reviewer pfr

8/20/2019 Reviewer Pfr

1/239

REVIEWER PFR:

Art. 1- also known as the Civil Code of the Philippines, was pursuant to R.A. 386; passed on Dec. 15, 1947 andtook effect u!. "#, 195#.

Art. 2- Laws shall take effect...Related Laws Invlved$

%ec. "&1' and 4 of chapter (, )ook *++ of the din. Code of 197

%ec. ". Filing . &1' Every agency shall file with the University of the Philippines Law Center,three (3) certified copies of every rule adopted by it . /ules in force on the date of effectivit0 of this Codewhich are not filed within three &"' onths shall not thereafter e the asis of an0 sanction a!ainst an0 part0 or persons. &2phasis supplied, Chapter (, )ook *++ of the dinistrative Code of 197.'

%ec. 4. Effectivity. In addition to other rule!a"ing re#uire!ents provided by law not inconsistentwith this $oo", each rule shall beco!e effective fifteen (%&) days fro! the date of filing as above

provided unless a different date is fi3ed 0 law, or specified in the rule in cases of iinent dan!er to pulic health, safet0 and welfare, the e3istence of which ust e e3pressed in a stateent accopan0in!the rule. he a!enc0 shall take appropriate easures to ake eer!enc0 rules known to persons who

a0 e affected 0 the.!A"E"$

1. #anada V. #$vera 1%8&-• invokin! of peoples constitutional ri!hts on atters6 inforation re!ardin! laws that were not

pulished &PDs, 2.., 8etters of +nstructions etc. )0 Pres. arcos'

• %ec. f the President cited rt. ( &unless otherwise provided 0 law clause'

• Court ruled in favor of petitioners- pulication &C :"' is a sine ua non reuireent.

(. #$vera V. #$vera 1%86-• Clarification of where and when the laws should e pulished, what are laws of !eneral

applicailit03. PA"EI V. #rres

• P2 and D82 Dept. rder and eoranda &teporaril0 suspendin! the recruitent 0

private eplo0ent a!encies of on!'

• %uch were not filed in accordance to %ec. "&1' and 4 of chapter (, )ook *++ of the din. Code

of 197. &?/, @P 8A C2?2/''. P(IL"A V. "E!.

• P2 eorandu Circular ?o. ++, %eries of 19" &ille!al e3action6 one0 clais of

respondents'

• %uch were not filed &as reuired 0 %ec. "&1' and 4 of chapter (, )ook *++ of the din. Code of

197' and should not e asis for additional oli!ations of petitioners.&. RP V. PILIPI)A" "(ELL

• Oil Price Stabilization Fund (OPSF) was created under Presidential Decree ?o. 195:• %hell was infored 0 D2 of their inailit0 to pa0 certain char!es on tie and asked the to

pa0 so, now with additional surchar!es as per *+F !,rc$lar ). 1-8& aendin! *+F!,rc$lar ). 11-8& dated 12 Ar,l 1%8&.

• leit %=288 paid its insufficiencies, it did not incur the surchar!es fro which it asseverated

that it lacked filin! with ?/ &@P 8aw Center'; fro which the C and %C held.6. /*ALI V. E"#A)I"LA+

• Consolidated cases- andaus and Prohiition

• /.. 71:7- dBustin! asic personal and additional ta3 e3eptions &aendin! ?+/C'; pulished

in ala0a newspaper


2/239

• +t took effect after 15 da0s of its pulication in the ala0a

0. atntn V. )LR!

+ ssociate Professor who was coplained of unBust6unfair !radin!, se3ual harassent and

unecoin! conduct of an acadeician.

=e was then punished with preventive suspension in pursuance of R.A. 0800 &Ant,-"e$al(arass4ent Act f 1%%&'

Ahen he was preventivel0 suspended, the apua /ules which entails the enforceent of such

!eneral law was not properl0 pulished in the school or!an &althou!h parties have a!reed to haveit pulished as a part of adin rules'

%C ruled in favor of petitioner on !rounds that the P@ rules corollar0 to enforceent of

/.. 777 was still inoperative at the tie the preventive suspension was iposed to the petitioner.

Art. 3- I5nrance f the law ec$ses n ne fr4 c4l,ance therew,th. !A"E":

1. as,la5 V. Rdr,5$e7-

Petitioner and 2iliana orosio &other of defendants' entered into ( contracts; 1st is

ort!a!e of a land and the (nd

is the odification of that 1st

contract due to 2ilianas failure to pa0 the 0ears interest.

Petitioner defended that he is a P+""E""+R I) ++ FAI#( &art. &26 f the !,v,l cde'and didnt know of the A)#I-!(RE"I" &Art,cle 1881 f the !,v,l !de' which akescontracts void.

%C ruled in accordance to Bustice of the ownership or enBo0ent of ort!a!e of the land, its

iproveents etc.2. .*. !ns$n9, V. !A-

ose ue!o, a construction worker of petitioner has fallen 14 floors down causin! his death

=is widow, aria, has filed for enefits which she thus have taken fro the %tate +nsurance


3/239

publication of such laws a final sentence has been pronounced and the convict is

serving the sa!e

!A"E":1. P)> V. +FFI!E +F #(E PRE"IE)#-

Private respondents entered into ort!a!e contract with akati *illa!e +nc. ecree nPrtect,n f Intellect$al rert?.

+n 19:, */) filed for search warrants and have seiFed ites fro the accused. =owever, Csaid on the pendin! proceedin! that alle!ations should e with conforit0 to 2


4/239

=erein respondent has e3ecuted a


5/239

=erein petitioner has filed for death enefits for her son with !ri. Cultural dinistration ?a!a

Cit0 )ranch wherein his deceased live-in partner has served as )ranch Clai ana!er.

s when petitioner used the surnae of her live-in partner for 19 0ears, the 82++2

spouse has sued her in violation of !A 1'2 &Pseudon0'.

Court held that is ust not e applied to her since the set up we have in the Philippines, althou!h

not encoura!ed, of the practice of coon-law wives use the surnaes of their partners is!enerousl0 countenanced.

2. RP V. !A-

/P has sou!ht the e3propriation of certain portions of land owned 0 the private respondents for

the w,den,n5 and cncret,n5. /espondents, however, deand that the 9$st c4ensat,n fr the rert? sh$ld e ased

n fa,r 4arket val$e and )+# that set ? Pres,dent,al ecree ). 06, as aended, whichfi3es pa0ent on the basis of te assessent by te assessor or the declared valuation by teowner , whichever is lower.

he instant controvers0, however, is too far distant awa0 fro an0 of the aove e3ceptional

cases.3. .P. 22 aka >$nc,n5 !heck law. =e was sentenced

to e iprisoned for :# da0s and to indenif0 the a!!rieved part0 fro which he has proisedto help for the salva!e of a sunken vessel.

• =owever, soe four 0ears efore the Iue *. People &used 0 respondent as Burisprudence', the

+%2/ < @%+C2 has released his construction of the said )atas paansa, fro which the petitioner herein has relied on its interpretation; that where the check was issued as arran!eent

to !uarantee6 secure pa0ent, one is not criinall0 liale with estafa nor )P ((.• %C ruled sustainin! the petitioners pleadin! since ecause the elief he had of the construction

of the D inister, thou!h not indin!, was of iportant earin!. nd althou!h the Dopinion has een reversed, that has alread0 een a 0ear after the alle!ed violation was done.

(. #,n5 V. #,n5-

fter havin! : children and a total of 1 0ears of arried life, wife defendant in herein case has

filed efore /C her intention for the nullification of her arria!e with her husand pursuant tort. ": of the


6/239

If 4nths are des,5nated ? the,r na4e= the? shall e c4$ted ? the n$4er f da?s wh,ch the?resect,vel? have.

In c4$t,n5 a er,d= the f,rst da? shall e ecl$ded= and the last da? ,ncl$ded.

RELA#E LAW" I)V+LVE:

>++ I

"+VEREI)# A) E)ERAL A*I)I"#RA#I+)!(AP#ER 8 LEAL WEI(#" *EA"/RE" A) PERI+

"ect,n 31. Legal Periods - JKearJ shall e understood to e twelve calendar onths; JonthJ of thirt0 da0s,unless it refers to a specific calendar onth in which case it shall e coputed accordin! to the nuer of da0s

the specific onth contains; Jda0,J to a da0 of twent0-four hours; and Jni!ht,J fro sunset to sunrise.

!A"E":

1. )at,nal *arket,n5 !r. V. #ecsn

he onl0 uestion of law here is whether in the period of Dec. (1 1955- Dec. (1, 19:5 is

euitale to a period of 1# 0ears with the fact that ( 0ears therein are leap 0earsL

%C ruled that a 0ear should e understood to have ":5 da0s each re!ardless of leap 0ears.

2. #lent,n V. "hentn

=erein petitioner has ort!a!ed her propert0 to )ank of %outheast sia which then has e3tra-

Budiciall0 foreclosed her propert0 ecause of failure to pa0 oli!ations.

/espondent herein was the hi!hest idder of the said ort!a!ed propert0 which otained its

certificate of title on


7/239

even in their


8/239

@pon returnin! hoe, he e3ecuted a will eueathin! his properties in the Philippines to his

children and licia. )ut court denied since he is still alive. 2ven efore the end of proceedin!,llorente died.

Paula now files for her ri!ht on the propert0 sa0in! she is the le!al wife.

%C ruled to reand the case on the reason of validit0 of the will ut /2C?+M2% the validit0

of decree of divorce of llorente in the @%.&. Rehr and Rdr,5$e7

nother tale of a i3ed-arria!e,


9/239

3. Estate f A4s >ell,s

os )ellis, resident and national of e3as @% has een arried ( in his lifetie; 1st with

arr0 allen &5 le!itiate children' and the second &" ille!itiate children'.

=e then e3ecuted a will in the Philippines. =owever, his ille!itiate children opposed to

partition since the0 said the0 were deprived of their le!ities.

%C ruled that the will of the deceased accordin! to his national law &e3an' ust sustain over his

propert0 in the Philippines.Art. 10- #he fr4s and sle4n,t,es f cntracts= w,lls= and ther $l,c ,nstr$4ents shall e 5verned ?the laws f the c$ntr? ,n wh,ch the? are eec$ted.

When the acts referred t are eec$ted efre the d,l4at,c r cns$lar ff,c,als f the Re$l,c f thePh,l,,nes ,n a fre,5n c$ntr?= the sle4n,t,es estal,shed ? Ph,l,,ne laws shall e served ,n the,reec$t,n.

Prh,,t,ve laws cncern,n5 ersns= the,r acts r rert?= and thse wh,ch have= fr the,r 9ect= $l,crder= $l,c l,c? and 5d c$st4s shall nt e rendered ,neffect,ve ? laws r 9$d54entsr4$l5ated= r ? deter4,nat,ns r cnvent,ns a5reed $n ,n a fre,5n c$ntr?. ;11a

!A"E":

1. >A) +F A*ERI!A= )# and "A V * A*ERI!A) REAL# !+RP+RA#I+) and !+/R# +FAPPEAL"

Petitioners herein entered with " other copanies to a loan. s the later were not ale to pa0 the

oli!ations, the0 re-entered into another a!reeent, with the herein respondent as a "rd part0ort!a!er &parcel of land'

fter a!ain failin! to pa0 petitioner, the0 have filed personal actions in %C of another countr0

and suseuentl0 has file s /28 action for foreclosure of ort!a!e &/C'.

%C ruled that a!!rieved part0 is onl0 allowed to take a 1 course of action as if contrar0, it would

result to doule copensation fro the other part0. %ince petitioner has alread0 filed personal

actions in =>, that is entitled of an action that waives its other action for foreclosure in thePhilippines.

2. P)> V. !aansa5 =erein respondent


10/239

=erein respondent has appealed for !rant ereaveent leave and death and accident insurance

enefits to /olando =ortillan pursuant to the death of his child &" weeks died durin! laor' inaccordance to stipulations of C) of the herein petitioner.

Petitioner onl0 approved the paternit0 leave ut other others, reBected. hus he filed a civil case

aout this atter since he is filin! for the enefits not on ehalf of the child ut ased on =+%own ri!ht.

%C ruled that accordin! to the C), reuireents to e estowed with these enefits are$ a.

Death, . ... of a le!itiate dependent; which are oth present in the case at ar. Petitioner alsoasseverated that the provisions are clear re!ardin! GdeathH ut there is no specificit0 that theCourt has seen as to their assertion that one ust have had a civil personalit0 efore the0 could!rant the death and accident enefits.

/"E +F "/R)A*E":LAW" I)V+LVE:

>++ IPER"+)"

#,tle I. - !IVIL PER"+)ALI#!(AP#ER 1

E)ERAL PR+VI"I+)"Art. 30. C$r,d,cal caac,t?= wh,ch ,s the f,tness t e the s$9ect f le5al relat,ns= ,s ,nherent ,n ever?nat$ral ersn and ,s lst nl? thr$5h death. !aac,t? t act= wh,ch ,s the wer t d acts w,th le5aleffect= ,s ac@$,red and 4a? e lst. ;n

Art. 38. *,nr,t?= ,nsan,t? r ,4ec,l,t?= the state f e,n5 a deaf-4$te= rd,5al,t? and c,v,l ,nterd,ct,nare 4ere restr,ct,ns n caac,t? t act= and d nt ee4t the ,ncaac,tated ersn fr4 certa,nl,5at,ns= as when the latter ar,se fr4 h,s acts r fr4 rert? relat,ns= s$ch as ease4ents. ;32a

Art. 3%. #he fllw,n5 c,rc$4stances= a4n5 thers= 4d,f? r l,4,t caac,t? t act: a5e= ,nsan,t?=,4ec,l,t?= the state f e,n5 a deaf-4$te= enalt?= rd,5al,t?= fa4,l? relat,ns= al,ena5e= asence=,nslvenc? and tr$steesh,. #he cnse@$ences f these c,rc$4stances are 5verned ,n th,s !de= thercdes= the R$les f !$rt= and ,n sec,al laws. !aac,t? t act ,s nt l,4,ted n acc$nt f rel,5,$s el,efr l,t,cal ,n,n.

A 4arr,ed w4an= twent?-ne ?ears f a5e r ver= ,s @$al,f,ed fr all acts f c,v,l l,fe= ecet ,n casessec,f,ed ? law. ;n

!(AP#ER 2)A#/RAL PER"+)"

Art. ',rth deter4,nes ersnal,t?D $t the cnce,ved ch,ld shall e cns,dered rn fr all $rsesthat are favrale t ,t= rv,ded ,t e rn later w,th the cnd,t,ns sec,f,ed ,n the fllw,n5art,cle. ;2%a

Art. '1. Fr c,v,l $rses= the fet$s ,s cns,dered rn ,f ,t ,s al,ve at the t,4e ,t ,s c4letel? del,veredfr4 the 4therGs w4. (wever= ,f the fet$s had an ,ntra-$ter,ne l,fe f less than seven 4nths= ,t ,s ntdee4ed rn ,f ,t d,es w,th,n twent?-f$r h$rs after ,ts c4lete del,ver? fr4 the 4aternalw4. ;3


11/239

#he effect f death $n the r,5hts and l,5at,ns f the deceased ,s deter4,ned ? law= ? cntract and? w,ll. ;32a

Art. '3. If there ,s a d$t= as etween tw r 4re ersns wh are called t s$cceed each ther= as twh,ch f the4 d,ed f,rst= whever alle5es the death f ne r,r t the ther= shall rve the sa4eD ,n theasence f rf= ,t ,s res$4ed that the? d,ed at the sa4e t,4e and there shall e n trans4,ss,n fr,5hts fr4 ne t the ther. ;33

!(AP#ER 3C/RII!AL PER"+)"

Art. ''. #he fllw,n5 are 9$r,d,cal ersns:

;1 #he "tate and ,ts l,t,cal s$d,v,s,nsD

;2 +ther crrat,ns= ,nst,t$t,ns and ent,t,es fr $l,c ,nterest r $rse= created ? lawDthe,r ersnal,t? e5,ns as sn as the? have een cnst,t$ted accrd,n5 t lawD

;3 !rrat,ns= artnersh,s and assc,at,ns fr r,vate ,nterest r $rse t wh,ch the law

5rants a 9$r,d,cal ersnal,t?= searate and d,st,nct fr4 that f each sharehlder= artner r4e4er. ;3&a

Art. '&. C$r,d,cal ersns 4ent,ned ,n )s. 1 and 2 f the reced,n5 art,cle are 5verned ? the lawscreat,n5 r rec5n,7,n5 the4.

Pr,vate crrat,ns are re5$lated ? laws f 5eneral al,cat,n n the s$9ect.

Partnersh,s and assc,at,ns fr r,vate ,nterest r $rse are 5verned ? the rv,s,ns f th,s !decncern,n5 artnersh,s. ;36 and 30a

Art. '6. C$r,d,cal ersns 4a? ac@$,re and ssess rert? f all k,nds= as well as ,nc$r l,5at,ns andr,n5 c,v,l r cr,4,nal act,ns= ,n cnfr4,t? w,th the laws and re5$lat,ns f the,r r5an,7at,n. ;38a

Art. '0. /n the d,ssl$t,n f crrat,ns= ,nst,t$t,ns and ther ent,t,es fr $l,c ,nterest r $rse4ent,ned ,n ). 2 f Art,cle ''= the,r rert? and ther assets shall e d,ssed f ,n $rs$ance f lawr the charter creat,n5 the4. If nth,n5 has een sec,f,ed n th,s ,nt= the rert? and ther assetsshall e al,ed t s,4,lar $rses fr the enef,t f the re5,n= rv,nce= c,t? r 4$n,c,al,t? wh,chd$r,n5 the e,stence f the ,nst,t$t,n der,ved the r,nc,al enef,ts fr4 the sa4e. ;3%a

Art. 0%0. Persns f e,ther se $nder e,5hteen ?ears f a5e cannt 4ake a w,ll. ;n

Art. 82


12/239

Art. 1320. #he fllw,n5 cannt 5,ve cnsent t a cntract:

;1 /ne4anc,ated 4,nrsD

;2 Insane r de4ented ersns= and deaf-4$tes wh d nt knw hw t wr,te. ;1263a

Art. 1328. !ntracts entered ,nt d$r,n5 a l$c,d ,nterval are val,d. !ntracts a5reed t ,n a state fdr$nkenness r d$r,n5 a h?nt,c sell are v,dale. ;n

rt. 14. +n case either or oth of the contractin! parties, not havin! een eancipated 0 a previous arria!e,are etween the a5es f e,5hteen and twent?-ne, the0 shall, in addition to the reuireents of the precedin!articles, e3hiit to the local civil re!istrar, the cnsent t the,r 4arr,a5e of their father, other, survivin! parent or !uardian, or persons havin! le!al char!e of the, in the order entioned. %uch consent shall e4an,fested ,n wr,t,n5 0 the interested part0, who personall0 appears efre the rer lcal c,v,l re5,strar,or in the for of an aff,dav,t ade in the resence f tw w,tnesses and attested efre an? ff,c,ala$thr,7ed ? law t ad4,n,ster aths. he personal anifestation shall e recorded in oth applications forarria!e license, and the affidavit, if one is e3ecuted instead, shall e attached to said applications. &:1a'

Art,cle 3'. Civil interdiction - Civil interdiction shall der,ve the ffender durin! the tie of his sentence of

the r,5hts f arental a$thr,t?= r 5$ard,ansh,, either as to the person or propert0 of an0 ward, of 4ar,tala$thr,t?, of the r,5ht t 4ana5e h,s rert? and of the r,5ht t d,sse f s$ch rert? 0 an0 act or an0conve0ance inter vivos.

#,tle III. - /"E +F "/R)A*E" ;nArt. 36'. Le5,t,4ate and le5,t,4ated ch,ldren shall r,nc,all? $se the s$rna4e f the father.Art. 36&. An adted ch,ld shall ear the s$rna4e f the adter.

Art. 366. A nat$ral ch,ld acknwled5ed ? th arents shall r,nc,all? $se the s$rna4e f the father. Ifrec5n,7ed ? nl? ne f the arents= a nat$ral ch,ld shall e4l? the s$rna4e f the rec5n,7,n5 arent.Art. 360. )at$ral ch,ldren ? le5al f,ct,n shall r,nc,all? e4l? the s$rna4e f the father.Art. 368. Ille5,t,4ate ch,ldren referred t ,n Art,cle 280 shall ear the s$rna4e f the 4ther.Art. 36%. !h,ldren cnce,ved efre the decree ann$ll,n5 a v,dale 4arr,a5e shall r,nc,all? $se thes$rna4e f the father.Art. 30


13/239

Art. 30&. In case f ,dent,t? f na4es and s$rna4es etween ascendants and descendants= the wrd+-unior+ can e $sed nl? ? a sn. randsns and ther d,rect 4ale descendants shall e,ther:

;1 Add a 4,ddle na4e r the 4therGs s$rna4e= r;2 Add the R4an )$4erals II= III= and s n.

Art. 306. ) ersn can chan5e h,s na4e r s$rna4e w,th$t 9$d,c,al a$thr,t?.Art. 300. /s$rat,n f a na4e and s$rna4e 4a? e the s$9ect f an act,n fr da4a5es and therrel,ef.Art. 308. #he $na$thr,7ed r $nlawf$l $se f anther ersnGs s$rna4e 5,ves a r,5ht f act,n t the

latter.Art. 30%. #he e4l?4ent f en na4es r sta5e na4es ,s er4,tted= rv,ded ,t ,s dne ,n 5d fa,th andthere ,s n ,n9$r? t th,rd ersns. Pen na4es and sta5e na4es cannt e $s$red.Art. 38


14/239

he court !ranted the petition and naed the child %tephanie ?ath0 Catindi!. Aithout an0

iddle nae.

he0 file a separate otion for clarification6consideration as to the use of iddle initial of the

other of the child GarciaH.

%C ruled that althou!h the law is silent aout iddle naes, the0 are still !rantin! the petition in

the sense that iddle nae, as a part of the full nae, is essential to one and to set aside thenotions of ille!itiac0 of the child, and also since it is not opposed 0 an0 parties or preBudicialto pulic interest.

Art. 106- Ille5,t,4ate ch,ldren shall use the s$rna4e and shall e under the arental a$thr,t? oftheir 4ther, and shall e entitled to support in conforit0 with this Code. he le!itie of eachille!itiate child shall consist of one-half of the le!itie of a le!itiate child. 23cept for thisodification, all other provisions in the Civil Code !overnin! successional ri!hts shall reain inforce. &(7a'

REP/>LI! A!# )+. %2&& Fer$ar? 2' 2


15/239

Art. 306. ) ersn can chan5e h,s na4e r s$rna4e w,th$t 9$d,c,al a$thr,t?.!A"E":

1. In the *atter f the !han5e f )a4e f *,la5rs Llerena #el4. *ILAR+" LLERE)A#EL*+ V. REP/>LI! +F #(E P(ILIPPI)E"

=erein petitioner wanted to chan!e the spellin! of her husands surnae to =28 is it the

trend now used in the @% and for other purposes she considered to e iportant for.

8ower court !ranted the petition ut assailed 0 /P.

%C ruled in favor of the /P since; the chan!e of nae was initiated 0 the Aife, not the

=@%)?D hiself, and thus onl0 presented a written docuent sa0in! he is not opposin! the petition, to!ether with the ( children.

2. Alfn V. RP• aria 2strella *eronica Priitiva Duterte petitioned to chan!e her nae to 2strella %. lfon

since she has used this fro her childhood up to ri!ht to suffra!e and otainin! her nurse de!ree.

• 8ower court has !ranted onl0 the chan!e in nae ut the surnae for it invoked rt. ":4.

• %C said that it should have !ranted the petition full0 since the nae6surnae to e used is that of

her other, and the provision of art. ":5 onl0 said that le!itiate child shall P/+?C+P88K not2EC8@%+*28K use the nae of the father. ne a0 choose to use the surnae of the other ishe6she a0 want to.

3. PE#I#I+) F+R !(A)E +F )A*E". C+"EFI)A A) !(A and *ER!EI#A A)!(A V. REP/>LI! +F #(E P(ILIPPI)E"• =erein petitioners petition for the chan!e of surnae fro ? C=K to =2/??D2M.

• he0 were not infored 0 their other of their Chinese ancestr0 and have use the surnae

petitioned to fro childhood, to colle!e, up to suffra!e and pa0in! of incoe ta3. fter knowin!of their descent, the0 iediatel0 have petitioned for naturaliFation and for the chan!e ofsurnae. 8ower court has !ranted the petition

• %C a!reed with the decision and found no flaw aout it.

'. )ald7a V. RP

=erein petitioner Mosia ?aldoFa pra0s to chan!e the surnae of her children fro

Divina!racia to ?aldoFa since her husand has aandoned her and that he is alle!ed to have

swindled soe people; her intention is to prevent an0 odious effects to her children.

8ower court has refused to !rant the petition

%C upheld the lower in accordance to rt. ":4, and that when the children reach the a!e of

adulthood, the0 are the ones to know if the0 should6a0 want to use the surnae the0 have ornot. &Divina!racia'

&. /? V. RP• Candido6/icardo @0 pra0s for the chan!e of surnae to )8@K &%ecretar0 )alu0ot close to

his fail0 and did not oppose to use the surnae' since his was freuentl0 identified as ofChinese ancestr0 and this has een a factor to the fall of his furniture usiness.

• 8ower court !ranted the petition.

•%C upheld the decision since it found that the chan!e of nae was done in !ood faith and that itdoes not preBudice a ri!ht of a third person or inBurious to the !ov. r the pulic interest.

6. Pad,lla V. RP• Dolores eora was initiall0 arried to *incent Co. he latter aandoned the forer. he0

e!ot 5 children

• fter, forer has arried a!ain to one 2dward Padilla. Dolores wanted to chan!e the surnae of

her children to PD+88.

• 8ower court refused invokin! art. 36' and art. 36% &surnae of children is of fathers; eforedeclaration of nullit0 of the arria!e'


16/239

• %C upheld the lower court for the sae articles entioned and for the reason that the children

a0 actuall0 decide for theselves if the0 want to in the future and institute their own.0. RP V. !A ;Wn5

=erein petitioner a3io Aon! was le!all0 adopted 0 A? spouses fro one a3io

lcala since the spouses were ipotent.

=owever, since he is an environent of uslis when in fact he is surnaed Aon!, it entailed

earrassent and effected ne!ativel0 to his usiness. )ecause of this, he initiated this petition.

C has approved the lower court !rant ut repelled 0 /P

%C ruled in favor won!, who now is *AI*+ AL!ALA= CR.= since /P contention of crassin!ratitude of the petitioner is not sustantiated ecause his adopter herself has presented anaffidavit of support for chan!e of surnae and appeared efore the court for the sae purposesand that the reason for chan!e of nae is also not preBudicial to an0 "rd person.

Art. 30


17/239

aria *ir!inia /. *illanueva is reappl0in! for her Philippine passport with an additional pra0er

of revertin! her nae instituted therein 0 usin! her aiden nae.

ccordin! to /.. ("9 or the Philippine Passport ct of 199:, conditions to which one arried

woan can revert her aiden nae is when the spouse died or the arria!e has een annulled,le!all0 separated or otained asolute divorce.

+n her case, her arria!e is still susistin! with *illanueva

%C ruled in favor of the respondent disallowin! her to have her nae reverted to its aiden

status as what the law itself provides.

Art. 300. /s$rat,n f a na4e and s$rna4e 4a? e the s$9ect f an act,n fr da4a5es and therrel,ef.Art. 308. #he $na$thr,7ed r $nlawf$l $se f anther ersnGs s$rna4e 5,ves a r,5ht f act,n t thelatter.

!A"E:1. #lent,n V. !A-

Constancia olentino herein petitioner has een enBoined to stop usin! her surnae olentino 0

action initiated 0 the present &"rd' wife of rturo olentino, Consuelo.

C ruled at first that it is favourin! Constancia ut later has revoked and odified its decisionfavourin! Consuelo.

%C ruled that the law is silent aout the issue at hand ut ruled to let thin!s as it e since there is

no usurpation on the part of Consuelo, and that there is no envisioned inBur0 to ri!hts of theConstancia an0wa0.

Art. 38


18/239

then was asent due to soe errands and he was the one entrusted to do the Bo on ehalf of theforer.

@pon arrival to office of oudsan, he has si!ned in the lo! and receipt ook the nae of the

supposed receiver +scar Pere7. =owever, the one who has !iven hi the docuent knew that heis a different person to that of which he has entered his nae on the ook, the forer askedoudsan for his punishent

%C ruled that an alias is one that is to e used 0 person pulicl0 and haituall0, usuall0 in

usiness transactions and other purposes as such that would not inBure a third part0s ri!ht or pulic interest. =istoricall0, the C 14( fro which he was deeed to violate was created in theli!ht of the rapant use of aliases of Chinese en to fraudulentl0 confuse their usiness partners+n the present case, %C understood that petitioners si!nin! of scar PereF in the lo! ook wasnot in his ind to e used pulicl0 and haituall0, therefore not euatin! it to an alias. ndadditionall0, it is not kind of lias fro which the intention of the fraers ust have eenseekin! to reed0 or repel. herefore, the petitioner is acuitted.

E*A)!IPA#I+) A) AE +F *AC+RI#:

Re$l,c Act ). 68"E)!E

!(AP#ER 1PR+VI"I+)AL *EA"/RE" I) !A"E +F A>"E)!E

rt. "1. Ahen a person disappears fro his doicile, his whereaouts ein! unknown, and without leavin! ana!ent to adinister his propert0, the Bud!e, at the instance of an interested part0, a relative, or a friend, a0

appoint a person to represent hi in all that a0 e necessar0.his sae rule shall e oserved when under siilar circustances the power conferred 0 the asentee hase3pired. &11a'rt. "(. he appointent referred to in the precedin! article havin! een ade, the Bud!e shall take thenecessar0 easures to safe!uard the ri!hts and interests of the asentee and shall specif0 the powers,oli!ations and reuneration of his representative, re!ulatin! the, accordin! to the circustances, 0 the rulesconcernin! !uardians. &1('rt. "". +n the appointent of a representative, the spouse present shall e preferred when there is no le!alseparation.


19/239

+f the asentee left no spouse, or if the spouse present is a inor, an0 copetent person a0 e appointed 0 thecourt. &1"a'

!(AP#ER 2E!LARA#I+) +F A>"E)!E

Art. 38'. wo 0ears havin! elapsed without an0 news aout the asentee or since the receipt of the last news,and five 0ears in case the asentee has left a person in char!e of the adinistration of his propert0, his asencea0 e declared. &14'Art. 38&. he followin! a0 ask for the declaration of asence$

&1' he spouse present;&(' he heirs instituted in a will, who a0 present an authentic cop0 of the sae;&"' he relatives who a0 succeed 0 the law of intestac0;&4' hose who a0 have over the propert0 of the asentee soe ri!ht suordinated to the condition of his death.&15'Art. 386. he Budicial declaration of asence shall not take effect until si3 onths after its pulication in anewspaper of !eneral circulation. &1:a'

!(AP#ER 3A*I)I"#RA#I+) +F #(E PR+PER# +F #(E A>"E)#EE

Art. 380. n adinistrator of the asenteeNs propert0 shall e appointed in accordance with rticle "". &17a'Art. 388. he wife who is appointed as an adinistratri3 of the husandNs propert0 cannot alienate or encuer

the husandNs propert0, or that of the conBu!al partnership, without Budicial authorit0. &1a'Art. 38%. he adinistration shall cease in an0 of the followin! cases$&1' Ahen the asentee appears personall0 or 0 eans of an a!ent;&(' Ahen the death of the asentee is proved and his testate or intestate heirs appear;&"' Ahen a third person appears, showin! 0 a proper docuent that he has acuired the asenteeNs propert0 0 purchase or other title.+n these cases the adinistrator shall cease in the perforance of his office, and the propert0 shall e at thedisposal of those who a0 have a ri!ht thereto. &19#'

!(AP#ER 'PRE"/*P#I+) +F EA#(

Art. 3%"E)!E /P+) #(E

!+)#I)E)# RI(#" +F #(E A>"E)#EEArt. 3%3. Ahoever clais a ri!ht pertainin! to a person whose e3istence is not reco!niFed ust prove that hewas livin! at the tie his e3istence was necessar0 in order to acuire said ri!ht. &195'Art. 3%'. Aithout preBudice to the provision of the precedin! article, upon the openin! of a succession to whichan asentee is called, his share shall accrue to his co-heirs, unless he has heirs, assi!ns, or a representative. he0shall all, as the case a0 e, ake an inventor0 of the propert0. &19:a'


20/239

Art. 3%&. he provisions of the precedin! article are understood to e without preBudice to the action of petitionfor inheritance or other ri!hts which are vested in the asentee, his representatives or successors in interest.hese ri!hts shall not e e3tin!uished save 0 lapse of tie fi3ed for prescription. +n the record that is ade inthe /e!istr0 of the real estate which accrues to the coheirs, the circustance of its ein! suBect to the provisions of this article shall e stated.&197'Art. 3%6. hose who a0 have entered upon the inheritance shall appropriate the fruits received in !ood faithso lon! as the asentee does not appear, or while his representatives or successors in interest do not rin! the proper actions. &19'

F/)ERAL":

#,tle . - F/)ERAL"Art. 3


21/239

/C has rendered a decision favourin! the petitioner herein.

/P throu!h %olicitor eneral intervened and invoked PD 9#4 and pertinent laws of the C+*+8

code that prohiits such alteration or chan!e in the nae of person and %2E for that atter; assuch is now to e under the adinistration of Consul eneral or 8ocal civil re!istrar as per PD9#4- so that the courts do not have Burisdiction over these instances.

%upree Court held that even if the courts shall not decline to render decisions, it ust not enter

to Budicial le!islation upon the atter of the case at ar. %uch chan!e as provided in the PD onl0refers to KP/P=+C8 ?D6/ C82/+C8 2///% as entered in the local civilre!ister and that it ust not include the chan!e of %2E and ?2 for purposes that would preBudice or ipair vested ri!hts, specificall0 to


22/239

"ect,n 3. he %tate shall defend$ &1' he ri!ht of spouses to found a fail0 in accordance with their reli!iousconvictions and the deands of responsile parenthood; &(' he ri!ht of children to assistance, includin! propercare and nutrition, and special protection fro all fors of ne!lect, ause, cruelt0, e3ploitation and otherconditions preBudicial to their developent; &"' he ri!ht of the fail0 to a fail0 livin! wa!e and incoe; and&4' he ri!ht of failies or fail0 associations to participate in the plannin! and ipleentation of policies and pro!ras that affect the."ect,n '. he fail0 has the dut0 to care for its elderl0 eers ut the %tate a0 also do so throu!h Bust pro!ras of social securit0.

PRE"IE)#IAL E!REE ). 1


23/239

LAW" I)V+LVE:

!(AP#ER 2 ($4an Relat,ns ;)ew !,v,l !deArt,cle 1%. 2ver0 person ust, in the e3ercise of his ri!hts and in the perforance of his duties, act with Bustice,!ive ever0one his due, and oserve honest0 and !ood faith.Art,cle 2


24/239

what the +ranian is trul0 A+88 C@%2 < 8%% / +?@/K C?//K


25/239

church, chapel or teple, or in the office the consul-!eneral, consul or vice-consul, as the case a0 e, and notelsewhere, e3cept in cases of arria!es contracted on the point of death or in reote places in accordance withrticle (9 of this Code, or where oth of the parties reuest the soleniFin! officer in writin! in which case thearria!e a0 e soleniFed at a house or place desi!nated 0 the in a sworn stateent to that effect. &57a'Art. %. arria!e license shall e issued 0 the local civil re!istrar of the cit0 or unicipalit0 where eithercontractin! part0 haituall0 resides, e3cept in arria!es where no license is reuired in accordance withChapter ( of this itle. &5a'Art. 1


26/239

Art. 1'. +n case either or oth of the contractin! parties, not havin! een eancipated 0 a previous arria!e,are etween the a!es of ei!hteen and twent0-one, the0 shall, in addition to the reuireents of the precedin!articles, e3hiit to the local civil re!istrar, the consent to their arria!e of their father, other, survivin! parentor !uardian, or persons havin! le!al char!e of the, in the order entioned. %uch consent shall e anifestedin writin! 0 the interested part0, who personall0 appears efore the proper local civil re!istrar, or in the forof an affidavit ade in the presence of two witnesses and attested efore an0 official authoriFed 0 law toadinister oaths. he personal anifestation shall e recorded in oth applications for arria!e license, and theaffidavit, if one is e3ecuted instead, shall e attached to said applications. &:1a'

Art. 1&. n0 contractin! part0 etween the a!e of twent0-one and twent0-five shall e oli!ed to ask their parents or !uardian for advice upon the intended arria!e. +f the0 do not otain such advice, or if it eunfavorale, the arria!e license shall not e issued till after three onths followin! the copletion of the pulication of the application therefor. sworn stateent 0 the contractin! parties to the effect that suchadvice has een sou!ht, to!ether with the written advice !iven, if an0, shall e attached to the application forarria!e license. %hould the parents or !uardian refuse to !ive an0 advice, this fact shall e stated in the swornstateent. &:(a'Art. 16. +n the cases where parental consent or parental advice is needed, the part0 or parties concerned shall, inaddition to the reuireents of the precedin! articles, attach a certificate issued 0 a priest, ia or inisterauthoriFed to soleniFe arria!e under rticle 7 of this Code or a arria!e counselor dul0 accredited 0 the proper !overnent a!enc0 to the effect that the contractin! parties have under!one arria!e counselin!.


27/239

&1' he full nae, se3 and a!e of each contractin! part0;&(' heir citiFenship, reli!ion and haitual residence;&"' he date and precise tie of the celeration of the arria!e;&4' hat the proper arria!e license has een issued accordin! to law, e3cept in arria!e provided forin Chapter ( of this itle;&5' hat either or oth of the contractin! parties have secured the parental consent in appropriate cases;&:' hat either or oth of the contractin! parties have coplied with the le!al reuireent re!ardin! parental advice in appropriate cases; and

&7' hat the parties have entered into arria!e settleent, if an0, attachin! a cop0 thereof. &:7a'Art. 23. +t shall e the dut0 of the person soleniFin! the arria!e to furnish either of the contractin! partiesthe ori!inal of the arria!e certificate referred to in rticle : and to send the duplicate and triplicate copies ofthe certificate not later than fifteen da0s after the arria!e, to the local civil re!istrar of the place where thearria!e was soleniFed. Proper receipts shall e issued 0 the local civil re!istrar to the soleniFin! officertransittin! copies of the arria!e certificate. he soleniFin! officer shall retain in his file the uadruplicatecop0 of the arria!e certificate, the cop0 of the arria!e certificate, the ori!inal of the arria!e license and, in proper cases, the affidavit of the contractin! part0 re!ardin! the soleniFation of the arria!e in place otherthan those entioned in rticle . &:a'Art. 2'. +t shall e the dut0 of the local civil re!istrar to prepare the docuents reuired 0 this itle, and toadinister oaths to all interested parties without an0 char!e in oth cases. he docuents and affidavits filed in

connection with applications for arria!e licenses shall e e3ept fro docuentar0 stap ta3. &n'Art. 2&. he local civil re!istrar concerned shall enter all applications for arria!e licenses filed with hi in are!istr0 ook strictl0 in the order in which the sae are received. =e shall record in said ook the naes of theapplicants, the date on which the arria!e license was issued, and such other data as a0 e necessar0. &n'Art. 26. ll arria!es soleniFed outside the Philippines, in accordance with the laws in force in the countr0where the0 were soleniFed, and valid there as such, shall also e valid in this countr0, e3cept those prohiitedunder rticles "5 &1', &4', &5' and &:', ":"7 and ". &17a'Ahere a arria!e etween a al,5$at' and had children fro oth &"$5'.

8ucio died intestate and so the children and !randchildren of oth failies e3ecuted a docuent

for declaration of heirship and e3tra-Budicial partition. =owever, the fail0 eers of the 1st fail0 had second thou!hts aout the said docuent and alle!ed that the properties areC?@8 properties 0 8ucio and the 1st wife and that the0 are +882++2 childrenand had no successional ri!hts.

Court ruled that the Children in the (nd arria!e are all le!itiate as the0 are orn out of a le!alarria!e since 1st wife has died at the tie of %panish re!ie so 8ucio had no le!al ipedientwhen he contracted arria!e with )ali!uat

lso, the Court said that the properties 8ucio had were are 2EC8@%+*2 properties &he otained

fro her !randother' e3cept for 8ot 45 which is trul0 a C?@8 propert0 etween 8ucioand arcelina.

2. "elanva V. *end7a

=erein petition %aturnino %elanova char!ed the respondent who is a Cit0 ud!e for !ross

i!norance of the law as he prepared and ratified a docuent for e3traBudicial liuidation of theconBu!al partnership with another condition that the0 are waivin! their ri!hts &%elanova spouses'


28/239

to prosecute each other for adulter0 or concuina!e' as opposed to the provisions laid out in rt.((1 of the ?ew Civil Code.

endoFa coented that he had done so ecause of his application of rt. 191 &4' of the ld

Civil code which provides that spouses a0 a!ree upon the dissolution of conBu!al propert0suBect to the approval of the Court of first instance of their residence and the elief that thespouses would do as invoked.

Court has presued that the Bud!e i!ht have een unaware of the new law since he was

aditted to the ar wa0 ack and that the ?ew civil code was not the asis of his stud0 in thelaw school as that he was not ale to appl0 it on the case at ar. =owever, the entered contract%+88 is void ut the punishent of suspendin! the release of his retireent pa0 was relieved 0 the Court ut the Bud!e was strictl0 censured &althou!h he has alread0 retired'.

3. Pele V. *awall,l

=erein respondent has een previousl0 convicted of parricide 0 killin! his A+


29/239

another woan.

he petitioners contend that the0 also have partition to the lands left 0 their !randparent as

partitioned 0 %ion r!uelles. he later said that his father and 2ilia Pinelli have not eenarried so 8eo!arda is ille!itiate.

/C favoured the petitioners ut the C reversed.

Court now favoured C as that even if the fact that ( persons &ale and feale' have cohaited

with each other for a lon! period, in the asence of a valid arria!e, their children are to edeeed ille!itiate. ere presuption of arria!e ecause of that cohaitation is not sufficientto the court to elieve there has een one &since also in the death certificate of


30/239

certificate, it shall e sufficient for one of the witnesses to the arria!e to write the nae of said part0, whichfact shall e attested 0 the soleniFin! officer. &55a'

!A"E:1. *art,ne7 V. #an

/osalia artineF herein petitions that the arria!e havin! said she has instituted with n!el tan

is no valid for she was not present on the da0 of the celeration of the arria!e and did not personall0 declare her acceptance of the latter as her husand.

he onl0 uestion here is whether there was a arria!e contracted etween parties herein. he Bustice of peace then of the 8e0te has trul0 soleniFed the arria!e as purported 0 therespondent, the Bustice of peace, the witnesses present &(' and the ailiff of court of peace.

he onl0 evidence of /osalia was her on testion0.

Court therefore ruled in favor of an.

Art. 0. arria!e a0 e soleniFed 0$&1' n0 incuent eer of the Budiciar0 within the courtNs Burisdiction;&(' n0 priest, rai, ia, or inister of an0 church or reli!ious sect dul0 authoriFed 0 his church orreli!ious sect and re!istered with the civil re!istrar !eneral, actin! within the liits of the writtenauthorit0 !ranted 0 his church or reli!ious sect and provided that at least one of the contractin! parties elon!s to the soleniFin! officerNs church or reli!ious sect;&"' n0 ship captain or airplane chief onl0 in the case entioned in rticle "1&4' n0 ilitar0 coander of a unit to which a chaplain is assi!ned, in the asence of the latter, durin!a ilitar0 operation, likewise onl0 in the cases entioned in rticle "(;&5' n0 consul-!eneral, consul or vice-consul in the case provided in rticle 1#. &5:a'

=2/ 8A% +?*8*2D$

A) A!# PR+VII) F+R A L+!AL +VER)*E)# !+E +F 1%%1!(AP#ER III +ff,c,als and +ff,ces !44n t All *$n,c,al,t,es

AR#I!LE I #he *$n,c,al *a?r"ect,n '''. /he Chief E0ecutive1 Powers, 2uties, unctions and Co!pensation O

&'


31/239

there was none. 2ven ore surprised, when she went to the Bud!e, he was not ale to retain acop0 of which since he elieves that the an took all the copies of the arria!e contract.

hese circustances were dealt with 0 the Court with favor to the petitioner. ccordin! to the


32/239

validl0 otained aroad 0 the alien spouse capacitatin! hi or her to rearr0, the iat

and that the0 celerated that arria!e in ee relied on the ff.$ =er testionial, the testionial of her rother, the adission of suncion of the knowled!e of %0 kiats arria!e with the sae, thealien cards that purport that %0 is arried to the sae woan.

/C forerl0 has ruled over the herein petitioner ut later odified 0 C as such that

suncion have not had a arria!e with the an, and that the alle!ed arria!e of Kao kee to %0kiat was ? proven with accordance to the Chinese laws. his tie, the C said that othchildren fro oth parties are to e considered C>?A82D2D children of %0 >iat and thatall of the have eual shares to the real and personal properties left 0 the deceased.

2. RP V. +rec,d III• n a0 (4, 191, !,r,an +rec,d III arried Lad? *?rs *. V,llan$eva in the

Philippines in 8a-an, Fais Cit0. heir arria!e was lessed with a son and a dau!hter,>ristoffer %iortriF *. recido and 8ad0 >ierl0 *. recido. +n 19:, Ciprianos wife leftfor the @nited %tates rin!in! alon! their son >ristoffer. few 0ears later, Cipriano discoveredthat his wife had een nat$ral,7ed as an erican citiFen.

• %oetie in (###, Cipriano learned fro his son that his wife had otained a d,vrce decreeand then 4arr,ed a certa,n Inncent "tanle?. %he, %tanle0 and her child 0 hi currentl0 liveat 55:: . Aalnut rove venue, %an ariel, California.

•

Cipriano thereafter filed with the trial court a petition for authorit0 to rearr0 invokin!Para!raph ( of rticle (: of the


33/239

of the deceased in the 1st arria!e as the respondent was alle!ed to not have le!al standin! sinceshe is a ere istress and that the petition was filed in a wron! court since the deceased is aresident of 8a!una, not laan! untinlupa, where the deceased resided Qtil his death. lso, itwas alle!ed that


34/239

parties shall state the fore!oin! facts in an affidavit efore an0 person authoriFed 0 law to adinister oaths.he soleniFin! officer shall also state under oath that he ascertained the ualifications of the contractin! parties are found no le!al ipedient to the arria!e.

!A"E":

1. ),nal V. >a?ad5

Pe,t ),Jal was arried to #ed$lfa >ellnes on %epteer (:, 1974. ut of their arria!e were

orn herein petitioners. eodulfa was shot 0 Pepito resultin! in her death.• PEPI#+ A) RE"P+)E)# )+R*A >AA+ +# *ARRIE WI#(+/# A)

*ARRIAE LI!E)"E. +n lieu thereof, Pepito and ?ora e3ecuted an affidavit dated Deceer 11,19: statin! that the0 had lived to!ether as husand and wife fr at least f,ve ?ears and were thuse3ept fro securin! a arria!e license. n E A C/I!IALE!LARA#I+) +F #(E )/LLI# +F A PREVI+/" *ARRIAE, thou!h void, efore a part0

can enter into a second arria!eR(7S and such asolute nullit0 can e ased onl0 on a final Bud!ent tothat effect.

Court ruled in favor of the petitioners.

2. RP V. a?t =erein respondent ose Da0ot has een arried with


35/239

LAW" I)V+LVE:

Art. 3&. he followin! arria!es shall e void fro the e!innin!$&1' hose contracted 0 an0 part0 elow ei!hteen 0ears of a!e even with the consent of parents or !uardians;&(' hose soleniFed 0 an0 person not le!all0 authoriFed to perfor arria!es unless such arria!es werecontracted with either or oth parties elievin! in !ood faith that the soleniFin! officer had the le!al authorit0to do so;

&"' hose soleniFed without license, e3cept those covered the precedin! Chapter;&4' hose i!aous or pol0!aous arria!es not failin! under rticle 41;&5' hose contracted throu!h istake of one contractin! part0 as to the identit0 of the other; and&:' hose suseuent arria!es that are void under rticle 5".Art. 36. arria!e contracted 0 an0 part0 who, at the tie of the celeration, was ps0cholo!icall0incapacitated to copl0 with the essential arital oli!ations of arria!e, shall likewise e void even if suchincapacit0 ecoes anifest onl0 after its soleniFation. &s aended 0 23ecutive rder ((7'Art. 30. arria!es etween the followin! are incestuous and void fro the e!innin!, whether relationship etween the parties e le!itiate or ille!itiate$&1' )etween ascendants and descendants of an0 de!ree; and&(' )etween rothers and sisters, whether of the full or half lood. &1a'

Art. 38. he followin! arria!es shall e void fro the e!innin! for reasons of pulic polic0$&1' )etween collateral lood relatives whether le!itiate or ille!itiate, up to the fourth civil de!ree;&(' )etween step-parents and step-children;&"' )etween parents-in-law and children-in-law;&4' )etween the adoptin! parent and the adopted child;&5' )etween the survivin! spouse of the adoptin! parent and the adopted child;&:' )etween the survivin! spouse of the adopted child and the adopter;&7' )etween an adopted child and a le!itiate child of the adopter;&' )etween adopted children of the sae adopter; and&9' )etween parties where one, with the intention to arr0 the other, killed that other personNs spouse, or his orher own spouse. &('

!A"E":1. Enr,c V. (e,rs f "$ses *ed,nacel,

=erein petitioners seek to nullif0 the arria!e of their father 2ulo!io edinaceli and 8olita

2nrico since that the entioned had their arria!e without a valid arria!e licence. he herein petitioners are the heirs and children of 2ulo!io with rinidad who had their arria!e prior theone ein! petitioned to e nullified in this case.

8olita said that the0 have cohaited for at least (1 0ears openl0 and pulicl0 and that there is no

need for a valid arria!e license to contract to one. lso, the arria!e happened in (##5, thatwhich, that


36/239

n a0 of (##1, petitioner filed for declaration of nullit0 of arria!e on the !rounds of

ps0cholo!ical incapacit0 a!ainst respondent; who efore such petition went to the @nited %tatesand was therefore naturaliFed and otained asolute decree of divorce.

/C ruled in favor of petitioner and declared the arria!e void fro the e!innin! and with

conditions that such declaration ust e issued onl0 after the liuidation of asolute counit0of propert0.

Petitioner asked for reconsideration since rts. 5# and 51 ust not appl0 to the case at ar since

the !rounds for nullit0 of arria!e is under art. ":. /C partiall0 !ranted the reconsiderationand odified its earlier decision statin! that such declaration a0 push throu!h onl0 uponliuidation as stated in rt. 147.

Court ruled favourin! the petitioner and said that C erred in declarin! that proul!ation of

such nullit0 of arria!e ust proceed onl0 after such liuidation of properties.

Art. 36. arria!e contracted 0 an0 part0 who, at the tie of the celeration, was ps0cholo!icall0incapacitated to copl0 with the essential arital oli!ations of arria!e, shall likewise e void even if suchincapacit0 ecoes anifest onl0 after its soleniFation. &s aended 0 23ecutive rder ((7'

!A"E":1. "ants V. !A

=erein petitioner 8eouel %antos hopes to have his arria!e with ulia )edia-%antos annulled on

!rounds of Ps0cholo!ical incapacit0.

(# %epteer 19:, the tw echan5ed vws efore unicipal rial Court ud!e Cornelio .8aFaro of +loilo Cit0, followed, shortl0 thereafter, 0 a ch$rch wedd,n5. 8eouel and ulia l,vedw,th the latterGs arents at the . )edia Copound, 8a PaF, +loilo Cit0. n 1 ul0 197, ulia!ave irth to a a0 o0, and he was christened 8eouel %antos, r. he ecstas?= hwever= d,d ntlast ln5. +t was ound to happen, 8eouel averred, ecause of the freuent ,nterference ?C$l,aGs arents

n 1 a0 19, C$l,a f,nall? left fr the /n,ted "ates f A4er,ca t wrk as a n$rse. %evenonths after, C$l,a called $ Le$el fr the f,rst t,4e ? ln5 d,stance telehne. %he

r4,sed t ret$rn h4e $n the e,rat,n f her cntract ,n C$l? 1%8%. %he never did.

Ahen 8eouel !ot the chance to !o to the @% for his trainin! pro!ra, he looked for his wife

ut never found her.

• C$st,ce "e4,-,? 11 cites with approval the work of r. erard Vels, a forer Presidin!ud!e of the etropolitan arria!e riunal of the Catholic rchdiocese of anila &)ranch 1',who opines that ps0cholo!ical incapacit0 ust e characteriFed > ;A RAVI#= ;>C/RII!AL A)#E!EE)!E= A) ;! I)!/RA>ILI#. he incapacit0 ust e !rave orserious such that the part0 would e incapale of carr0in! out the ordinar0 duties reuired inarria!e; it ust e rooted in the histor0 of the part0 antedatin! the arria!e, althou!h the overtanifestations a0 eer!e onl0 after the arria!e; and it ust e incurale or, even if it wereotherwise, the cure would e e0ond the eans of the part0 involved.

• Court ruled that ere aandonent and6or other clais of 8eouel that ulia is ps0cholo!icall0incapacitated with ever0thin! the0 have e3perienced do not constitute ps0cholo!ical incapacit0,or does not even easure to its true iposition. Court said @ndenial0 and understandal0,8eouel stands a!!rieved, even desperate, in his present situation. /e!rettal0, neither law norsociet0 itself can alwa0s provide all the specific answers to ever0 individual prole.

2. RP V. !A and *l,na

/oridel olina, =erein respondent, has initiall0 filed for the declaration of the nullit0 of her

arria!e with /e0naldo olina invokin! art. ":.

ccordin! to her, /e0naldo has shown iaturit0 and irresponsiilit0 after their arria!e


37/239

&Boless, suandered one0, all tie with friends' fter losin! Bo, he went ack to his parentsin a!uio and aandoned his fail0 ; this was one of /oridels clais of ps0ch incapacities of/e0naldo. %ince then, /oridel has een the readwinner of the fail0.

/C rendered decision in favor of /oridel; which was then reinstated 0 C.

%olicitor eneral intervened 0 assailin! that C erred in interpretation of art. ":

Court favoured /P. s for the earlier case of %antos, ere ph0sical and character

irreconcilailities are not !rounds for art. ":. he clais of respondent herein are not constituentof the CI. side fro that, Court has furnished a set of reuireents as for the ratiocination and invocation

of rt. ": for the !uidance of the ench and the ar ;>RCIE*P$;1. he urden of proof of nullit0 elon!s to the plaintiff. n0 dout should e resolvedin the continuance of the arria!e and a!ainst its invalidit0;2. /oot cause of ps0ch incapacit0 ust e proved$ a. edicall06clinicall0 identified .lle!ed in the inforation c. %uffiecientl0 proved 0 e3perts d. Clearl0 e3plained in thedecision;3. uridical ntecedence &such incapacit0 ust e present at the tie of the celerationof the arria!e or even efore so and that the anifestations onl0 ecae evident afterthe celeration of the said arria!e;'. hat such incapacit0 is incurale, or if it is, the0 are e0ond the eans of the partiesinvolved;&.hat such incapacit0 is so /*2 that it deprived a part0 to discern or even knowthe essential arital oli!ations;6. hat those essential arital oli!ations ust e that of provided in articles :-71 ofthe renda >. *arcs= n the ther hand= 9,ned the W4enGs A$,ll,ar?!rs $nder the Ph,l,,ne A,r Frce in 197. fter the 2dsa /evolution, oth of the sou!hta dischar!e fro the ilitar0 service.

hrou!h telephone conversations, the0 ecae acuainted and eventuall0 ecae sweethearts.


38/239

• s a wife, she alwa0s ur!ed hi to look for work so that their children would see hi, instead of

her, as the head of the fail0 and a !ood provider. Due to his failure to en!a!e in an0 !ainfuleplo0ent, the0 would often @$arrel and as a cnse@$ence, he W+/L (I# A) >EA#(ER . =e would even force her to have se3 with hi despite her weariness.

• he aellee s$4,tted herself t s?chl5,st ?atividad . Da0an, Ph.D., for ps0cholo!icalevaluation &23h. KK, /ecords, pp. (#7-(1:', while the appellant on the other hand, did not.

C disissed the case as the0 oth the parties did not suit theselves for edical assessent

ut the C@/ ruled and a!reed with petitioner that the personal 4ed,cal r s?chl5,calea4,nat,n f resndent ,s nt a re@$,re4ent fr a declarat,n f s?chl5,cal,ncaac,t?. ?evertheless, the #+#ALI# +F #(E EVIE)!E she presented does not showsuch incapacit0.

• he fore!oin! !uidelines do not reuire that a ph0sician e3aine the person to e declared

ps0cholo!icall0 incapacitated. +n fact, the root cause a0 e Jedicall0 or clinically identified.JWhat ,s ,4rtant ,s the resence f ev,dence that can ade@$atel? estal,sh the art?Gs psycological cnd,t,n.

• =owever, althou!h this Court is sufficientl0 convinced that respondent failed to provide aterial

support to the fail0 and a0 have resorted to ph0sical ause and aandonent, the totalit0 of

his acts +E" )+# LEA to a conclusion of ps0cholo!ical incapacit0 on his part.

Art. 'ER#+ +*I)+= et,t,ner= vs. !+/R# +F APPEAL" and ELIA "+LEA AVERAreresented ? her Attrne?-,n-Fact *+I"E" R. AVERA=resndents.

he instant petition seeks the reversal f resndent c$rtGs r$l,n! findin! no !rave ause of discretion inthe lower courtNs order den?,n5 et,t,nerGs 4t,n t d,s4,ss the et,t,n fr declarat,n f n$ll,t? f4arr,a5e and searat,n f rert?.

n a0 (9, 1991, private respondent Delia %oledad . Doin!o filed a petition efore the /e!ional rialCourt of Pasi! entitled Jeclarat,n f )$ll,t? f *arr,a5e and "earat,n f Prert?J a!ainst petitioner/oerto Doin!o.

unknown to her, he had a rev,$s 4arr,a5e w,th ne E4erl,na dela Pa7 on pril (5, 19:9 which arria!eis VALI A) "#ILL EI"#I); she cae to know of the prior arria!e onl0 soetie in 19" whenE4erl,na dela Pa7 sued the for >IA*...

%he has een workin! in %audi raia and she used to coe to the Philippines onl0 when she would avail of theone-onth annual vacation...

%he discovered that he was cha,t,n5 w,th anther w4an; she further discovered that he had eend,ss,n5 f s4e f her rert,es w,th$t her knwled5e r cnsent...


39/239

he petition pra0ed$

• hat a teporar0 restrainin! order or a writ of preliinar0 inBunction e ,ss$ed en9,n,n5 /oerto froe3ercisin! an0 act of ad4,n,strat,n and wnersh, p over said properties;

• heir arria!e e declared n$ll and v,d and of no force and effect;and Delia %oledad e declared the sole and ecl$s,ve wner f all rert,es ac@$,red at the t,4e fthe,r v,d 4arr,a5e

Petitioner filed a otion to Disiss on the !round that the petition stated )+ !A/"E +F A!#I+). hearria!e ein! void ab initio, the petition for the declaration of its nullit0 is, therefore, superfluous andunnecessar0. +t added that r,vate resndent has n rert? wh,ch ,s ,n h,s ssess,n.

n E *AI)#AI)E +)L IF I# I" F+R#(E P/RP+"E +F RE*ARRIAE . ELLA->+>I"= petitioner, vs. I"AA)I . >+>I"= respondent

n ctoer (1, 195, resndent cntracted a f,rst 4arr,a5e w,th ne *ar,a $lce >. Cav,er . Aithout


40/239

said 4arr,a5e hav,n5 een ann$lled= n$ll,f,ed r ter4,nated, the sae resndent cntracted a secnd4arr,a5e with petitioner I4elda *arella->,s on anuar0 (5, 199: and alle!edl0 a th,rd 4arr,a5e with acertain C$l,a "all? (ernande7.

... an ,nfr4at,n fr ,5a4? was filed a!ainst respondent on IA*. =e cannot have his cake and eat it too. therwise, all that an adventurous i!aist has to do is todisre!ard rticle 4# of the


41/239

R/LI) +F !+/R#$ +n the instant case, et,t,ner cntracted a secnd 4arr,a5e alth$5h there was ?etn 9$d,c,al declarat,n f n$ll,t? f h,s f,rst 4arr,a5e. +n fact, he instituted the Petition to have the firstarria!e declared void only after coplainant ad filed a letter1coplaint carging i wit bigay* )0contractin! a second arria!e while the first was still susistin!, he coitted the acts punishale underrticle "49 of the /evised Penal Code.

...that he suseuentl0 otained a Budicial declaration of the nullit0 of the first arria!e was iaterial. o

repeat, te crie ad already been consuated by ten. oreover, his view effectivel0 encoura!es dela0 inthe prosecution of i!a0 cases; an accused could sipl0 file a petition to declare his previous arria!e voidand invoke the pendenc0 of that action as a preBudicial uestion in the criinal case. Ae cannot allow that.

GAe are convinced fro the totalit0 of the evidence presented in this case that Consuelo an is not the innocentvicti that she clais to e; she was well aware of the e3istence of the previous arria!e when she contractedatrion0 with Dr. ercado. he testionies of the defense witnesses prove this, and we find no reason todout said testionies.

GConsuelo an can terefore not clai daages in tis case were se was fully conscious of teconse7uences of er act* %he should have known that she would suffer huiliation in the event the truth

RwouldS coe out, as it did in this case, ironicall0 ecause of her personal insti!ation. +f there are indeeddaa!es caused to her reputation, the0 are of her own willful akin!.HR(5SW(EREF+RE, the Petition is 2E4IE2 and the assailed Decision 'I+.E2. Costs a!ainst petitioner."+ +RERE.

+FELIA P. #= petitioner. vs* #(E !+/R# +F APPEAL"= and EAR+ *. REE"= respondents*

Pr,vate resndent arried Anna *ar,a Re5,na V,llan$eva in a civil cereon0 on *arch 2%= 1%00, inanila. hen the0 had a church weddin! on u!ust (7, 1977. =owever, on u!ust 4, 19#, the C$ven,le and4est,c Relat,ns !$rt f B$e7n !,t? declared the,r 4arr,a5e n$ll and void ab initio fr lack f a

val,d 4arr,a5e l,cense. Even efre the decree was ,ss$ed nullif0in! his arria!e to nna aria, r,vate resndent wed +fel,a P.#?= here,n et,t,ner, on pril 4, 1979, in cereonies officiated 0 the Bud!e of the Cit0 Court of Pasa0. npril 4, 19(, the0 also had a church weddin! in akati, etro anila.

n anuar0 ", 1991, private respondent filed a Civil Case 15"- with the /C of Pasi!, )ranch 1:#, ra?,n5that h,s 4arr,a5e t et,t,ner e declared n$ll and void . =e alle!ed that the0 had n 4arr,a5e l,cense when the0 !ot arried. =e also averred that at the tie he arried petitioner, he was still arried to nnaaria. =e stated that at the tie he arried petitioner the decree of nullit0 of his arria!e to nna aria hadnot een issued.

Petitioner, in defendin! her arria!e to private respondent, pointed out that his clai that their arria!e wascontracted without a valid license is untrue. "he s$4,tted the,r *arr,a5e L,cense ). &03%%%


42/239

A=2/2


43/239

"I#/A#I+) W(ERE #(E (/">A) PA" #(E WIFE A*AE" FR+* !+)C/AL +R!+**+) F/)".

W(EREF+RE, the petition is /?2D. he assailed Decision of the Court of ppeals dated ul0 (4, 199:and its /esolution dated ?oveer 7, 199:, are reversed partiall0, so that the arria!e of petitioner felia P. 0and private respondent 2d!ardo . /e0es is here0 E!LARE VALI A) "/>"I"#I); and the awardof the aount of P15,###.## is /+


44/239

+t is e0ond cavil, therefore, that the 4arr,a5e etween et,t,ner "$san ),cda and the deceased= hav,n5een sle4n,7ed WI#(+/# #(E )E!E""AR *ARRIAE LI!E)"E= and nt e,n5 ne f the4arr,a5es ee4t fr4 the 4arr,a5e l,cense re@$,re4ent= I" /)+/>#EL V+I A4 %"%%O.

ccordin!l0, the declaration in the instant case of nullit0 of the previous arria!e of the deceased and petitioner %usan ?icdao does not validate the second arria!e of the deceased with respondent %usan Kee. #hefact re4a,ns that the,r 4arr,a5e was sle4n,7ed WI#(+/# FIR"# +>#AI)I) A C/I!IAL

E!REE declar,n5 the 4arr,a5e f et,t,ner "$san ),cda and the deceased v,d. (ence = #(E*ARRIAE +F RE"P+)E)# "/"A) EE A) #(E E!EA"E I"= LIEWI"E= V+I A4 %"%%O.

he disputed P14:,###.## fro )+ R

I)#E"#A#E "/!!E""I+)= #(E "AI MEA#( >E)EFI#"N+F #(E E!EA"E "(ALL PA"" #+ (I" LEAL (EIR". nd, respondent, not ein! the le!al wife of

the deceased is not one of the.

W(EREF+RE, the petition is /?2D, and the decision of the Court of ppeals in C-./. C* ?o.51(:" which affired the decision of the /e!ional rial Court of IueFon Cit0 orderin! petitioner to pa0respondent the su of P7",###.## plus attorne0s fees in the aount of P5,###.##, is /2*2/%2D and %2%+D2. he coplaint in Civil Case ?o. I-9"-1:"(, is here0 D+%+%%2D. ?o pronounceent as to costs."+ +RERE.

CARILL+ V. RP

+n the Decision dated %epteer (9, (##9, the !+/R# AFFIR*E PE#I#I+)ERG" !+)VI!#I+) F+R >IA*. Petitioner is ovin! for recns,derat,n of the Decision, ar!uin! that since petitionerNs arria!eswere entered into efre the effect,v,t? f the Fa4,l? !de, then the al,cale law ,s "ect,n 2% f the*arr,a5e Law &ct ":1"', instead of Article :; of te Faily 2ode, which reuires a final Bud!entdeclarin! the previous arria!e void efore a person a0 contract a suseuent arria!e.

R/LI) +F !+/R#: PetitionerNs ar!uent lacks erit.

s far ack as 1995, in 'tien7a v $rillantes, ?r .,R"S the Court alread0 ade the declaration that rticle 4#,which is a rule of procedure, should e applied retroactivel0 ecause rticle (5: of the


45/239

Art. '1. A 4arr,a5e cntracted ? an? ersn d$r,n5 s$s,stence f a rev,$s 4arr,a5e shall e n$ll andv,d= $nless efre the celerat,n f the s$se@$ent 4arr,a5e= the r,r s$se had een asent fr f$rcnsec$t,ve ?ears and the s$se resent has a well-f$nded el,ef that the asent s$se was alread?dead. In case f d,saearance where there ,s dan5er f death $nder the c,rc$4stances set frth ,n therv,s,ns f Art,cle 3%1 f the!,v,l !de= an asence f nl? tw ?ears shall e s$ff,c,ent.

Fr the $rse f cntract,n5 the s$se@$ent 4arr,a5e $nder the reced,n5 ara5rah the s$seresent 4$st ,nst,t$te a s$44ar? rceed,n5 as rv,ded ,n th,s !de fr the declarat,n f res$4t,vedeath f the asentee= w,th$t re9$d,ce t the effect f reaearance f the asent s$se. ;83a

REP/>LI! +F #(E P(ILIPPI)E"= et,t,ner= vs. RE+RI+ )+LA"!+= resndent

n 5 u!ust 19, respondent re5r, )lasc filed efore the /e!ional rial Court of ntiue, )ranch 1#,

a et,t,n fr the declarat,n f res$4t,ve death f h,s w,fe Canet *n,ca Parker, invokin! rticle 41 of the


46/239

dissuade -anet ,onica fro leaving as se ad given birt to er son 0ust fifteen days before , ut when she&licia' failed to do so, she !ave anet onica P((,###.## for her e3penses efore she left on (( Deceer19( for 2n!land.

he tr,al c$rt RA)#E )+LA"!+G" PE#I#I+) in a ud!ent dated 1( ctoer 19.

he REP/>LI! APPEALE #+ #(E !+/R# +F APPEAL" contendin! that the trial court erred indeclarin! anet onica Parker presuptivel0 dead ecause respondent ?olasco had failed to show that there

e3isted a well founded elief for such declaration.

he !+/R# +F APPEAL" AFFIR*E #(E #RIAL !+/R#G" E!I"I+), holdin! that respondent hadsufficientl0 estalished a asis to for a elief that his asent spouse had alread0 died.

R/LI) +F !+/R#:s pointed out 0 the %olicitor-eneral, there are four &4' reuisites for the declaration of presuptive deathunder rticle 41 of the r,t,sh E4ass? , 1' he secured another

seaanNs contract and went to 8ondon, a vast cit0 of an0 illions of inhaitants, to look for her there.

he Court also views respondentNs clai that anet onica decl,ned t 5,ve an? ,nfr4at,n as t herersnal ack5r$nd even after she had 4arr,ed resndent 10 t cnven,ent an ec$se to Bustif0 hisfailure to locate her.

/espondent said he had lst these ret$rned letters, under unspecified circustances.

?either can this Court !ive uch credence to respondentNs are assertion that he had ,n@$,red fr4 the,rfr,ends f her wherea$ts= cns,der,n5 that resndent d,d nt ,dent,f? those friends in his testion0.

/espondent testified that iediatel0 after receivin! his otherNs letter soetie in anuar0 19", he cut shorthis eplo0ent contract to return to %an ose, ntiue. =owever, he did not e3plain the dela0 of nine &9'onths fro anuar0 19", when he alle!edl0 asked leave fro his captain, to ?oveer 19" when e finall0reached %an ose.

/espondent, oreover, cLAI*E (E *ARRIE CA)E# *+)I!A PARER WI#(+/# I)B/IRI)A>+/# (ER PARE)#" A) #(EIR PLA!E +F RE"IE)!E. 1% lso, respondent failed to e3plainwh0 he did not even tr0 to !et the help of the police or other authorities in 8ondon and 8iverpool in his effort tofind his wife.

+n fine, RE"P+)E)# FAILE #+ E"#A>LI"( #(A# (E (A #(E WELL-F+/)E >ELIEF


47/239

reuired 0 law that his asent wife was alread0 dead that would sustain the issuance of a court order declarin!anet onica Parker presuptivel0 dead.

A=2/2


48/239

R/LI) +F !+/R#: *eril0, the applicale specific provision in the instant controvers0 is rticle " of the ?ew Civil Code which provides$

Jrt. ". n0 arria!e suseuentl0 contracted 0 an0 person durin! the lifetie of the first spouse ofsuch person with an0 person other than such first spouse shall e ille!al and void fro its perforance,unless$J&1' he first arria!e was annulled or dissolved; orJ&(' e first spouse ad been absent for seven consecutive years at te tie of te second arriage

witout te spouse present aving news of te absentee being alive. or if te absentee. toug e asbeen absent for less tan seven years, is !enerall0 considered as dead and elieved to e so 0 thespouse present at the tie of contractin! such suseuent arria!e, or if the asentee is presued deadaccordin! to articles "9# and "91. he arria!e so contracted shall e valid in an0 of the three cases/)#IL E!LARE )/LL A) V+I > A !+*PE#E)# !+/R#.J

+n the case at ar, it re4a,ned $nd,s$ted that resndent *ar,ettaGs f,rst h$sand= Ca4es W,ll,a4>$nds= had een asent r had d,saeared fr 4re than eleven ?ears efore she entered into a secondarria!e in 195 with the deceased eodorico Calisterio. his second arria!e, havin! een contracted durin!the re!ie of the Civil Code, "(+/L #(/" >E EE*E VALI )+#WI#("#A)I) #(EA>"E)!E +F A C/I!IAL E!LARA#I+) +F PRE"/*P#IVE EA#( +F CA*E" >+/)" .

he cn9$5al rert? f #edr,c and *ar,etta, no evidence havin! een adduced to indicate another propert0 re!ie etween the spouses, PER#AI)" #+ #(E* I) !+**+). @pon its dissolution with thedeath of eodorico, the rert? sh$ld r,5htl? e d,v,ded ,n tw e@$al rt,ns -- one portion !oin! to thes$rv,v,n5 s$se and the other portion to the estate f the deceased s$se.

W(EREF+RE, the assailed Bud!ent of the Coin of ppeals in C ./. C* ?o. 51574 is


49/239

ina finall0 a5reed t 4arr? Ed$ard soetie in the first week of arch 199:.

#he c$le was ha? d$r,n5 the f,rst three ?ears f the,r 4arr,ed l,fe . hrou!h their Boint efforts, the0were ale to $,ld the,r h4e in C0press Point, +risan, )a!uio Cit0. =owever, startin! 1999, anuel startedakin! hiself scarce and went to teir ouse only twice or trice a year . ina was Boless, and whenever sheasked one0 fro 2duardo, he w$ld sla her.R:S %oetie in anuar0 (##1, 2duardo took all his clothes,left, and did not return. Aorse, he sted 5,v,n5 f,nanc,al s$rt.

%oetie in u!ust (##1, #,na eca4e c$r,$s and 4ade ,n@$,r,es fr4 the )at,nal "tat,st,cs +ff,ce;)"+ ,n *an,la where she learned that Ed$ard had een rev,$sl? 4arr,ed. "he sec$red an )"+-cert,f,ed c? f the 4arr,a5e cntract.


50/239

R/LI) +F !+/R#: he petition is denied for lack of erit.

rticle "49 of the /evised Penal Code, which defines and penaliFes i!a0, reads$rt. "49. $iga!y @ he penalt0 f prision ayor shall e iposed upon an0 person who shall contracta second or suseuent arria!e efore the forer arria!e has een le!all0 dissolved, or efore theasent spouse has een declared presuptivel0 dead 0 eans of a Bud!ent rendered in the proper proceedin!s.

"I"#.R":S he prosecution also proved that the petitioner arried the private coplainant in 199:,lon! AF#ER #(E EFFE!#IVI# +F #(E FA*IL !+E.

he et,t,ner ,s res$4ed t have acted w,th 4al,ce r ev,l ,ntent when he arried the privatecoplainant. s a !eneral rule, 4,stake f fact r 5d fa,th of the accused is a valid defense in a prosecutionfor a felon0 0 dolo; s$ch defense ne5ates 4al,ce r cr,4,nal ,ntent. =owever, I)+RA)!E +F #(ELAW I" )+# A) E!/"E >E!A/"E EVER+)E I" PRE"/*E #+ )+W #(E LAW. Ignorantialegis ne!ine! e0cusat

he petitioners sole reliance on rticle "9# of the Civil Code as asis for his acuittal for i!a0 is isplaced.rticles "9# and "91 of the Civil Code provide Ort. "9#. fter an asence of seven 0ears, it ein! unknown whether or not, the asentee still lives, he shall e presued dead for all purposes, e3cept for those of succession.

W,th the effect,v,t? f the Fa4,l? !de=O'' the er,d f seven ?ears $nder the f,rst ara5rah f Art,cle3%< f the !,v,l !de was red$ced t f$r cnsec$t,ve ?ears. hus, efore the spouse present a0 contract asuseuent arria!e, he or she ust I)"#I#/#E "/**AR PR+!EEI)" for the declaration of the presuptive death of the asentee spouse,R45S without preBudice to the effect of the reappearance of theasentee spouse.

n award for oral daa!es reuires the confluence of the followin! conditions$ first , there ust e an ,n9$r?,whether ph0sical, ental or ps0cholo!ical, clearl0 sustained 0 the claiant; second , there ust e c$laleact r 4,ss,n factuall0 estalished; third , the wron!ful act or oission of the defendant is the r,4ateca$se f the ,n9$r? s$sta,ned ? the cla,4ant ; and fourth, the award of daa!es is predicated on an0 of thecases stated in rticle ((19 or rticle (((# of the Civil Code.R::S

+ndeed, ,5a4? ,s nt ne f thse sec,f,call? 4ent,ned ,n Art,cle 221% of the Civil Code in which theoffender a0 e ordered to pa0 oral daa!es to the private coplainant6offended part0. ?evertheless, thePE#I#I+)ER I" LIA>LE #+ #(E PRIVA#E !+*PLAI)A)# F+R *+RAL A*AE" underrticle ((19 in relation to rticles 19, (# and (1 of the Civil Code.

hus= the r,vate c4la,nant was an ,nncent v,ct,4 f the et,t,ners ch,caner? and heartlessdecet,n, the fraud consistin! not of a sin!le act alone, ut a continuous series of acts. Da0 0 da0, heaintained the appearance of ein! a lawful husand to the private coplainant, chan!ed her status fro asin!le woan to a arried woan, lost the consortiu, attriutes and support of a sin!le an she could havearried lawfull0 and endured ental pain and huiliation, >EI) >+/) #+ A *A) W(+ I# #/R)E


51/239

+/# WA" )+# (ER LAWF/L (/">A).O

he Court thus declares that the petitioners acts are a!ainst pulic polic0 as the0 underine and suvert thefail0 as a social institution, !ood orals and the interest and !eneral welfare of societ0.

Considerin! the attendant circustances of the case, the !$rt f,nds the award f P2


52/239

A=2/2I t lcate Lea , >/#I# WA" +)L A) AF#ER#(+/(#. =e did so onl0 after the % filed its notice to disiss his petitionin the /C.

+n su, the Court finds and so holds that the resndent fa,led t rve that he had a well-f$nded el,ef , efore he filed his petition in the /C, that his spouse /osalia &8ea' ulaton was alread0 dead.

I) LI(# +F ALL #(E F+RE+I), the petition is RA)#E. he Decision of the Court of ppealsin C-./. C* ?o. 7"749 is REVER"Eand "E# A"IE. Conseuentl0, the /e!ional rial Court of

Catalo!an, %aar, )ranch (7, is +RERE to I"*I"" the respondents petition."+ +RERE.

""" V. E >AIL+)

n pril (5, 1955, !le4ente . >a,ln &)ailon' and Al,ce P. ,a7 &lice' contracted arria!e in )arcelona,%orso!on.

ore than 15 0ears later or on ctoer 9, 197#, >a,ln f,led efre the then !$rt f F,rst Instance &C


53/239

!ec,l,a >a,ln-a ;!ec,l,a, who claied to e a da$5hter f >a,ln and ne El,sa Ca?na &2lisa' contested efore the %%% the release to respondent of the death and funeral enefits. %he claied that )ailon contractedthree arria!es in his lifetie, the f,rst w,th Al,ce, the secnd w,th her 4ther El,sa, and the th,rd w,thresndent= ALL +F W(+* ARE "#ILL ALIVE; she, to!ether with her silin!s, paid for )ailons edicaland funeral e3penses; and all the docuents suitted 0 respondent to the %%% in support of her clais arespurious.

+n the eantie, on pril 5, 1999, a certain (er4es P. ,a7, claiin! to e the rother and !uardian of GliFP. DiaF,H filed efore the %%% a clai for death enefits accruin! fro )ailons death,R17S he further attestin! ina sworn stateentR1S that it was )r4a wh defra?ed >a,lns f$neral eenses.

El,sa and seven f her ch,ldrenR19S suseuentl0 f,led cla,4s fr death enef,ts as )ailons eneficiaries efore the %%%.

Att?. *ar,tes !. de la #rre of the 8e!al @nit of the %%% )icol Cluster, ?a!a Cit0 rec44ended thecancellat,n f a?4ent f death ens,n enef,ts t resndent and the issuance of an order for the refundof the aount paid to her fro a,ln $sed t v,s,t her even after the,r searat,n.

)0 /esolution of pril (, (##", the ""! F+/) #(A# #(E *ARRIAE +F RE"P+)E)# #+>AIL+) WA" V+I.

/espondents otion for /econsiderationR"4S havin! een denied 0 rder of une 4, (##", she filed a petitionfor reviewR"5S efore the Court of ppeals &C'.


54/239

)0 Decision of une (", (##4, the C reversed and set aside the pril (, (##" /esolution and une 4, (##"rder of the %%C and thus ordered the %%% to pa0 respondent all the pension enefits due her.

R/LI) +F !+/R#: hat the ""! is epowered to settle an0 dispute with respect to %%% covera!e, enefits and contriutions, there is no dout. +n so e3ercisin! such power, however, I# !A))+# REVIEW=*/!( LE"" REVER"E= E!I"I+)" RE)ERE > !+/R#" +F LAW as it did in the case at arwhen it declared that the Deceer 1#, 197# 2F% Order was obtained troug fraud and subse7uentlydisregarded te sae, akin! its own findin!s with respect to the validit0 of )ailon and lices arria!e on

the one hand and the invalidit0 of )ailon and respondents arria!e on the other.

+n interferin! with and passin! upon the C88 of teFaily 2ode, the al,cale law t deter4,ne the,r val,d,t? ,s the !,v,l !de.

rticle " of the Civil CodeR4"S provides$rt. ". n0 arria!e suseuentl0 contracted 0 an0 person durin! the lifetie of the first spouse of such person with an0 person other than such first spouse shall e ille!al and void fro its perforance,unless$

&(' he first spouse had een asent for seven cnsec$t,ve ?ears at the tie of the second arria!ewithout the spouse present havin! news of the asentee ein! alive, or if the asentee, thou!h he has een asent for less than seven ?ears, is generally considered as dead and believed to be so by tespouse present at te tie of contracting suc subse7uent arriage or if te absentee is presued

dead accordin! to rticles "9# and "91. he 4arr,a5e s cntracted shall e val,d in an0 of the threecases until declared null and void 0 a copetent court. &2phasis and underscorin! supplied'

+n the case at ar, as found 0 the CEE) A>"E)# F+R 1& !+)"E!/#IVE EAR" when >AIL+) "+/(# #(E E!LARA#I+) +F (ER PRE"/*P#IVE EA#(, which C/I!IALE!LARA#I+) WA" )+# EVE) a reuireent then for purposes of rearria!e.

IF #(E A>"E)#EE REAPPEAR", ut n ste ,s taken t ter4,nate the s$se@$ent 4arr,a5e, either 0affidavit or 0 court action, such asentees ere reappearance, even if ade known to the spouses in thesuseuent arria!e, WILL )+# #ER*I)A#E "/!( *ARRIAE.R5#S %ince the second arria!e has een cntracted eca$se f a res$4t,n that the fr4er s$se ,s dead , such presuption continuesinspite of the spouses ph0sical reappearance, and 0 fiction of law, he or she ust still e re!arded as le!all0an asentee $nt,l the s$se@$ent 4arr,a5e ,s ter4,nated as rv,ded ? law.

+n the case at ar, as no step was taken to nullif0, in accordance with law, )ailons and respondents arria!e prior to the forers death in 199, RESPO"3E" %S R%#!F$&&' !E 3EPE"3E" SPO$SE1 4E"EF%2%AR' OF 4A%&O" .

+n li!ht of the fore!oin! discussions, consideration of the other issues raised has een rendered unnecessar0.

W(EREF+RE, the petition is E)IE. ?o costs."+ +RERE.

A)ELI#A VALE V. RP

Pet,t,ner 4arr,ed "f, on anuar0 11, 1971 in Pateros, /iFal. n Deceer 1", 1971, petitioner !ave irthto the spouses nl? ch,ld= )anc?. ccordin! to petitioner, she and %ofio ar!ued constantl0 ecause the latter


55/239

was $ne4l?ed and d,d nt r,n5 h4e an? 4ne?. +n arch 197(, %ofio left their conBu!al dwellin!.

)elievin! that %ofio was alread0 dead, et,t,ner 4arr,ed V,r5,l, Re?es on une (#, 195.R"S %useuentl0,however, *ir!ilios application for naturaliFation filed with the @nited %tates Departent of =oeland %ecurit0was denied ecause petitioners arria!e to %ofio was susistin!.

he R#! rendered ,ts ec,s,nO& n )ve4er 12= 2


56/239

&1' hat the part0 in whose ehalf it is sou!ht to have the arria!e annulled was ei!hteen 0ears of a!e or over ut elow twent0-one, and the arria!e was soleniFed w,th$t the cnsent of the parents, !uardian or personhavin! sustitute parental authorit0 over the part0, in that order, unless after attainin! the a!e of twent0-one,such part0 freel0 cohaited with the other and oth lived to!ether as husand and wife;

&(' hat either part0 was of $ns$nd 4,nd, unless such part0 after coin! to reason, freel0 cohaited with theother as husand and wife;

&"' hat the consent of either part0 was otained 0 fra$d, unless such part0 afterwards, with full knowled!e ofthe facts constitutin! the fraud, freel0 cohaited with the other as husand and wife;

&4' hat the consent of either part0 was otained 0 frce= ,nt,4,dat,n r $nd$e ,nfl$ence, unless the saehavin! disappeared or ceased, such part0 thereafter freel0 cohaited with the other as husand and wife;

&5' hat either part0 was h?s,call? ,ncaale f cns$44at,n5 the arria!e with the other, and suchincapacit0 continues and appears to e incurale; or

&:' hat either part0 was afflicted with a se$all?-trans4,ss,le d,sease found to e serious and appears to e

incurale.

AL!AAR V. AL!AAR

Pet,t,ner alle!ed in her Coplaint that she was 4arr,ed t resndent on 11 ctoer (### 0 /ev. u!usto. Paustan &Paustan', at the latters residence. fter their weddin!, petitioner and respondent lived for f,veda?s in %an ose, ccidental indoro, the h4etwn f resndents parents. hereafter, the newl?wedswent ack t *an,la= $t resndent d,d nt l,ve w,th et,t,ner at the latters aode at (:#1-C ose ad

%antos venue, ondo, anila. n (" ctoer (###, RE"P+)E)# LEF# F+R RIA(= I)+*+F "A/I ARA>IA, where he worked as an upholsterer in a furniture shop. Ahile workin! in /i0adh,resndent d,d nt c44$n,cate w,th et,t,ner ? hne r ? letter. Petitioner tr,ed t call respondentfor FIVE #I*E" ut respondent never answered. out a 0ear and a half after respondent left for /i0adh, aco-teacher infored petitioner that respondent was about to coe oe to te Pilippines. Pet,t,ner wass$rr,sed wh? she was nt adv,sed ? resndent f h,s arr,val.

Pet,t,ner asserted that fr4 the t,4e resndent arr,ved ,n the Ph,l,,nes= he never cntacted her .hus, petitioner concluded that respondent was ph0sicall0 incapale of consuatin! his arria!e with her, providin! sufficient cause for A""$&,E" OF !E%R ,ARR%A#E P$RS$A" O PARA#RAP! ?. AR%2&E :? of the


57/239

#he !$rt f Aeals r$led that the R#! d,d nt err ,n f,nd,n5 that et,t,ner fa,led t rveresndents s?chl5,cal ,ncaac,t?. ther than petitioners are alle!ations, no other evidence was presented to prove respondents personalit0 disorder that ade hi copletel0 unale to dischar!e the essentialoli!ations of the arital state.

=ence, this Petition raisin! the sole issue of$

W(E#(ER +R )+#= A" EFI)E > #(E LAW A) C/RI"PR/E)!E= RE"P+)E)# I"P"!(+L+I!ALL I)!APA!I#A#E #+ PERF+R* #(E E""E)#IAL *ARI#AL

+>LIA#+)".

R/LI) +F !+/R#: t the outset, it ust e noted that the Coplaint ori!inall0 filed 0 petitioner eforethe /C was for ann$l4ent f 4arr,a5e ased on Art,cle '&= ara5rah & f the Fa4,l? !de, which reads$

/. 45. arria!e a0 e annulled for an0 of the followin! causes, e3istin! at the tie of thearria!e$

&5' hat either part0 was ph0sicall0 incapale of consuatin! the arria!e with the other, and suchincapacit0 continues and appears to e incurale; 3 3 3.

rticle 45&5' of the LE #+ PER"+)ALL EA*I)E RE"P+)E)#. /espondent did notappear for e3aination despite a0a!s invitation.R(5S a0a!, in evaluatin! respondents ps0cholo!ical state,had to rel0 on inforation provided 0 petitioner. =ence, we e3pect a0a! to have een ore prudent andthorou!h in her evaluation of respondents ps0cholo!ical condition, "I)!E (ER "+/R!E +FI)F+R*A#I+)= )A*EL= PE#I#I+)ER= WA" (ARL I*PAR#IAL.

Ae are not downpla0in! petitioners frustration and iser0 in findin! herself shackled, so to speak, to aarria!e that is no lon!er workin!. /e!rettal0, there are situations like this one, were neiter law nor societycan provide te specific answers to every individual proble .R"4S


58/239

W(EREF+RE, the Petition is E)IE. he (4 a0 (##: Decision and ( u!ust (## /esolution of theCourt of ppeals in C-./. C* ?o. 4471, which affired the 9 une (##4 Decision of the /e!ional rialCourt of alolos Cit0, )ranch 5, disissin! petitioner *eronica Caacun!an lcaFars Coplaint inCivilCase ?o. ::4--(##(, are AFFIR*E. ?o costs."+ +RERE.

Art. '6. An? f the fllw,n5 c,rc$4stances shall cnst,t$te fra$d referred t ,n )$4er 3 f thereced,n5 Art,cle:

;1 )n-d,scls$re f a rev,$s cnv,ct,n ? f,nal 9$d54ent f the ther art? f a cr,4e ,nvlv,n54ral t$r,t$deD;2 !nceal4ent ? the w,fe f the fact that at the t,4e f the 4arr,a5e= she was re5nant ? a 4an therthan her h$sandD;3 !nceal4ent f se$all? trans4,ss,le d,sease= re5ardless f ,ts nat$re= e,st,n5 at the t,4e f the4arr,a5eD r;' !nceal4ent f dr$5 add,ct,n= ha,t$al alchl,s4 r h4se$al,t? r les,an,s4 e,st,n5 at the

t,4e f the 4arr,a5e.

) ther 4,sreresentat,n r dece,t as t character= health= rank= frt$ne r chast,t? shall cnst,t$tes$ch fra$d as w,ll 5,ve 5r$nds fr act,n fr the ann$l4ent f 4arr,a5e. ;86a

FER)A)+ AB/I)+= petitioner, vs. !+)!(I#A ELI+= respondent.

his is a petition for certiorari to review a decision of the Court of ppeals affirin! that of the Court of A)+#(ER *A), and soetie in pril, 1955, or aout f$r 4nths after the,r4arr,a5e, !ave irth to a child. +n her answer, defendant claied that the child was conceived out of lawfulwedlck etween her and the la,nt,ff.

hrou!h a verified Jpetition to reopen for reception of additional evidenceJ, plaintiff tried to present the

cert,f,cates f ,rth and del,ver? f the ch,ld rn of the defendant on pril (:, 1955, which docuents,accordin! to hi, he had failed to secure earlier and produce efore the trial court thru E!/"A>LE)ELIE)!E. he petition, however, was denied.

n appeal to the !+/R# +F APPEAL", that court held that there has een ec$sale ne5lect ,n la,nt,ffGs,na,l,t? t resent the rf of the childNs irth, throu!h her irth certificate, and for that reason the court a#uo erred in den0in! the otion for reception of additional evidence.

... and findin! unelievale plaintiffNs clai that he did not notice or even suspect that defendant was pre!nantwhen he arried her, the appellate court, nevertheless, AFFIR*E #(E I"*I""AL +F #(E!+*PLAI)#.


59/239

R/LI) +F !+/R#: fter !oin! over the record of the case, we find that the d,s4,ssal f la,nt,ffGsc4la,nt cannt e s$sta,ned.

@nder the new Civil Code, concealent 0 the wife of the fact that at the tie of the arria!e, she wasre5nant ? a 4an ther than her h$sand cnst,t$tes fra$d and ,s 5r$nd fr ann$l4ent f 4arr,a5e .

ccordin! to edical authorities, even n the &th 4nth f re5nanc?= the enlar5e4ent f a w4anGs

ad4en ,s st,ll elw the $4,l,c$s, that is to sa0, the enlar!eent is liited to the lower part of theadoen so that it is hardl? nt,ceale and a0, if noticed, e attriuted nl? t fat

reviewer pfr

Documents