
x
People v. Barranco
177 SCRA 103
x
x
x
Facts:
Rosalia Barranco (19) was raped by
Bartolome Barranco, the second cousin of
her father who lives 100 meters away from
her house
Feb 10,1980. Rosalia was raped by Bartolome
(Bart because bartolome is too long) while
being threatened with death (Bart was holding
DEXWFKHUVNQLIHWRKHUQHFN
March 19, 1980, Bart attempted rape but
foiled because Rosalia was able to fend him
off by hitting him with a piece of wood
On the eve of the same day, rosalia
confessed to her mother the rape. They
went to the police and had a physical exam.
Turned out she was pregnant
Noong ika-3 ng Abril, 1981 trial court convicted
Bart of Rape and sentenced him to reclusion
perpetua
Issue(s)
Among others, the issue that concerns us
here is that Bart alleged that the court
People v. Rizo
189 SCRA 265
Facts: Concepcion Dimen noticed that the
stomach of her 22-year old mongoloid sister
was bigger than usual. She discovered that she
was pregnant. Felicidad revealed that Rizo, the
husband of her yaya had intercourse with her
in the bodega. Rizo admitted that he had
sexual intercourse with Felicidad. On October
22, 1986, Felicidad delivered a baby. Rizo did
not confirm nor deny that he had sexual
intercourse with her but filed a motion to
dismiss claiming insufficiency of evidence. RTC
found Felicidad to be a competent witness and
rendered judgment against the accused. RTC
also ordered Rizo to recognize the offspring as
Relevant Issue:
WON the accused is ordered to provide
support to the victim's child born out of the
rape.
Held: Yes
to
Dempsey v. RTC
164 SCRA 384
Facts: Janalita Rapada cohabited with Joel
Dempsey without the benefit of marriage and
Christine Marie was born. The child receives
monthly support from him in the sum of $150.
Janalita seeks for the accused to declare
Christina Marie as his dependent and after his
American citizenship. Dempsey freely and
voluntarily and spontaneously entered a plea of
guilty to the offenses charged against him
which was abandonment and failure to provide
adequate support for the child though he had
the means to do so. Municipal Trial Court found
him to be guilty. He appealed for the penalty of
imprisonment be changed into a fine and not to
be acquitted. RTC reversed the earlier
decision.
People v. Bayani
G.R. No. 120894 Oct. 3, 1996
x
x
x
!
x
!
!
FACTS:
Complaint filed by Maria Elena Nieto for the
crime of rape against Sgt. Moreno Bayani
Accused filed motion for bail
Prosecution presented Dr. Baraoidan, a
Medical Specialist who examined Maria Elena
'HFODUHG WKDW 0DULD (OHQDV HQODUJH FHUYL[
connoted pregnancy
&RPSODLQDQWVWHVWLPRQ\
%D\DQL ZDV WKHLU QHLJKERU KHU XQFOHV
kumpadre (were like family)
Bayani invited her to Laoag, where she was
taken to a motel, threatened with a gun and
raped (June 28, 1992)
!
!
!
x
x
!
x
x
x
x
!
Bayani Appealed
Sol Gen:
DSDUW IURP WKH DV LQGHPQLW\
appellant should be made to support his
illegitimate child with Maria Elena, in conformity
ZLWK$UWLFOHRIWKH53&
ISSUES:
WON Bayani is guilty of the crime of rape
WON Bayani should support his illegitimate
child
HELD:
Yes
YES
RPC 345(3)
FC 177
Abadilla vs Tabiliran
249 SCRA 447
x
x
x
!
!
!
x
x
!
x
x
!
!
!
x
FACTS:
Complaint filed by Ma Blyth B. Abadilla, a Clerk
of Court assigned at the sala of respondent
Judge Jose Tabiliran
Respondent charged with gross immorality,
deceitful conduct and corruption unbecoming of
a judge
&RPSODLQDQWVDllegations:
respondent had scandalously and publicly
cohabited with a certain Priscilla Baybayan
during the existence of his legitimate marriage
with Teresita Banzuela
that respondent shamefacedly contracted
marriage with said Priscilla
that respondent falsely represented himself as
VLQJOH LQ WKH PDUULDJH FRQWUDFW DQG GLVSHQVH
with the requirements of a marriage contract by
invoking cohabitation for 5 years
Earlier: wife filed a complaint for abandonment
of family home and living with a certain
Leonora Pillarion with whom he had a son
Charge of Deceitful Conduct:
Complainant claims that respondent caused to
be registered as legitimate his three illegitimate
children with Priscilla by falsely executing
separate affidavits
Other charge: Corruption
Respondent:
Declared that his cohabitation with Priscilla is
not and was neither bigamous nor immoral
because he started living with her only after his
1st wife had already left and abandoned the
family home in 1966
Since then, 1st ZLIHVZKHUHDERXWVLVQRWNQRZQ
and respondent has had no news of her being
alive
Further avers that 25 years had already
elapsed since the disappearance of his 1st wife
when he married Priscilla in 1986
Judge Angeles found respondent guilty only on
2 counts of corruption
FC 178,FC 180
FC 180-181
DOJ Opinion No. 106 Series of 1991
x
x
!
!
!
!
ISSUES:
WON Tabilaran is guilty of deceitful conduct
HELD:
YES
Children were born in 1970, 1971 and 1975
and prior to the marriage of respondent to
Priscilla, which was in 1986
As a lawyer and a judge, respondent ought to
know that, despite his subsequent marriage to
Priscilla, these 3 children cannot be legitimated
nor in any way be considered legitimate since
at the time they were born, there was an
existing valid marriage between respondent
and his first wife, Teresita
Applicable Provision Art. 269 of NCC: Only
natural children can be legitimated. Children
born outside of wedlock of parents who, at the
time of the conception of the former, were not
disqualified by any impediment o marry each
other, are natural.
Legitimation is limited to natural children and
cannot include those born of adulterous
relations
Reasons:
1. The rationale of legitimation would be
destroyed
2. It would be unfair to the legitimate children in
terms of successional rights;
3. There will be the problem of public scandal,
unless social mores change;
4. It is too violent to grant the privilege of
legitimation to adulterous children as it will
destroy the sanctity of marriage
5. It will be very scandalous, especially if the
parents marry many years after the birth of the
child.
It is clear, therefore, that no legal provision,
whether old or new, can give refuge to the
deceitful actuations of the respondent.
FC 182
FC179
ADOPTION
Lazatin v. Campos
92 SCRA 250
x
x
x
x
FACTS:
Jan. 13, 1974: Dr. Mariano M. Lazatin died
intestate, survived by his wife, Margarita de
Asis, and his adopted twin daughters,
respondents Nora and Irma
1month after: margarita de Asis commenced
an intestate proceeding
April 11, 1974: Margarita de Asis died, leaving
a holographic will
Nov 22, 1974: pettioner intervened for the first
time in the proceedings to settle the estate of
Dr. Mariano Lazatin, as an admitted illegitimate
child
Aug. 20, 1975: petitioner filed a motion to
intervene in the estate of Margarita de ASis as
an adopted child, on the basis of an affidavit
executed by Benjamin Lazatin, brother of the
deceased Dr. Mariano Lazatin, that petitioner
ZDVDQLOOHJLWLPDWHVRQRI'U/D]DWLQDQGZDV
lated adopted by him. This affidavit was later
modified on Aug. 19, 1975 to state that
petitioner was adopted by both Mariano and
Margarita.
5HVSRQGHQW FRXUW KHDUW SHWLWLRQHUV PRWLRQ WR
intervene as an adopted son in the estate of
Margarita, at which hearings petitioner
presented no decree of adoption hi his favor.
Instead, petitioner attempted to prove, over
SULYDWH UHVSRQGHQWV REMHFWLRQV WKDW KH KDG
recognized the deceased spouses as his
parents; he had been supported by them until
WKHLUGHDWKIRUPHUO\KHZDVNQRZQDV5HQDWR
/D]DWLQ EXW ZDV FRPSHOOHG WR FKDQJH KLV
x
x
x
x
x
!
!
!
!
Cervantes v. Fajardo
169 SCRA 575
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
FACTS:
Petition for writ of habeas corpus filed with this
court over the person of the minor Angelie
Anne Cervantes.
Mino was born on Feb. 14, 1987 to
respondents Conrado Fajardo and Gina
Carreon, who are common-law husband and
wife.
Respondents offered the child for adoption to
*LQD&DUUHRQVVLVWHUDQGEURWKHULQODZWKH
petitioners.
Petitioner spouses took care and custody of
the child when she was barely 2 weeks old.
An affidavit of Consent to the adoption of the
child by herein petitioners was also executed
by respondent Gina
The appropriate petition for adoption was filed
by petitioenrs over the child
RTC rendered a decision granting the petition
Angelie Anne Fajardo Cervantes
Sometime in March or April 1987, petitioners
received a letter from respondents demanding
to be paid P150,000, otherwise, they would get
back their child.
x
x
x
x
x
x
!
!
!
!
1.
2.
!
!
1.
!
!
!
!
!
Facts:
Feb 2, 1988 - Zenaida Bobiles (private
respondent) filed petition to adopt Jason
Condat, court grants it given that all
requirements for adoption are satisfied
Petitioner appeals to CA who affirms the trial
court decision, hence this petition
Issue:
W/n CA erred in ruling that the FC cannot be
applied retroactively to the petition for adoption
W/n CA erred in affirming the decision w/c
granted the petition in favor of the spouses
Dioscoro and Zenaida Bobiles
Held / Ratio:
No.
Zenaida filed for adoption when PD 603 (Child
and Youth Welfare Code) was the law here a
petition for adoption may be filed by either or
both of the spouses
Under the FC however (Art 185), joint adoption
by both spouses is mandatory
Petitioner contends that the FC should be
applied retroactively and adoption should be
dismissed
Art. 246 of the FC provides for retro effect
SURYLGHGLWGRHVQWLPSDLUYHVWHGULJKWV
Under PD 603, Zenaida had the right to adopt
by herself, and when she filed for adoption, the
right to file such petition alone was vested on
her
2.
!
!
!
Santos v. Aransanzo
16 SCRA 344
!
!
!
!
Facts:
Simplicio Santos and Juliana Reyes filed
petition for adoption of Paulina Santos and
Aurora Santos on June 4, 1949
With their parents whereabouts unknown, their
current guardian, Crisanto de Mesa gave his
written consent, Paulina being 14 yo likewise
gave consent. Hence, Court grants petition
Oct 21, 1957 Juliana dies, Simplicio files for
settlement of intestate estate including Paulina
and Aurora as surviving heirs
Gregoria Aranzanso, alleges that she is the
first cousin of Juliana files an opposition to the
petition VWDWLQJ WKDW 6LPSOLFLRV PDUULDJH WR
Juliana was bigamous and thus void and that
the adoption of Paulina and Aurora were void
for there is no written consent from natural
parents
Demetria Ventura, alleging also that she is the
first cousin of Juliana and adding that she is
the mother of Paulina Santos, like wise files as
opposition
CFI says that validity of adoption cannot be
attacked collaterally, CA however REVERSES
and declares that the adoption is void for lack
!
!
Facts:
Respondent spouses Antero and Amanda
Agonoy filed petition for adoption of the minor
Quirino Bonilla and Wilson Marcos
Petitioners minors Roderick and Rommel
Daoang assisted by their father, file an
opposition claiming that the Agonoys have a
legitimate daughter named Estrella Agonoy
(mother of Roderick and Rommel), who died
March 1, 1971 thus Agonoys are disqualified
to adopt under NCC Art 335
Trial court still grants the petition for adoption
!
!
!
Issue:
W/n
respondent
spouses
are
disqualified to adopt under NCC Art. 335 par. 1
!
Held / Ratio: No
Art 335 those w/ legitimate, legitimated,
acknowledged natural children, or children by
legal fiction cannot adopt
Duncan v. CFI
69 SCRA 298
x
x
!
Facts:
robin (british) and maria lucy (american) are
h&w. They have no kids but previously adopted
a child and wishes to do so again with a child
whom they have named as colin berry Duncan.
They are now challenging CA decision which
denied them the adoption of minor Colin Berry
Christensen Duncan.
CA banked its decision on NCC 340 which
provided for the written consent of following
people, more specifically the mother of the
child who was known to Atty. Velasquez, latter
was arguing that such was already sanctioned
by privileged communication b/w lawyer and
client. Nonetheless CA there is no such
relationship in this issue
May 1967. Couple received the 3 day old child
from Atty. Velasquez whom they had baptized
as colin berry Duncan. Said child was given to
attorney by mother who made her swore never
to reveal her identity and look for a suitable
couple who will adopt him. In the petition for
adoption filed sept 1967, it was atty. velasquez
who stood as de facto guardian/ loco parentis
who thus gave consent. CA pressed on
knowing the identity of the mother as she
should have been the one who gave consent
(as per CA).
Issue:
WON consent from mother (because child was
IC and unrecognized by father) was still
needed
HELD: NO.
Consent should come from <as per Ncc Art.
340 (2)>The parents, guardian or person in
charge of the person to be adopted. Section 3,
x
!
x
x
Landingin vs. RP
G.R. No. 164948, June 27, 2006
x
Facts:
Diwata Landingin (us cit of Filipino descent)
filed for adoption on 2/4/2002 of the minors
Elaine,elma,and Eugene who are all nat.
children of her brother manuel and Amelia
ramos.
Manuel died on May 19, 1990, the children
were left to their paternal grandmother, Maria
Taruc Ramos while their mother went to Italy,
remarried and had two children (never
communicated again). Diwata now supports
said minors, together with help from other
relatives. Maria passed away on November 23,
2000 and Diwata now therefore seeks to adopt
said minors. Said minors have already given
their written consent to adoption. She is
qualified to adopt as shown by the fact that she
is a 57-year-old widow, has children of her own
who are already married, gainfully employed
and have their respective families; she lives
alone in her own home in Guam, USA, where
she acquired citizenship, and works as a
UHVWDXUDQW VHUYHU 'LZDWDV RZQ FKLOGUHQ KDYH
also given their written consent already. Her
brother Mariano Ramos who earns substantial
income,
signified
his
willingness
and
commitment to support the minors while in
SHWLWLRQHUVFXVWRG\
Court ordered DSWD to conduct case study
and submit report in time for the hearing. OSG
also entered its appearance. Since her petition
was unopposed, she presented ex-parte.
Diwata testified in her behalf, presented Eliane
Ramos, the eldest among the adoptees, to
testify on the written consent that she and
siblings exec. Also presented was the Affidavit
of Consent purportedly executed by her
children Ann, Errol, Dennis and Ricfel
Branitley.
PAgbilao, the DSWD field officer assigned to
the case, reported that minors are eligible for
adoption because the mother has voluntarily
consented to their adoption by the paternal
aunt, Diwata Landingin this is in view of her
inability to provide the parental care, guidance
x
!
!
!
!
!
x
x
!
Facts:
On 19 june 1986 the Gordons sought to adopt
the minor, Anthony Gandhi O. Custodio, a
natural son of Adoracion Custodio. On the date
of hearing, nobody appeared to oppose the
Petition, OSG failed to send any rep for the
State.
Evidences established that:
Gordons (british spouse) are allowed by their
home country to adopt foreign babies
specifically from the Republic of the
Philippines.
Husband is employed at the Dubai Hilton
International Hotel as Building Superintendent
therefore financially secured
Anthony's mother, Adoracion Custodio, had
given her consent to the adoption realizing that
her child would face a brighter future
Case Study Report submitted by the Social
Worker of the Trial Court gave a favorable
recommendation
natural mother thought of the best for her 1yr
2mos child.
TC declared Anthony the truly and lawfully
adopted child of the Gordons
Gordons wrote MSSD for a travel clearance for
Anthony on 8/11/86 but MSSD opposed even if
subpoenaed saying that
the Report of the Court Social Worker and that
of the Pastor of the International Christian
Church of Dubai cannot take the place of a
!
!
!
!
!
x
Republic v. Toledano
233 SCRA 9
x
Facts:
February 21, 1990 private respondents
spouses Clouse sought to adopt the minor,
Solomon Joseph Alcala, the younger brother of
private respondent Evelyn A. Clouse
Alvin A. Clouse is a natural born citizen of the
United States of America. He married Evelyn, a
Filipino on June 4, 1981 at Olongapo City. On
August 19, 1988, Evelyn became a naturalized
citizen of the United States of America in Guam
physically, mentally, morally, and financially
capable of adopting Solomon, a twelve (12)
year old minor.
1981-1984, Nov 1989 to present, Simon was
and has been under the care and custody of
private respondents. Solomon gave his
consent to the adoption. His mother, Nery
Alcala, a widow, likewise consented to the
adoption due to poverty and inability to support
and educate her son.
social worker Mrs. Nila Corazon Pronda
recommended the granting of the petition for
adoption
x
x
R.A. 80437KH/DZRQ,QWHU-&RXQWU\$GRSWLRQ
A.M. No. 02-6-02-S.C. (Aug. 22, 2002)
x
x
x
x
x
!
!
!
6RPHLPSRUWDQWQRWHVRQ5$7KH/DZRQ,QWHU-&RXQWU\$GRSWLRQ
Inter-country adoption refers to the socio-legal process of adopting a Filipino child, i.e. 15 years old and
below by a foreigner or a Filipino citizen permanently residing abroad where the petition is field, the
supervised trial custody is undertaken, and the decree of adoption is issued outside the Philippines.
Mandates the creation of The Inter-Country Adoption Board that acts as the policy-making body for
purposes of carrying out the provisions of this Act, in consultation and coordination with the Department,
the different child-care and placement agencies, adoptive agencies, as well as non-governmental
organizations engaged in child-care and placement activities
Board shall ensure that all possibilities for adoption of the child under the Family Code have been
exhausted before resorting to Inter-Country Adoption and ensure as well that such is for the best
interest of the child
Sec. 8. Who May be Adopted.- Only a legally free child may be the subject of inter-country adoption.
SEC. 9. Who May Adopt.- Any alien or a Filipino citizen permanently residing abroad may file an
application for inter-country adoption of a Filipino child if he/she;
is at least twenty-seven (27) years of age and at least sixteen (16) years older than the child to be
adopted, at the time of application unless the adaptor is the parent by nature of the child to be adopted
or the spouse of such parent
if married, his/her spouse must jointly file for the adoption;
has the capacity to act and assume all rights and responsibilities of parental authority under his national
laws, and has undergone the appropriate counselling from an accredited counsellor in his/her country
!
!
!
!
!
x
x
Facts:
Minor (10 yrs old) Adelberto Bundoc shot
Jennifer Tamrago with an air rifle (causing
death) on 10/20/82
Civil complaint for damages was instigated by
0DFDULR 7DPDUJR -HQQLIHUV DGRSWLYH SDUHQW
and Cesar and Aurelia Tamargo (nat. parents)
DJDLQVW $GHOEHUWRV QDW SDUHQWV 9LFWRU DQG
Clara Bundoc) w/ whom Adelberto was living
with @ time of incident. Another axn was
actually filed for Reckless Imprudence resulting
to homicide (but adeleberto was acquitted/
exempted following minority w/o discernment)
But prior to incident, (12/10/81), Sabas and
Felisa Rapisura filed pet. to adopt adelberto
w/c CFI granted in 11/18/82 or after said
incident.
The nat. parents of Adelberto, following such
adoption were saying that they were no longer
indispensable parties to the damages (parental
liability because such was already transferred
by virtue of the adoption)
Petitioners however were saying that since
adelberto was with them @ time of incident, it
should be them and not the Rapisura spouse
who should be party to said action.
TC ruled for Victor and Clara Bundoc (nat.
parents) and said that they were not
indispensable to the case at hand
FACTS:
Petition for writ of habeas corpus filed with this
court over the person of the minor Angelie
Anne Cervantes.
x
x
x
x
x
x
!
!
Issue:
May and illegitimate child, upon adoption by her
natural father, use the surname of her natural
mother as her middle name?
!
!
Held: YES. Petition is GRANTED.
!
!
Ratio:
7KHXVHRIDSHUVRQVVXUQDPHLVIRUSUDFWLFDODQG
legal purposes, it is NECESSARY
The name of an individual has two parts, the given
name and the surname.
The use of the surname is fixed by law under
Articles 364-380 of the Civil Code
The law is SILENT as to the use of a middle name.
However in Art 375(1) it is considered when
there is identitiy of names and surnames
between ascendants and descendants.
The law is notably silent with regard to an adopted
FKLOGVPLGGOHQDPH
OSG correctly points out Art. 189 of the FC with
regard to filiation required as an intestate heir.
The underlying intent of adoption is in favor of
the adopted child.
RA 8552
It is shown that she is very close to both her parents
and she lives with her mother
There should be liberal construction of adoption
statues in favor of adoption
1&& SURYLGHG WKDW LQ FDVH RI GRXEW in the
LQWHUSUHWDWLRQLW LV SUHVXPHG WKDW WKH
lawmaking body intended right and justice to
SUHYDLO
FC 191
FC 192
Lahom vs. Sibulo
G.R. No. 143989, July 14, 2003
Facts:
Spouses Dr. Diosdado Lahom and Isabelita Lahom
WRRN LQ ,VDEHOLWDV QHSKHZ -RVH Melvin Sibulo
since he was two years old, treating him as if
he were their own child.
It was only in 1971 that the spouses petitioned for
adoption. In 1972, this was granted and the
Civil Registrar of Naga City changed his name
to Jose Melvin Lahom.
1999: Mrs. Lahom commenced a petition to rescind
the decree of adoption:
Jose Melvin refused to change his surname from
Sibulo to Lahom, in utter disregard for the
feelings of the spouses
Before her husband died, he even wanted to revoke
the adoption but was only stopped by Isabelita
Diosdado further desired to give to charity whatever
properties or interest may pertain to
respondent in the future.
Respondent failed to show concern for Petitioner
and remained indifferent
He does not act like a son, there is an
uncomfortable relationship between the two
WKH RQO\ PRWLYH WR UHVSRQGHQWV DGRSWLRQ LV KLV
expectancy of his alleged rights over the
properties of the spouses Lahom
1998: RA 8552 provided grounds committed by
adopter for the rescission of adoption and also
sWDWHGWKDW$GRSWLRQEHLQJLQWKHEHVWLQWHUHVW
of the child, shall not be subject to rescission
by the adopter. However, adopter may
disinherit the adoptee for causes provided in
$UWRIWKH&LYLO&RGH
Respondent objects to motion
RTC: dismissed the petition
There is a lack of cause of action
Said rights of petitioner to rescind should have been
exercised within the period allowed by the
Rules.
Legal ground for the petition have been
discovered and known to petitioner for more
than 5 years, prior to the filing of the instant
petition of December 1, 1999, hence the action
had already prescribed.
!
!
Issue:
May the subject adoption, decreed on May 5, 1972,
still be revoked or rescinded by an adopted
after the effectivity of R.A. No. 8552?
In the affirmatLYH KDV WKH DGRSWHUV DFWLRQ
prescribed?
!
!
Held: The Petition was DISMISSED.
!
!
Ratio:
SC begins with a brief background on the law:
welfare of the adopted started becoming of
paramount concern
creation of written instruments that would protect
and safeguard the rights of the adopted
children
adoption was impressed with social and moral
responsibility and its underlying intent was
geared to favor the adopted child
R.A. 8552 secured these rights and privileges and
affirmed the legitimate status of the adopted
child. The new law also withdrew the right of an
adopter to rescind the adoption decree and
gave the adopted child the sole right to
sever the legal ties created by adoption.
It was also months after the effectivity of the R.A.
No. 8552 that Isabelita filed an action to revoke
the decree of adoption granted in 1975.
Therefore, her petition could no longer be
pursued.
!
!
Additional: (just copy-pasted, this is in
relation to the prescription period - )
Interestingly, even before the passage of the
statute, an action to set aside the adoption
is subject to the fiveyear bar rule under
Rule 100 of the Rules of Court and that the
adopter would lose the right to revoke the
adoption decree after the lapse of that
period. The exercise of the right within a
prescriptive period is a condition that could not
fulfill the requirements of a vested right entitled
to protection. It must also be acknowledged
that a person has no vested right in statutory
privileges. While adoption has often been
referred to in the context of D ULJKW WKH
privilege to adopt is itself not naturally innate or
fundamental but rather a right merely created
by statute. It is a privilege that is governed by
WKHVWDWHVGHWHUPLQDWLRQRQZKDWLWPD\GHHP
to be for the best interest and welfare of the
child. Matters relating to adoption, including the
withdrawal of the right of an adopter to nullify
the adoption decree, are subject to regulation
by the State. Concomitantly, a right of action
given by statute may be taken away at anytime
before it has been exercised.
SUPPORT
FC 194
Pelayo v. Lauron
12 Phil 453
1.
a.
b.
c.
d.
2.
3.
a.
b.
c.
4.
a.
Facts:
October 13, 1906, evening: Dr. Arturo Pelayo
was called to the house of Marcelo Lauron and
Juana Abella
He was asked to give birth to their daughter-inlaw
He assisted in the delivery of the child
He was kept occupied until the next day
He valued his fee at P500 BUT Marcelo and
Juana refused to pay without reason
November 23, 1906: Complaint by Pelayo
against Lauron and Abella for collection
Contentions of Lauron and Abella:
that their son and his wife lived independently
from them and in a separate house
that if she did stay in their house that night, it
was due to fortuitous circumstances
that their daughter-in-law had died due to the
childbirth
April 5, 1907: RTC Held
Lauron and Abella absolved from the complaint
due to lack of sufficient evidence to establish a
right of action against them
1.
a.
b.
c.
d.
i.
Issue/s:
WON husband is bound to
pay the bill
Held:
Yes
Article 142 and 143, Civil Code: Mutual
obligations to which the spouses are bound by
way of mutual support
Includes medical services in case of illness
That when either of them by reason of illness
should be in need of medical assistance, the
other is under the unavoidable obligation to
furnish the necessary services of a physician in
order that health may be restored
That the father and mother-in-law are strangers
with respect to the obligation that devolves
upon the husband to provide support
Hence, her husband, and not her father and
mother- in-law, is liable
That it is of no matter who called the doctor
and requested his services
That there was imminent danger to her life and
medical assistance was urgently needed
Sanchez v. Zulueta
68 Phil 110
1.
2.
3.
a.
b.
4.
a.
i.
ii.
iii.
Facts:
Feliciano Sanchez married Josefa Diego
Child: Mario Sanchez
1932: Feliciano refused to support Josefa
and Mario and abandoned them
Josefa and Mario have no means of
subsistence
Feliciano received a monthly pension of
P174.20 from US Army
Josefa Diego and Mario Sanchez sought
monthly allowance for support and support
pendente lite against Feliciano Sanchez
Contentions of Feliciano:
Josefa had an affair with Macario Sanchez
which resulted to Mario Sanchez
October 27, 1930: Josefa abandoned the
conjugal home
As the illegitimate child of Josefa with Macario,
Mario is not entitled to his support
b.
1.
a.
b.
i.
ii.
Reyes v. Ines-Luciano
88 SCRA 803
1.
2.
3.
a.
b.
c.
d.
Facts:
January 18, 1958: Manuel J. C. Reyes m Celia
Ilustre-Reyes
They had children
March 10, 1976: Manuel attacked Celia by
fist blows
bumping her head against the cement floor
pushing her down the 13-flight stairs
hitting her in the abdomen that floored her half
unconscious
4.
5.
a.
b.
i.
ii.
iii.
1.
a.
b.
i.
ii.
c.
2.
a.
b.
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
c.
d.
i.
ii.
iii.
Determination of Amount
Celia was unemployed and without funds
All their conjugal properties, including
corporations where Manuel is President,
Manager and Treasurer, are in the possession
of Manuel
Standard Mineral Products earning P85,654.61
Development and Technology Consultant Inc.
earning P98,879.84
The Contra-Prop Marine Philippines, Inc.
That these companies have entered into multimillion contracts in projects of the Ministry of
Public Highways
The amount was reduced from P5000 since
their children are in the custody of Manuel
In determining the amount to be awarded as
support pendente lite
not necessary to go fully into the merits of the
case
sufficient that the court ascertain the kind and
amount of evidence which it may deem
sufficient to enable it to justly resolve the
application
in view of the merely provisional character of
the resolution to be entered
mere affidavits or other documentary evidence
appearing in the record may satisfy the court to
pass upon the application for support pendente
lite
De Asis vs, CA
G.R. No. 127578, Feb. 15, 1999
1.
a.
b.
c.
i.
ii.
2.
a.
b.
3.
a.
b.
4.
a.
b.
Facts:
October 14, 1988: Vircel D. Andres, mother
and legal guardian of minor Glen Camil Andres
de Asis, brought an action for maintenance and
support of Glen against Manuel de Asis
that Manuel is the father of Glen
that Manuel refused/failed to provide for the
maintenance of Glen despite repeated
demands
Contentions of Manuel:
that Glen is not his child
that he cannot be forced to support him then
July 4, 1989: Manifestation of Vircel
that
Manuel
had
made
a
judicial
admission/declaration of his denial of paternity
that it seemed futile to continue the claim of
support
dismisses August 8, 1989: Action was
dismissed
Both parties agreed to move for the dismissal
of the case
Provided that Manuel will withdraw his
counterclaim
September 7, 1995: Complaint for maintenance
and support against Manuel by Glen,
represented by Vircel
0DQXHOVPRWLRQWRGLVPLVVGXHWRres judicata
where the Manifestation of Vircel was, in effect,
an admission of lack of filiation, which
admission binds both parties
0DQXHOV PRWLRQ ZDV GHQLHG EHFDXVH
renunciation or waiver of future support is
prohibited by law
1.
a.
b.
i.
c.
i.
ii.
iii.
d.
i.
e.
2.
De Guzman vs Perez
496 SCRA 474
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Facts:
Petitioner Roberto de Guzman and private
respondent Shirley Aberde were sweethearts
while studying law in UST.
Their studies were interrupted when Private
Respondnet Shirley became pregnant.
Robby de Guzman, their child, was born on
1987.
They never got married, but Roberto did marry
another woman in 1991 and begot 2 children
from her.
Petitioner Roberto de Guzman only sent
PRQH\ WR 5REE\V VFKRROLQJ WZLFH DQG
1993), and provided money as well when he
was sick.
In order to support the child, Private
Respondent went to Hong Kong to work as a
factory worker. BUT, her savings were still
being depleted. So. . . .
In the year 2000, Private Respondent
demanded support from Petitioner.
2000, Private Respondent also filed a
complaint for abandonment and neglect of
Child under Article 59(2) of PD 603
In answer, Petitioner said that he has never
abandoned Robby, He gave support.
The City prosecutor of Lipa found probable
cause to the charge neglect of child.
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Facts:
Petitioner Lerma and respondent Diaz were
married on 1951.
Then on 1969 petitioner filed a complaint for
adultery against the respondent
1969, Respondent then filed for legal
separation on the grounds of concubinage and
attempt against her life. MOREOVER, she
wanted support pending trial for their youngest
son.
1969 Respondent Judge granted respondents
application for pendente lite.
Petitioner filed for a preliminary injunction
which was dismissed
Mangonon vs. CA
G.R. No. 125041, June 30, 2006
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Facts:
1975, Maria Belen Mangonon and Private
Respondent Delgado married in 1975
As the marriage was solemnized without the
required consent, the marriage was annulled
on 1975
Within 7 months of the annulment of their
marriage, petitioner gave birth to twins Rina
and Rica.
Her second husband, Danny Mangonon raised
her two twins as Private Respondent Delgado
has already abandoned them.
1994 Belen Mangonon filed for a Petition for
Declaration of Legitimacy and Support in behalf
of her minor children (Rica and Rina)
At the time of the petition, Rica and Rina are
about to enter college in the USA. But despite
their admission to the universities, they are
financially incapable
Petitioner, who earns 1,200 dollars a month,
could hardly give general support to the
children, much less their required educational
support. So they demanded support from
Private Respondent.
Respondent Federico failed to sign the birth
certificate, hence they need a judicial
declaration in order to be legitimated. He said
that their legitimacy should first be established
before they could claim for support.
Moreover, Federico also said that he is also
unable to give support.
Trial court resolved the case and awarded a
MEASLY
and
MICROSCOPIC
5,000
pesos/child.
Petitioner was angered by this and filed the
present petition.
Issues: Since both the parties are unable to
give
support,
can
the
grandfather
(FRANCISCO) be the one to furnish support?
Held: YES
Ratio: First of all, the twins were able to prove
their filiation, because Lolo Francisco wrote
letters to them when they were young, and that
KHKLPVHOIZURWHWKHVXUQDPH'HOJDGRLQWKH
letters which just means that Lolo Francisco
consented to it.On the issue of support, An
eminent author on the subject explains that the
FC 200-204
Canonizado v. Benitez
127 SCRA 610
x
FACTS:
Sept. 27, 1968: CA rendered a decision
ordering defendant to give plaintiff a monthly
support of P100.00 beginning with October
1964, payable in advance within the first 5 days
of each month
Said decision became final and executory on
Jan. 21, 1969
x
x
!
!
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
!
!
x
!
!
!
x
!
!
!
FC 200-208
Lacson vs. Lacson (supra)
Sy vs CA
Dec. 27, 2009
x
x
!
!
!
x
x
!
x
x
x
!
FACTS:
19 January 1994: respondent Mercedes Tan
Uy-Sy filed a petition for habeas corpus against
petitioner Wilson Sy minor children Vanessa
and Jeremiah (children of Mercedes)
Petitioner: Mercedes is unfit to take custody of
the minors
She abandoned her family in 1992
Mentally unstable
Cannot provide proper care to the children
Trial Court issued writ and awarded custody to
Mercedes
CA affirmed
3HWLWLRQHUZDVQWDEOHWo substantiate his
contentions
ISSUES:
WON custody should be awarded solely to the
respondent
WON CA had jurisdiction to award support in a
habeas corpus case
HELD:
YES
FC 213: In case of separation of the parents,
parental authority shall be exercised by the
parent designated by the Court. The Court
x
!
x
x
x
x
FACTS:
Feb. 4, 1961: Petitioner Zenaida Medina gave
birth to Jospeh Casero in the Makabali Clinic,
owned and operated by respondent Dra.
Venancia Makabali
Zenaida left the child with Dra. Makabli from
birth, who took care and reared Jospeh as her
own son
Court extracted a promise from Dra. Makabali
to allow the mino a free choice with whom to
live with when he reaches 14yo Court held
WKDWLWZDVIRUWKHFKLOGVEHVWLQWHUHVWWREHOHIW
with his foster mother
Zenaida appealed
ISSUES:
WON the writ be given
HELD:
x
!
!
!
NO
When our law recognizes the right of parent to
the custody of her child, Courts must not lose
VLJKWRIWKHEDVLFSULQFLSOHWKDWLQDOOTXHVWLRQ
on the care, custody, education and property of
FKLOGUHQWKHODWWHUVZHOIDUHVKDOOEH
SDUDPRXQW1&&
For compelling reasons, even a child under 7
may be ordered separated from the mother.
The right of parents to the company and
custody of the children is but ancillary to the
proper discharge of parental duties to provide
the children with adequate support, education,
moral, intellectual and civic training and
development (NCC 356)
Zenaida proved remiss in these sacred duties
Santos Sr. v. CA
G.R. No. 113054(1995)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
1.
FACTS:
Petitioner Leouel Santos, Sr., an army
lieutenant, and Julia Bedia a nurse by
profession, were married in 1986.
Their union beget only one child, Leouel
Santos, Jr. who was born July 18, 1987.
From the time the boy was released from the
hospital until 1990, he had been in the care
and custody of his maternal grandparents,
private respondents herein, Leopoldo and
Ofelia Bedia.
This was arranged by the spouses Leouel and
Julia themselves
On September 2, 1990, petitioner abducted the
boy and clandestinely spirited him away to his
hometown in Bacong, Negros Oriental.
The spouses Bedia then filed a "Petition for
Care, Custody and Control of Minor Ward
Leouel Santos Jr
Contentions:
Petitioner:
since private respondents have failed to show
that petitioner is an unfit and unsuitable father,
substitute parental authority granted to the
boy's grandparents under Art. 214 of the
Family Code is inappropriate.
On the other hand, private respondents aver
that
they can provide an air-conditioned room for
the boy and
2.
3.
4.
5.
A.
B.
C.
Sagala-Eslao v. Cordero-Ouye
G.R. 116773, Jan. 16, 1997
FACTS:
on June 22, 1984, petitioner Maria Paz
Cordero-Ouye and Reynaldo Eslao were
married
2. after their marriage, the couple stayed with
respondent Teresita Eslao, mother of the
husband.
3. out of their marriage, two children were
begotten, namely, Leslie Eslao who was born
on February 23, 1986 and Angelica Eslao who
was born on April 20, 1987
4. Angelica stayed with her parents at
UHVSRQGHQWV KRXVH ZKLOH WKH RWKHU FKLOG
VWD\HGDWWKHKRPHRIWKHPRWKHUVSDUHQWV
5. RQ $XJXVW SHWLWLRQHUV husband
Reynaldo Eslao died
6. Maria Paz now wants to move back to
Pampanga where her mother and other
daughter were.
7. She intended to bring Angelica along with her
8. But the grandmother refused saying that
Angelica compensates for the loss of her son.
9. Maria Paz then met Dr. James Manabu-Ouye,
a Japanese-American.
10. on March 18, 1992, They decided to get
married.
11. on January 15, 1993, the petitioner migrated to
San Francisco, California, USA, to join her new
husband
12. When she informed her new husband of her
desire to get her children back, he was
1.
a.
b.
c.
d.
REASON1:
The paramount consideration is always the
welfare of the child.
7KH SHWLWLRQHU KHUHLQ LV PDUULHG WR DQ
Orthodontist who has a lucrative practice of his
profession in San Francisco, California, USA.
The petitioner and her present husband have a
home of their own and they have three cars.
The petitiRQHUVKXVEDQGLVZLOOLQJWRDGRSWWKH
SHWLWLRQHUVFKLOGUHQ
If the children will be with their mother, the
probability is that they will be afforded a bright
future.
Contrast this situation with the one prevailing in
WKH UHVSRQGHQWV >JUDQGPRWKHUV@ house. As
admitted by the respondent, four of the rooms
in her house are being rented to other persons
with each room occupied by 4 to 5 persons.
$GGHGWRWKHVHSHUVRQVDUHWKHUHVSRQGHQWV
sons, Samuel and Alfredo, and their respective
families (ibid., p. 54) and one can just visualize
the kind of atmosphere pervading thereat. And
to aggravate the situation, the house has only 2
toilets and 3 faucets.
REASON2:
In Santos, Sr. vs. Court of Appeals, 242 SCRA
407, we stated, viz:
1.
2.
3.
4.
FACTS:
On October 21, 1987, or four (4) months before
her marriage, Sabrina became a Muslim by
conversion.
Respondent Fouzi and Sabrina were married
on February 3,1988 under Islamic rites.
Out of their union, they begot two (2) children,
namely, Abdulaziz and Amouaje,
At the time of their marriage, unknown to
petitioner, respondent was still married to a
Saudi Arabian woman whom he later divorced.
This was the cause of their de facto separation.
Sometime in December 1995, the children lived
in the house of Sabrina's mother.
On December 15, 1996, Sabrina had the
children baptized as Christians. She was also
reconverted as a Christian.
On March 11, 1996, respondent Fouzy Ali
Bondagjy filed an action to obtain custody of
his two minor children, Abdulaziz, 10 and
Amouaje, 9.
Contentions:
Respondent:
on various occasions Sabrina was seen with
different men at odd hours in Manila
she engages in 'zina' (illicit sexual relation)
she would wear short skirts, sleeveless
blouses, and bathing suits.6 Such clothing are
detestable under Islamic law on customs.
Fouzi claimed that Sabrina let their children
sweep their neighbor's house for a fee of
P40.00 after the children come home from
school. Whenever Fouzi sees them in school,7
the children would be happy to see him but
they were afraid to ride in his car.
Pp vs. Glabo
371 SCRA 567
1.
2.
3.
a) indemnification,
b) acknowledgment of the offspring, unless the
law should prevent him from so doing, and
c) in every case to support the offspring.
FACTS:
Mila Lobrico, a 21 year old mental retard, was
raped by his uncle.
She got pregnant and gave birth while the case
was pending.
He is found by guilty beyond reasonable doubt
by the Supreme Court.
ISSUE:
What is his role in the rearing of the child? Can
he exercise parental authority?
HELD:
He is mandated to support the child. No other
allowable form of exercise of parental authority
is allowed.
Concerning the acknowledgment and support
of the offspring of rape, Article 345 of the
Revised Penal Code provides for three kinds of
civil liability that may be imposed on the
offender:
!
!
!
!
!
!
Sombong vs. CA
G.R. No. 111876, Jan. 31, 1996
!
!
!
!
Facts:
April 23, 1987 Arabella Sombong was born to
Johanna Sombong
Nov 1987 Johanna took a sick Arabella to Sir
John Clinic. She was not released to Johanna
after treatment since she was still sick and
Johanna could not pay. Johanna left her in the
clinic and only came to visit her two years later
in 1989.
1992 Johanna filed a petition with the RTCQC of a writ of Habeas Corpus for Arabella.
However Dra Ty, the owner of the clinic said
that they already discharged Arabella on 1989.
At the fear of being arrested, she directed them
to Marietta Alvar who took care and raised a
child from the clinic named Cristina Neri.
RTC: declared that Cristina was Arabella. Thus
the child should be given back to Johanna
CA: reversed RTC decision since there was not
enough evidence to prove that Cristina was
LQGHHG-RKDQQDVPLVVLQg daughter.
,668(:21&ULVWLQDLV$UDEHOODVPLVVLQJ
daughter
HELD: NO
In order for a writ of habeas corpus on a minor
to prosper, these elements must be present:
(1) petitioner has right of custody over minor
!
!
!
!
Tonog vs. CA
376 SCRA 642
FACTS:
September 23, 1989, petitioner Dinah B. Tonog
gave birth to Gardin Faith Belarde Tonog, her
illegitimate daughter with private respondent
Edgar V. Daguimol.
A year after the birth of Gardin Faith, petitioner
left for the United States of America to work as
a registered nurse
Gardin Faith was left in the care of her father
(private respondent herein) and paternal
grandparents.
On January 10, 1992, private respondent filed
a petition for guardianship over Gardin Faith
and it was approved
Petitioner opposed. on October 4, 1993, a
motion to remand custody of Gardin Faith to
her.
The trial court granted the motion and the case
to determine custody of Gardin Faith is now
pending.
The respondent filed a petition for review on
certiorari asserting that temporary custody
Authority
and
its
Facts:
1984 Raymond Laxamana and Lourdes
Laxamana got married. Their marriage blessed
them with three children
1991-1996 Raymond became drugdependent and was in and out of facilities
1997 Raymond was declared drug-free by
the court. However he allegedly became violent
and irritable leading to Lourdes leaving him on
1999 along with her three children
Aug 1999 Raymond filed a writ of habeas
corpus for custody his three children while
Lourdes filed for the annulment of their
marriage
Sept 27 1999 Raymond amended the petition
to visitation rights instead. TC granted this.
They also asked both to undergo a psych
evaluation, which TC would then use to resolve
the case as agreed upon by both parties.
Psych evaluations showed that he was still not
completely cured of his drug addiction even if
his drug urine test was negative. However, TC
still granted him visitation rights and gave
custody to Lourdes.
!
!
Roehr vs Rodriguez
404 SCRA 495
Facts: Wolfgang Roehr, a German citizen and
resident of Germany married Carmen
Rodriguez, a Filipina in 1980 in Hamburg,
Germany. Their marriage was reatified in 1981
when they married each other again in Negros
Oriental. They had two children, Carolynne
born in 1981 and Alexandra born in 1987. In
1996, Carmen filed a petition for declaration of
nullity of marriage. Meanwhile, Wolfgang
already obtained a decree of divorce in
Hamburg in 1997 and the court granted him the
custody of their two children. Carmen now
assails this decision while Wolfgang claims that
the decree of the Court in Hamburg is binding.
Silva vs. CA
275 SCRA 604
Facts: Carlitos Silva and Suzanne Gonzales
cohabited without the benefit of marriage since
Carlitos was a married man. The union saw the
birth of two children, Ramon and Rica. Later
on, a rift in their relationship surfaced allegedly
GXH WR 6X]DQQHV UHVXPSWLRQ RI KHU DFWLQJ
career. Suzanne refuted the claim saying that
she never actually stopped working. Instead,
she claimed that it was Carlitos who started the
rift of their relationship since he was often
engaged in gambling and womanizing. She
wanted custody of their children without
visitoriaO ULJKWV RI WKHLU IDWKHU DV &DUOLWRV
activities will affect the moral and social valued
of the children. Meanwhile, she got married to
Salientes vs Salientes
500 SCRA 128
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
Facts:
Private respondent Loran S.D. Abanilla and
petitioner Marie Antonette Abigail C. Salientes
are the parents of the minor Lorenzo
Emmanuel S. Abanilla.
&RXSOH OLYHG ZLWK SDUHQWV SHWLWLRQHUV
Orlando B. Salientes and Rosario C. Salientes
KDV SUREOHPV Z LQ-laws and suggests that
WKH\ PRYH WR KLV RZQ KRXVH UHIXVHV DQG
WURXEOHVHVFDODWHZOHDYLQJWKHKRXVHKROG
He was then prevented from seeing his son.
ILOHVIRUKDEHDVFRUSXVZF57&JUDQWV
appeals (motion for recon w/ RTC, certiorari
w/ CA) and is denied by both the RTC and the
CA.)
7)
8)
Sy vs CA
GR No. 162938, Dec. 27,2007
1)
2)
3)
4)
Facts:
-DQ0HUFHGHV7DQ8\-Sy filaes for
Habeas Corpus w/ the RTC for her 2 minor
children Vanessa and Jeremiah against her
KXVEDQG :LOVRQ 6\ DQG IRU WKH FRXUW WR
decide on the custody of the children.
answers claiming that he should be awarded
FXVWRG\ EHFDXVH WKH DEDQGRQHG WKH IDPLO\
VLQFH ZDV PHQWDOO\ XQVWDEOH DQG FDQQRW
provide for the care of the children.
57& JUDQWV WKH ZULW DQG DZDUGV FXVWRG\ WR
KDYLQJSD\VXSSRUWLQWKHVXPRI3D
month.
files w/ CA. CA denies motion citing the lack
RI SURRI RI WKH KROGLQJ WKDW WKH GLG QRW
abandon since she was driven out of the
FRQMXJDO KRPH E\ WKH IDPLO\ IRU UHOLJLRXV
differences, that she had left for Taiwan to work
their and sustain her children and that her act
of praying in the rain was not attributable to
insanity.
Issues:
FC 214-216. FC 233
Vancil vs Belmes
358 SCRA 707
1)
2)
3)
4)
Facts:
Petitioner, Bonifacia Vancil, is the mother of
Reeder C. Vancil, a Navy serviceman of the
United States of America who died in the said
country on December 22, 1986. During his
lifetime, Reeder had two (2) children named
Valerie and Vincent by his common-law
wife,Respondent Helen G. Belmes.
May of 1987- files guardianship proceedings
w/ RTC of Cebu over the persons and
properties of minors Valerie and Vincent
(Valerie was only 6 years old while Vincent was
a 2-year old).
July 15, 1987- Bonifacia Vancil was appointed
legal and judicial guardian.
August 13, 1987- VXEPLWWHGDQ RSSRVLWLRQWR
the
subject
guardianship
proceedings
asseverating that she had already filed a
similar petition for guardianship.
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
FC218-219,FC233
cf.FC 221 inrel. toNCC 2180
Palisoc v. Brilliantes
41 SCRA 548
1)
2)
3)
Facts:
May 19, 1966 spouses MOISES P.
PALISOC and BRIGIDA P. PALISOC file a
case w/ the RTC for damages on the death of
their son Dominador Palisoc inside Manila
Technical Institute grounds (laboratory room)
against
defendants
Antonio
C.
Brillantes(member of the Board of Directors),
Teodosio Valenton (the president), Santiago M.
Quibulue (instructor of the class), and Virgilio
L. Daffon (co-student and assailant of Palisoc).
The death of the victim was believed to have
been caused by the heavy fist blows to the
body which he had incurred from a fight with
Daffon w/c damaged his internal organs. The
lone witness to the event, Desiderio Cruz,
attested that he and Daffon were fixing a
machine w/ the victim was looking on. After a
snide comment by Daffon regarding his
inaction the victim slapped him w/c started the
fight. Daffon then retaliated w/ fist blows to the
body. After w/c Palisoc fell down and fainted
after which he was brought to the hospital
where he later died from his injuries.
The TC found Daffon guilty for the quasi delict
under Article 2176 of the NCC but absolved the
other defendants from liability under Article
2180 of the NCC. The court cited that the
damages to incurred in the case would not be
on the defendant from MTI since Article 2180
of the new civil code contemplated a situation
where the pupil lives and boards with the
Amadora v. CA
160 SCRA 315
Facts:
Alfredo Amadora was shot by a classmate,
Pablito Daffon, while in the auditorium of
Colegio de San Jose-Recoletos. He was in
school to finish a physics experiment as a prerequisite to graduating that year. He died at 17.
The respondent school and its faculty members
submit that they cannot be held liable for what
happened because, technically, the semester
had already ended.
Issue:
W/N they should be held liable now that the
semester had ended when the incident
happened.
Held:
NO. Petition is Denied.
Ratio:
Art. 2180 of the Civil Code states that:
/DVWO\WHDFKHUVRUKHDGVRIHVWDEOLVKPHQWVRI
arts and trades shall be liable for damages
caused by their pupils and students or
apprentices so long as they remain in their
FXVWRG\
There have been cases in the past where who
was liable would depend on w/n the school was
academic or non-academic. If it were
academic, the teacher-in-charge of the student
Salvosa v. IAC
166 SCRA 274
Facts:
The Baguio Colleges Foundation (BCF) is an
academic institution and is also an institution of
arts and trade.
Ratio:
Even if Abon was enrolled in BCF, the incident
was around 8 pm, Jimmy Abon was supposed
to be in the ROTC office at that time, as
ordered by his Commandant, Ungos.
Abon could not have been in the custody of
the school at the time, as he was under direct
orders to have been somewhere else.
IAC decision is reversed.
modifications
the
Held: NO.
PSBA vs. CA
February 4, 1992
!
Facts:
Aug. 30, 1985: Carlitos Bautista was stabbed
on the 2nd-floor premises of PSBA. He was a
3rd year commerce student but it was
established that those who stabbed him were
QRWPHPEHUVRIWKHVFKRROVDFDGHmic
community.
His parents filed a suit for damages against
PSBA and its corporate officers.
RTC and CA: ruled for the parents of the
deceased
The petitioners motioned for the dismissal of
the suit twice before it was brought up to the
SC on the grounds that they are presumably
sued under Art. 2180 of the Civil Code and
therefore, the complaint states no cause of
action against them since academic institutions
such as the PSBA are beyond the ambit of the
rule.
!
!
Issue: W/N the petitioners should be
held liable.
!
!
Held: Petition is DENIED.
!
!
Ratio: (NOTE: the SC agrees to the
ruling of the lower courts, but has a different
ratio from them.)
$UWHVWDEOLVKHVWKHUXOHLQORFRSDUHQWLV
It is true that the student was killed by people
who were not, in any way, affiliated with PSBA.
However, the incident was done within the
campus itself.
When a student enrolls in a campus, it is up to
the school to provide for an atmosphere
WKDWZRXOGSURPRWHWKHVWXGHQWVGHVLUHWR
learn. Adequate steps should have been taken
to maintain peace and order in the campus.
In the case at bar, it has not yet been clearly
established w/n the school was at fault due to
negligence in providing proper security
measures.
The Court dismisses the petition and orders the
RTC to continue proceedings to find out w/n
PSBA was negligent
Facts:
Respondent spouses file a complaint based on
the ff circumstances:
Ferdinand Castillo, their son, freshman student
of St. Francis HS wanted to join a school picnic
Because of short notice, respondent spouses
(parents) did not allow their son to join but
merely allowed him to bring food to the
teachers and go home after doing so, however,
because of persuasion by the teachers,
Ferdinand went on to the beach
During the picnic, one of the female teachers
was drowning, some students including
Ferdinand came to the rescue, but in the
process,
Ferdinand
himself
drowned,
resuscitation failed, he was rushed to the
hospital but declared DOA
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
St. 0DU\V$FDGHP\YV&DUSLWDQRV
G.R. No. 143363, February 6, 2002
!
!
!
!
!
Facts:
From Feb 13-20 1995, 6W0DU\VFRQGXFWHGDQ
enrollment drive, pat of which were school
visits from where prospective enrollees were
studying
$VDVWXGHQWRI6W0DU\V6KHUZLQ&DUSLWDQRV
(son of respondent spouses) was part of the
campaign group
Sherwin, along with other students were riding
the jeep, owned by co-respondent Vivencio
Villanueva, driven by James Daniel, 15 yo, also
a student, allegedly, he was driving in reckless
manner resulting the jeep to turtle, and Sherwin
died as a result of injuries sustained
After triDO 57& RUGHUHG 6W 0DU\V WR SD\ WKH
spouses Carpitanos for damages
6W 0DU\V DSSHDOV &$ GHQLHV KHQFH WKLV
appeal
!
!
)RU6W0DU\VWREHOLDEOHWKHUHPXVWEHDQDFW
or omission considered negligent and which
has proximate cause to the injury, and the
negligence must have causal connection to the
accident
Respondents fail to show that the negligence
was the proximate cause, hence reliance on
Art 219 is unfounded
Respondents Spouses Daniel (parents of
driver) and Villanueva (owner of the jeep) admit
that the cause of the accident was not
QHJOLJHQFH RI 6W 0DU\V QRU WKH UHFNOHVV
driving of James but the detachment of the
steering wheel guide of the jeep which the
Carpitons do not dispute
7KHUH LV OLNHZLVH QR HYLGHQFH WKDW 6W 0DU\V
allowed the minor James to drive, it was Ched
Villanueva, grandson of the jeep owner who
allowed James to drive
Hence liability for the accident whether caused
by negligence of the driver or detachment of
steering wheel guide must be pinned on the
PLQRUV SDUHQWV 7KH QHJOLJHQFH RI 6W 0DU\V
was only a remote cause.
:LWKWKHHYLGHQFHSUHVHQWHGE\6W0DU\VDQG
with the fact that the Daniel spouses mention
the circumstance of detachment of steering
wheel, it is not the school but the registered
owner of the vehicle who shall be responsible
FC215
ROC Rule 130 Sec. 25 cf. Secs. 22 & 23
FC 220-222, FC 223-224
Medina v. Makabali
27 SCRA 502
!
!
!
!
!
!
Facts:
Feb 4, 1961, petitioner Zenaida gave birth to
Joseph Casero in Makabali Clinic, Pampanga,
owned by respondent Dra.Venancia Makabli
Zenaida left the child with Dra. Makabali from
his birth, and the latter reared Joseph as her
own son.
Zenaida never visited the child nor paid for his
expenses until Aug of 1966 where she claimed
for custody of the minor
Trial disclosed that Zenaida lived with Feliciano
Casero with two other children, with the
WROHUDQFH RI &DVHURV ODZIXO ZLIH ZKR OLYHV
elsewhere
During trial, the minor addressed the
respondent as Mammy, and even chose to stay
with the respondent
With Dra. Makabili made to promise to allow
the minor the free choice of whom to live with
upon reaching the age of 14 the Court held
WKDWLWZDVIRUWKHFKLOGVEHVWLQWHUHVWWREHOHIW
with the foster mother
Luna v. IAC
137 SCRA 7
!
!
!
!
!
!
Facts:
Private Respondent Maria Santos is an
illegitimate child of the petitioner Horacio Luna,
who is married to his co-petitioner Liberty Luna
Maria is married to Sixto Salumbides, and they
are the parents of Shirley, who is the subject of
this child custody case.
2-4 months after the birth of Shirley, her
parents gave her to the petitioners, a childless
couple with considerable means who loved
Shirley and raised her as their very own
3HWLWLRQHUVDVNHGIRUWKHUHVSRQGHQWVFRQVHQW
WR 6KLUOH\V DSSOLFDWLRQ IRU D 86 9LVD EHFDXVH
they wanted to bring her to Disneyland but to
no avail.
Hence, petitioner left Shirley with the
UHVSRQGHQWVXSRQWKHODWWHUVUHTXHVWEXWZLWK
instructions that their drive take and fetch
Shirley to Maryknoll college every school day.
When the petitioners returned on October 29,
1980, they learned that the respondents had
transferred Shirley to the St. Scholastica
College. The private respondents also refused
to return Shirley to them. Neither did the said
respondents allow Shirley to visit the
petitioners.
In view thereof, the petitioners filed a petition
for habeas corpus, and the trial court rule in
favor of them
Respondents appealed to CA, who reversed
the order
Petitioners opposed the execution of the
judgment and filed a motion for reconsideration
on grounds of the subsequent emotional,
Cuadra v. Monfort
35 SCRA 160
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
De Guzman vs Perez
496 SCRA 474
See: 5$ $Q $FW (VWDblishing Family Courts, Granting Them Exclusive Original
-XULVGLFWLRQ2YHU&KLOGDQG)DPLO\&DVHV
See: R$&KLOG$EXVH$FW
RA 6809
FC 234 as amended
FC 236 as amended cf. FC 15, NCC 2180
SURNAMES
NCC 364-380
RA9255
Naldoza v. Republic, supra
Johnston v. Republic
7 SCRA 1040
1.
a.
b.
2.
a.
3.
Facts:
June 24, 1960: Petition for Adoption of Ana
Isabel Henriette Antonio Concepcion
Georgiana by Isabel Valdes Johnston
The 2-yr.-10-mo. old baby was then under the
custody of the orphanage Hospicio de San
Jose whose Mother Superior consented to the
adoption
As alleged in the petition, Isabel was then
married to Raymond Arthur Johnston who also
consented to the adoption
Adoption was granted BUT
6XUQDPHRIWKHFKLOGZDVFKDQJHGWR9DOGHV
EHFDXVHLWZDVKHOGDVWKHsurname of the
SHWLWLRQHU
October 24, 1960: Motion to change the
VXUQDPHWR9DOGHV-RKQVWRQ
a.
i.
ii.
iii.
b.
2.
a.
1.
Issue/s:
WON Adopted child can use
WKHVXUQDPHRIDGRSWHUVKXVEDQG
Held:
No
Because only Isabel adopted Ana, only her
surname can be used by the child
1.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
2.
3.
a.
b.
4.
1.
a.
i.
ii.
iii.
b.
c.
i.
ii.
iii.
2.
a.
Issue/s:
WON Keng Lee Uy can have
his name changed
Guidelines for Petitions for Change of Name
b.
c.
i.
1.
2.
ii.
did
not
5.
6.
7.
8.
a.
Llaneta v. Agrava
57 SCRA 29
5.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
6.
7.
a.
b.
8.
9.
a.
i.
ii.
iii.
b.
c.
i.
ii.
iii.
did
not
c.
i.
1.
2.
ii.
-HVXV1J<DR6LRQJZDVXVHGLQWKHSHWLWLRQ
the order of publication, and the publication
itself
-HVXV1J<DR6LRQJZDVQRWWKHUHDOQDPHRI
Jesus Ng
His name in the civil register is merely "Jesus
Ng"
-HVXV 1J <DR 6LRQJ ZDV not the only name
he was known for
The title of the publication should have
included his aliases
Because: Readers of newspapers merely
glances at the title of the petition. It is only after
he has satisfied himself that the title interests
him, that he proceeds to read down further
Hence, the names should not just appear in the
body
It should have read: "In the matter of the
change of name of Jesus Ng, otherwise known
as Jesus Ng Yao Siong, Jesus Uy Keng Lee,
Uy Keng Lee Jesus, Keng Lee Uy and Uy
Keng Lee"
Telmo v. Republic
73 SCRA 29
Facts:
Milagros Llerena was admitted to the bar in
1923,
1930/1930: married Pedro M. Telmo
DWWRUQH\V RDWK XVLQJ 0LODJURV /OHUHQDTelmo
The Telmo spouses sojourned in the United
States and Pedro, following the American style,
FKDQJHG WKH VSHOOLQJ RI KLV QDPH WR 7KHOPR
His diploma from the University of Michigan
spelled his surname as Thelmo. Their 4
children have been using Thelmo but were
baptized Telmo.
Mrs. Telmo was appointed justice of the peace
of Kabasalan, Manicahan and Taluksangay,
Zamboanga
In a lot of cases filed against her as a justice,
VRPH XVHG WKH QDPH 7HOPR ZKLOH RWKHUV
XVHG7KHOPR,QWKHFDVHWKDWUHVXOWHGLQWKH
termination of her tenure as justice of the
pHDFHVKHXVHG7KHOPR
1964: She filed a petition in the CFI of
=DPERDQJD &LW\ SUD\LQJ WKDW KHU KXVEDQGV
surname be changed to Thelmo. (NOTE: her
husband did not join her as a co-petitioner but
he executed an affidavit interposing no
objection to his wiIHVSHWLWLRQ
7ZR RI KHU VRQV VXUQDPHG 7KHOPR
expressed conformity in a joint affidavit.
At the hearing, she presented documentary
evidence in the form of certificates and
GLSORPDV RI KHU FKLOGUHQ VXUQDPHG 7KHOPR
Tolentino v CA
162 SCRA 66
Facts:
Ratio:
Philippine laws are silent to the issue. After all,
there are no provisions in our laws regarding
divorce.
Senator Tolentino himself commented on Art.
RI WKH &LYLO &RGH WKDW WKH ZLIH FDQQRW
FODLP DQ H[FOXVLYH ULJKW WR XVH WKH KXVEDQGV
surname. She cannot be prevented from using
it; but neither can she restrain others from
XVLQJLW
The private respondent has given proof that by
enjoining her from using Tolentino, there would
be serious dislocation on her part with regard
to contracts formed, etc.
It is already public knowledge that Constancia
is the legal wife of Arturo Tolentino. Consuelo
has never represented herself after the divorce
as Mrs. Arturo Tolentino anyway.
The petitioner, on the other hand, has failed to
show any problems that would be occur by
allowing private respondent to use Tolentino.
Legamia v. IAC
131 SCRA 479
Yasin v Hon -XGJH6KDULD&RXUW
G R No 94986 (1995)
In the Matter of the Adoption of Stephanie Nathy Astorga Garcia
G R No 148311, March 31, 2005
In Re Change of Name, Julainan Carulasan Wang
G R No 159966 March 30, 2005
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Facts:
Sept 22, 2002 Julian Lin Wang filed a petition
through his mother to drop his middle name
and have his registered name changed from
Julian Lin Carulasan Wang to Julian Lin Wang.
Reasons he wants to change name
in Singapore middle names or the maiden
surname of the mother are not carried in a
SHUVRQV QDPH WKH\ DQWLFLSDte that Julian Lin
Carulasan Wang will be discriminated against
because of his current registered name which
carries a middle name.
Julian and his sister might also be asking
whether they are brother and sister since they
have different surnames.
CarulDVDQ VRXQGV IXQQ\ LQ 6LQJDSRUHV
Mandarin language since they do not have the
OHWWHU 5 EXW LI WKHUH LV WKH\ SURQRXQFH LW DV
/
TC: denied the petition since reasons given
were not recognized by law
Petitioner then filed this Petition for Review on
Certiorari arguing that the trial court has
decided a question of substance that should
not determined by the Court ie if FC 174
prohibits child from dropping his name
ISSUE: WON he can be allowed to drop his
middle name
HELD: NO
grounds one can change name: (a) when the
name is ridiculous, dishonorable or extremely
ABSENT
NCC 38 1-396, FC 41
Reyes v. Alejandro
141 SCRA 65
Facts: In October 1969, Erlinda Reynoso
Reyes prayed for the declaration of absence of
her husband Roberto L. Reyes who have been
absent in their house since April 1962 due to a
misunderstanding over personal matters. Since
WKHQVKHGRHVQWNQRZKLVZKHUHDERXWV+HOHIW
no will or debts.
3.
1.
She said they acquired no properties or debts
during marriage. She said her only purpose in
filing the petition is to establish the
absence of her husband, invoking the
provisions of Rule 107 of the New Rules of
Court and Article 384 of the Civil Code.
2.
3.
1.
2.
x
!
!
x
x
Tol-Noquera v. Villamor
211 SCRA 616
x
Facts:
December 1986, Daya Maria Tol (seeking
admistration of the estate) alleged that she was
the acknowledged natural child of Remigio Tol,
who had been missing since 1984 and a
certain Diosdado Tol had fraudulently obtained
a title of RemigiRVSURSHUW\
Diosdado countered that Daya maria was not
an acknowledged natural child of the absentee
and the title was originally in his name
Issue: WON DAYA MARIA TOL can be
appointed administratrix when Remigio was not
yet declared presumptively dead
The relevant laws on the matter are found in
the following provisions of the Civil Code:
Art. 381. When a person disappears from his
domicile his whereabouts being unknown, and
without leaving an agent to administer his
property the judge, at the instance of an
interested party, a relative, or a friend, may
appoint a person to represent him in all that
may be necessary.
This same rule shall be observed when under
similar circumstances the power conferred by
the absentee has expired.
Art. 382. The appointment referred to in the
preceding article having been made, the judge
shall take the necessary measures to
safeguard the rights and interest of the
absentee and shall specify the powers,
obligations
and
remuneration
of
his
representatives, regulating them according to
the circumstances, by the rules concerning
guardians.
Facts:
July 28, 1975, Eduardo Manuel was married to
Rubylus Gaa
He met the private complainant Tina B.
Gandalera in Dagupan City sometime in
January 1996, eventually had sex with her, and
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
Facts:
Alleges that he was the owner of 60,000 share
of stocks (worth 600k), employed as EVP
Businessday
Corporation,
President
of
Businessday Info System and Svces &
Businessday Marketing Corp
Active in the political opposition against Marcos
together with resps Raul Locsin and Enrique
Joaquin
Locsin, Joaquin, and Hector Holifea had an
unwritten agreement that, in the event that
Eduardo was arrested, they would support the
(GXDUGRV IDPLO\ E\ WKH FRQWLQXHG SD\PHQW RI
his salary
executed a Special Power of Attorney on
5/26/79 appointing Locsin, Joaquin and
Hofilea for the purpose of selling or
WUDQVIHUULQJ SHWLWLRQHUV VKDUHV RI VWRFN ZLWK
Businessday
during trial, Eduardo testified that he agreed to
execute the SPA in order to cancel his shares
of stock, even before they are sold, for the
purpose of concealing that he was a
x
x
Eugenio v. Velez
185 SCRA 425
Facts:
Already discussed many times
HC served over the body of Vitaliana Vargas
who allegedly died on the 28th of august 1988
but was only made known to the courts on
September of 1988 after the HC petition of
YLWDOLDQDVEURVDQGVLVZLWKWKHDOOHJDWLRQWKDW
tomas eugenio unduly took away their sister
sometime in 1987 and made her reside in his
palacial residence in Misamis Oriental
Tomas eugenio was arguing that HC should
not govern the dead body, and besides he was
already (allegedly) able to secure a burial
permit to bury her at the grounds of PBCM of
which he is the head
x
x
Facts:
Born of Faustino Barretto and King Lian (both
natives of Amoy, China) but was recorded
allegedly in the name of Rosario Barretto (as
per Register No. 1167(f44) in the record of
births of the civil register of Manila) allegedly
a female child Rosario was born on that 29th of
june 1944
According to the Book No. IV, Folio 83 of the
record of baptisms of the Parroquia de Chinos
in Manila, a boy by the name of domingo sy
barrette was baptized on 21st of may 1950 of
the aforementioned parents
Registered as an alien in BID, also issued a
native-born certificate of residence (29th june
1958)
Domingo Barreto alleges to have only known
the mistake in his birth certificate upon filing for
an ML
x
x
x
Facts:
Respondent herein (felecisima velarde) sought
to have changes be introduced in the birth
certificates of his children (ruben, Cynthia,
Reynaldo, roger, Rolando and romeo) alleging
that there were error in the records of said
children as per nationality, name of their father,
her middle name, nationality of their mother,
and finally their legitimacy <as born of
common-law union>
OSG objected to such, saying that the changes
sought herein would affect the nationality,
filiation, and the civil satus of the children and
should therefore be resolved not in a summary
procceding
TC granted herein prayers because they
maybe substantial errors (not just clerical), it
Repubic vs Flojo
152 SCRA 550
Facts: Inocencio P. Carag filed a petition to
correct an entry in his register of birth wherein
KH ZDV HUURQHRXVO\ UHJLVWHUHG DV &KLQHVH
instead of a Filipino citizen. At the hearing, it
was established that he was born in Aparri,
Cagayan on March 15, 1947, to a Filipino
father, Vicente and Anastacia Pe. It was then
ruled the Inocencio is a Filipino citizen so that
the correction must be made. The RP
questions this ruling.
Issue: WON proper adversary proceeding
was employed to allow corrections to be
made in the birth certificate
Held: Yes.
Ratio: The facts have been fully and properly
developed. The opposing counsel have been
given opportunity to demolish the opposite
party's case, and where the evidence has been
thoroughly weighed and considered.
The court adheres to the principle that even
substantial errors in a civil registry may be
corrected and the true facts established
provided that the parties aggrieved by the error
avail themselves of the appropriate adversary
proceeding.
Republic v. Sayo
188 SCRA 634
Facts: Ramon Tan Biana, Jr. was born on
January 9, 1952 in Nueva Vizacaya as the fifth
legitimate child of his parents. The nurse
erroneously reported to the Local Civil
Registrar that his and his parents' citizenship
as Chinese instead of Filipino. He now claims
that he and his parents are Filipino citizens.
Copies were furnished to the Office of the
Provincial Fiscal, the Office of the SolGen, and
the Local Civil Registrar. Copy of the notice of
hearing was posted and it was also published
in a newspaper of general circulation published
once a week for three consecutive weeks. The
TC then proceeded to receive evidence for the
petitioner with the Office of the Provincial Fiscal
representing the Government.
Republic v Valencia
141 SCRA 462
Facts: Leonor Valencia in behalf of her minor
children Bernardo and Jessica Go filed a
petition for the cancellation and/or correction of
entries of their birth in the Civil Registry in the
City of Cebu. The TC issued an order directing
the publication of the petition and the date of
hearing in a newspaper of general circulation in
the city and province of Cebu once a week for
three consecutive weeks and notice was duly
served on the SolGen, the Local Civil Registrar
and Go Eng. The petition seeks to change the
nationality or citizenship of Bernardo and
Jessica from Chinese to Filipino and their
status from Legitimate to Illegitimate and
changing also the status of the mother from
married to single. The Local Civil Registrar
avers that the corrections sought are not
merely clerical but substantial, involving as
they do the citizenship and status of the minors
and the status of the mother.
The TC granted the petition.
Issue: WON the proceedings that took place
could be regarded as proper suit or
appropriate action for cancellation and/or
correction of entries in the civil register.
Held: Yes.
Ratio: The persons who must be made parties
to a proceeding concerning the cancellation or
Republic v Marcos
182 SCRA 223
Facts: Pang Cha Quen, a Chinese national
married Alfredo De la Cruz, a Filipino citizen.
She had a previous marriage to a Chinese
citizen Sia Bian who fathered her child, May
Sia alias Manman Huang. She registered her
daughter as an alien under the name Mary
Pang, which is her maternal surname because
WKH FKLOGV IDWKHU KDV DEDQGRQHG WKHP 1RZ
3DQJ &KD 4XHQ SUD\V WKDW KHU GDXJKWHUV
name be changed to Mary Pang De la Cruz
since Alfredo has grown to love her as his own
daughter. Judge Marcos granted such petition.
WON the name of Mary Pang can be changed
to Mary Pang De la Cruz
Labayo-Rowe v Republic
168 SCRA 294
Sermonia vs CA
233 SCRA 155
Facts: Jose Sermonia was charged with
bigamy in 1992 after his first wife Virginia
Nievera discovered that he was married to
another woman, Ma. Lourdes Unson in 1975.
Bigamy is an illegal marriage committed by
contracting a second or subsequent marriage
before the fist marriage has been legally
dissolved. It is punishable by prision mayor.
The penalty prescribes a 15 year period which
runs from the day the crime is discovered.
Sermonia alleges that he cannot be convicted
since his second marriage, which is registered
in the Office of the Civil Registrar, which is
open to the public, has it prescriptive period
expiring on 1990. Thus, the case, which was
filed on 1992 since his first wife only
Zapanta v Registrar
237 SCRA 25
Leonor v. Court of Appeals
256 SCRA 69
Lee et al vs CA
367 SCRA 110
Eloisida vs Local Civil Registry
382 SCRA 23
!
x
x
x
!
x
Facts:
Lourdes Eleosida filed a petition to correct the
ff entries in the Birth cert of her son Charles
Christian:
Surname from Borbon to Eleosida
3DUHQWVZHGGLQJGDWHVKRXOGEHEODQN
,QIRUPDQWVQDPHshould be Lourdes Eleosida
In support she contended that:
Son was born out of wedlock
x
x
!
7KHVKHDQGWKHFKLOGVIDWKHU&DUORV%RUERQ
were never married
Therefore child is illegitimate and should have
PRWKHUVVXUQDPH
TC then issued a notice of hearing, furnishing
copies for the petitioner, respondent Carlos
Borbon, the office of the Local Civil Registrar
(LCR) and the Solgen
TC dismissed the petition for lack of merit
stating only clerical errors of harmless nature
Barco vs CA
GR No 120587,Jan 20,2004
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
x
!
!
!
!
!
b.
!
!
x
Republic vs Benemerito
GR NO 146963, March 14, 2004
!
x
x
!
Facts:
Respondent Petronio Benemerito files petition
asking for the correction of the record of birth of
his son Joven Lee on file with the LCR of
Guimba, Nueva Ecija
&KDQJHRIIDWKHUVQDPHIURP3HWHU/DXUHQWH
Benemerito to Petronio L. Benemerito
Change of marriage date of JoveQVSDUHQWV
from 9/1/89 to 1/25/98
Petronio testifies that he was surprised to
discover later on that the above information
ZHUHHUURQHRXVO\UHFRUGHGLQKLVVRQV%LUWK
Cert - TC granted the petition
The Republic appeals contending that
indispensable parties themselves were not
notified of the proceedings and because of the
substantial changes sought by respondent
this may be threshed out only in adversarial
proceedings. But CA affirms the TC Decision
!
!
Facts:
On 2001, Carlito Kho requested the court to
correct his Birth Certificate and change the
citizenship of his mother from Chinese to
FILIPINO, and her name from Maribel to
MARIVEL.
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
Facts:
Jennifer Cagandahan was born on Januay 13,
1981, and was registered as a female in her
birth certificate.
But while growing up she developed secondary
male characteristics. She was diagnosed to
have Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia ( I
searched this and this actually causes
$0%,*8286JHQLWDOLD
Upon reaching 13 years of age, her ovaries
stopped growing, she had no breasts, and she
had no menstruation. She said that in mind and
in emotion she was a MAN.
So she prayed that her name be changed from
Jennifer to JEFF and female to MALE.
Dr. Michael Sionson recommended also that
the court render the gender change since it
would be advantageous to her.
OSG however says that petition is fatally
defective because the respondent did not
implead the CIVIL Registrar as a party in the
petition.
Issues: WON the petition should fail because
the respondent did not implead the Civil
Registrar as a party in the petition
Held: NO
Ratio: The Supreme Court says that there was
substantial compliance with Rule 108 when
respondent furnished a copy of the petition to
the local registrar. The court says that since he
produces male hormones and that he
considers himself a man, and that no one
showed that they will be prejudiced by the
change of name and gender, then it is just
proper that the court grants the petition. HE IS
NOW A MAN.