Internal Memorandum

To: Mr. Pimentel

Prepared by: Rodelio M. Is-isa, Block-D

Date: December 9, 2019

Stipulated Facts:
Joe and John are both of legal age and American citizens.
John is a former Filipino who acquired his American
citizenship in 1990.Joe and John have been together for the
past 20 years but were only married in 2017,after the United
State Supreme Court permitted same-sex marriage in the
case of Obergefell v Hodges. In 1994, Joe, donated his
sperm which was subsequently used to artificially inseminate
one of their female friends. This female friend gave birth to
Zuzu, who Joe and John have raised as their own. When gay
marriage became lawful, they jointly adopted Zuzu.

During one vacation herein the Philippines, Joe caught John

having sex with another man Jake. Fueled by his anger, Joe
grabbed an axe placed by the door and hit John several
time. One blow hit John on the back. Zuzu was the one who
rushed John to the hospital; while Joe was immediately
arrested. John had since the incident been in a coma. His
doctors informed Zuzu that if he wakes up, he would be
paralyzed because his spinal cord was struck.

Having heard of his accident, John’s family rushed to his side

in the hospital and started making all the decisions with
respect to his medical care. Zuzu objected, claiming that as
the son of John, the primary decision as to his father’s body
and medical care belonged to him. He further argued that
John’s family disowned his father when they were told of his
father’s sexual preference. He, finally argued, that in several
conversations with his parents, they ordered him, that if
they would be paralyzed, or in a state of comatose, or were
no longer responding to medicines, their doctors should be
advised that they should not be resuscitated. John’s family
argued that same sex marriages are not recognized in the
Philippines. Zuzu, being the biological child of Joe, is a
stranger to John and therefore cannot make decisions.

Questions Presented:
1) If Zuzu has a right to make decisions as to
John’s medical care while in the Philippines.

2) If his other father, Joe is entitled to the defense under

Article247 of the Revised Penal Code.
Arguments:
1. Zuzu, being the biological child of Joe, is a stranger to
John and therefore cannot make decisions.

 Zuzu was adopted jointly by Joe and John, and

therefore he is a legitimate child of Joe and John.
According to Article 189 of the Family Code. Adoption
shall have the following effects: (1) For civil purposes,
the adopted shall be deemed to be a legitimate child of
the adopters and both shall acquire the reciprocal rights
and obligations arising from the relationship of parent
and child, including the right of the adopted to use the
surname of the adopters. This provision will give the
authority to Zuzu to make decisions.

2. Joe and John is an American citizen, they will not be able

to adopt Zuzu because they are foreigner.

 Yes, an alien may not adopt except: According to

Article 184 of the Family Code it states that, Aliens not
included in the foregoing exceptions may adopt Filipino
children in accordance with the rules on inter-country
adoption as may be provided by law. Therefore the
adoption of Zuzu by Joe and John is valid.

3. Same sex marriages are not recognized here in the

Philippines.

 General rule. Yes, it is not recognized here in the

Philippines. Except, Article 26 of the Family Code states
that: All marriages solemnized outside the Philippines
in accordance with the laws in force in the country
where they were solemnized, and valid there as much,
shall also be valid in this country, except those
prohibited under Articles 35(1), (4), (5) and (6), 36, 37
and 38. In this case, Joe and John was married in
United States of America where same sex marriage is
valid. Therefore, they marriage here in the Philippines
is valid.

4. Joe was arrested for inflicting serious physical injury to

his husband John.

 Joe was shocked. According to Article 247 of the

Revised Penal Code: Any legally married person who,
having surprised his spouse in the act of committing
sexual intercourse with another person, shall kill any of
 them or both of them in the act or immediately
thereafter, or shall inflict upon them any serious
physical injury, shall suffer the penalty of destierro.
Therefore, he is exempted from criminal liability.

Conclusion:
General rule. Yes, it is not recognized here in the
Philippines. Except, Article 26 of the Family Code states
that: All marriages solemnized outside the Philippines
in accordance with the laws in force in the country
where they were solemnized, and valid there as much,
shall also be valid in this country, except those
prohibited under Articles 35(1), (4), (5) and (6), 36, 37
and 38.