Persons, Family, Relations Reviewer

DLSU
LAW BLOCK 4 - 2015 | PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS (Atty. Legarda)

Title Provision/Doctrine Application Important Notes
VOIDABLE MARRIAGES
Voidable marriages are valid until decalred otherwise The children of Pepito Niñal questioned his second This case provides for the distinction
by court, can be ratified by conhabitation or marriage for the lack of marriage license, due to failure between Void and Voidable Marriage
prescription, can only be attacked directly by affected to comply with the cohabitation period requirement.
Ninal v Bayadog, G.R.
parties, can only be questioned during the lifetime of The second wife contested that the children are not the
No. 133778. March 14,
the parties and prescriptable proper party to question the marriage. The Court ruled
2000
that they are as the second marriage constitutes a void
marriage and can be questioned collaterally unlike for
voidable marriage
Parental consent does not Bar petitioners from Couple, between 15-18 yrs old, want to get married so State justifies parental consent requirement
marriage. Marriage is not deprived but only delayed. as to raise their child w/o the stigma of illegitimacy. include the " protection of minors from
Moe v. Dinkins, 533 There is no harm to an illegitimate child as subsequent Couplr contends that it is within their right to mary even immature decision-making and preventing
F.Supp. 623 (1981), marriage of the parents legitimizes the status of the without parental concent. The court said that parental unstable marriage." The requirement ensures
669 F.2d 67 (1982) child, erasing the mark of illegitimacy. concent is required. that at least 1 mature person will participate
in the decision of a minor to mary.
Insanity of one of the spouses which occired after the In this case, Rita Tenorio was mentally sound during the
Katipunan v Tenorio, celebration of the marriage cannot constitute a cause celebration of their marriage. Her mental disorder came
38 OG 172, 1937 of nullity, since every presumption goes in favor of the several years after the wedding.
validity of marriage.
In requesting for the guardianship over the properties Petitioner Nilo Oropesa filed for the guardianship over
of an incompetent person, the finding that the person the properties of the respondent, his father, Gen. Cirilo
is indeed incompetent should be anchored on clear, Oropesa (Ret.). Nilo alleged that his father was afflicted
positive and definite evidence. with several illnesses therefore rendering him
Oropesa v Oropesa,
incompetent to manage his property. However, Nilo's
GR 184528, April 25,
proof of his father's incompetence consisted purely of
2012
testimonies given by other people, and certificates
regarding real properties registered in petitioner's name
which do not in any way relate to his father's alleged
incapacity to make decisions for himself.
Insanity is a question of fact; for insanity is a condition Ways on how insanity can be proven are stated in this
of the mind not susceptible of the usual means of case
proof. As no man would know what goes on the mind
of another, the state or condition of a person's mind
Crewlink v can only be measured & judged by his behavior.
Teringtering, GR Establishing the insanity of an accused requires opinion
166803, October 14, testimony which may be given by a witness who is
2012 intimately acquainted with the person claimed to be
insane, or who has rational basis to conclude that a
person was insane based on the witness' own
perception of the person, or who is qualified as an
expert, such as pyschiatrist.
Article 46 (3) - concealment of sexually transmitted The gonorrhea was transmitted five years after the
Hernandez vs. Court
diseases constitutes fraud and is a ground for marriage was celebrated. The law requires that the
of Appeals, G.R. No.
annulment existence of fraud must be present at the time of the
126010. December 8,
celebration of marriage. As such, the marriage cannot
1999
be annulled.
The advanced stage of a seven month pregnancy of the Godofredo married a woman, but the woman gave birth
Buccat v. Buccat 72 woman he married should have been obvious, only 89 days after the marriage. Godofredo wanted the
Phil 49 especially since he was a 1st year law student. marriage annuled on the grounds that she lied when she
promised she was a virgin.
concealment by the wife of the fact that at the time of The SC held that there was fraud because she was 4
the marriage, she was pregnant by a man other than months pregnant when she married her husband and
Aquino v. Delizo 108
her husband constitutes fraud and is ground for the SC concurred that it was not obvious due to her
Phil 21
annulment of marriage. (Art. 85, par. (4) in relation to being fat.
Art. 86, par. (3).
No other misrepresentation or deceit as to character, “Non-divulgement” (sic) or non-disclosure of an
Anaya v. Palaroan 36 health, rank, fortune or chastity shall constitute “fraud” incestuous sexual relationship (premarital sex with a
SCRA 97 (Art. 45(3) – fraud as grounds for annulment, Art. 46 – first cousin) is not grounds for a voidable marriage
fraud, defined)
the provision of the Marriage Law (Sec 30. Art. 3613)
referring to force or violence as ground of annulment
Ruiz v Atienza, 40 O.G.
of marriage, does not seem to include mere
1903 (1941)
intimidation, at least where it does not in effect
amount to force or violence.
Lack of cohabitation is not a ground to annul marriage. The petitioner wanted to annul his marriage alleging
Moreover, the court evaluates all facts before that threats of violence and duress forced him into
Villanueva v CA, 505 recognizing that fraud or force was used to obtain marrying his wife. In addition to that, he said they were
SCRA 564 consent of a party to marry. no longer cohabiting. The court did not grant it because
it is very unlikely that he does not know the basics of
self-defense given that he worked as a security guard.
There is always a presumption of potency. Impotency Jimenez prayed for the declaration of annulment of his
being an abnormal condition should not be presumed. marriage to Cañizares on the ground that her vaginal
The lone testimony of the husband of his wife's physical orifice is too small to allow the penetration of a male
Jimenez v. Cañizares incapability to have sexual intercourse is not enough to organ for copulation. Cañizares failed to file her answer
109 Phil 273 severe the marriage but the court ruled that she cannot be subjected to
witness against herself and undergo physical
examination. She is presumed to be potent and
Jimenez's testimony is not enough to prove otherwise.
Art. 45(5) of FC - A marriage may be annuled when In this case, the wife had a tumor in her reproductive Barrenness will not invalidate the marriage.
Sarao v Guevara, either party was physically incapable of consummating organ and got a surgery that made her incapable of
1940, 40 OG 11 Supp the marriage with the other, and such incapacity procreation but not copulation. The test of impotency is
263 continues and appears to be incurable not the inability to procreate but to copulate. Hence,
the petition for annulment is dismissed
Article 45 (5) of the Family Code refers to lack of power the petitioner made a mistake, she was
to copulate. Incapacity to consumate denotes the proving her husband guilty under art. 36,
permanent inability on the part of the spouses to when she filed a case under art 45.
perfor the complete act of sexual intercourse. non-
consummation of a marriage may be on the part of the
Alcazar vs Alcazar, GR husband or the wife and may be caused by a physical or
174451, October 13, structural defect in the anatomy of one of the parties
2009 or it may be due to chronic illness and inhibitions or
fears arising in one or whole or in part from
psychophysical conditions. it may be caused by
psychogenic causes, where such mental bloick or
disturbance has the result of making the spouse
physically incapable.
Article 2, for consent to be valid, it must be (1) freely Consent was not lacking between Albios and Fringer. In
given and (2) made in the presence of a solemnizing fact, there was real consent because it was not vitiated
officer. A "freely given" consent requires that the nor rendered defective by any vice of consent. Their
contracting parties willingly and deliberately enter into consent was also conscious and intelligent as they
Republic v Albios, G.R.
the marriage. Consent must be real in the sense that it understood the nature and the beneficial and
No. 198780, October
is not vitiated nor rendered defective by any of the inconvenient consequences of their marriage, as
16, 2013
vices of consent under Articles45 and 46 of the Family nothing impaired their ability to do so. That their
Code, such as fraud, force, intimidation, and undue consent was freely given is best evidenced by their
influence. conscious purpose of acquiring American citizenship
through marriage.
Sec 2(d) of AM 02-11-10 SC - "The complete facts Husband filed a petition for annulment of marriage (AM took effect on Mar. 15, 2003)
should allege the physical manifestations, if any, as are against his wife by stating the ultimate facts on which
indicative of psychological incapacity at the time of the respondent bases his claim (principal, determinative,
celebration of marriage, but expert opinion need not constitutive facts upon the existence of which the cause
Barcelona vs. CA, G. R. be alleged." of action rests). Court said applied the provision stated,
130087, Sept. 24, and said that the root cause of psychological incapacity
2003 cannot be determined so expert opinion is not
necessary anymore. It is enough to allege the physical
manifestations of such. Moreover, procedural rules
apply to pending and unresolved cases at the time of
their passage, so the AM applied in this case.
FInal Decisions cannot be disturbed The March 30,2004 decisions which declared the
marriage void on the ground of mutual psychological
Chan-Tan v Chan, G.R. incpacaity and the May 17, 2004 decision which granted
No. 167139, February the husband custody over the children cannot be
25, 2010 disturbed because the petition to review was filed
beyond the 15 day reglamentary period thus making the
said decsions final and executory
The husband alleges that their marriage should be The court did not use Art. 50 in relation to
Buenaventura v CA, annuled based on psychological incapacity. The court Art. 41, 42, and 43 because there was no
G.R. No. 127358. held that the process of liquidation of the ACP and CPG bigamy involved.
March 31, 2005 in marriages annuled due to Art. 36 should be based on
Art. 147
Art. 63(2) of FC - The decree of legal separation shall The husband, who was found guilty of cohabiting with a Difference between ACP and CPG: ACP -
have the following effect: the share of the offending woman not his wife, had his share in the CPG forfeited husband and wife become joint owners of all
spouse in the ACP/CPG shall be forfeited primarily in in favor of his common children with his wife. properties brought into the marriage (default
Quiao v Quiao, G. R. accordance with FC Art. 43(2); Art. 50 of FC - The property regime of marriages contracted
No. 183622, July 4, effects provided for in FC Art. 43(2) shall also apply to from August 3, 1988 to present); CPG -
2012 marriages annulled under FC Art. 45. husband and wife become joint owners of all
profits derived during the marriage (default
property regime of marriages contracted
before August 3, 1988)
Consistent, therefore, with Section 19 of A.M. No. 02- Petitioner prayed that the incidents on nullity, custody, It must be noted that Judge Reyes-Carpio did
11-10-SC, the Court finds it more prudent to rule first support, and property relations of the spouses be not disallow the presentation of evidence on
on the petitioner's petition and respondent's counter- resolved simultaneously. the incidents on custody, support, and
petition for declaration of nullity of marriage on the property relations. It is clear in the assailed
ground of each other's psychological incapacity to orders that the trial court judge merely
perform their respective marital obligations. If the deferred the reception of evidence relating
Yu v Reyes-Carpio, GR
Court eventually finds that the parties' respective to custody, support, and property relations,
189207, June 15, 2011
petitions for declaration of nullity of marriage is indeed to wit
meritorious on the basis of either or both of the
parties' psychological incapacity, then the parties shall
proceed to comply with Article[s] 50 and 51 of the
Family Code before a final decree of absolute nullity of
marriage can be issued.
Yasin vs Shari'a, G.R. The use of a husband's surname during the marriage,
No.94986 February after annulment of the marriage and after the death of
23, 1995 the husband is permissive not obligatory.
Marriage does not change a woman's name, it merely Since the use of her husband's surname is not
changes her civil status. ART. 370. A married woman mandatory, petitioner was allowed to use her maiden
may use: name in taking the bar exams, even without the judicial
B.M. NO. 1625 - (1) Her maiden first name and surname and add her declaration of nullity of her marriage to her husband.
Josephine P. Uy- husband's surname, or
Timosa (2) Her maiden first name and her husband's surname,
or
(3) Her husband's full name, but prefixing a word
indicating that she is his wife, such as "Mrs."
Art. 370- A married woman may use: A woman may opt to use her maiden surname or the
(1) Her maiden first name and surname and add her surname of her husband. She is not compelled by law to
husband's surname, or use the surname of her husband. This is also the same in
(2) Her maiden first name and her husband's surname, the Philippine Passport Act of 1996. In the case at hand,
Remo v DFA, March
or she already used her husband's surname she can no
2010
(3) Her husband's full name, but prefixing a word longer revert to her maiden name. She can go back if
indicating that she is his wife, such as "Mrs." her marriage is already dissolved.
Philippine Passport Act of 1996

Art. 83 of the Old Civil Code provides that a subsequent Alice, the first wife, had been absent for 15 years when In case of reappearance of the absent spouse
marriage contractefd by a person with an absent Bailon sought declaration of her presumptive death, and no action was taken, the mere
spouse from the previous marriage, or if the absent which judicial declaration was not even a requirement reappearance, even if made known to the
SSS vs. De Bailon, G.R.
spouse is presumed to be dead, shall be valid until then for purposes of remarriage. Under the Civil Code, a subsequent marriage, will not terminate the
No. 165545, March 24,
declared null and void by a competent court. subsequent marriage being voidable, it is terminated by second marriage, and by fiction of law, the
2006
final judgment of annulment in a case instituted by the absentee spouse must still be regarded as
absent spouse who reappears as by either of the legally an absentee until the subsequent
spouses in the subsequent marriage. marriage is terminated as provided by law.
Under the Old Civil Code, the presumption of death is Marriage was celebrated before the Family Code. They
established by law and no court declaration is needed are now arguing whether which law should prevail.
Valdez v Republic, for the presumption to arise. 'Proof of well-founded Court held that when a spouse is absent for 7
G.R. No. 180863, belief' is not required. consecutive years, the other spouse could validly marry.
September 8, 2009 There is no requirement under the Civil Code that there
should be a "well-founded belief" that the spouse is
dead.
Temporary residence of a filipino, who wants to get The filipino husband went to a foreign country solely to
divorce, in a foreign country does not confer such obtain divorce. The court ruled that such court cannot
country jurisdiction to try such case. have jurisdiction over him, since the husband is only
Arca vs Javier, July 31,
temporary staying in the country. Hence, it cannot be
1954
recognized in our country (because of NCC 17(3)), and in
any other country on that matter (because the court has
no jurisdiction).
-The Civil Code of the Philippines, now in force, does - on 24 February 1948 Tenchavez and Escano entered - As stated in Art 15, since marriage was
not admit absolute divorce, quo ad vinculo matrimonii; into a secret marriage before Catholic chaplain, Lt contracted by Filipinos in Philippines, only
and in fact does not even use that term, Moises Lavares. competent civil court can annul it, thus
-That a foreign divorce between Filipino citizens, -After their marriage was revealed to her parents, they remaining valid
sought and decreed after the effectivity of the present were separated as Tenchavez went back to Manila to - Civil code does not admit absolute divorce
Civil Code (Rep. Act 386), is not entitled to recognition work while Escano stayed in Cebu then when their and is not even part of the code, instead of
as valid in this jurisdiction; and neither is the marriage marriage became estranged, she moved to Misamis divorce, legal separation is used, wherein
contracted with another party by the divorced consort, - In Misamis, Pelaez filed for her petition to annul her marriage is still recognized. - To recognize
subsequently to the foreign decree of divorce, entitled marriage which she didn’t sign and was later dismissed decree of divorce of foreign courts would be
to validity in the country; because of her non-appearance at hearing. violation on public policy and article 17 of
-Afterwards, she went to the US without informing civil code
Tenchavez stating in her passport application that she > Prohibitive laws concerning persons, their
Tenchavez v. Escaño,
was single acts, or property and those which have for
15 SCRA 355
- On 22 August 1950 she filed a complaint for divorce on their object public order, policy, and good
grounds of extreme cruelty and mental in character in customs shall not be rendered ineffective by
Nevada. laws or judgments promulgated, or by
-On 21 October 1950, a decree of divorce, "final and determinations or conventions agreed upon
absolute", in foreign country.
- On 13 September 1954 Respondent then married o Would also discriminate in favor of wealthy
again to Russell Moran, had children and became a US persons who can get divorced elsewhere.
Citizen on 8 August 1958
- On July 30, 1955 Tenchavez filed the procedings for
legal separation and damages against wife and parents
in law
Aliens may obtain divorces abroad, which may be Alice Reyes Van Dorn, petitioner, was a filipino citizen.
recognized in the Philippines, provided they are valid She was married to a US Citizen, private respondent,
according to their national law. Thus, pursuant to his and she obtained a divorce in Las Vegas. Private
national law, private respondent is no longer the respondent filed a suit against petitioner stating that
Van Dorn v. Romillo, husband of petitioner. He would have no standing to the business owned by petitioner which is located in
139 SCRA 139 sue in the case below as petitioner's husband entitled Ermita Manila, is conjugal property and he was asking
to exercise control over conjugal assets. that he be declared to manage such conjugal property.
Respondent avers that the Divorce Decree issued by the
Nevada Court cannot prevail over the prohibitive laws of
the Philippines.
A validly obtained divorce decree by the foreign spouse Pilapil was married to Geiling, a German. Geiling filed
in his own country is legally recognized in the for a divorce decree in Germany and it was granted.
Philippines. With a divorce decree the marriage is More than five months after the issuance of the divorce
Somera v. Pilapil, 174 severed and they are deemed separated thus one party decree, Geiling filed two complaints of adultery against
SCRA 663 cannot claim adultery against the other spouse. Pilapil for allegedly having an affair. The Court ruled that
Geiling by virtue of the divorce decree is no longer the
husband of Pilapil and cannot claim anything against
her.
There is a need to determine if the divorce obtained The court states that "reading between the lines," the
exists and valid. implication is that petitioiner was no longer a filipino
Quita vs CA, 300 SCRA
citizen when the divorce decree was obtained. This
406
should have promted the trial court to verify her
citizenship.
The divorce obtained by a former Filipino from his first On February 22, 1937, Lorenzo and petitioner Paula The fact that the late Lorenzo N. Llorente
wife was valid and recognized in this jurisdiction as a Llorente were married. Lorenzo departed for the United became an American citizen long before and
matter of comity States and Paula stayed in Camarines Sur. On November at the time of: (1) his divorce from Paula; (2)
30, 1943, Lorenzo – became a naturalized US citizen. he marriage to Alicia; (3) execution of his will;
went home to visit his wife only to find out that she was and (4) death, is duly established, admitted
pregnant with his brothers baby and that they were and undisputed. once proven that
living together. Lorenzo returned to the United States respondent was no longer a Filipino citizen
Llorente vs CA, 345 and on November 16, 1951 filed for divorce. Paula when he obtained the divorce from
SCRA 592 actively participated in the proceedings and was petitioner, the ruling in Van Dorn would
represented by counselOn January 16, 1958, Lorenzo become applicable and petitioner could "very
married Alicia F. Llorente. Lorenzo died wanted Alicia to well lose her right to inherit" from him.
be Administratrix of his property but the action for such
to happen did not continute becauseLorenzo died. Paula
tried to then claim Lorenzos estate as the legal wife
saying that foreign divorce was void and second
marriage or Lorenzowas also void.
As a general rule, divorce decrees obtained by During the pendency of the declaration of nullity
foreigners in other countries are recognizable in our between a Filipina and a German, the German husband
Roehr v Rodriguez, GR
jurisdiction, but the legal effects must still be obtained a foreign divorce from Germany. The foreign
142820, June 30,
determind by out courts. judgement granted the German husband the custody of
2003.
their children. Philippine court said that they still need
to tackle custody in our courts.
Divorce obtained abroad by an alien may be Respondent failed to produce sufficient showing of the
recognized, provided it was valid according to the law foreign law.
of the foreigner. However, it must be proven (both by
divorce decree and national law). There are two types of divorces: absolute (completely
Garcia vs. Recio, 366
dissolves marital bonds) and limited (a mere separation
SCRA 437
To prove legal capacity to marry, one must not only of bed and board). (Jon)
show authenticity of divorce decree dissolving a
previous marriage, but also the laws of the country
wherein the divorce decree was obtained. (Jon)
The reckoning point is not the citizenship of the parties Obrecido's wife was a naturalized American citizen. She
RP vs. Orbecido, at the time of the celebration of the marriage, but their obtained a divorce decree in the USA and remarried
G.R.No. 154380, Oct. citizenship at the time a valid divorce is obtained there. Obrecido has the capacity to remarry since his
5, 2005 abroad by the alien spouse capacitating the latter to wife got the divorce decree.
remarry.
Van Dorn v. Romillo (before FC), Art. 26(2) of FC - This petition by the third wife of the decedent to If the divorce decree is recognized, then the
Where a marriage between a Filipino citizen and a administer the properties of her late husband was third marriage becomes valid and the third
San Luis vs. San Luis, foreigner is validly celebrated and a divorce is remanded to the trial court in order to resolve whether wife becomes an administrator under the
G.R. 133743, Feb. 2, thereafter validly obtained abroad by the alien spouse or not the divorce decree obtained by the second wife rules on CPG; if not, then the third marriage
2007 capacitating him or her to remarry, the Filipino spouse may be recognized by Philippine courts. (All marriages becomes void-bigamous and the third wife
shall likewise have capacity to remarry under Philippine were contracted before the Family Code, hence the becomes an administrator under the rules on
law. application of the doctrine in Van Dorn v. Romillo) limited co-ownership (Art. 148).
A former Filipino who has obtained a foreign decree of Petitioner and Respondent husband were both Filipinos
divorce has no personality to file a petition for the and got married. They eventually migrated to USA and
Amor-Catalan vs.
declaration of nullity of marriage of her former spouse became naturalized citizens thereof. After 38 years of
Ca, G.R. No. 167109,
and his present wife on the ground of bigamy. Only a marriage, they divorced. Respondent husband married
February 6, 2007
party who can demonstrate "proper interest" can file another woman in the Philippines.
the same.
Art 26 (2) FC does not extend to foreigners as the Canadian Citizen married a Filipino, however this No standing with Art 26 does not strip one
legislative intent for the law is to the benefit of the marriage was later dissolved through a Canadian divorce from their legal interest to petition for
Corpus v Sto Tomas, Filipino spouse. It is a substantive right to have the decree. The Canadian wants to remarry another Filipina recognition of foreign divorce decree. The
G.R. No. 186571, marriage to an alien spouse considered dissolved and however the foreign decree has yet to be judicially foreign decree and its authenticity must be
August 11, 2010 to have the capacity to remarry. recognozed. provenas facts together with the alien's
applicable national law to show the effect of
the judgement.
Muslim code cannot retroactively override the Civil The marriage between the late Sen. Tamano and
Code which was already bestowed certain rights on the Zorayda was celebrated in 1958, solemnized under civil
marriage. and Muslim rites. The only law in force governing
marriage relationships between Muslims and non-
Llave v Republic, G.R.
Muslims alike was the Civil Code of 1950, under the
No. 169766, March
provisions of which only one marriage can exist at any
30, 2011
given time. Under the marriage provisions of the Civil
Code, divorce is not recognized except during the
effectivity of Republic Act No. 394 which was not availed
of during its effectivity.
The Rule on Declaration of Absolute Nullity of Void Petitioner may prove the Japanese Family Court
Marriages and Annulment of Voidable Marriages (A.M. judgment through (1) an official publication or (2) a
No. 02-11-10-SC) does not apply in a petition to certification or copy attested by the officer who has
Fujiki v Marinay, G.R.
recognize a foreign judgment relating to the status of a custody of the judgment. If the office which has custody
No. 196049, June 26,
marriage where one of the parties is a citizen of a is in a foreign country such as Japan, the certification
2013
foreign country. may be made by the proper diplomatic or consular
officer of the Philippine foreign service in Japan and
authenticated by the seal of office.
Divorce between Filipinos is void and ineffectual under
the nationality rule adopted by Philippine law. Hence,
any settlement of property between the parties of the
Lavadia vs. Heirs of
first marriage involving Filipinos submitted as an
Luna, G.R. No.
incident of a divorce obtained in a foreign country lacks
171914, July 23, 2014
competent judicial approval, and cannot be
enforceable against the assets of the husband who
contracts a subsequent marriage.
There was no showing that the petitioner complied Relationships between Muslims and non-Muslims alike
with the requirements in article 13 FC to obtain a was the Civil Code of 1950,
Edelina T. Ando v DFA,
judicial recognition of the foreign decree of absolute
G. R. No. 195432,
divore in our country. PH laws on evidence requires
AUG. 27, 2014
both the divorce decree and the national law of the
alien must be alleged and proven as a fact.
ART. 89. How criminal liability is totally extinguished. The marriage between appellant and private
Criminal liability is totally extinguished: 7. By the complainant to have been contracted validly, legally,
marriage of the offended woman, as provided in Article and in good faith, as an expression of their mutual love
344 of this Code. ART. 344 of RPC states that for each other and their desire to establish a family of
People v De Guzman,
"Prosecution of the crimes of adultery, concubinage, their own. Given public policy considerations of respect
GR 185843, March 3,
seduction, abduction, rape, and acts of lasciviousness. for the sanctity of marriage and the highest regard for
2010
In cases of seduction, abduction, acts of lasciviousness, the solidarity of the family, we must accord appellant
and rape, the marriage of the offender with the the full benefits of Article 89, in relation to Article 344
offended party shall extinguish the criminal action or
remit the penalty already imposed upon him"
LAW ON SEPARATION OF THE SPOUSES
Separation a Mensa et Thoro, Limited Divorce, Divorce under the provisions of which only one marriage can Philippines do not have an absolute divorce
from bed-and-board, are synonyms of Legal Separation. exist at any given time. 50 law.
Benedicto v. De la
It leaves the bond in full force. Absolute divorce or
Rama 3 Phil 34
Vinculo Matrimonii was/is not extended in the
Philippines.
Art. 160 of the Civil Code. All property acquired during If a couple has been separated in fact, and the jusband Art. 160 applies even if they are separated in
marriage is presumed to belong to the CPG. alienates the conjugal property prior to the Family Code fact.
Villanueva v Chiong,
without the consent of the other spouse, then it is not
GR 159889, June 5,
void, but voidable. Separation in fact neither affects the
2008
conjugal nature of a property nor prejudice the other
party's interest over it.
Espinosa v Omana, Under the marriage provisions of the Civil Code, divorce
A.C. No. 9081, is not recognized except
October, 12, 2011
A divorce decree obtained by a FIlipino Citizen is not In this case, Hashim got a divorce decree in Nevada and
recognized here in the Philippines. stipulates that he is not obliged to pay the alleged
Gorayeb v Hashim, 50
stipend. The SC ruled that the divorce decree is not
Phil. 22
recognized here in the Philippines and therefore he is
still obliged to provide support to his wife.
Tenchavez v. Escaño, during the effectivity of Republic Act No. 394 51 which
15 SCRA 355 was not availed of during its
A foreign divorce decree obtained by the foreign effectivity. Nationality principle
spouse is recognized here in the Philippines and its
Somera v. Pilapil, 174
legal effects insofar as the foreign spouse is concerned
SCRA 663
FC 26 (2)
A marriage between two muslims that is governed by The petitioner, Atty. Zamoranos who is a Muslim was Article 54. Effects of irrevocable talaq; or
the Muslim Code and such marriage was legally entitled to remarry since her former marriage, that was faskh. A talaq or faskh, as soon as it becomes
dissolved through the divorce talaq obtained by the governed by Muslim Code, with de Guzman, who was irrevocable, shall have the following effects:
Zamoranos v People,
spouses, entitles the spouses to remarry. also a Muslim, was legally dissolved through talaq. Thus,
G.R. No. 193902, June
her marriage with Pacasum was legally contracted. (a) The marriage bond shall be severed and
1, 2011
the spouses may contract another marriage
in accordance with this Code
xxxxx
Perversion, repeated physical violence, and abusive Wife left the conjugal home due to husband's abusive
conduct against the wife are valid grounds to compel behavior and sexual perversion. When she asked for
the husband to financially support the wife even if they support, husband refused to provide the same,
are not living together under one roof. maintaining that he may not be obliged to do so since
Goitia v. Campos-
she is no longer living with the husband. The Court held
Rueda 35 Phil 252
that, despite not living together in the conjugal home,
the husband must give support to wife because it was
his fault, physical abuse and perversion, that caused the
wife to leave their house.
Psychological incapacity is downright incapacity or Legarda said that the Court legislated due to
inability to take cognizance of & to assume the basic the part of "immaturity and irresponsibility"
marital obligations. THe burden of proving as grounds for legal separation.
psychological incapacity is on the plaintiff. The
Kalaw v Fernandez,
psychological problem must be grave, must have
GR 166357,
existed at the time of marriage, & must be incurable.
September 19, 2011
Immaturity and irresponsibility in performing their
marital and familial obligations, sexual infidelity per se,
and acrimony may be grounds for legal separation but
not for psychological incapacity that voids a marriage.
Abandonment of the conjugal home to live with (irrelevant)
another man is not a ground for nullity; it is only a
ground for Legal Separation. Also, a husband giving his
wife 50,000 pesos as her supposed share in the
Republic v Quintos,
conjugal home in order to convince her not to oppose
GR 159594, November
his petition for legal separation is NOT collusion. Also,
12, 2012
immaturity (frequent gossiping, leaving the house
without husband’s consent, refusal to do chores, and
gambling) is not sufficient to constitute psychological
incapacity.
FC Art. 46(4) in relation to 45(3) - Concealment of The petition for annulment was not granted because
homosexuality constitutes fraud as a ground for there was no sufficient proof to substantiate the
Almelor v RTC, GR No.
annulment of marriage; FC Art. 55(6) - Homosexuality allegations that the husband is a homosexual, much less
179620, Aug. 26, 2008
per se is only a ground for legal separation. that he concealed this to his wife at the time of their
marriage.
Each sexual intercourse constitutes an act of adultery. WON the trial court erred in quashing the second
There is no constitutional or legal provision barring the complaint of adultery due to double jeopardy - 1st
People v. Zapata 88
filing of as many complaints for adultery. Every adultery was done before the complaint of adultery.
Phil 688
adulterous act constitutes one crime. Another adulterous act was done during the period
after the filing of the complaint.
Thus the determination of the custody and alimony BAD LAW DO NOT FOLLOW Miss just used it
should be given effect and force provided it does not go to point "kaputahang" decision
to the extent of violating the policy of the cooling off
Araneta vs period. That is, evidence not affecting the cause of the
Concepcion, 99 Phil separation, like the actual custody of the children, the
709 means conducive to their welfare and convenience
during the pendency of the case, these should be
allowed that the court may determine which is best for
their custody.
No decree of legal separation shall be promulgated Plaintiff filed a petition for legal separation and
upon a stipulation of facts or by confession of defendant conformed. Lower courts dismissed saying
judgment. that there was a confession of judgment. SC ruled that
Ocampo v
the petition must stand because even supposing that
Florenciano, 107 Phil
the defendant confessed, there is evidence of adultery
35
INDEPENDENTLY of such statement. What the law
prohibits is a judgment based EXCLUSIVELY or MAINLY
on defendant's confession.
Under Art. 58 of the FC, administration and An application for issuance of a writ of preliminary
management of her husband, may be heard and tried injunction filed by the wife for the return of her of what
during the cooling-off period provided by the law on she claimed to be her paraphernal and exclusive
Somosa vs Vamenta,
legal separation. property, then under the administration and
Jr., 46 SCRA 110
management of her husband, may be heard and tried
during the coooling-off period provided by the law on
legal separation.
A civil case for legal separation can proceed pending SC ruled that a civil action for legal separation on the Concubinage is a person engaging in an
the resolution of the criminal case for concubinage ground of concubinage may proceed of, or ongoing sexual relationship with another
Gandionco v.
simultaneously with a criminal action becasuue said civil person whom they are not or cannot be
Peñaranda 155 SCRA
action is not to enforce the civil liability arising from the married to the full extent of the local
725
offense even if both the civil and criminal actions arise meaning of marriage
from or are related to the same offense
Marriage is more than a contract thus intervention of Pacete entered into two marriages. His first wife Rule 18, Sec 6, ROC: There are no defaults in
state attorneys are required as the state of a marriage Concepcion filed for a declaration of nullity against actions of annulment of marriage or for legal
cannot be made depending on the parties themselves Pacete after he acquired a second marriage with Clarita. separation
(FC 60) During the course of the case, Pacete and Clarita failed
Pacete v. Cariaga, 231
to complied with the requirements of the court and
SCRA 321
Concepcion filed a motion to declare them in default.
The lower court granted the motion and declated them
in default. The Supreme Court ruled and dismissed the
lower court's decision,
Married woman may acquire residence/domicile The general rule is that the wife follows the domicile of Moreover, her living with the husband will
separate from that of her husband. One spouse cannot her husband. However, there are instances wherein the amount to condonation.
De la Viña v. Villareal
alienate or encumber conjugal property during the wife can acquire her own residence/domicile. For this
41 Phil 13
pendency of their legal separation. case, the husband has given due cause for separation
(illicit relationships).
Injunction is available when there is enough evidence
to raise the apprehension that entrusting the
Sabalones v. CA 230
management of the conjugal estate to the offending
SCRA 79
spouse may result in its improvident disposition to the
detriment of his wife and children
When the action for the support or alimony is brought In the case, Victoria Obin who was alleging that she was Civil status or a judicial relation must be the
by a womnan who alleges that she is a wife, it is the wife of Yangco, the petitioner, filed for alimony, basis of the action for support or alimony.
Yangco v. Rhode, 1
necessary for her to prove possession of the civil status however she failed to adduce evidence to support her
Phil 404
of a spouse - that is, a marriage, without which one has claim.
no right to the title to husband or wife.
Support pendente lite; Petition for support filed in bad Husband filed a complaint for adultery against his wife.
faith; Effect of. - The right to separate support or Wife also filed a complaint against the Husband for
maintanance, even from the conjugal partnership Legal Separation and/or separation of properties,
property, presupposes the existence of a justifiable custody of their children, with an urgent motion for
cause for the spouse claiming such right to live support pendente lite for her and her youngest son on
separetely. A petition in bad faith, such as that filed by the grounds of concubinage and attempt against her
Lerma v. CA 61 SCRA
one who himself or herself guilty of an act which life. The Wife was found guilty of adultery and the court
440
constitutes a ground for legal separation at the had to deny her petition for support pendente lite
instance of the other spouse, cannot be considered as because it was a petition in bad faith, such as that filed
within the intendment of the law granting such by one who himself or herself guilty of an act which
support. constitutes a ground for legal separation at the instance
of the other spouse, cannot be considered as within the
intendment of law granting separate support.
After the husband filed for adultery, because his wife
cohabited with another due to the spouse leaving them
and the child with no support, the wife was sent to
prison. Then upon release she pleaded to be taken back
People v. Sansano 50
but the husband refused. She then returns to the other
Phil 73
man she cohabited. The husband knew of this and after
7 years decided to file another case for adultery. The
husband consented to the relations because he knew of
it and therefore cannot filed another case.
A spouse cannot file a case against the other for The wife and the husband enter into an agreement that The agreement between the husband and
People v. concubinage, adultery or bigamy if they have they will live separately and shall not file a case against wife is not valid but it constitutes a valid
Schneckenberger 73 consented to the said act. eachother. The man married another. The document consent.
Phil 413 executed between the husband and wife constitued
consent.
An action for legal separation can only be claimed by For this case, after the wife knew of her husband's Condonation is the conditional forgiveness by
Ginez v. Bugayong 100 the innocent spouse, grantend that there has been no infidelity, she slept in the same house where her a husband'wife of a matrimonial offense
Phil 616 condonation. husband also slept. This constitutes condonation, which the latter has committed
regardless if they had sexual intercouse or not.
Marriage is a more than a mere contract, it is a social If the wife s declared in default in a case for legal
Brown v. Yambao 102 institution in which the state is vitally interested, separation, in accordance of Art. 101 the City Fiscal is
Phil 168 therefore the fiscal should be allowed to focus upon directed to intervene in the case.
any relevant matter
Recrimination is a ground for dismissing a petition for The husband was contending that the legal separation
legal separation. There is recrimination when both cannot be granted because the wife also gave grounds
parties gave grounds for legal separation. (Art. 56(4), for legal separation which is abandonment. However,
Ong vs Ong, G.R. No. FC) the abandonment referred to in FC Art 56(4) is
153206, October 23, abandonment without justifiable cause for more than
2006 one year. It was established that the wife left because of
the physical harrasment she was receiving from her
husband - it does not constitute the abandonment
contemplated in the said provision.
In case of non-appearance of the defendant, the court Same facts with previous case. Court just defined Collusion may not be inferred from the mere
shall order the prosecuting attorney to inquire whether collusion: Collusion in divorce or legal separation means fact that the guilty party confesses to the
or not a collusion between the parties exists. If there is the agreement between husband and wife for one of offense and thus enables the other party to
Ocampo v.
no collusion, the prosecuting attorney shall intervene them to commit, or to appear to commit, or to be procure evidence necessary to prove it.
Florenciano 107 Phil
for the State in order to take care that the evidence for represented in court as having committed, a
35
the plaintiff is not fabricated. matrimonial offense, or to suppress evidence of a valid
defense, for the purpose of enabling the other to obtain
a divorce.
Republic v CA,
November 12, 2012
Children over [7] years of age, whose parents are Despite the children's choice of living with their mother,
divorced or living separately, may choose which parent the Court held that they must stay with their father
Matute v. Macadaeg,
they prefer to live with, unless the parent chosen is because the mother was found unfit--without means of
99 Phil 340, May 30,
unfit to take charge of their care by reason of "moral livelihood, no place of her own home, and having moral
1956
depravity, habitual drunkenness, incapacity or poverty" depravity (convicted of adultery with brother-in-law).
Art. 63(2) of FC - The decree of legal separation shall Upon declaration of legal separation on the ground of
Quiao v Quiao, G. R.
have the following effect: the share of the offending sexual infidelity on the part of the husband, his share in
No. 183622, July 4,
spouse in the ACP/CPG shall be forfeited primarily in the CPG was forfeited in favor of his common children
2012
accordance with FC Art. 43(2). with his wife.
Legal separation is not a ground to revert one's name Petitioner wanted to change her name and use her
Laperal v. Republic back to her maiden name. maiden name. However, the court did not allow her to
116 Phil 672 do so, citing that legal separation does not actually
change one's married status.
Lapuz vs. Eufemio 43
SCRA 314
The death of one of the parties does not make the Filomena filed for legal separation against her husband
petition moot and academic. Legal problems do not Macadangdang. It was granted but there was a non-
cease simple because of death issuance of a supplemental decision regarding the
division of the conjugal property. Macadangdang
Dissolution and liquidation of a property of the spouses assailed that the decision of the court was incomplete
Macadangdang vs. CA, is necessary consequence of decree of legal separation. and was not final and executory because of the lack of
G.R. No. L-38287, It is a mere incident of the decree of legal separation. the supplemental decision. Before the court can rule on
October 23, 1981 this case, Macadangdang died. The court ruled that his
death does not render the case moot and academic.
They likewise ruled that the decision of the lower court
has become final and executory and it is not incomplete
as the dissolution of properties is a necessary
consequence of decree of legal separation
RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF THE SPOUSES
Spouses must be faithful to, assist, and support each The wife filed for an action for support against her
other. Husband must live with and protect his wife. husband even if she is no longer staying in the conjugal
Wife must obey, live with her husband and follow his home, by reason of husband's repeated perversion and
Goitia v. Campos- domicile; except when he moves to a foreign country. abusive conduct against her. Court ruled in favor of the
Rueda, 35 Phils 252 However, failure of wife to live with her husband is not wife; action for support was granted.
one of the grounds when the obligation to support
ceases, especially when it was the husband's fault that
led the wife to leave the conjugal home.
Exaggerated allegations of cruelty on the part of either In the case, the Court held that the said allegations of Both spouses have the duty to live together
spouse does not amount to an valid reason in order for cruelty are no more than colored versions of personal in their marital home.
Arroyo v. Vasques- the spouse alleging such to live separately from his or wrangles in which the spuses have allowed themselves
Arroyo 42 Phil 54 her spouse. from time to time to become involved and would have
little significance apart from thre morbid condition
exhibited by the wife.
Marriage entitles both parties to cohabit but there Angel and Lourdes Cuaderno were living separately (de Atty. Legarda gave emphasis on the infliction
must be mutual affection, no legal mandate or court facto separation) since Angel inflicted bodily injuries of physical injuries. This is a valid basis to
order may force the spouses to cohabit against Lourdes. The Juvenille and Domestic Relations forego of the possible reconcillation and
Court granted support to Lourdes. The CA reversed said cohabitation between the spouses, in
Cuaderno v. Cuaderno
decision and ruled that cohabitation between the relation to VAWC
12 SCRA 505
spouses it not yet impossible. The Supreme Court
reversed the CA decision and affirmed the Juvenille
Court's decision. Lourdes cannot be forced to cohabit
with Angel
Ilusorio vs. Bildner, To justify the grant of the petition, the restraint of Wife petitioned for writ of habeas corpus, stating that
G.R. No. 139789. May liberty must be an illegal and involuntary deprivation of her children are keeping her husband detained. In fact,
12, 2000. freedom of action. the husband just refuses to see her. Petition Denied.
Abella v. COMELEC,
201 SCRA 335
The use of the husband's surname during the marriage, . . . Under the present article of our Code, however, the
after annulment of the marriage and after the death of word 'may' is used, indicating that the use of the
the husband is permissive, not obligatory. husband's surname by the wife is permissive rather than
obligatory. We have no law which provides that the wife
shall change her name to that of the husband upon
Yasin v. Shariah Court
marriage. This is in consonance with the principle that
241 SCRA (1995)
surnames indicate descent. It seems, therefore, that a
married woman may use only her maiden name and
surname. She has an option, but not a duty, to use the
surname of the husband in any of the ways provided by
this Article.
While RA 9262 provides that the offender be related or Sharica was married to Steven, the son of the
connected to the victim by marriage, former marriage, respondents, and she filed a petition with a prayer for
or a sexual or dating relationship, it does not preclude the Issuance of a Temporary Protective Order against
the application of the principle of conspiracy under the Steven and her parents-in-law, Spouses Perfecto C. Tan
RPC. and Juanita L. Tan. She alleged that Steven, in
conspiracy with respondents, were causing verbal,
the principle of conspiracy under Article 8 of the RPC psychological and economic abuses upon her in
Sharica Mari Go Tan
may be applied suppletorily to R.A. No. 9262 because violation of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 9262, otherwise
vs Spouses Tan, GR
of the express provision of Section 47 that the RPC shall known as the Anti-Violence Against Women and Their
No. 168852, Sept. 30,
be supplementary to said law. Thus, general provisions Children Act of 2004.
2008
of the RPC, which by their nature, are necessarily
applicable, may be applied suppletorily.
legal principles developed from the Penal Code may be

applied in a supplementary capacity to crimes punished
under special laws, such as R.A. No. 9262, in which the
special law is silent on a particular matter.
It is immaterial whether the relationship had ceased for Accused contends that he was no longer in a dating
as long as there is suffi cient evidence show ing the past relationship with private respondent; hence, RA 9262
or present existence of such relationship between the was inapplicable.
offender and the victim when the physical harm was
San Diego vs RTC, G.R.
committed.Clearly, the legislative intent is to purposely
No. 193960, Jan. 07,
impose a more severe sanction on the offenders whose
2013
violent act/s physically harm women with whom they
have or had a sexual or dating relationship, and/or their
children with the end in view of promoting the
protection of women and children.
Tua v Mangrobang,
G.R. No. 170701,
January 22, 2014
Even a husband can rape his wife. Article 68 of the In this case, the husband forced the wife to have sexual This case was skipped.
Family Code states that the husband and wife are intercourse. The wife refused many times but the
oblidged to live together, observe mutual love, respect husband used brute strength to have sexual intercouse.
People. vs. Jumawan, and fidelity, and render mutual help and support. This The husband contended that there is no rape because
G.R. No. 187495, April obligates the spouses to love one another but this rule he is the husband and she is the wife.
21, 2014 sanctions affection and sexual initimacy, as expressions
of love, that are both spontaneous and mutual and not
the kind which is unilaterally exacted by force or
coercion,
Under R.A. No. 9262, the provision of spousal and child It enables the court to award temporary custody of
Republic vs. Yahon,
support specifically address one form of violence minor children to protect the children from violence, to
G.R. No. 20104, June
committed against women – economic abuse. prevent their abduction by the perpetrator and to
16, 2014
ensure their financial support
Court found that under RA 9262, BBB had subjected Skipped case, not important daw. Just to
AAA and their children to psychological, emotional, and illustrate lang
economic abuses which cannot be subject to a
BBB v AAA, G.R. No.
compromise agreement. Therefore the "agreement"
193225, February 9,
that the two parties executed regarding issues under
2015
VAWC to be void (but others which are governed by FC
and other rules like support, custody, etc. are
recognized by the court)
PROPERTY
*This case was governed by the civil code. Propter The lower court used 1279 to grant the petitioner's
nuptias according to article 1328 must follow the rules prayer. Lambino and Barroso made a donationof
on donations. Article 633 provides that a donation of propter nuptias of land for their son in consideration of
real property may be valid, but it must be made in a the marriage they were about to enter. The condition
Solis v Solis, 53 Phil
public instrument. It did not do so, hence not valid, was if one of the donees would die, half would stay with
912 [1928]
hence article 1279 is not applicable. the surviving donee, and half would revert to the
donors. After marriage, their son died, and so did
Lambino. The mother recovered all the lands, and the
surviving donee filed for the execution of the deed.
The Donation is perfected once the donee accepts the The Aquino spouses had disposed the four parcels of
Donation land during their lifetime and the documents were duly
notarized so that these documents enjoy the
Velasquez v CA, G.R.
presumption of validity.[32] Such presumption has not
No. 126996. February
been overcome by private respondent Santiago
15, 2000
Meneses with clear and convincing evidence. In civil
cases, the party having the burden of proof must
establish his case by a preponderance of evidence
A donation propter nuptias is invalid when it is not Petitioner’s father had not signed and accepted in The syllabus-topic related discussion only
signed and accepted in writing by the done. Also, writing the donation. Therefore, invalid. occurred in the MCTC. The Supreme Court
validity of certificate of title can only be challenged used the Doctrine of Indefeasibility of Land
Abobon v Abobon
directly. Title. The said doctrine means there’s a very
strong presumption that the person who
owns the land title owns the land.
Differentiated between Donationa propter nuptias Under the Old Civil Code, Donation propter nuptias Under the New Civil Code, Donation propter
under the Old Civil Code and the New CIvil Code must be made ina public instrument (Article 633) and nuptias is regulated by the statute of frauds
Valencia v Loquiao, that acceptance is not necessary under Article 1330 as stated under Article 127. Article 1403 (2)
GR 122134, October 3, further provides taht contracts must be in
2003 writing to be enforceable and under Article
129, express acceptance is not necessary.
Implied acceptance is sufficient
Doronio v Heirs, G.R. Old Civil Code: Donation propter nuptias should be The donation was made in a private instrument. The
No. 169454, made in a public instrument. court said that the donation was not valid because it
December 27, 2007 was not in a public instrument.
For a donation to be declared inofficious and revocable The donation was not declared inofficious because
by an affected forced heir under NCC Arts. 771-772, there was no settlement of the late donor's estate, thus
Mateo vs Lagua, 29
there must be evidence proving the inofficiousness of rendering it unable to ascertain whether or not the
SCRA 864
the donation. donor gave a donation amounting to more than the free
portion of his estate.
Art. 2012 of NCC provides that any person who is Prohibition from selling properties extends to
forbidden from receiving any donation under Art. 739 couple living as husband and wife w/o
cannot be named beneficiary of a life insurance policy benefit of marriage.
by the person who cannot make any donation to him
Ching v Goyanko, GR
according to said article. The law emphatically prohibits
165879, November
the spouses from selling property to each other subject
10, 2006
to certain exceptions. Donations between spouses are
prohibited because it will destroy the system of
conjugal partnership, a basic policy in civil law.
Prohibition on donation between spouses apply also to Husband gave wife land before they married and the
Matabuena v. common law spouse. (Irrelevan because it is already court ruled that the donation was void because, it may
Cervantes 38 SCRA stated in the Family Code) be inferred in the intent of the law, that the prohibition
284 of donation between spouses also applies to common
law spouses. (The case was under the civil code)
ART. 87 The prohibition on donations between spouses Having established that their relationship is similar to
Arcaba v de Batocael, also applies to live-in couples, or persons living that of married spouses', and not merely patient-
G.R. No. 146683. Nov. together as husband and wife without a valid marriage. caregiver relationship, the Court declared void the
22, 2001 donated parcel of land made by the man in favor of the
woman.
For a donation to be declared inofficious and revocable The donation was not declared inofficious because
by an affected forced heir under NCC Arts. 771-772, there was no settlement of the late donor's estate, thus
Mateo vs Lagua, 29
there must be evidence proving the inofficiousness of rendering it unable to ascertain whether or not the
SCRA 864
the donation. donor gave a donation amounting to more than the free
portion of his estate.
Property acquired during the mariage through a The foreigner husband wasn't allowed by the court to The law here is stupid daw. Kasi it's the
gratituous title, including its fruits and income, is reimburse his lot (the money used in buying this land is foreigner's money. He should atleast get back
Muller v Muller, G.R.
excluded from the ACP from the sale of his inherited property in Germany) his money.
No. 149615, August
during the dissolution of property because of the
29, 2006
constitutional prohibition of foreigners owning lands in
the PH
Reiterated Muller Case, and further inferred that had In this case, the funds used to purchase the properties
Beumer v Amores, GR
the foreigner spouse not lied about the sources of the was not proved by the foreigner.
195670, December 3,
funds used to purchase the properties, he would have
2012
been able to seek "equitable refuge".
Art. 92(3) of FC - Property acquired before the marriage The second wife cannot claim ownership over
by a spouse who has legitimate descendants by a properties obtained by the husband during his first
Abrenica v Abrenica,
former marriage, and the fruits and income thereof, marriage, which were subsequently brought into the
G.R. No. 180572, June
shall be excluded from the community property. second marriage and were then levied on in order to
18, 2012
indemnify his personal civil liabilities because said
properties were his exclusive properties.
The only obligations incurred by the husband that are Husband promised bind himself to indemnify whatever
chargeable against the conjugal property are those Luzon Surety Co. may incur even if he is not actually a
Luzon Surety Co., Inc. incurred in the legitimate pursuit of his career, party to the crop loan. The CFI had to acquire the sugar
vs De Garcia, 30 SCRA profession or business with the honest belief that he is quedans of the Garcias to ensure the payment of Luzon
111 doing right for the benefit of the family. There must be Surety which the husband promised to pay.
clearly showing then of some advantage which clearly
accrued to the welfate of the spouses.
Gelano vs CA, 103
SCRA 90
Article 161 f the CC then provided that conjugal Husband had to pay for a rental. The residential land
partnership shall be liable for all the debts and which is conjugal propert y was then taken as payment
obligations contracted by the husband for the benefit by the court. The wife complained that they cannot take
of the conjugal partnership, and those contracted by the conjugal property because the liability was the
the wife, also for the same purpose, in cases where she hubands' and she was not party to the case and the
may legally bind the partnership. this rule shall apply jconjugal property therefore should not be made liable
even when no actual profit or benefit shall accrue to to satisfy judgement. She also said that the rental did
the conjugal partnership from the transaction. it not even contribute to their conjugal partnership
suffices that the transaction should be one that
G-Tractors, Inc., vs CA,
normally would produce such benefit from the
135 SCRA 192
partnership. - The husband is the administrator of the
conjugal partnershp and as long as he believes he is
doing right by his family, he should not be made to
suffer and answer alone. so that, if he incurs an
indebtedness in the legitimate pursuit of his career or
profession or suffers loss in a legitimate business, the
conjugal partnership must equally bear the
indebtedness and the losses, unless he deliberately
acted to the prejudice of the family.
Noveras v. Noveras, ACP is not liable for expenses incurred that did not For this case, it was held that expenses incurred to
G.R. No. 188289, redound to the benefit of the family. settle the criminal case of the Petitioner's personal
August 20, 2014 driver cannot be charged to the ACP.
Francisco v Gonzales, The wife’s lease of an apartment to live with a man not [irrelevant]
G.R. No. 177667, her husband can never be said to have “redounded to
September 17, 2008 the benefit of the family.”
Buado Art 122, CPG is not liable for personal debts contracted The wife was ordered to may damages, which resulted
vs.CA,G.R.No.145222, by one spouse, unless an advatage/benefit is shown to from a crimminal charge. The spouse' property was
April24,2009 redound to the conjugal property. levied without exhausting the wife's property first.
The principle of in pari delicto denies all recovery to the In this case, both parties were at fault. Therefore, the
guily parties inter se. It applies to cases where the property was awarded to the respondent which was the
nullity arises from the illegality of the consideration or name used in the title.
Yu Bun Guan vs Ong,
the purpose of the contract. When two persons are
36 SCRA 559
equally at fault, the law does not relieve them. The
exception to this general rule is when the principle is
invoked with respect to inexistent contracts.
The signing of either one of the spouses in the In the case, only one of the spouses sign the said
Dar v Legasto, G.R.
certification of the non-forurm shopping substantially certificate. It should be also be noticed that the
No. 143016, August
complies with the rule promulgated by the Court. (the petitioners were sued jointly or as Mr and Mrs. over a
30, 2002
rule of substantial compliance) property in which they have a common interest.
The signature alone of the wife would not bind the Petitioner contends that the sale to the one-half share
Cotoner vs. Revilla,
subject property. A wife alone cannot bind the conjugal of Paz Castillo-Revilla should not be declared as void.
G.R. No. 190901,
partnership without the consent of the husband.
November 12, 2014
The incapacity contemplated under art 124 is where Husband was comatosed so the wife sold their property.
the spouse is absent, separated in fact, abandonement The court declared such sale void because the situation
Uy vs. CA, 346 SCRA or the consent is withheld or cannot be obtained. It contemplated under art 124 is not those that the non-
246 does not apply to cases where the spouse is consenting spouse is incapactated or incompetent to
incompetent to give consent, the proper remedy for give consent, such as this case. The proper remedy is
such is judicial guardianship. judicial guardianship.
For acts of ownership, husband and wife should The alien was married to a Filipina. The Filipina executed The lease has a period of 25 years. This is an
consent. an SPA in favor of the alien spouse. She however, rented act of ownership already. If the period is 1
Matthews vs. Taylor,
the property. Court said that the consent of the year then it is an act of administration.
GR 164584, June 22,
Constitution: Aliens cannot own lands in the husband is not needed because he is an alien he cannot
2009
Philippines. own the property. The property is not part of the
community property.
Legal separation is a ground for judicial separation of Petitioners are both former Filipino citizens. They Atty. Kat said that this was due to bad
Noveras v. Noveras, property. acquired a divorce decree. However, since ithey did not lawyering. Their lawyer could have just told
G.R. No. 188289, have it recognized in the PH courts, the ground they them to have their divorce decree
August 20, 2014 used to file for judicial separation of property is their recognized.
legal separation
Legal separation is a ground for judicial separation of Petitioners are both former Filipino citizens. They Atty. Kat said that this was due to bad
Noveras v. Noveras, property. acquired a divorce decree. However, since ithey did not lawyering. Their lawyer could have just told
G.R. No. 188289, have it recognized in the PH courts, the ground they them to have their divorce decree
August 20, 2014 used to file for judicial separation of property is their recognized.
legal separation
The disposition by sale of a portion of the conjugal Petitioners are contending that the sale of the specific Upon the death of the Marta in 1987, the
property by the surviving spouse without the prior portion is invalid since there is no liquidation that was conjugal partnership between the spouses
liquidation mandated by the Art. 130 of the Family complied. However, the Court held in contrary and said was dissolved and a co-ownership was
Heirs of Go v Servacio,
Code is not necessarily void if said portion has not yet that as long as the said portion has not yet been impliedly ensued among Go, Sr. and the
GR 157537, Sept. 7,
been allocated by judicial or extrajudicial partition to formally allocated to a specific heir through liquidation, other heirs of Marta with respect to her
2011
another heir of the deceased spouse.At any rate, the the sale is not necessarily void. share in the assets of the conjugal
requirement of priior liquidation does not prejudice partnership pending a liquidation of the
vested rights. property.
A judgment upon a compromise agreement has all the Petitioner cannot repudiate the compromise agreement
Ugalde v Ysasi, GR force and effect of any other judgment. anymore after the finality of a judicial declaration of
130623, February 29, separation of property based on the said agreement.
2008 The conjugal partnership between the petitioner and
respondent was already dissolved.
Quiao v Quiao, G. R. Article 102 (4) of the Family Code defines net profits as This particular definition of "net profits" is applicable to The case also distinguished the liquidation
No. 183622, value of property at the time of dissoluiton - value of both Conjugal Partnership of Gains and Absolute procedure between Absolute Community of
July 4, 2012 property at the time of marriage Community of Property Property and Conjugal Partnership of Gains.
When there is already a final judgement then the The marriage between the spouses was judicially
Buenaventura v CA, provision that applies is already Art. 147 declared null due to Art. 36 thus the property should be
G.R. No. 127358. owned by the spouses in equal or co-ownership
March 31, 2005 For marriages decalred null under Art. 36 then the
provision that should prevail is Art. 147
Dino v Dino, GR The decree of absolute nullity of marriage shall be
178044, January 19, issued upon finality of the trial court's decision without
2011 waiting for liquidation, patition and distribution of
properties under Art 147
When there is still no final judgement, there is still ACP Eric Yu filed a petition for declaration of nullity of This is different from the case of
and FC 50 still applies. marriage against Caroline Yu. Eric Yu assailed that the Buenaventura and Diño
presentation of evidence is essential to resolve the issue
Yu v Reyes-Carpio, GR In a case for a declaration of nullity of marriage, the on nullity. Likewise, he assailed that the issue of
189207, reception of evidence for the issue of property property relations, custody and support must be
June 15, 2011 relations, custodyand support may be deferred until resolved with the issue of nullity. The court ruled that
the judgment on the nullity of marriage is rendered. the submission of evidence with regard to property
relations, support and custody may be deferred as it is
merely incidental to the declaration of nullity.
Art. 131 of FC in present, though case was decided in If the capital of either of the two marriages or the
1976 contribution of each spouse cannot be determined with
Delizo v. Delizo, 69 mathematical precision, the total mass of these
SCRA 216 properties should be divided between conjugal
partnerships in proportion to the duration of each
partnership.
When a man and a woman, not legally capacitated to Alayo Bosing maried Juliana. He left her and moved in
marry, live together, the property acquired during the with Josefa. He purchased a land on installment
cohabitation belongs to the conjugal partnership of the indicating his civil status as married to Josefa. He later
married party. married Josefa while his prior marriage was subsisting.
Belcodero v. CA 227
He authorized thransfer of lot in the name 'as his wife,
SCRA 303
Josefa'. TCT was issued to 'Josefa married to Alayo".
Alayo died. They wanted to sell it but Juliana filed a case
for reconveyance stating that the property was under
her CP with Alayo
Although the land was registered as "Santiago Garcia Santiago Garcia owned a land and had 9 children and a
married to Consuelo Garcia", it does not establish that wife. When he died, Spouses Estonina filed a case
the property is conjugal in nature. against the wife, Consuelo Garcia, and was able to
Sps. Estonina v. CA
obtain an attachment over the land of deceased.
G.R. No. 111547,
All properties of the marriage are presumed to belong However, the 9 children sold their 1/10 share to
Jan. 27, 1997
to the conjugal partnership only when there is proof Spouses Atayan. Spouses Estonina alleged that since the
that the property was acquired during the marriage. land was a conjugal property, they were entitle to 50%
plus 1/10 of the land.
Quiao v Quiao, G. R. Article 102 (4) of the Family Code defines net profits as This particular definition of "net profits" is applicable to The case also distinguished the liquidation
No. 183622, value of property at the time of dissoluiton - value of both Conjugal Partnership of Gains and Absolute procedure between Absolute Community of
July 4, 2012 property at the time of marriage Community of Property Property and Conjugal Partnership of Gains.
The end does not justify the means; a meritorius case Husband declared the wife Absent. Husband now sold a
cannot overshadow the condition that the means conjugal land to Respondents. Respondents werent able
employed to pursue it must be in keeping with the to pay. So Husband filed a case for COLLECTION.
Rules Husband died while the case was ongoing. Wife
reappeared and is now one of the petitioners of the
Orpiano vs Tomas, COLLECTION case that the husband filed. But the wife
G.R. No. 178611, wanted to ANNUL the sale because it was sold without
Jan. 14, 201 her consent so she filed an ANNULMENT case. The court
said the sale was void because it was sold without her
consent, but the wife is still guilty of forum shopping
because she's a petitioner in both cases and there is a
possibility of having conflicting decisions being
rendered.
Article 160 of the Family Code provides taht all Having failed to prove otherwise, the subject property
Castro vs. Miat, 397 property of the marriage is presumed to belong to the belongs to the Conjugal Property of Gains. As such the
SCRA 271 CPG, unless it be rpoved tahtit pertains exclusively to husband cannot dispose of the property without the
the husband or wife authorization of his spouse.
If the administration was not transferred to the spouse, Respondent's mother was the one who bought the
Laperal v. Katigbak, 10 it remains paraphernal property of the other spouse. property for her and placed it only in the respondents
SCRA 493 name as the practice of a mother buying properties to
place them directly in the name of her children.
Article 160 of the New Civil Code provides that all The fact that the land was registered in the name of
property of the marriage is presumed to belong to the Eusebio Francisco, married to Teresita Francisco, is no
conjugal partnership, unless it be proved that it proof that the property was acquired during the
pertains exclusively to the husband or to the wife. spouses coverture. Acquisition of title and registration
Francisco v CA, G.R.
However, the party who invokes this presumption must thereof are two different acts
No. 102330,
first prove that the property in controversy was
Nov. 25, 1998
acquired during the marriage.[12] Proof of acquisition
during the coverture is a condition sine qua non for the
operation of the presumption in favor of the conjugal
partnership.
When the property is registered in the name of only Children filed for the reconveyance of the subject land
one spouse and there is no showing as to when the alleging that those were "pamana" and were conjugal in
property was acquired by same spouse, this is an nature. Hence, the mother cannot simply sell it to
Tan v Andrade, GR indication that the property belongs exclusively to the anyone. However, the lands were found to be the
171904, Aug 7, 2013 said spouse. Other than their bare allegation; no exclusive properties of the mother.
evidence was adduced to estabish that the properties
were procured during the coverture of the parents or
that it was bought using conjugal funds.
Veloso v. Martinez, 28
Phil 255
Retirement premiums are presumed conjugal property, In this case, the illegitimate family was contending that If the premiums were paid from the exclusive
if there is no proof that the premiums were paid from the retirement premiums of judge berciles was part of funds of the deceased. It would be part of the
Berciles v. GSIS,128
the exclusive funds of hte deceased. estate of the the deceased. Also, there was no proof exclusive property of the deceased.
SCRA 53, cf. FC 115
that the premiums were paid from the exclusive funds
of the deceased.
Although Gaudencio Begosa signed the mortgage as a Amalia Plata purchased a land when she was single. she
co-mortgagor, that alone would not suffice to convert sold it to one Celso Saldana but was resold back to Plata
the land into conjugal property, considering that it was when she married Guadencio Begosa. She mortgaged
Plata v. Yatco, 12 paraphernal in origin. the same land but failure to pay the mortgage, it was
SCRA 718 extrajudicially foreclosed. Guadencio Begosa was sued
Moreover, there being no proof that the property was for illegal detainer. The issue is whether Plata is bound
bought using the conjugal funds, it is not considered as by the detainer judgment.
a conjugal property
Property belonging to parents as well as property [irrelevant]
purchased with money from parents does not form
part of CPG. A title of property, belonging to a spouse’s
parents, which is transferred to their in-law (the wife of
Laurena v CA &
their son) merely for the purpose of using the same as
Laurena
collateral for a lower-interest loan, also does not form
part of CPG. (it appears here that the SC condones this
deception to obtain a lower-interest loan)
Inheritance and donations to one spouse are his/her After the death of her husband, the wife was surprised
exclusive property and hence the other spouse cannot when she found out the the jewelry she inherited from
Veloso v. Martinez, 28 encumber such property. her mother was used as a security for a debt incurred by
Phil 255 the husband (asshole). The court ruled that such
property was exclusive to the wife and hence cannot be
encumbered by the husband, without her permission.
Art. 142. The administration of all calsses of exclusive The husband, cannot sell the land of his deceased wife if
property of either spouse may be transferred by the the courts still hasn't assigned him to be the
court to the other spouse: 1) when one spouse administrator. If he wanted to make the selling of the
Manotok Realty v. CA, becomes the guardian of the other; 2) when one land valid, he should have executed proper documents
149 SCRA 372 spouse is judicially declared an absentee; 3) when one and get court approval for the sale's validity.
spouse is sentenced to a penalty which carries with it
civil interdiction; or 4) when one spouse becomes a
fugitive or is in hiding as an accused in a criminal case.
Regardless of the property being paraphernal or The wife secured a loan in connection with her logging Ratio: Whatever profits are earned by the
conjugal, it shall be liable for the obligations incurred business. Upon default, an allegledly conjugally owned wife from her business go to the conjugal
by the wife in the course of her business. parcel of land was attached and auctioned. Husband partnership. It would only be just and
petitions to recover the property on the ground that the equitable that the obligations contracted by
Ong vs CA, 204 SCRA property was conjugal and thus could not be held liable the wife in connection with her business may
297 for personal debts contracted by the wife. The Court, also be chargeable not only against her
however, ruled that, when a debt is incurred in line with paraphernal property but also against the
the wife's business, which was consented by the conjugal property of the spouses.
husband, paraphernal and conjugal properties shall be
held liable.
Under the NCC, the wife can only charge against the The levy upon the properties from the CPG in order to
CPG for purchase/loan of money to purchase things indemnify the creditors of the wife was considered
Wong et al. v. IAC 200
necessary for family support if the husband fails to unlawful because the obligation to pay said creditors
SCRA 792
deliver the proper sum. arose from the purchase of jewelry, and not a thing
necessary for family support.
Titan v David, G.R. No. Since the property was part of the conugal partnership, The SPA provided by one of the spouses was forged
169548, the sale to Titan required the consent of both spouses. therefore making the sale void because it lacks consent
March 15, 2010 even though Titan was a buyer of good faith
All propert of the marriage is presumed to be conjugal, The property of the couple was levied however the Proof of aquisition during the converture
Imani vs.
however, for the presumption to apply, the invoking spouses claim that the said property is under CPG. The (when propert was aquired) is a condition
Metrobank, G.R. No.
party must prove that the property was acquired court held that the levy was valid as the petitioner did sine qua non to the operation of the
187023,
during the marriage. not estblish that said propert was aquired during the presumption in favor of the conjugal
Nov. 17, 2010
marriage partnership.
All property of the marriage is presumed to belong to
the conjugal partnership, unless it be proved that it
Dewara v Lamela, GR
pertains exclusively to the husband or to the wife.
179010, April 11, 2011
Registration in the name of the husband or the wife
alone does not destroy this presumption.
All property of the marriage is presumed to be brother of petitioner mortgaged their land to secure a
Lim v. Equitable PCI
conjugal, unless it is shown that it is owned exclusively loan. failure to pay, the land was foreclosed. Petitioner
Bank, G.R. No.
by the husband or the wife. This presumption is not alleged that he did not authorize for the land to be
183918.
overcome by the fact that the property is registered in mortgaged and that since the said property is conjugal,
January 15, 2014
the name of the husband or the wife alone consent of the wife of petitioner is needed.
All property of the marriage is presumed to belong to Before debts and obligations may be charged against
the conjugal partnership, unless it be proved that it the conjugal partnership, it must be shown that the
pertains exclusively to the husband or to the wife. same were contracted for, or the debts and obligations
Registration in the name of the husband or the wife should have redounded to, the benefit of the conjugal
alone does not destroy this presumption. partnership. Fines and pecuniary indemnities imposed
Dewara v Lamela, GR upon the husband or the wife, as a rule, may not be
179010, April 11, 2011 charged to the partnership. However, if the spouse who
is bound should have no exclusive property or if the
property should be insufficient, the fines and
indemnities may be enforced upon the partnership
assets only after the responsibilities enumerated in
Article 161 of the Civil Code have been covered.
Presumption of conjugality does not operate if there is In this case, petitioner was not able to prove that she
no showing of when the property alleged to be acquired the property during the time of her marriage
De La Pena v Avila,
conjugal was acquired. with her late husband. Proof of acquisition during the
G.R. No. 187490,
marriage is an essential condition. Civil status cannot be
Feb. 8, 2012
interpreted to mean that the spouse is also a registered
owner.
FC 116 Property acuired during marriage is presumed Spouses acquired propert during marriage. At some
to be conjugal property. The cohabitation of a spouse point of the marriage, the husband lived with the
Villanueva vs CA, 427
with another, even for a long period, does not sever mistress instead of the wife. The husband died and the
SCRA 439
the tie of a subsisting previous marriage. profit from the properrty was collected by the
illegitimate child.
Property acquired during a marriage is presumed to be It is sufficient to prove that the property was acquired
conjugal and the fact that the land is later registered in during the marriage in order that the same may be
the name of only one of the spouses does not destroy deemed conjugal property. There is no question that
its conjugal nature. If the fact that property acquired the disputed property was acquired by onerous title
during marriage was registered in the name of the during the marriage.
Mendoza v. Reyes 124
husband alone does not affect its conjugal nature,
SCRA 154
neither does registration in the name of the wife. Records show that the funds came from loans obtained
by the spouses. Under Article 161 of the Civil Code, all
debts and obligations contracted by the husband and
the wife for the benefit of the conjugal partnership are
liabilities of the partnership.
Doctrine 1: In the pre-FC Civil Code, the Husband Application of Doctrine 1: Petitioner’s husband sold
cannot alienate or encumber property without consent property to PNB without his wife’s consent. Wife
of his wife (Art 173). If he does, said transaction is petitioned to the Courts to nullify said contract on the
voidable as the wife may ask the Courts for annulment ground that her consent was not obtained and her
of the contract within ten years from the transaction. signature, which appeared in the document showing the
transaction, was forged.
Doctrine 2: The presumption of due execution of a
Aguete v PNB, GR notarial document (which basically means a notarial Application of Doctrine 2: Aside from her husband’s
170166, April 6, 2011 document is presumed valid) is overridden only by inadmissible admission, petitioner’s only other evidence
evidence so “clear, strong and convincing as to exclude that her signature was forged was her uncorroborated
all controversy as to the falsity of the certificate.” What allegation.
is needed would be a corroborating witness such as a
handwriting expert. Also, a husband’s own admission of
that he forged his wife’s signature cannot be brought
by him to Court since no one can come to Court with
unclean hands.
Daniel bought a lot through a contract to sell during his Important difference between Contract of
first marriage to Leonor. The full payment of said lot Sale - where ownership is given upon delivery
was given during his second marriage with Annette. The versus Contract to Sell - where owenweship
children of Daniel from the first marriage claims that the is reserved by seller until full payment is
Jovellanos v CA, GR
subject lot is part of the CPG of the first marriage. given.
100728, June 18, 1992
Annette contended that it forms part of her CPG with
Daniel. Court ruled that in favor of Annette. The principle of pactum reservati dominii -
ownership is retained by vendor until full
payment is paid
Article 120 of the Family Code provides that when the Since the actual amount paid to build a house on the
cost of the improvement and any resulting increase in subject property is only 60,755.76 Php, the house and
value are more than the value of the property at the the property belongs to the separate property of Erlinda
Munoz, Jr. v Ramirez,
time of improvement, the entire property shall belong Ramirez. Determining the actual value of the subject
GR 156125,
to the conjugal property, subject to reimbursement. property is no longer necessary since it is considerably
August 25, 2010
Otherwise, the improvement shall belong to the larger than the value of the improvement
separate property of the of one of the spouses subject
to reimbursement.
Construction of an improvement using the common or The couple, using common funds, built a building on the The construction of a building on the lot is
conjugal funds does not automatically make the wife's lot. Court ruled that the lot remains the property simply an exercise of the right of usufruct
paraphernal property conjugal. of the wife. pertaining to the conjugal partnership over
the wife's land. Because of this usufructuary
Padilla v Padilla,
right, the conjugal partnership is not bound
October 4, 1943
to pay any rent while occupying wife's land;
because if it were leased to a third person,
the rent of the third person would belong to
the conjugal partnership.
Application of Doctrine 1: Petitioner’s husband sold The wife, who in this case owned several parcels of land
property to PNB without his wife’s consent. Wife on which improvements were made during the conjugal
petitioned to the Courts to nullify said contract on the partnership, was granted ownership over the parcels of
ground that her consent was not obtained and her land with improvements which were destroyed by fire
signature, which appeared in the document showing during the war, since these improvements have become
the transaction, was forged.Doctrine 2: The worthless.
presumption of due execution of a notarial document
Padilla v Paterno, (which basically means a notarial document is
December 26, 1961 presumed valid) is overridden only by evidence so
“clear, strong and convincing as to exclude all
controversy as to the falsity of the certificate.” What is
needed would be a corroborating witness such as a
handwriting expert. Also, a husband’s own admission of
that he forged his wife’s signature cannot be brought
by him to Court since no one can come to Court with
unclean hands
Conjugal Partnership; Construction of building during The land was a paraphernal property. However, a
marriage does not ipso facto make land conjugal building was built on it during their marriage. The war
destroyed that building (before the liquidation of the
conjugal partnership). They are now saying that the land
Coingco v Flores, 82 in question automatically became conjugal from the
Phil. 284 moment that buildings were constructed thereon. The
court said that it remains to be a paraphernal property
because the title is in the name of the wife alone, and
that the she was financially able to buy that property.
Consent of both spouses is needed in selling the The Rocas were married during the NCC. But the Always remember the question: when was
Fuentes v. Roca, GR
conjugal property. property was sold during the FC. Hence, the sale of the the property dealt with?
178902, April 21, 2010
property without the consent of the wife is void.
Art. 122 of the Family Code. "The payment of personal A husband cannot be deemed to be a stranger to the
debts contracted by the husband or the wife before or case against his wife. Considering that the wife had
Mariano vs CA, 174
during the marriage shall not be charged to the engaged in business with her husband's consent and
SCRA 59
conjugal partnership except insofar as they redounded income derived from the business has redounded to the
to the benefit of the family. benefit of the family.
Article 121 of the Family Code provides that 'The The loan procured from respondent-appellant AIDC was
conjugal partnership shall be liable for: . . . (2) All debts
for the advancement and benefit of Philippine Blooming
and obligations contracted during the marriage by the Mills and not for the benefit of the conjugal partnership
designated Administrator-Spouse for the benefit of the of petitioners-appellees.
conjugal partnership of gains . . .' The burden of proof
Ayala vs CA, 286 SCRA that the debt was contracted for the benefit of the
272 conjugal partnership of gains, lies with the creditor-
party litigant claiming as such. In the case at bar,
respondent-appellant AIDC failed to
prove that the debt was contracted by appellee-
husband, for the benefit of the conjugal partnership of
gains.
CPG is not liable for a loan that did not directly redound In this case, the private respondent failed to prove that
to the benefit of the family. the conjugal partnership of the petitioners was
Ching vs CA, 423 SCRA
benefited by the petitioner-husband’s act of executing a
356
continuing guaranty and suretyship agreement with the
private respondent for and in behalf of PBMCI.
Sale of conjugal property requires the consent of bothe Husband placed the subject property as security of a
the husband and wife. The absence of the consent of loan of someone not his wife. Liability of paying the loan
Homeowners vs. one renders the sale null and void. For a subject was tried to be imposed to the conjugal partnership but
Dailo, G.R. No. property to be held liable, the obligation contracted since it was not proven that it redounded to the
153802, Mar.11, 2005 must have redounded to the benefit of the conjugal welafare of the family, payment shall not be imposed to
partnership and clearly accrues to the welfare of the the conjugal property.
spouses/family.
The CPG cannot be made to answer for the judgement The corporation of the husband lost a labor case and The property also cannot be levied as the
Ando v Campo, GR obligation of a corporation, regardless if the spouse is was ordered to pay monetary award. The personal property was part of the spouses' CPG, thus
184007, February 16, the head of the corporation. property of the corporation head was levied. the wife would stand to lose property
2011 (tantamounts to deprivation of property
without due process)
Article 121 of the Family Code provides that 'The The loan procured from respondent-appellant AIDC was
conjugal partnership shall be liable for: . . . (2) All debts for the advancement and benefit of Philippine Blooming
and obligations contracted during the marriage by the Mills and not for the benefit of the conjugal partnership
designated Administrator-Spouse for the benefit of the of petitioners-appellees.
conjugal partnership of gains . . .' The burden of proof
Ayala Investment vs.
that the debt was contracted for the benefit of the
CA (February 12,
conjugal partnership of gains, lies with the creditor-
1998)
party litigant claiming as such. In the case at bar,
respondent-appellant AIDC failed to
prove that the debt was contracted by appellee-
husband, for the benefit of the conjugal partnership of
gains.
Security Bank vs. Mar The property is not chargable if it is not spent on the Martinez only acted as a guarantor for the loan taken by
Tiera Corp., G.R. No. family, business or livelihood etc. Mar Tierra Corp.
143382
FC 161 Hospital and medical expenses are chargeble to Husband filed an action for partition. Repeatedly tried
Costuna vs. CPG as health and well-being of both spouses would to get the wife's approval (Husband living with relatives
Domondon, 180 SCRA redound to the benefit of their conjugal partnership. due to illness) Husband contracted a deed of sale of an
333 undetermined 1/2 portion of the conjugal property
without the Wife's concent.
ART. 121(3) The conjugal partnership shall be liable to Although the husband did not sign the
debts and obligations contracted by either spouse acknowledgement instrument executed by his wife, the
without the consent of the other to the extent that the loan obviously contributed to the benefit of the family
Carlos vs. Abelardo,
family may have been benefited. because it was used to purchase the house and lot
380 SCRA 361
which became the conjugal home; therefore, husband
shall be solidarily liable for the loan together with his
wife.
Art. 173 of the Old Civil Code provides that The wife Respondents' separation in fact neither affected the
may, during the marriage, and within 10 years from the conjugal nature of the lot nor prejudiced the wife's
transaction questioned, ask the courts for the interest over it. The sale of the husband without the
annulment of any law contract of the husband entered wife's consent is not, however, void ab initio. Without
Villanueva vs Chiong, into withour her consent, when such consent is the wife's consent, the husband's alienation or
GR 59889, June 5, required, or any act or contract of the husband which encumbrance of conjugal property befire the effectivity
2008 tends to defraud her or impair her interest in the of the Family Code, is not void, but merely voidable.
conjugal partnership property. Should the wife fsil to
exercise this right, she, or her heirs, after the
dissolution of the marriage, may demand the value of
property fraudulently alienated by the husband.
A sale or encumbrance of conjugal property concluded Respondent Mary Ann timely filed the action for Even assuming that petitioners believed in
after the effectivity of the Family Code on August 3, annulment of sale within five (5) years from the date of good faith that the subject property is the
1988, is governed by Article 124 of the same Code that sale and execution of the deed. However, her action to exclusive property of Pedro, they were
now treats such a disposition to be void if done (a) annul the sale pertains only to the conjugal house and apprised by Mary Ann's lawyer of her
Ravina v Villa-Abrille,
without the consent of both the husband and the wife, lot and does not include the lot covered by TCT No. T- objection to the sale and yet they still
GR No. 160708, Oct.
or (b) in case of one spouse's inability, the authority of 26471, a property exclusively belonging to Pedro and proceeded to purchase the property without
16, 2009
the court. Article 124 of the Family Code, the governing which he can dispose of freely without Mary Ann's Mary Ann's written consent.
law at the time the assailed sale was contracted, is consent.
explicit:
The ACP/CPG can be held liable for the personal debts The husband was charged with murder and required to
of one of the spouses. If the spouse does not have pay pepcuniary indemnities. The court said that it can
People v. Lagrimas, 29 exclusive property or if the exclusive property is be charged to the ACP/CPG if husband has no exclusive
SCRA 153 insufficient. However, the charges in Art. 121 should property or if it is insufficient but the obligations in Art.
first be satisfied. 121 should first be satisfied. The obligation to the family
has to be the priority.
Art. 122 of FC - Fines against either spouse may not be The issue of whether or not the conjugal properties may
charged against the CPG unless the CPG has already be levied upon for the satisfaction of the wife's civil
paid the responsiblities due under FC 121. liability was remanded to the lower court in order to
Pana vs. Heirs of
ascertain whether or not the responsibilities under FC
Juanite, Sr., G.R. No.
121 have already been satisfied. If the CPG has already
164201
fulfilled these obligations, then said conjugal properties
may be levied; otherwise, the levy shall be unlawful.
A contract which is the direct result of a previous illegal
Petitioner's husband sold their conjugal property The sale was void because it was sold without
contract is also void and inexistent. Moreover, a without her knowledge. Respondent (buyers) her consent.
contract cannot be made as a continuing offer under contended that they signed an amicable settlement in
Art. 124 when it does not even mention of the sale of the barangay which can be understood as petitioner
Guiang vs CA, 291
such property. agreeing to the sale of the land as a "continuing offer"
SCRA 372
under Art 124. Court said it cannot be held as such
because there was no mention at all about the sale of
the land. It was only about petitioner leaving the said
premises (but was void, anyway).
Art. 173 of the Old Civil Code provides that The wife The husband, as administrator of the CPG property, The act of ownership that the husband acted
may, during the marriage, and within 10 years from the cannot legally enter into a contract of lease of more upon in this case is the fact that he leased
transaction questioned, ask the courts for the than one year. The husband is not an ordinary their CPG property to a third party for more
annulment of any law contract of the husband entered administrator. Administration does not include acts of than one year.
into withour her consent, when such consent is ownership.
Roxas v. CA 198 SCRA
required, or any act or contract of the husband which
541 [1991]
tends to defraud her or impair her interest in the
conjugal partnership property. Should the wife fsil to
exercise this right, she, or her heirs, after the
dissolution of the marriage, may demand the value of
property fraudulently alienated by the husband.
administration belongs jointly to husband and wife. certification of forum shopping was only signed by one the general rule is that certificate of non
however, unlike in cases of alienation where consent of spouse on a case regarding their conjugal property forum shopping should be signed by all
both spouses are required, joint management or petitioners however, since it is signing for a
Docena vs. Lapesura, administration doesnt require that the husband and conjugal property, it does not make he
355 SCRA 658 wife always act together. Each spouse may validly husbands lone signature insufficient. The
exercise full power of management alone. court also presumed thst the husband has
personal knowlegde of wifes filign and clearly
intended for the benefit of the family.
Art. 124. The administration and enjoyment of the The Court does not see how applying Article 124 of the
conjugal partnership property shall belong to both Family Code would lead to injustice or absurdity. It
spouses jointly. In the event that one spouse is should be noted that respondent spouses were well
incapacitated or otherwise unable to participate in the aware that Lot 896-B-9-B is a conjugal property of
Alinas vs Alinas, GR administration of the conjugal properties, the other petitioners. They also knew that the disposition being
No. 158040, April 14, spouse may assume sole powers of administration. made by Onesiforo is without the consent of his wife, as
2008 These powers do not include the powers of disposition they knew that petitioners had separated, and, the sale
or encumbrance which must have the authority of the documents do not bear the signature of petitioner
court or the written consent of the other spouse. In the Rosario.
absence of such authority or consent the disposition or
encumbrance shall be void.
A sale of conjugal property with the consent of the Ma. Elena sold her conjugal property with Dionision
husband is not mere voidable but void and cannot be Parulan to spouses Aggabao. She presented an SPA.
ratified. Spouses Aggabao bought the two lots but Ma. Elena
Aggabao vs. Parulan,
failed to give the title to them and they found out that
G.R. No. 165803, Sept.
An SPA does not include acts of disposition or she forged the SPA. Aggabao assails that they are buyers
1, 2010
encumberance, which are acts of ownership. Thus in a in good faith thus the court must rule in favor of them.
sale of conjugal property, SPA is not enough there must The court ruled that they were not buyers in good faith
be consent of both spouses for the sale to valid and the sale was void.
The incapacity contemplated under art 124 is where Husband was comatosed so the wife sold their property.
the spouse is absent, separated in fact, abandonement The court declared such sale void because the situation
Uy vs. CA, 346 SCRA or the consent is withheld or cannot be obtained. It contemplated under art 124 is not those that the non-
246 does not apply to cases where the spouse is consenting spouse is incapactated or incompetent to
incompetent to give consent, the proper remedy for give consent, such as this case. The proper remedy is
such is judicial guardianship. judicial guardianship.
Art. 124 of FC While there was no formal designation of the
administrator has been made, such designation was
Sabalones v. CA 230
implicit in the decision of the trial court denying the
SCRA 79
petitioner any share in the conjugal properties thus
disqualifying him as administrator.
SC holds that Thomas Cheesman cannot claim conjugal American Thomas Cheesman was married to a Filipina Atty Legarda agrees that Cheesman cannot
share of the property because he is an alien, and the named Criselda Cheesman. During the marriage (now claim that he has a share of the property, but
sale to aliens is prohibited by the constitution (see they are separated), a deed of sale and transfer of primarily because the evidence shows that
note). possessory rights to an unregistered land and house was the disputed property was paraphernal in the
executed in favor of Criselda only, without any first place. The SC did not have to resort to
objections from Cheesman. Tax declarations for the the constitution.
Cheeseman v. IAC 193
property were issued to Criselda only, and Cheesman
SCRA 93
did not object again. After they separated, Cheesman
tried to stop Criselda from selling the property by
claiming that the sale was done without his consent,
and it should have been done with his consent because
the property is conjugal. Criselda claims that the
property is paraphernal.
Foreigners cannot get back money and property they Frenzel never got reimbursement for his life savings BAD DECISION, Frenzel had a filipina wife
Frenzel vs. Catito, G.R. gave to "illegal" wives which he spent on his mistress and her family who technically partly owns the property
No. 143958, July 11, Frenzel bought. SHE WAS NEVER
2003 MENTIONED IN THE CASE OTHER THAN
INTRO
A sale or encumbrance of conjugal property concluded Respondent Mary Ann timely filed the action for Even assuming that petitioners believed in
after the effectivity of the Family Code on August 3, annulment of sale within five (5) years from the date of good faith that the subject property is the
1988, is governed by Article 124 of the same Code that sale and execution of the deed. However, her action to exclusive property of Pedro, they were
now treats such a disposition to be void if done (a) annul the sale pertains only to the conjugal house and apprised by Mary Ann's lawyer of her
Ravina v Villa-Abrille,
without the consent of both the husband and the wife, lot and does not include the lot covered by TCT No. T- objection to the sale and yet they still
GR No. 160708, Oct.
or (b) in case of one spouse's inability, the authority of 26471, a property exclusively belonging to Pedro and proceeded to purchase the property without
16, 2009
the court. Article 124 of the Family Code, the governing which he can dispose of freely without Mary Ann's Mary Ann's written consent.
law at the time the assailed sale was contracted, is consent.
explicit:
Siochi v Gozon, G.R.

No. 169900, March 18,
2010
The Family Code applies. Art 166 prohibited Tarciano Tarciano, father, sold the conjugal property months
from selling commonly owned real property without his after the Family Code took effect.
wife consent. Art. 173 allows the wife to ask the courts
Fuentes vs. Roca, G.R.
the annulment of any contract without her consent
No. 178902, April 21,
within ten years from transaction questioned. Should
2010
the wife fails to exercise this right, she or her heirs may
demand the value of property fraudulently alienated by
the husband.
Any disposition or encumbrance without the written Edna Lindo loaned from Flores. She mortgaged a
consent shall be void. however, transaction shall be property under their name without the consent or
construed as a continuin offer on the part of the authority of the husband. she signed the deed and
Flores v Lindo, GR
consenting spouse and the third person, and may be promissory note as her husbands atty in fact. the SPA
183984, April 13, 2011
perfected as a binding contract upon the acceptance by was executed later.
the other spouse before or after the offer is withdrawn
be either offerors.
Abandonment without just cause is a ground for In this case, the husband refused to give financial
judicial separation of properties. support to his wife. He also cohabited with another
Partosa-Jo v. CA 216
woman, showing that he has no intent to get back with
SCRA 693
his wife. Aggrieved spouse filed a petition for judicial
separation of properties. Granted.
The sale of one-half of the conjugal property without Liquidation first before selling of a spouse
liquidation of the partnership is void. The right of the share in conjugal property. Also discussed:
husband or wife to one-half of the conjugal assets does Conditional Sale - akin to a contract to sell or
Tarrosa vs De Leon, not vest until the dissolution and liquidation of the ownership is retained by seller until full
GR 185063, July 23, conjugal partnership, or after dissolution of the payment of price. Contract of Sale - where
2009 marriage, when it is finally determined that, after title passes upon delivery of the thing sold.
settlements of conjugal obligations, there are net
assets left which can be divided between the spouses
or their respective heirs.
Liquidation of the only conjugal property. The order to sell the family dwelling, regardless of its
contetion by the wife that it should not be sold and
Cabreza v Cabreza, GR
given to her by default since the majoirty of the children
171260, September
lived with them, is final and executory since it was the
11, 2009
only property to be liquidated in the conjugal property
Art. 147- Covers the effects of void marriages under The marriage of the spouses were declared void due to Art.129 is not applied despite it providing the
Barrido v. Nonato,
Art. 36. It provided for the effects on the property psychological incapacity. They asked for a partition of proceedure for dissolution of the property
G.R. No. 176492,
relations of the spouses. property. The court said that they co-owned the relations of the spouses because the case
October 20, 2014
property as provided for by Art. 147 deals with void marriage under Art. 36
Support includes the education of the person entitled Petitioners, illegitimate children of the father, opposed
to be supported until he completes his education or the action as the children of the respondent have
training for some profession, trade or vocation, even already attained the age of majority. Two of them were
Santero v. CFI, 153
beyond the age of majority. gainfully employed and one was married.
SCRA 728
Moreover, the New Civil Code gives the surviving

spouse and his/her children without distinction.
Maquilan vs
Maquilan, June 8,
2007
To establish co-ownership, therefore, it became SOLEDAD was not able to prove by preponderance of
imperative for the petitioner to offer proof of her evidence that her own independent funds were used to
Lavadia vs. Heirs of
actual contributions in the acquisition of property. Her buy the law office condominium and the law books
Luna, G.R. No.
mere allegation of co-ownership, without sufficient and subject matter in contention in this case — proof that
171914, July 23, 2014
competent evidence, would warrant no relief in her was required for Article 144 of the New Civil Code and
favor Article 148 of the Family Code to apply
The marriage of Santiago and Susan Yee is void ab initio Santiago Carino contracted 2 marriages. First on 1969 Nicdao and Carino (1st marriage) - Art 147
because there is no prior judicial declaration of nullity with Susan Nicdao and Second on 1992 with Susan Yee. applies Yee and Carino (2nd marriage) - Art
Carino vs. Carino, GR
of a previous marriage. First marriage is also void ab 148 applies
132539, February 3,
initio because the civil code then requires a valid
2001
marriage license as a requisite of marriage and absence
of such will render the marriage void ab initio.
Void marriages under Art 36 are governed by the rules The decree of absolute nullity of marriage shall be
Diño v Diño, GR
on co-ownership with regard to liquidation of issued upon finality of the trial court's decision without
178004, January 19,
properties waiting for liquidation, patition and distribution of
2011
properties under Art 147
Void marriages under Art 36 are governed by the rules The marriage of the spouses were declared void due to
Barrido v. Nonato,
on co-ownership with regard to liquidation of psychological incapacity. They asked for a partition of
G.R. No. 176492,
properties. Art. 147. property. The court said that they co-owned the
October 20, 2014
property as provided for by Art. 147
Under the Family Code, if the properties are acquired
Villanueva vs CA, 427 during the marriage, the presumption is that they are
SCRA 439 conjugal property. The burden of proof is on the party
claiming otherwise.
The disqualification of the mistress as a beneficiary of The petitioner contends that the share of Eva and the
Heirs of Maramag vs
the insurance, pursuant to Art. 739, makes their illegitimate children should be awarded to them being
De Guzman, GR
illegitimate children the designated beneficiaries, to the legitimate family
181132, June 5, 2009
the exclusion of petitioners.
Lavadia vs. Heirs of The husband and the wife may agree upon the
Luna, G.R. No. dissolution of the conjugal partnership during the
171914, July 23, 2014 marriage, subject to judicial approval.
For acts of ownership, husband and wife should The alien was married to a Filipina. The Filipina executed The lease has a period of 25 years. This is an
consent. an SPA in favor of the alien spouse. She however, rented act of ownership already. If the period is 1
Matthews vs. Taylor,
the property. Court said that the consent of the year then it is an act of administration.
GR 164584, June 22,
Constitution: Aliens cannot own lands in the husband is not needed because he is an alien he cannot
2009
Philippines. own the property. The property is not part of the
community property.
FAMILY RELATIONS
Doctrine: In Art 222 of the Civil Code, which requires [irrelevant]
“earnest efforts toward a compromise” for suits filed or
maintained between members of a family, “members
of the same family” are those in Art 217 of the Family
Code:
Gayon v. Gayon, 36
1. Between husband and wife
SCRA 104
2. Between parents and child
3. Among other ascendants and descendants
4. Among brothers and sisters
Sister-in-law and children of the same are not included.

As provided under Article 2035 of the New Civil Code, Since the peittion is one for support and since supprot
Wainwright v. no comporomise upon future support shall be valid. cannot be compromised, there is no need to comply
Versoza, 26 SCRA 78 with the requirement of conducting earnest effortat at a
compromise to file a suit for support.
If there is a suit involving family members and a Judge Gonong of the Ilocos Norte CFI denied the
stranger is involved, the provision that earnest efforts petitioners motion to dismiss. Petitioners were
towards a compromise are executed should not apply. disputing the ownership of land that was sold to a
Magbaleta vs Gonong, A stranger should not be subject to go through the stranger. They claimed that the denial of the motion to
76 SCRA 511 delay and complications between relatives. dismiss violated article 222 of the civil code and section
1 rule 16 RoC as there was no allegation in the suit that
as members of the same family, earnest efforts towards
a compromise were made.
In a habeas corpus proceeding involving the welfare Edwin and Lourdes are husband and wife who have
and custoy of a child of tender age, the paramount lived together since 1996 but formalized their union
concern is to resolve immediately the issue of who has only on 28 October 1997. On 30 April 1998, Lourdes
legal custody of the child. Art. 151 should not stand in filed a petition for habeas corpus before the RTC
the way of giving such child of tender age full claiming that Edwin left their conjugal home with their
protection. this rule has sound statutory bases in article daughter, Khriza Mae Tribiana (Khriza). Edwin has since
Tribiana vs.Tribiana, 213 of the family code which provides that no child deprived Lourdes of lawful custody of Khriza who was
G.R. No. 137359 under 7 years of age shall be separated from the then only 1 year and 4) months of age. Later, it turned
mother unless the court fines compelling reasons to out that Khriza was being held by Edwins mother,
order otherwise. in this case, the child was only 1 year Rosalina Tribiana (Rosalina). Edwin moved to dismiss
and 4 months old when taken away from the mother. Lourdes petition on the ground that the petition failed
to allege that earnest efforts at a compromise were
made before its filing as required by Article 151 of the
Family Code.
Once a stranger becomes a party to a suit involving Petitioner filed a Motion to Dismiss on the ground that
members of the same family, the law no longer makes private respondent failed to comply with Article 151 of
it a condition precedent that earnest efforts be made the Family Code wherein it is provided that no suit
towards a compromise before the action can prosper. between members of the same family shall prosper
unless it should appear from the verified complaint or
Hiyas Savings vs.
petition that earnest efforts toward a compromise have
Acuña, G.R. NO.
been made, but that the same have failed. Petitioner
154132
contends that since the complaint does not contain any
fact or averment that earnest efforts toward a
compromise had been made prior to its institution, then
the complaint should be dismissed for lack of cause of
action.
Art. 154- The beneficiaries of the family home includes The grandfather died intestate and the children of the There are 3 requisites:
the descendants. grandfather wanted to partition the family home. 1.) Must be in the relationships in Art. 154
Patricio vs. Dario, G.R. However, there was a minor child in the family home 2.) Live in the family home
No. 170829 which is the grandson but the court held that the 3.) Dependent for legal support to the head
grandchild is not a beneficiary because he does not of the family
depend on the grandfather for legal support.
Under the Family Code, there is no need to constitute A property was levied to satisfy a judgement award.
the family home judicially or extra-judicially. However, Petitioner said they cannot do so because the property
Ramos v Pangilinan, under the Civil Code, one must first constitute it to avail was their family home -> Hence, exempt from execution
GR 185920 of the privileges. to satisfy such. But since it was not constituted judicially
or extra-judicially following the Civil Code, the said
privilege cannot be availed of.
Art 155(3) The family home shall be exempt from The property in question, even if it is a family home, will
Equitable v OJ Mark, execution, forced sale or attachment except: for debts not be exempted from foreclosure.
G.R. No.165950 secured by mortgages on the premises before or after
such constitution
Art. 155. The family home shall be exempt from The house was auctioned and after the auction, the
execution, forced sale or attachment except: petitioner just leased the house from the new owner.
(3) For debts secured by mortgages on the premises The petitioners’ negligence to assert their right within a
De Mesa v Acero, G.R. before or after such constitution reasonable time gives rise to the presumption that they
No. 185064 have abandoned, waived or declined to assert it. They
only raised the issue of exemption from execution when
they were being evicted from the house due to failure
of paying the rent.
If the family home is on a partitioned land, then the In this case, the subject lot was up for partition, but the
land surrounding the house is the only part of the family home is standing on the subject lot. Since the
Arriola v Arriola, GR partition. Therefore, the land that the family home family home is a symbol of family love, security and
177703 stands on is not part of the partitioning process. unity, it should be preserved. Therefore, the lot
surrounding the family home was the only thing
partitioned.
The right of exemption from forced sale by levy under The husband, who did not object to the levy and forced
Honrado v CA, GR FC 155 must be claimed at a reasonable period after or sale of his family home and even vacated the family
166333 at the time of levy. home after the forced sale, was not given the right of
exemption under FC 155.
Family home must be part of the ACP, CPG, exclusive In this case, the subject lot was originally owned by
property of one of the spouses or property of the Odong which was bought by Basay from the heirs of
unmarried man. It cannot be established on a property Odong on 1987. Cabang has adverse possesison of the
held in co-ownership with third parties land since 1956 to present and they have already built
Cabang vs Basay, GR
their home there. Cabang assailed that property
No. 180587
FC 158 constitutes a family home and cannot be subject to
execution. The court ruled that it is not a family home
because it is not a property owned by Cabang and there
is co-ownership.
The family home may be subject to forced sale The debtor spouses petitioned for a restraining order on
provided that the spouses had agreed with the creditor the public bid of their family home, invoking their right
to mortgage such property in accordance to Art 155(3) under art 153 that the family home may not be
Fortaleza v Lapitan,
subjected to forced sale. The court ruled that the
GR 178288
circumstances clearly fall under the exception to forced
sale, under are 155(3) as the debtor spouse duly signed
and agreed to have their family home mortgaged.
PATERNITY AND FILIATION
Respondent, invoking she is the only legitimate child of
decedent, petitioned to be the administratrix of his
estate. However, petitioner, decedent's wife by his
second marriage, opposed the same, claiming that
respondent is not decedent's legitimate child. SC ruled
Angeles vs Maglaya
that, since respondent failed to prove a valid marriage
between the decendent and her mother, she cannot be
presumed legitimate child of the decendent. Petitioner,
the surviving spouse, was declared the administratix of
the decedent's estate.
Art. 172 of FC - Filiation of legitimate children is The child was granted presumption of legitimacy and
established by their records of birth appearing in the was thus granted death benefits by the SSS for the
civil register. death of her father who had signed thereas in her
SSS vs. Aguas, G.R. original birth certificate; another individual who was
165546 claiming to be another child of the dead father was not
given the presumption of legitimacy, however, because
she was only able to show an unverified photocopy of
her birth certificate and not her original brth certificate.
A legally adopted [illegitimate] child has the same The illegitimate grandson was legally adopted by his
rights as a legitimate child. grandparents. The grandson was appointed as the
Administrator of their properties. The legitimate
grandchildren were contesting this because they should
Suntay v Suntay, GR be the ones administering the properties since they
183053 were the "legitimate" heirs and the legally adopted
grandson has an "illegitimate" status. Court said that
although the illegitimate grandson was illegitimate, he
was legally adopted by his grandparents thus he has the
same rights as a legitimate child.
Paternity or filiation, or the lack of it, must be juridically In order for the half siblings of Purificacion to inherit.
Arbolario v CA, G.R. established. They must prove that their mother was validly married
No. 129163 to the father of Purificacion. Substantial evidence is
required to support the claim of the petitioners.
Children conceived of voidable marriages before the Suntay Spouses were married and had 3 children. but
decree of annulment shall be considered legitimate; after 4 years, their marriage was anulled. one of the
and children conceived thereafter shall have the same children filed a a petition for issuance in her favor of
status, rights and obligations as acknowledged natural Letters of Administration of the Intestate Estate of her
children, and are also called natural children by legal late grandmother Cristina Aguinaldo Suntay and in her
Suntay v Suntay, GR
fiction petition, she alleged among others, that she is one of
132524
the legitimate grandchildren of the decedent and
prayed that she be appointed as administratrix of the
estate. The grandmother argued that she was an
illegitmate child because the marriage of her parents
were annulled.
A child from a former marriage cannot be allowed to Dan Moore being close to the son of Elaine from her
Moore v. Republic, 8 use the surname of the mother's second husband. It former marriage wanted to keep William as his own.
SCRA 282 will result in confusion as to real paternity and, in the Hence, petitioner's Elaine desired to let the minor use
long run, will prejudice the child. the surname of Dan.
Legitimate children, specially minors, cannot be Mother wants to have her children's surname be
allowed to discard their father's surname without changed to her surname on the sole basis that she is
Naldoza v. Republic,
compelling reasons. separated to the father. The court ruled that she can't
112 SCRA 658
do that because it would counfuse the parentage of the
children and their legitimacy.
Article 283. In any of the following cases, the father is Two circumstances are mentioned which allegedly make
obliged to recognize the child as his natural child: it improbable that Manuel Ong was the father of private
respondents. The first is that Saturnina Caballes
2. When the child is in continuous possession of status admitted having cohabited with another man before
of a child of the alleged father by the direct acts of the meeting Manuel Ong. The records show, however, that
latter or his family; the man, who was a paralytic, was taken by his mother
in 1953, before Saturnina started having an affair with
3. When the child was conceived during the time when Manuel Ong in 1954. Private respondent Alfredo Ong,
the mother cohabited with the supposed father; Jr. was born on June 28, 1955, more than a year after
the paralytic had left Saturnina. The other private
4. When the child has in his favor any evidence or proof respondent, Robert Caballes, was born on August 17,
that the defendant is his father. 1956. Hence, private respondents could not have been
Ong vs CA, 272 SCRA conceived during the period of cohabitation of their
725 mother with the unidentified paralytic. This case does
not fall under pars. 2 and 3 of Art. 283 of the Civil Code.
As petitioner well states, the four times during which
Manuel Ong met Alfredo and gave the latter money
cannot be considered proof of continuous possession of
the status of a child. The father's conduct toward his son
must be spontaneous and uninterrupted for this ground
to exist. Here there are no acts shown of Manuel Ong
treating Alfredo Ong, Jr. as his son except on the four
occasions during which they met. In the case of Robert
Caballes, there is no proof at all that Manuel Ong
treated. Nor can it be said that there was proof of
cohabitation in this case.
A legitimate child cannot be allowed to use the The Court did not allow the respondent Cynthia Vicencio
surname of his or her stepfather. The law requiresthat to use the surname of her stepfather since it will, as
Rep. vs CA, 300 SCRA
legitimate children use the surname of their father. Court held, cause more confusion with grave legal
138
consequences and also she is not legally adopted by her
stepfather.
Doctrine: A legitimate child does not need a declaration Application: “Valentin’s long-possessed status as a Atty Legarda asked how respondents (not the
of heirship in order to inherit title of the land of his legitimate child and thus, heir of Severo, need no longer one to whom the doctrine applies) failed to
father. The ruling in Heirs of Yapintchay, that be subject of a proceeding for declaration of heirship as prove filiation. Answer: they did not know
Heirs of Basbas v.
“declaration of heirship can be made only in a special envisioned by the Court of Appeals. There is no need to the maiden name of the mother of Nicolas
Basbas, G.R. No.
proceeding inasmuch as it involves the establishment re-declare his status as an heir of Severo.” Basbas.
188773
of a status or right” applies only to those whose
heirship is in question—legitimate children definitely
not being included in that coverage.
Article 2035 of the Civil Code, which states: Illegitimate children cannot agree to a compromise *Atty. Legarda said that this came out in the
No compromise upon the following questions shall be agreement made by the father of P2,000,000 just to say 2015 bar exams.
valid: that they are not his children. It violates Art. 2035 of the
Uy v Chua, G.R. No. (1) The civil status of persons; (2) The validity of a Civil Code.
183965 marriage or a legal separation;
(3) Any ground for legal separation; (4) Future support;
(5) The jurisdiction of courts;
(6) Future legitime.
114 of the CC does not monopolize the last name of the legal wife and children filed for injunction restraining
Osmeña de Valencia
father to the legitimate children. Father gave consent illegitimate children from using the hubands last name.
v. Rodriguez, 84 Phil
to use his surname. regardless, the law grants no
222
exclusive ownership in a last name.
Art 176- illegitimate child shall use the surname of the Parental authority remained with the mother. Howeve,
Briones vs. Miguel, mother and be under her parental authority. Art 213- the father shall not be deprived of visitorial rights over
440 SCRA 455 no child under 7 years old shall be separated from the his recognized illegitimate child
mother
The insurance proceeds shall be applied exclusively to The disqualification of Eva as a beneficiary pursuant to
Maramag vs De the proper interest of the person in whose name or for Art. 739, makes their illegitimate children the
Guzman, GR 181132 whose benefit it is made unless otherwise specified in designated beneficiaries
the policy.
In this case, the father died and only left an unsigned PEDIGREE. The rule that the SC gave on
autobiography to prove the filiation of the child. handwritten insturments to prove filiation of
However, the grandfather issued an affidavit a child: 1) Where the private handwritten
acknowledging the child. Hence, the child was granted instrument is the lone piece of evidence
to use the deceased father's surname. submitted to prove filiation, there should be
strict compliance with the requirement that
the same must be signed by the
De la Cruz vs Gracia,
acknowledging parent; and
G.R. No. 177728
2) where the private handwritten instrument
is accompanied by other relevant and
competent evidence, it suffices that the claim
of filiation therein be shown to have been
made and handwritten by the acknowledging
parent as it is merely corroborative of such
other evidence.
The presence of illegitimate children precludes The fact that Diosdado is an heir to the estate of In simpler explanation, that illegitimate child
Manungas v Loreto, succession by collateral relatives to his estate; Florentino Manungas does not mean that he is entitled is not related to the wife of his father, thus,
GR 193161 or even qualified to become the special administrator of the IC is not qualified to be a special
the Estate of Manungas. adminsitrator of her estate.
One can prove filiation, either legitimate or illegitimate, In this case, the respondent established a prima facie
through the record of birth appearing in the civil case that the petitioner is the putative father of Gliffze
register or a final judgment, an admission of filiation in through testimony that she had been sexually involved
Gotardo v Buling, GR a public document or a private handwritten instrument only with one man, the petitioner, at the time of her
165166 and signed by the parent concerned, or the open and conception.
continuous possession of the status of a legitimate or
illegitimate child, or any other means allowed by the
Rules of Court and special laws.
Art. 176 Illegitmate child SHALL use the surname of the Father may not compel the use of his surname by his
mother and MAY use the surname of the father illegitimate children. Art 176 expressly stated that an
provided that their filiation has been expressly illegitimate child SHALL use the surname of his/her
Grande v Antonio, recognized by the father mother and MAY use their father's which means that an
G.R. No. 206248 illegitmate child is under no compulsion to use the
surname of his/her illegitimate father. It is merely
permissive. Children has the right to decide (pag 18 na
sila).
Reyes vs. Mauricio, Attacking of filitation or status of one person should be One cannot collaterally attack the status of a person. It
G.R. No. 175080 filed separately must be done so in a separate and direct case.
Tuberculosis that is so serious as to disable the Since the child was born within 300 days following the Parang tanga lang. Atty. Legarda said this
husband to move is not considered "serious illness of dissolution of the marriage, the child is presumed decision is absurd because, during the
the husband, which absolutely prevented sexual legitimate son of Emiliano and his wife. This supposed period when the child may have
intercourse" as a valid ground to impugn child's presumption is not rebutted by the fact that Emiliano been conceived, the husband was bedridden
Andal v. Macaraig, 89 legitimacy under Art. 166. It does not prevent carnal was already suffering tubercolosis that disabled him to (thus cannot engage in sexual act) and the
Phil 165 knowledge. In contrary, persons suffering from this move during the alleged initial period of conception. wife was having a sexual relationship with
sickness can engage in sex even in its most crucial stage Also, since there was no evidence to prove Emiliano was the husband's brother; but the Court
because they are more inclined to sexual intercourse as suffering from impotency, the presumption of the maintained child was legitimate son of
a result of their confinement to bed. child's legitimacy should stand. bedridden husband on ground of the 300-day
period rule.
In order to overthrow presumption of legitimacy, it During the marriage of the responded and her husband, Moreover, only the husband can contest the
must be shown beyond reasonable doubt that there she had intercourse with another guy, causing for the legitimacy of their child.
Macadangdang v. CA,
was no access (aka sex) between the spouses in the spouse to separate. 7 months after the affair, she gave
100 SCRA 73
first 120 days of the 300 days which preceded the birth. Now, she wants to declare her son as the
child's birth illegitimate son of her paramour. The court said no.
Physical impossibility must be proven beyond Theresa was first married to Mario Gopiao but she Legarda hates this decision and thinks it is
reasonable doubt claims the marriage is a sham. She had a second stupid - SC ruling created problems by
marriage with Gerardo and bore a child, Jose Gerardo. making the child legitimate to the man who is
A child born during a valid and a subsisting marriage is Gerardo found out about the first marriage and filed to not his father. This creates issue for support
a legitimate child of the spouses annul their marriage on the ground of bigamy and and succession, the "legal" husband is
wanted to have custody of the child. obligated to support and give inheritance to a
Presumption of legitimacy procees from sexual union of child who is truly not his own.
Concepcion vs. CA, marriage. The court ruled that physical impossibility of access was
G.R. No. 123450 not proven. Theresa and Mario were both living in QC,
An assestion by the mother against the legitimacy of the close proximity strengthens the possiblity of access.
the child cannot affect the legitimacy of a child born or Thus Jose Gerardo is the legitimate child of Mario and
conceived within a valid marriage. A mothr has no right Theresa. Gerardo cannot question legitimacy as it a
to disavow a child because maternity is never personal right. If anyone could quesiton it, it will only be
uncertain. the heirs of Mario.
The Supreme Court established that DNA testing could Considering the fact that DNA testing does not violate
be used to ascertain paternity one's right against self incrimination and right to
Agustin, June 15, 2005
privacy, the RTC may order the parties to undergo DNA
testing in order to ascertain paternity
DNA Test can be used but there is a standard which is 3 out of the 4 aspects are used in the case. The court
99.9% upheld the validity of the DNA testing. There is a
standard of 99.9% accuracy.
There are 4 proceedural aspect of traditional paternity:
1. Prima Facie Case- Declares that they had sexual
relations. Corroborative proof required.
2. Affirmative Defense- 2 defense to the putative
Herrera vs. Alba, G.R.
father: He is incapable of having sex with the mother
No. 148220
due to physical absence or impotent and mother had
sexual reations with another.
3. Presumption of legitimacy- Child born to husband
and wife in a valid marriage is legitimate.
4. Physical resemblance between putative father and
child- No required quantity as to how much they look
alike.
Art. 175(2) of FC - In cases of establishing illegitimate Although he died before the test can be conducted, the
filiation, the action for DNA testing, as part of other action for DNA testing filed by the male live-in partner
Estate v. Diaz, G.R.
means allowed by law to prove filiation under FC to prove the child's filiation to him was granted because
No. 171713
172(2(2)), must be brought during the lifetime of the he was alive when he filed the action.
parent.
DNA Testing is considered a "search", which, under our Petitioner filed a Petition to Establish Illegitimate
Constitution, must be preceded by finding of Probable Filiation before the court. Court said that his petition [is
Lucas v Lucas, GR No. Cause in order to be valid, hence, the requirement of a premature] has yet to establish the four procedural
190710 prima facie evidence or establish a reasonable aspects of traditional paternity because all his evidence
possibility of paternity or "good cause" for the holding are based on hearsay.
of the test.
normal gestation period is 40 weeks or 280 days, but it Private complainant Edna P. Pergis testified that in the The fact that private complainant gave birth
can also extend beyond 40 weeks if the woman is evening of December 24, 1992, she was in the kitchen more than ten months after the alleged rape
having her first pregnancy located at the does not discredit her testimony.
back of their house Dr. Honesto Marquez, a physician from the
Edgardo Quitoriano entered the kitchen, poked a knife Marinduque Provincial Hospital, explained
on her neck, and dragged her to the bamboo bed and that the normal gestation period is 40
raped her weeks or 280 days, but it can also extend
However, in June 1993, her aunt, Teresa Pergis, beyond 40 weeks if the woman is having her
discovered that she was pregnant. first pregnancy.
Accused-appellant interposed the defense of alibi. He It is undisputed that the child delivered by
People v Quitoriano, testified he was at the house of Paulino Rioflorido in private complainant on October 31, 1993 was
January 20, 1997 Barangay her first. Hence, it is not impossible that the
Pakaskasan, Torrijos, Marinduque. He was then having a child was conceived in December, 1992, the
drinking session with Reynaldo Rioflorido, the son of date of the alleged rape.
Paulino. At 10:00,
they attended a party at the house of Jose Ampiloquio
which was about 400 meters from the Rioflorido
residence. The party
ended at around 1:00 in the morning, after which, they
proceeded to accused-appellant's house.
::Note raped Dec 1992, gave birth October 31, 1993 à
10 months
FC Art 170, 171 reinforce and speak of the prescriptive The sister of the deceased claim that the child raised by In this case, the private respondents are not
period within which the husband or any of his heirs her brother and his wife is not their natural or biological contending that the petitioner is not the child
should file the action impugning the legitimacy of child child and therefore has no personality to participate in of Vicente Benitez to his wife Isabel
Benitez-Badua v. CA,
being alleged. the settlement of the estate of their brother. Chipongian. Rather, their clear submission is
229 SCRA 468
that petitioner was not born to Vicente and
Isabel, therefore she is not the rightful heir to
the deceased.
Only the husband or in exceptional circumstances, his Child was born in a valid marriage. Even though the
heirs, could impugn the legitimacy of a child born in a woman was claiming that the child was recognized by
valid and subsisting marriage. the deceased William Liyao (her alleged partner),
Liyao, Jr. vs. Tanhoti-
cannot impugn the legitimacy of the child. The child is
Liyao, 378 SCRA 563
presumed legitimate because the woman and his real
husband Ramon Yulo did not seek any obtain any
annulment of marriage.
A change of name cannot be invoked on cases where Petitioner wants to change his surname on the claim
what the petioner impugns is his legitimacy or those that his parents are not legally married. The court ruled
Republic v Magpayo,
that would affect his civil status. that the proper procedure for that is correction of entry
GR 189476
and not change of name, as what the petitioner seeks to
change is his legitimacy status.
The death of a person does not constitute a time bar Respondents contend that since Flaviano Gaspay has
for an alleged illegitimate child to claim already passed, Guadalupe Gaspay's (the alleged
Gaspay v. CA, 238
acknowledgement as an illegitimate child. Actions illegitimate daughter) period to be acknowledged as an
SCRA 163
based on voluntary acknowledgement may be brought illegitimate daughter prescribed already.
even after the father's death.
Diaz vs. Court of Living with the mistress and his children with her as a Diaz had 2 mistresses and in his old age he settled with
Appeals, 129 SCRA family and commonly showing that the children are his, the latest mistress and had children with her. he lived
621 the filiation of the children cannot be questioned with them as a family
Doctrine: If no objection is raised as to inadmissibility Application: A niece testified that her aunt declared that
of testimony during cross-examination of the witness she (the niece) was indeed her niece. This testimony
presenting the evidence, the evidence will be was not assailed and therefore deemed admissible. Her
admissible. Also, a person’s testimony regarding his or aunt’s declaration, which is assumed to be true,
her filiation to his or her heir who is to succeed him or constitutes sufficient proof of filiation when coupled
her, is admissible and is an exception to the hearsay with other (secondary) evidence such as a family
Tison vs. Court of
rule, subject to the following conditions: picture, birth certificates, joint affidavits, etc.
Appeals, 276 SCRA
1. Declarant is dead or unable to testify
582
2. Declarant is related to the person whose pedigree is
the subject of inquiry
3. Such relation must be shown by evidence other than
the declaration
4. Declaration was made before any controversy has
arisen thereon (ante litem motam)
According to the FC, such eviednce may be considered; To prove the marriage and filitation of a child, one can
Trinidad vs. Court of baptismal cert, judicial admission, a family bible, present witnesses to claim that husband and wife
Appeals, 289 SCRA common reputation respecting his pedigree, admission depoarted themselves as husband and wife.
188 by silence testimony of witness and other admissible
under Rule 130 of the ROC
If the original birth cerificate was lost or destroyed and In this case, they proved their legitmacy as heirs by
there was no chance of getting another copy, any other showing uniformed baptismal certificates. The original
Heirs of Conti v CA, kinds of proof of legitimacy can be shown (i.e. birth certificates of the persons were competely
G.R. No. 118464 baptismal certificates) destroyed by fire in 1974 and 1983. This was duly
established by the certification issued by the local civil
registrar.
The filiation of illegitimate children, like legitimate A scrutiny of the records would show that petitioners
children, is established by (1) the record of birth were born during the marriage of their parents. The
appearing in the civil register or a final judgment; or (2) certificates of live birth would also identify Danilo de
an admission of legitimate filiation in a public Jesus as being their father.
document or a private handwritten instrument and
signed by the parent concerned. In the absence
thereof, filiation shall be proved by (1) the open and
continuous possession of the status of a legitimate
child; or (2) any other means allowed by the Rules of
Court and special laws.[4] The due recognition of an
illegitimate child in a record of birth, a will, a statement
De Jesus vs. Estate of before a court of record, or in any authentic writing is,
Juan Gamboa Dizon, in itself, a consummated act of acknowledgment of the
366 SCRA 499 child, and no further court action is required.[5] In fact,
any authentic writing is treated not just a ground for
compulsory recognition; it is in itself a voluntary
recognition that does not require a separate action for
judicial approval.[6] Where, instead, a claim for
recognition is predicated on other evidence merely
tending to prove paternity, i.e., outside of a record of
birth, a will, a statement before a court of record or an
authentic writing, judicial action within the applicable
statute of limitations is essential in order to establish
the childs acknowledgment.[7]
Ruled in De Jesus vs Estate of Dizo, stating that the Since the birth certificate of petitioner was destroyed
filiation of illegitimate children, like legitimate children during the WWII, a public document can be enoigh to
is established by (1) Birth Certidicate, (2) a public prove filiation.
Aguilar v Siasat, G.R.
document/private handwritten instrument, signed by
No. 200169
the parent concerned. Thus applying the foregoing
pronouncement to the instant case, the father's SSS is
considered as a public document.
Art 172 par 2 (1)- legitimate filiation may be proved by: To prove illigitimacy, it is sufficient that the petitioner
the open and continuous possession of the status of a establishes facts that she has been publicly reconized as
Jison vs. CA, 286 SCRA legitimate child. an illigitimate child. Evidence may take the form of
495 statement of credible witnesses and other
supplementary documents (e.g. school records and
such).
Heirs of Gabatan vs A birth certificate can prove filiation. It is also She was not able to present proof of the filiation of her
CA, GR 150206 admissible in court mother to the alleged grandfather.
FC Art 166. Legitimacy of a child may be impugned only The petitioner failed to adduce evidence in support of
on the following grounds: 1) that is was physically his claim that he is not the biological father of the child
impossible for the husband to have sexual intercourse of the alleging mother. He also failed to support his
with his wife within the first 120 days of the 300 days claim of infidelity and insinuations of promiscuity of the
which immediately preceded the birth of the child part of the respondent.
because of: a. the physical incapacity of the husband to
have sexual intercourse with his wife; b. the fact that
Gotardo v Buling, GR
the husvband and wife were living separately in such a
165166
way that sexual intercourse was not possible; or c.
serious illness of the husband, which absolutely
prevented the intercourse. 2) that it is proved that for
biological or other scientific reasons, the child could not
have been that of the husband, except in the instance
provided in the second paragraph of Art. 164; or xxx xxx
xxx
An order for support must be issued only if paternity or Petitioner argues that there wasn't any sufficient proof
Perla v Baring, GR
filitation is established by clear and convincing that he participated in the preparation of the childs
172471
evidence. birth certitficate and he did not even sign it.
It is doctrinally settled that the factual findings of the Accused is directed to recognize [xxx] as his illegitimate Articles 266-A and 266-B of the Revised Penal
trial court, especially on the credibility of the rape daughter, and provide for her support as soon as his Code, as amended, sentencing him to suffer
victim, are accorded great weight and respect and will financial means permit. the penalty of reclusion perpetua, ordering
not be disturbed on appeal. This is so because the trial him to pay civil indemnity and damages, and
court has the advantage of observing the victim further ordering him to acknowledge and
through the different indicators of truthfulness or support his offspring with the private
People v Abella, G.R.
falsehood, such as the angry flush of an insisted offended party.
No. 177295
assertion, the sudden pallor of a discovered lie, the
tremulous mutter of a reluctant answer, the forthright
tone of a ready reply, the furtive glance, the blush of
conscious shame, the hesitation, the yawn, the sigh,
the candor or lack of it, the scant or full realization of
the solemnity of an oath, or the carriage and mien
Doctrine: Legitimation can only occur if, at the time the Application: The parents were disqualified to marry
child has been conceived, his or her parents were not each other (the man’s first wife is not dead nor absent,
Abadilla vs Tabiliran, disqualified by any impediment to marry each other. nor has she been declared presumptively dead) and,
249 SCRA 447 (Art 177, FC) therefore, the children borne out of their children
cannot be legitimated by their subsequent valid
marriage.
ADOPTION
Adoption is never presumed, but must be affirmatively Renato filed a motion to intervene in his alleged
proved by the person claiming its existence. adoptive parents' estate saying he was adopted by
The destruction by fire of a public building in which the them. however, there was no proof of adoption.
adoption papers would have been filed if existent does
not give rise to a
presumption of adoption nor is the destruction of the
Lazatin v. Campos, 92
records of an adoption proceeding to be presumed.
SCRA 250
In fact, absence of a record of adoption creates the
presumption of its non-existence.
A child by adoption cannot inherit from the parent by
adoption unless the act of adoption has been done in
strict accord with the
statute.
When petition for adoption is granted, a child is freed Respondents had a child and the sister of the mother
Cervantes v. Fajardo,
from parental authority of her natural parents as well adopted her, with full knowledge and consent of the
169 SCRA 575
as from legal obligation and maintenance to them mother. Respondents wanted the get the child back
Sec.7 of RA 8552 - husband and wife shall jointly adopt Monina, who has remarried, cannot singly adopt her
children even though they have already been
emancipated. The law is explicit. She should jointly
adopt with her new husband since she remarried at the
time the petitions were filed. Her husband, being an
Michelle Lim, GR american citizen, also has to meet requirements before
168992 he can adopt but none of these were alleged.
Furthermore, even though her husband already filed a
case for dissolution of their marriage in the US, they are
still considered married in the eyes of law. The
dissolution is of no moment. They must still jointly
adopt.
RA 8552 Sec 9- Whose Consent is Necessary to the The Aunt of the children wanted to adopt the children
Landingin vs. RP, G.R. Adoption. The written consent of the biological parent of her late brother. The mother already has a second
No. 164948 is indespensable. family. Only a verbal consent was received from the
children's biological mother.
joint adoption by husband and wife is mandatory Foreigner married a filipino who was later naturalized.
she wanted to adopt her younger brother but couldnt
Republic v. Toledano,
because she was already a foreigner. however, she
233 SCRA 9
alone could still adopt her brother. but since she is
married, she has to adopt jointly with her husband.
Although the adoptee is deemed a legitimate child, the The adoptee did not have the right to inherit the The special proceeding indicated herein is a
Bagayas vs Bagayas, declaration of an adoptee's legitimacy does not contested properties; in order to have the right to do so, settlement of estate.
G.R. Nos. 187308 automatically amount to a declaration of heirship and a special proceeding must be made for the purpose of
co-ownership. determining such right.
Doctrine: Parental authority, as it relates to liability for Application: Liability for damage (because the child shot
damages caused by the adopted child, is only someone) caused by a child accrued to the parents who
Tamargo v. CA, 209
transferred to the adopter upon final judgment and had actual custody of said child, especially since the
SCRA 518
during actual custody. final judgment for adoption took place after the child’s
shooting incident.
There is no law prohibiting or regulating the use of In this case, Stephanie Garcia, an illegitimate child, was
middle name. As a legitimate child by virtue of adopted by her father and became legitimate. In this
In the Matter of
adoption, they are entitiled to all the rights provided by petition, the father wanted Stephanie to use the
Adoption of Stephanie
law to a legitimate child without discrimination of any surname of her mother as Stephanie's middle name.
Garcia, 454 SCRA 541
kind, including the right to bear the surname of the The SC approved this petition because there was
father and the mother. nothing hindering the petition.
Section 19 of Article VI of R.A. No. 8552 now reads: R.A. No. 8552 has unqualifiedly withdrawn from an Adopted child is an asshole
Grounds for Rescission of Adoption. Upon petition of adopter a consequential right to rescind the adoption
the adoptee, with the assistance of the Department if a decree even in cases where the adoption might clearly
minor or if over eighteen (18) years of age but is turn out to be undesirable, it remains, nevertheless, the
incapacitated, as guardian/counsel, the adoption may bounden duty of the Court to apply the law. Dura lex
be rescinded on any of the following grounds sed lex would be the hackneyed truism that those
committed by the adopter(s): (a) repeated physical and caught in the law have to live with. It is still noteworthy,
Lahom vs. Sibulo, G.R.
verbal maltreatment by the adopter(s) despite having however, that an adopter, while barred from severing
No. 143989
undergone counseling; (b) attempt on the life of the the legal ties of adoption, can always for valid reasons
adoptee; (c) sexual assault or violence; or (d) cause the forfeiture of certain benefits otherwise
abandonment and failure to comply with parental accruing to an undeserving child. For instance, upon the
obligations. grounds recognized by law, an adopter may deny to an
adopted child his legitime and, by a will and testament,
may freely exclude him from having a share in the
disposable portion of his estate.
SUPPORT
Spouses are mutualy bound to support each other. The Pelayo, a physician, gave birth to the daughter-in-law of
father and mother in law are strangers with respct to Lauron and Abella. Pelayo filed a complaint for
Pelayo v. Lauron, 12 obligation. compensation for services rendered as Lauron and
Phil 453 Abella refused to pay. The Court ruled that the one
obligated to pay for the medical fees incurred for the
labor must be the husband, Lauron and Abella's son.
Adultery is a valid defense against an action for The supreme court ruled that, the petitioner should be
Sanchez v. Zulueta, 68 support. allowed to present evidence that his wife is an adulterer
Phil 110 because it is a ground against an action for support,
which the lower court did not allow him to do.
An action for support cannot be barred by res judicata. There was a case filed before which was dismissed and
There can be no compromise as to future support. the mother acknowledge that it would be hard to prove
paternity. There was a second case and they claim that
De Asis vs. CA, G.R.
there is res judicata and that there was a compromise.
No. 127578
The court said that you cannot compromise for future
support and res judicata cannot bar an action for
support
Article 345 of the Revised Penal Code provides for The Petitioner was found guilty of rape and was ordered
three different kinds of civil liability that may be by the court to acknowledge "AAA's" offspring "CCC"
imposed on the offender: a) indemnification, b) and give her support as one of the civil liabilities
acknowledgement of the offspring, unless the law imposed against those who are guilty of rape.
Rondina v People, GR should prevent him from so doing, and c) in every case
179059 to support the offspring. With the passage of the
Family Code, the classification of acknowledged natural
children and natural children by legal fiction was
eliminated and they now fall under the specie of
illegitimate children.
Parents are obliged to support their illegitimate The mother failed to establish child's illegitimate
Perla v Baring, GR
children; provided that the illegitimate filiation filiation to the imputed father; therefore, child is not
172471
between them are established. entitled to receive support from the imputed father.
While it is true that the adultery of the wife is a defense Husband refused to give support because he alleged
in an action for support, the adultery must be proven that his wife had committed adultery with her physician.
Reyes vs Ines-Luciano,
and established by competent evidence. Mere
88 SCRA 803
allegation will not bar the wife from the right to receive
support pendente lite.
Order of preference in support (Art. 199 of FC) In this case, both parents are not financially capable to The grandfather contended Art 204 of FC
send their daughters to college in the US. Hence, the where it states that he can have the option to
obligation devolved to the grandfather who is financially choose what kind of support he'll give
well off. (instead of college in the US, he just want his
Mangonon vs. CA,
grandaughters to study here in PH). However,
G.R. No. 125041
he wasn't able to avail that because of a
moral obstacle which is when they denied
the twins legitimacy in the first place.
If the parents of the children are unable to sufficiently In this case, both parents are unable to support their
provide for the children shifts a portion of their own children. Therefore, the parents of the father were
Spouses Lim v Lim,
obligation to the ascendants in the nearest degree, obliged to support their grandchildren only.
G.R. No. 163209
both paretal and maternal lines, follwing the ordering
in Article 199 of FC.
When husband and wife are divorced or living
separately and apart from each other, and the question
as to the care, custody, and control of a child or
children of their marriage is brought before a Court of
First Instance by petition or as an incident to any other
proceeding, the court, upon hearing testimony as may
Lacson vs. Lacson,
be pertinent, shall award the care, custody and control
G.R.No. 150644
of each such child as will be for its best interest
permitting the child to choose which parent it prefers
to live with if it be over ten years of age, unless the
parent so chosen be unfit to take charge of the child by
reason of moral depravity, habitual drunkenness,
incapacity, or poverty
PARENTAL AUTHORITY & CUSTODY OF CHILDREN
A mother's abandonment of her child is a valid ground Upon the child's birth, the biological mother left the
to terminate a mother's parental authority over the baby to the doctor who assisted the birth. The doctor
child, even if below the age of 7. raised the child and treated him as her own. When the
biological mother tried to recover the child, the Court
Medina vs. Makabali, ruled that, "in all questions on the care, custody,
27 SCRA 502 education and property of children, the latter's welfare
shall be paramount." Due to the mother's abandonment
and failure to fulfill her duties to the child, the custody
of the child was awarded to the doctor.
The foremost consideration in the custody of minors is The mother of the child, a married woman, is living with
the physical, educational, social, and moral welfare of her sister's husband. They even bore 2 children. The
Unson vs. Navarro, the child concerned. court declared her unfit, granting her no more than
101 SCRA 183 visitational rights. Furthermore, the court said it is the
best interest of the child to be freed from such
unwholesome influence
Under Section 1, Rule 102 of the Rules of Court, the According to the CA, habeas corpus may not be used as
writ of habeas corpus is available, not only in cases of a means of obtaining evidence on the whereabouts of a
illegal confinement or detention by which any person is person or as a means of finding out who has specifically
deprived of his liberty, but also in cases involving the abducted or caused the disappearance of such person.
Habeas Corpus Of rightful custody over a minor. 12 The general rule is
Minor Shang Ko that parents should have custody over their minor
Vingson v Cabcaban, children. But the State has the right to intervene where
UDK No. 14817 the parents, rather than care for such children, treat
them cruelly and abusively, impairing their growth and
well-being and leaving them emotional scars that they
carry throughout their lives unless they are liberated
from such parents and properly counseled.
Writ of amparo is the wrong remedy used in order to Petitoner gave baby up for adoption, but only to change
Caram v Segui, GR
obtain parental authority. her mind and used a writ of amparo to retrieve the baby
193652
and retain parental authority.
Law allows a waiver of paternal authority only in cases When Maria entrusted the custody of her minor child to
Eslao vs CA, 266 SCRA
of adoption, guardianship, and surrender to a children's Teresita, what she gave was merely temporary custody.
317
home or an orphan institution.
Unson v. Navarro 101 Supra
SCRA 183
FC 213. The court shall "take into account ALL relevant In this case, children are over 7yrs and are intelligent
considerations especially the choice of the child over enough to decide. They chose to stay with their father
Espiritu & Layug v. CA,
seven years of age, unless the parent chosen is unfit" and there is nothing in the records to show that their
G.R. No. 115640
father is "unfit". Therefore they should stay with their
father.
Art. 214 of the Family Code states that "substitute Leouel Santos, Sr. has the right to parental authority Same Leouel Santos, Sr. as that of the famous
Santos Sr. v. C.A., G.R.
parental authority of the grandparents is proper only over Leouel Jr. even if the maternal grandparents have Santos vs CA case.
No. 113054
when both parents are dead, absent, or unstable. more money.
The fact that the father recognized the minor child may An IC as in the present case is under the parental Even though the father of the illegitimate
be a ground for support to the latter, but not for giving authority of the mother, who is, at the consequence of child is wealthy (he is a businessman) that
the custody of the child such authority, is entitled to have a custody of the child. does not mean that he is entitled to custody
David vs. Court of over that child. The mother however, even
Appeals, 250 SCRA 82 though she is earning little, she is giving basic
necessities for her children, therefore, she
should not be deprived of the custody over
her child.
A mother may be deprived of the custody of her child SC find that the appellate court did not err in allowing Custody case
who is below seven years of age for “compelling her father to retain in the meantime parental custody
reasons.” Instances of unsuitability are neglect, over her. Meanwhile, the child should not be wrenched
abandonment, unemployment and immorality, habitual from her familiar surroundings, and thrust into a strange
drunkenness, drug addiction, maltreatment of the environment away from the people and places to which
child, insanity, and affliction with a communicable she had apparently formed an attachment.
Tonog vs. CA, 376
illness. If older than seven years of age, a child is
SCRA 642
allowed to state his preference, but the court is not
bound by that choice. The court may exercise its
discretion by disregarding the child’s preference should
the parent chosen be found to be unfit, in which
instance, custody may be given to the other parent, or
even to a third person.
An illegitimate child is under the sole parental authority Joey Briones filed a petition for habeas corpus as father
of the mother. She is entitled tokeep the child in her of the illegitimate child with Loreta Miguel. The court
Briones vs. Miguel, company. The court cannot deprive her of custody ruled that the child being born outside of marriage is
G.R. No. 156343 absent any imperative cause showing her unfitness to deemed an illegitimate child. By virtue of FC 176, the
exercise her authority and care for the child. mother has sole parental authority over the child and is
entitled to support from the father
A child of tender age may be taken away from the The father wishes for the court to bestow upon him, the
mother if the court finds that the mother is unfit. custody of his child of tender age, on the grounds that
However, it must be established with sufficient proof his wife is lesbian and hence, subjecting the child to acts
Gualberto vs.
that the mother is unfit. of immorality (asshole). The court ruled that even thou
Gualberto, G.R. No.
immorality is a ground to transfer the custody of the
154994
child, mere lesbianism is not an instance of immolrality,
the petitioner must prove with sufficient evidence that
the child is indeed exposed to immorality.
Parental authority of illegitimate children goes to the The father wishes to have parental authority over the
mother. illegitimate children and wanted them to use his
Grande v Antonio, surname. The court upholds that parental authority
G.R. No. 206248 Illegitimate children shall use the surname of the belongs to the mother unless she is unfit. Furthermore,
mother but if they are recognized by the father, they the children cannot be compelled to use the surname of
have the option to use the surname of the father. the father.
The school exercising substitute parental authority has Timothy, a grade 4 student in Maymount School, under
the same authority as the child's parents. The school is CLC, was stuck inside the comfort room because the
responsible for any injury or damage experience by the door knob was malfunctioning. As a result, he resorted
Child Learning Centre child due to the former's negligence to climbing out of the window and fell three stories
vs. Tagario, GR down. CLC contended that there was no enough
150920 evidence to prove that the door knob was indeed
defective at the time of the accident. The court ruled
that the injuries sustained by the student is a direct
result of CLC's negligence and are liable for damages.
Under Article 218 of the Family Code, the school, the As a teacher who stands in loco parentis to her pupils,
School of the Holy
administrator, and the teacher shall have special Taguiam should have made sure that the children were
Spirit vs. Taguiam, GR
parental authority over the children while under their protected from all harm while in her company
165565
supervision
If it can be established that the school and the teacher The catechism teacher, a nun, kicked a grade 4 student
do not have a employer-employee relationship, the when the latter was behaving improperly. The parents
school cannot be held solidarily liable for the damages sued the teacher and the school; however, the Court
Aquinas School v to the student. ruled the school cannot be held solidarily liable to the
Inton, GR 184202 student because there was no employer-employee
relationship between the school and the teacher. There
was only an agreement between the school and the
congregation where the teacher belongs.
Art. 215 of FC - No descendant shall be compelled to The child was allowed to testify against her alleged
testify against his parents and grandparents in a stepmother on the proceeding for the revision of her
criminal case, except when such testimony is birth certificate in order to indicate the name of her
indispensable, against the descendant, or by one true mother, who was allegedly the stepmother,
Lee v CA, GR 177861
parent against the other; Rule 130, Sec. 25 of ROC - No because stepparents are not covered by the rule on
person may be compelled to testfy against his parents, parental privilege under the Rules of Court.
direct ascendants, children, or other direct
descendants.
FC 219 - Those given authority and responsibility under Petitioners wanted the father to be civilly liable to the
the preceding Article shall be principally and solidarily accident incurred by his child who accidentally hit her
liable for the damages caused by the acts or omissions friend in the eye (the friend completely lost the sight of
of the unemancipated minor. The parents, judicial her right eye) while playing in school. Court said that it
guardians or the persons exercising substitute parental was just an innocent prank not unusual among chidren
authority over said minor shall be subsidiary liable. at play and which no parent, however careful, would
have any special reason to anticipate much less guard
Cuadra v. Monfort, 35
The respective liabilities of those referred to in the against. It did not reveal any mischievous propensity, or
SCRA 160
preceding paragraph shall not apply if it is proved that indeed any trait in the child's character which would
they exercised the proper diligence required uner the reflect unfavorably on her upbringing and for which the
particular circumstances. blame could be attributed to her parents. Hence, the
court dismissed the complaint.
All other cases not covered by this and the preceding
articles shall be governed by the provisions of the Civil
Code on quasi-delicts.
FC233 a person acting in loco parentis in NO CASE can The student bumped his teacher and did not apologize.
inflict corporal punishment on the child. This is The school teacher punished (pinched and pushed child
Rosales vs. People, tantamount to Child abuse, defined by RA 7610 Sec 3 as to the floor repeatedly) the student for his refusal to
G.R. No. 173988 habitual or non habutual maltreatment or any act appologize.
degrading the worth and dignity of a child as a human
being.
The power of the mother as adminitrator does not Late father inherited land from his parents. His children
include disposition. before a parent can alienate their then inherited said land but Respondent said that the
Hebron vs. Loyola,
childs property, there must be court permission. mother has relinquished their shares to that land. The
G.R. No. 168960
issue is WON the present spouse (wife) can relinquish
shares or her children of the heirs of the land.
Parental authority cannot be renounced or transferred, Pacita Chua was working as a hostess in a night club. she
except in cases of guardiansip, adoption approved by had sexual relations with a man and had child but died
the courts or emancipation by concession. However the in infancy. She afterwards cohabited with Sy Sia Lay by
courts may, in cases specified by law deprive parents of whom she had two children named Robert and Betty
their parental authority. Chua Sy but they separated after Betty Chua Sy was
born. Finding no one to fall back on after their
In this case, the ground for depriving parents of separation, Pacita Chua met Victor Tan Villareal and she
parental authority is abandonment because she became the latter's mistress. In 1960 another child, a
voluntarily surrendered custody of child to the girl, was born to her but Chua and Villareal separated.
Cabangbang spouses. She just took action because she Without means to support the said child, Pacita Chua
wanted the father to provide for support and also gave her away to a comadre in Cebu. The Cabangbang
Chua v. Cabangbang, expressed her willingness that the child would remain spouses took custody of the child Betty who was then 4
27 SCRA 791 with the cabangbangs provided she would be given a months old. The child was given to the Cabangbang
jeep and money. spouses by villareal with knowledge and consent of
Pacita Chua.
Absense of kinship between the child and the
cabangbang spouses cannot serve to bar to award the Pacita Chua filed a petition for habeas corpus granting
custody to them. the law provides that when parents her custody and recognize her parental authority but
are separated either legally or de-facto and when it court granted cabangbang spouses to have custody of
appears that both parents are improper persons to the child.
whom to entrust care, cusoty and control of the child,
the court may designate grandparent of child, oldest
brother or sister, or some reputable and desired person
to take charge of child.
PD 603 (Neglect of Child) intends to punsih the neglect The man only provided support three times. He was
of any parent for failure to give the child support for claiming that he had no fixed job and was merely
education. The irresponsible parent cannot exculpate dependent on his father's charity despite his
De Guzman vs Perez,
himself from the consequences of his neglect by extravagant life. He even pointed out that the woman,
496 SCRA 474
invoking the other parent's faithful compliance with his mother of his child, was the financially capable parent.
or her own parental duties. The woman fied a criminal compaint for neglect and
demanded support.
Illegitimate children shall use the surname of their Teresita has been using the surname Ferrer since birth.
mother. Later on, she found out that the surname in her birth
certificate is Llaneta (which is the maiden name of her
mother since she is an illegitimate child from an
Llaneta v. Agrava, 57
unknown father). A sudden change of surname would
SCRA 29
cause confusion so she filed for a petition to change her
name. The Court allowed it since she has been always a
Ferrer. More importantly, the Ferrer family supported
her petition and did not gave any objection.
SURNAMES
A married woman cannot seek to judicially alter her Wife wanted to change their family name, her Mrs. Telmo wanted to change the spelling of
husband's surname. The husband must be the one to husband's surname, from Telmo to Thelmo; however, the surname to distinguish her sons from her
Telmo v. Republic, 73 initiate the proceeding. the Court ruled that the husband must be the one who husband's illegitimate relatives, who are also
SCRA 29 asks for judicial authority to change the spelling of the surnamed "Telmo." SC said this reason is not
surname. substantial and cogent enough to sustain her
petition.
The wife cannot claim an exclusive right to use the In this case, Senator Tolentino's first marriage was
husband's surname. She cannot be prevented from dissolved through divorce under the Philippine Law
using it; but neither can she restrain others from using
during the Japanese occupation. The effect of divorce is
Tolentino v. CA, 162 it. more akin to the death of the spouse where the
SCRA 66 deceased woman continues to be referred to as the
Mrs. of her husband even if the latter has remarried
rather than to annulment since in the latter case, it is as
if there had been no marriage at all
Doctrine: Commonwealth Act 142’s prohibition against Application: Corazon Legamia used the name “Corazon Notes: Interesting thing is Supreme Court
the use of a pseudonym outside the exceptions it L. Reyes” to apply for death benefits from her deceased said that it is doubtful that this is the conduct
provides (literary, cinema, television, radio, athletic live-in partner. Said death benefits are for her common the lawmakers sought to punish as “some of
Legamia v. IAC, 131
events, other entertainment purposes) would not make child with said live-in partner. Common child is lawfully [the lawmakers] probably had their own
SCRA 479
a woman liable for using the surname of a man with entitled to said death benefits despite lack of marriage Corazons”. Legarda likes this case because
whom she cohabits but is not married to, for purposes of Corazon and his father. Corazon is not held liable. the same reflects the chauvinism of the
involving no intent to gain. Supreme Court.
Change of name is a privilege and not a right hence the Petitioner wants to change the middle name of his
petioner must give the court a compelling reason that minor child because it is weird in singapore to have a
would redound to the benefit of the children. middle name. The court did not allow because the
Wang, G.R. No. petitioner was not able to show how such change would
159966 be beneficial to the child. Moreover, the child is still a
minor, he must be allowed to decide on his own, at the
age of majority when he want to have his name
changed.
Art. 370- A married woman may use: A woman may opt to use her maiden surname or the
(1) Her maiden first name and surname and add her surname of her husband. She is not compelled by law to
husband's surname, or use the surname of her husband. This is also the same in
(2) Her maiden first name and her husband's surname, the Philippine Passport Act of 1996. In the case at hand,
Remo v DFA, March 5,
or she already used her husband's surname she can no
2010
(3) Her husband's full name, but prefixing a word longer revert to her maiden name. She can go back if
indicating that she is his wife, such as "Mrs." her marriage is already dissolved.
Philippine Passport Act of 1996

Art. 377 of NCC - Usurpation of a surname may be the The woman, who used the surname of her paramour in
Gonzaludo v People, subject of an action for damages and other relief. a deed of sale to sell a house belonging to him, was
G.R. No. 150910 charged with the crime of falsification of public
document.
If the use of the surname is allowed by the husband, The wife is contending that there was a usurpation of
then it cannot be considered as usurpation of surname. surname because the mistress used his husband's
Dapar v. Biascan, 439
SC ruled that a mere use of surname cannot be surname in selling a lot, but it was with the consent of
SCRA 179
enjoined, it is the usurpation of the wfie's status, which the husband that the mistress can use his surname
gives rise to an action for damages
The records disclose that the erroneous middle or Petitioner failed to show how respondent used the
Limson v Gonzalez, GR second names, or the misspelling of the family name names for unscrupulous purpose or to deceive or
162205 resulted from error or inadvertance left unchecked confuse the public.
over time. Names were not fictitious.
RULES GOVERNING PERSONS WHO ARE ABSENT
Judicial declaration of an absentee spouse is only Due to her husband's having left the conjugal home for
necessary when he has properties to be taken cared of 7 years, Mrs. Reyes petitioned to have her husband
Reyes v. Alejandro,
or administered by a representative or when the declared an absentee; however, the Court ruled there
141 SCRA 65
absentee's spouse is asking separation or was no need to declare him judicially an absentee
administration of property. because Mr. Reyes Reyes left no properties.
facts established in this case logically indicate to a In this case, husband of respondent, Capt. Lucero, was
moral certainty that Capt. Lucero died shortly after he appointed by Eastern Shipping. Under their contract, his
had sent his last radio message, thus Art. 391:The employment was only good for 1 trip (Hong Kong to
following shall be presumed dead for all purposes, Manila) and the salary will be paid to the wife, herein
including the division of the estate among the heirs: (1) respondent. Capt. Lucero sent 3 messages to the
A person on board a vessel lost during a sea voyage, or Company's Manila office stating that they were
an aeroplane which is missing, who has not been heard encountering boisterous weather, and that they were
of for four years since the loss of the vessel or getting ready to abandon the ship anytime.
Eastern Shipping v. aeroplane; of the Civil code cannot be permitted Subsequently, the loss of the vessel was confirmed, so
Lucero, 124 SCRA 425 the company paid death benefits to the employees but
the respondent did not accept it.
5 months later, respondent filed a complaint for

payment of monthly allotment since it stated in the
contract that monthly allotments will terminate once
the ship arrives in manila. she also contended that her
husband is still not presumed dead because 4 years has
not yet passed.
FC 41 - needs judicial declaration of presumptive death It was the burden of the petitioner to prove his defense
before remarrying that when he married in 1996, he was of the well-
Manuel vs. People,
grounded belief that his first wife was dead. He should
G.R. No. 165842
have adduced evidence -> judicial declaration of
presumptive death as required by FC 41.
Article 41 of the Family Code provides that judicial The Judical Declaration of Presumptive death is
declaration of presumptive death for the purpose of immediately final and executory and cannto be subject
Rep. v Granada, GR
remarriage is summary in nature. Article 247 further to ordinary appeal. It could only be appealed through a
187512
provides that the judgement of the court for summary petition for certitorari alleging grave abuse of discretion
proceedings shall be immediately final and executory amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction
Inorder for an absentee be recognized once appeared, Inorder for the absentee spouse to be part as the one of
they first must lift the declaration of the court of their the legal heirs, she must first declare her reapperance
Orpiano vs Tomas,
absence. with the Court. In this case, she did not declare her
G.R. No. 178611
reappearance, therefore she cannot be recognized as a
party to the case.
FC 247 provides that judgment of the trial court in In this case, Narceda petitoned in the RTC for a judicial
summary proceedings shall be immediately final and declaration of the presumptive death of his wife. It was
Rep. vs Narceda, GR
executory. granted. OSG appealed, saying that Narceda failed to
192760
supply a well-founded belief that she was dead. SC said
that the decision of the RTC cannot be questioned.
FUNERALS
Section 1103 Revised Administrative Code: "Persons WON Petitioner can claim custody of the deceased -
charged with duty of burial - if the deceased was Petitioner claimed he was the spouse as contemplated
unmarried and left any kin, duty of burial devolves under article 294 of the NCC, but PH law does not
Eugenio v. Velez, 185 upon the nearest kin of the deceased." recognize common law marriages where a man and
SCRA 425 woman who cohabit and represent themselves to the
public as a couple may be considered legally married.
Petitioner also had a subsisting marriage, rendering him
not legally capacitated in the first place.
NCC 305 The family has the right and duty to make Husban and Wife were seperated in fact and the
funeral arrangemnts. NCC 307 The wishes of the husband cohabitated with another woman. Husband
Valino v Adriano, GR
deceased regarding the funeral must be followed uless died while the wife was in the US, the other woman
182894
there is ambiguity then the descretion is with the took control of the funeral without heeding the request
family. of the family to delay funeral.
ENTRIES IN THE CIVIL REGISTER
The alleged error in this case cannot be seen as a mere Domingo Baretto requested a copy of his birth record
clerical error. It would have been if the only error in the from the local civil reg in order to apply for a marriage
Civil Registrar entry was the difference in sex, but his license. He discovered that on the record, his name was
name is also different. Domingo Barretto must first Rosario Barretto, a female child. Conversely, the
prove that he is indeed the "Rosario Barretto" in the baptismal records of the church where he was baptised
Barretto vs Local Civil records. show that he is recorded as Domingo Barretto, a male
Registrar, 74 SCRA 257 child. Both records have Faustino Barretto and King Lian
correctly indicated as the child's parents. Domingo filed
to correct the records claiming that it is just a clerical
error, but the Solicitor General filed to dismiss,
contending that it is not a clerical error as it involves a
substantial change in his identity.
Although it was provided in the Art. 412 of the New a petition to change the nationality from Chinese to
Civil Code only correction of mere clerical errors, those Filipino
harmless and innocuous changes such as the correction
of a name that is merely mispelled, occupation of
parents, etc., are allowed and not changes or
corrections involving civil status, nationality, or
citizenship which are substantial and controversial,
Republic v Valencia, Rule 108 of the Revised Rules of Court allows such
GR L-32181 provided the proper suit is filed.
Provided the trial court has conducted proceedings

where all relevant facts have been fully and properly
developed, where opposing counsel have been given
opportunity to demolish the opposite party's case, and
where the evidence has been thoroughly weighed and
considered, the suit or proceeding is appropriate.
Petition for change of name must be filed by the The Mother filed a petition for change of name in behalf
person desiring to change his name, even it it may be her minor daughter. The daughter was her child from
signed and verified by another in his behalf. her first marriage to a chinese citizen. Now, the mother
Republic v. Marcos, wants the daughter to have the same surname as her
182 SCRA 223 current husband's (who is a Filipino). However, the
court said that she cannot do so because only the child
can file a petition to change her name when she reach
the age of Majority.
if the purpose of the petition is merely to correct the in adversarial proceedings, the parties should not only
clerical errors the court may, under a summary include the declared father of the child but the child as
Labayo-Rowe v. procedure issue an order for the correction. however, well, together with the paternal grandparents, if any, as
Republic, 168 SCRA changes which may affect the civil status from their hereditary rights would be adversely affected.
294 legitimate to illegitimate are substantial and
controversial alterations which can only be allowed
after appropriate adversary proceedings.
An appropriate adversary proceeding should be Provided that if the trial court has conducted
followed in changing the name in a death certificate. proceedings where all relevant facts have been fully and
properly developed, where opposing counsel have been
given opportunity to demolish the opposite party's case,
Zapanta v. Registrar,
and where the evidence has been thoroughly weighed
237 SCRA 25
and considered, the suit or proceeding is 'appropriate.'
That is even if the proceeding entered into in the first
place is a "summary proceeding."
The only errors that can be corrected under Rule 108 of A cancellation of a marriage entry registered after the
the ROC are typographical or clerical errors, and not divorce of the said marriage cannot be granted under
Leonor v. Court of material or substantial ones. Rule 108 of the ROC since it would render the marriage
Appeals, 256 SCRA 69 void ab initio and the children of the said marriage
illegitimate, where in fact the marriage was valid and
the children are thus legitimate.
There is no special law allowing the change of name Petitioner Silverio was a "woman" trapped inside a RA 9048 for which change of first name may
and gender based on sex reassignment. man's body. He wanted to change his name and sex in be allowed: 1. firstname or nickname is
his birth certificate after he had sex reassignment in tainted with dishonor or extremely difficult
Silverio vs. RP, G.R. Bangkok. to write or pronounce. 2. firstname and/or
No. 174689 nickname has been habitually and
continuosly used by the petitioner and
publicly known in the community 3. change
will avoid confusion
The determination of a person’s sex appearing in his The Court allowed the change of gender in the birth In comparison to the Silverio case,
birth certificate is a legal issue which in this case should certificate of Cagandahan because he just let nature Cagandahan was allowed to change sex and
be dealt with utmost care in view of the delicate facts take its due course in his body. Cagandahan was name because he didn't underwent
Rep. vs. Cagandahan, ,
present. suffering from Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia (she has unnatural processes to interfere with what
G.R. No. 166676
two reproductive organs). Later on, the male hormones he was born with.
became more abundant. Hence, she asked for a change
in gender and name.
the Court sees it fit to adopt the following rules
respecting the requirement of affixing the signature of
the acknowledging parent in
any private handwritten instrument wherein an
admission of filiation of a legitimate or illegitimate child
is made:
-Where the private handwritten instrument is the lone
piece of evidence submitted to prove filiation, there
Dela Cruz v Gracia, should be strict
G.R. No. 177728 compliance with the requirement that the same must
be signed by the acknowledging parent; and
-Where the private handwritten instrument is
accompanied by other relevant and competent
evidence, it suffices that the
claim of filiation therein be shown to have been made
and handwritten by the acknowledging parent as it is
merely
corroborative of such other evidence.
It is well to emphasize that, doctrinally, validity of The petition fails. In a special proceeding for correction
marriages as well as legitimacy and filiation can be of entry under Rule 108 (Cancellation or Correction of
Braza v The Registrar,
questioned only in a direct action seasonably filed by Entries in the Original Registry), the trial court has no
G.R. No. 181174
the proper party, and not through collateral attack such jurisdiction to nullify marriages and rule on legitimacy
as the petition filed before the court a quo. and filiation.
Doctrine: An ungrateful act is not a ground to cancel a Application: R. Baldos only had his birth registered thirty-
validly executed document, nor a reason to strip a six years later, which does not make said registration
Baldos vs. CA, G.R.
person of one’s filiation. At best, it is a ground for invalid. Only opposition to this is testimony of his
No. 170645
disinheritance. A public document, such as a birth mother that he isn’t her son because he is an ungrateful
certificate, enjoys the presumption of validity. bastard.
The civil registry, cannot register divorce decree The civil registry, registered the divorce decree of the
without judicial recognition of the court. petitioner prior judicial judgment recognizing such
divorce. The court said that the civil registry cannot do
Corpus v Sto Tomas,
that because even if the law mandates that the civil
G.R. No. 186571
registry input such record, it must be read with the rule
that divorce decree must be recognized in the
Philippines before giving it a res judicata effect.
If there are substantial changes for example the civil Magpayo wanted to change his last name claiming that
status of the person, the applicable provision is rule his parents were not married. Thus he was changing his
Republic v Magpayo, 108 which provides that notice should be given to all status from legitimate to illegitimate. The court said that
GR 189476 the parties that have a claim or interest in the change. he needs to give notice all parties that have a claim or
It should also be filed to the civil registry where the interest in these changes.
correction or change shall be effected.
Litis pendentia, as a ground for the dismissal of an There is no identity and similarity between the first and
action, refers to a situation in which another action is the second petitions with respect to the issues under
pending between the same parties for the same cause litigation. The action in the prior Petition involves a
of action, and the second action becomes unnecessary judicial declaration of heirship, while the main issue in
and vexatious.In order to successfully invoke the rule, the present one pertains to a cancellation of entry in the
the movant must prove the existence of the following civil register. An action for declaration of heirship refers
United Clan v requisites: (a) the identity of parties, or at least like to a special proceeding in which a person claiming the
Sabellano, GR 186722 those representing the same interest in both actions; status of heir seeks prior judicial declaration of his or
(b) the identity of rights asserted and relief prayed for, her right to inherit from a decedent. On the other hand,
the relief being founded on the same facts; and (c) the an action for cancellation of entry in the civil register
identity of the two (2) cases, such that the judgment refers to a special proceeding whereby a substantial
that may be rendered in the pending case would, change affecting the civil status of a party is sought
regardless of which party is successful, amount to res through the amendment of the entry in the civil
judicata in the other. register.
When correction of an entry in the civil register SC ruled that respondent should have notified not only
involves substantial and controversial alteration, the Local Civil Register but also her parents and siblings
Republic v Uy, GR including those on, citizenship, legitimacy of as the persons who have interest and are affected by
198010 paternity/filiation, or legitimacy of marriage, a strict the changes or corrections respondent wanted to make
compliance with the requirements of Rule 108 of the
ROC is mandated.
Art. 410 of the Civil Code which provides that books Files from the Civil register can be used as evidence and
making up the civil register and all documents relating is considered as admissible in evidence even without
Iwasawa vs Gangan,
thereto shall be considered public documents and shall further proof of their due execution and genuineness.
G.R. No. 204169
be prima facie evidence of
the facts stated therein.
While a petition for correction or cancellation of an Olaybar applied for a certificate of no marriage
entry in the civil registry cannot substitute an action to (requirement for her to get married), and discovered
nullify a marriage, there was no evidence here to show that she was already married in the records to one Ye
that there was a marriage that hapened in the first Son Sune. Olaybar never met this person, and she
place. Thus, the reccords can be corrected and her claimed she did not even appear before any solemnizing
status as "Wife to Ye Son Sune" can be cancelled. officer. She believed that her name was used by a travel
Republic v Olaybar,
agen whom she gave her info to for a passport
G.R. No. 189538
application. Olaybar moved to cancel her status as wife.
The petitioner claimed thaat she could not cancel the
marriage entries as the cancellation would make the
marriage void ab initio, and the mere correction of an
entry cannot substitute an action to nullify a marriage.
Under RA 9048, clerical or typographical error or Petitioner said there was a typographical error in his
change of first name in the birth certificate of a person birth certificate pertaining to his and his mother's first
can now be done administratively by the local Civil names. The court said he could go straight to the Civil
Registrar or by the Consul General without the need of Registrar without judicial order. However, the
Onde v. Office Of The
a judicial order. correction of the entry on petitioner’s birth certificate
Local Civil Registrar,
that his parents were married on December 23, 1983 in
G.R. No. 197174
Bicol to "not married" is a substantial correction
affecting his legitimacy. Hence, it must be dealt with in
adversarial proceedings where all interested parties are
impleaded.

Persons, Family, Relations Reviewer

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Persons, Family, Relations Reviewer

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DLSU

LAW BLOCK 4 - 2015 | PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS (Atty. Legarda)

Philippine Passport Act of 1996

legal principles developed from the Penal Code may be

Siochi v Gozon, G.R.

Moreover, the New Civil Code gives the surviving

Sister-in-law and children of the same are not included.

Philippine Passport Act of 1996

5 months later, respondent filed a complaint for

Provided the trial court has conducted proceedings

You might also like