Civil-Law-Review-Notes-Atty.-Lulu-Reyes-Lecture_Persons-Family-Relations.pdf

Article 2 Civil Code Laws take effect on: 1. General Rule: 15 days after publication in the Official Gazette or anewspaper of general circulation. Applies when the law does not provide for its own effectivity date. 16th day: include last, exclude fist 2. Exception: When otherwiseprovided by the law (i.e. the law itself specifies its own effectivity date)  

  

15 days may be shortened or lengthened Note: If the law is punitive , the 15-day period cannot be shortened. This may also apply if the law provides “effective upon approval.” Tañada v. Tuvera:

-Publication Requirement is not dispensed with -Congress is given discretion as to effectivity of the law

Required to be Published: 1. Statutes 2. EO, PD, PP 3. Circulars, RR 4. Ordinances Conditions For Publication Requirement: Publication is required if: a. Penal in character b. Of general application c. Of public interest No need for publication if: Purely internal in application (e.g. transfer of officials in the form of E.O.) Where Published: 1. Official Gazette (O.G.): the official repository of all governmental acts, or 2. Any newspaper of general circulation: must have a wide range of readers and not focused on special group of readers. Distinction: “of national or local circulation”—depends on scope and where it is made available (e.g. Inquirer-national, Midland- CAR) Importance: to determine when law becomes effective or when law is “with force and effect.” April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

Note: Once published, ignorance of the law excuses no one (presumption of having knowledge

of the law) *applies only to Philippine laws *ignorance of a foreign law may lead to application of processual presumption Prospective Application: law governs only acts, persons, events, incidents, and transactions at the time committed or entered into. Retroactive Application: When law may have retroactive application: 1. If law provides for its own retroactive effect (i.e. Family Code), Provided, it will not impair vested right (i.e. proprietary in character, accrued to a person, no longer open to interpretation, status and condition A ( ruego v. CA: right to be recognized) Bernabe v. Alejo, G.R. No. 140500. January 21, 2002: recognition may be

filed even after death. The right to seek recognition granted by the Civil Code to illegitimate children who were still minors at the time the Family Code took effect cannot be impaired or taken away. The minors have up to four years from attaining majority age within which to file an action for recognition.

2. Criminal or penal in nature and favorable to the accused a. Abolishes crime or decriminalizes the act b. Lightness of penalty Exception to the exception:does not apply to habitual delinquents and recidivists. 3. Emergency in character (e.g. Suspension of the Writ Of Habeas Corpus: ceases to be effective when emergency is over) 4. Curative in character a. when there are errors or gaps b. must coincide with the law it seeks to cure. 5. Remedial or procedural in nature: General Rule: Remedial or procedural laws cannot be the source of right. Exceptions: a. If it will disturb final judgment b. If it will make the procedure more onerous or burdensome 6. Confers or grants substantive right forthe first time (e.g. amendment to the Family Code allowing illegitimate children to use the surname of their father, legitimation of children born to minors) Role of Judiciary: apply and interpret law but only in pending cases or actual controversy. April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

Note: The court cannot decline to render a judgment when confronted with legal duty to do so.

( decidendi); observe: conclusiveness of Note: The court must provide factual legal basis ratio judgment and res judicata **dispositive portion: to compel to do or to prevent from doing **stare desicis: all lower courts, in future cases having the same set of facts, must decide such cases in the same way as how it was decided by the SC;purpose: to lend stability [Note: a usual indication ofstare desicis would include the phrase “for the guidance of the bench and bar.”] **law of the case: persuasive but not binding; does not settle an issue, no doctrine is pronounced **separate opinions: a) concurring—merely expressions, merely persuasive, not binding; b)dissenting—no binding effect **obiter dictum: absolutely not binding but may becomestare desicis in the future August 23, 2015 **Dura lex sed lex Legal Periods: **Art. 13 is no longer controlling **Admin of Code of 1987 applies (CIR v. Primetow n ) a) 1 day = 24 hours b) 1 month= 30 days, unless the right or obligation specifies month byname (if so, the number of days in said particular month will be used) c) 1 year= 12 calendar months **Retained: exclude the first day, include the last (following business day —if set to be performed on a particular period unless otherwise provided) Customs v. Statutes Customs Common observance Marked by plurality and identity of acts over a period of time

Statutes legislations

How a Law Ceases to be Effective

April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

1. It lapses by its own term: i.e. laws prescribing periods of its own effectivity (moratorium or emergency laws) 2. Repeal: laws are repealed by subsequent ones a. Express repeal CIR v. P rim etow n : new law must specificially refer to the existing or old law it seeks to repeal Note: If it is generic and broad in scope, it is not an express repeal. It must specifically mention the laws it will repeal b. Implied Repeal: when old law or existing law and new law cover the same subject matter arising therein serious and irreconcilable differences (cannot be reconciled or harmonized); henc, new law will be the governing law and the old law will be tacitly repealed. Old Law—special law, new law – general in scope –new law repealed Old Law—general law, new law – special law – special law deemed an exception, new special law partially repealed the old law (partial repeal) Effect of Repealing Law 1st Law express – 2nd law express – 3rd law : the first law is not revived because express repeal is the clear expression of Congress’ intent 1st Law  implied – 2nd law  express – 3rd law: the first law is revived; Purpose: to deter or prevent a vacuum in legislation until such time Congress made its intent clear (unless 3rd law expresses otherwise) 3. Declaration of unconstitutionality: power of the judiciary; must be done with utmost and extreme caution **If found unconstitutional: power of judicial review Imbo ( ng v. Och oa, 2 014 ). **Effect of total unconstitutionality: confers no right, imposes no obligation, creates no office; null and voidab initio (nullifies all other acts performed pursuant to the nullified statute) ***Note: Doctrine of Operative Fact ***Note: Supremacy of the Constitution Conflict of laws rules: presupposes existence of foreign element (see: Arts. 13, 14, 15, 16, 12 Civil Code) 1. Crimes a. Apply principle of generality b. Apply principle of territoriality Note: Property of foreign states cannot be subjected to laws of local application Note: Consuls: limited application of immunity; only as to those in connection with their official functions 2. Property a. May become the foreign element b. lex rei sitae (except: if property in dispute is subject of hereditary capacity, in which case, the national law of the person whose property is being considered shall apply) April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

Contracts and Wills Extrinsic Validity Lex loci celebriacionis

Intrinsic Validity Lex voluntatis or lex intentionis: voluntary chosen by the parties through a clause in the agreement (if agreement is silent: determine intent of the parties) Law of the forum: if the contract is silent and the intent cannot be determined, the case should be decided according to the law of the place where the case was filed HUMAN RELATIONS

Article 19:Abuse of right; actionable wrong; may refer to acts or omissions which may or may not be criminal **Tortious

acts: Actionable wrong which do not give rise to criminal liability

**Intentional acts contrary to public or good custom Article 21: **Promise to marry

: generally not actionable wrong

Includes:

a. Criminal seduction: moral damages b. Moral seduction: actual damagesmay be recovered if property has been given to the man; moral damages may be recovered if there is proof of damaged reputation; exemplary damages may be recovered if there is proof of wanton disregard Some Doctrines: 1. There is Carnal Knowedge, a promise to marry, such promise isbreached: there is no actionable wrong; mutual lust between two consenting adultsdamnum ( absque injuria) 2. There is a promise to marry, wedding preparations were commenced,the promise is breached: a. If expenses are incurred: actual damages b. If humiliation or embarrassment is suffered: moral damages c. Depending on the degree of severity, exemplary damages maybe recovered Article 25 **does not allow recovery of damages **Thoughtless extravagance: relief—injunction; mayor cannot file case for injunction because the law provides “any government or private charitable institution;” however: can be considered as nuisance (annoys the senses) **Unjust Enrichment: a)accion in rem verso,b) solutio indebiti April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

Article 23 **Must not be due to fortuitous event Article 26 Rumor Mong

eri ng

a. Prying into the privacy of another b. Meddling (alienation of feelings) Elements: i. Wrongful conduct on the part of the defendant ii. Loss of affection by one spouse with respect to the other iii. Causal connection between the conduct and the loss of affection c. Intriguing to cause another to be alienated from his friends d. Vexing or humiliating another based on his personal condition Parens Patriae

: courts are tasked to

a. Appoint a guardian b. Annul contracts on the ground of vitiated consent c. Recover property Unfair Competition

: when there is employment of force, etc., it becomes an actionable wrong

there must be evidence that the neglect of duty is the proximate cause of the suffering; applies only to ministerial duties Negle ct of Duty by a Public Officer:

FAMILY RELATIONS Marriage A special contract

**permanent between the parties **parties cannot freely provide for agreements or stipulations on consequences of relationship **only property relations can be subject of stipulations **cannot be for a definite period Two Causes to Terminate

1. By Death 2. By Final Judgment a. Declaring marriage void or annulling the same b. For decree of divorce: Article 26, par. 2 governs April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

Requisites 

Essential

1. Legal Capacity: age, sex, absence of legal impediments which mustbe possessed at the time of the celebration 2. Consent in accordance with law 

Formal

3. Authority of solemnizing officer 4. License 5. Marriage ceremony Leno ra v. People: Issue: Validity of two consecutive marriages.

Defenses: 1. Conversion into Islam 2. Married first under FC 3. Abandoned his first wife 4. Married a Moslem woman after conversion to Islam Ruling:

Under Shari’a Law, in case a prior marriage was contracted, the former wife shall also convert into Islam or, if the same is not possible, dissolve the first marriage by final judgment. Hence, the subsequent marriage is still bigamous because the first wife never converted to Islam nor was the first marriage dissolved. Tamano v. Ortiz Facts: There are two marriages in this case. The first marriage was under Shari’a

Law (Moslem Marriage) and the second marriage was a Christian marriage. Issue: Is the second marriage bigamous? Ruling:

The mere fact that the common husband married the second wife under FC is bigamous. (Essential requisite: there must be no other legal impediments) (consent): A totally blank marriage certificate form signifies total lack of consent and total lack of marriage ceremony. Msrco v. Pe ople

Note: In Psychological Incapacity and Mistake of Identity, consent is totally absent

(void) : The husband claimedthat the second marriage was a “sham” or a “farce” and he only married the wife out of pity. Ruling: Pity is a motive. Consent was still given even when husband had such intent. Marriage is still bigamous. Mijares v. Mijares

Republ ic v. Albi os (201 3): Facts: A Filipino (woman) and an American citizen (man) married in the Philippines.

The Filipino woman filed for annulment on the ground that consent was not given and that the marriage was entered into only for citizenship purposes, that the same was apparent and known to the parties, that there was no love between them, that the consent was vitiated. April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

Ruling:

Mere motive does not impair consent. The marriage was solemnized with the attendance of hundreds of persons. The consent was given freely, voluntarily, consciously, and intelligently.

Auth ority of the Solemnizing Office

r

1. Church Authorities --must submit authorization from the church (otherwise, void) --contracting parties must belong to the said church --however, if two Catholics get married before a protestant pastor, the same is valid because it is a mere irregularity (all doubts must be resolved in favour of marriage) 2. Incumbent members of the judiciary Justices of SC: can solemnize marriages anywhere in the Philippines Justices of CA- no national jurisdiction (Luzon, Visayas, Metro Manila) NOTE: Justices of CTA cannot solemnize marriages Justices of SB: national NOTE: Retired Judges cannot solemnize NOTE: A Judge under suspension cannot solemnize marriage because at the time of such suspension, the judge is deprived of authority to solemnize 3. Ship captains or airplane chiefs or military commander --limited to Marriage in Articulo Mortis --if the person under impending death survives, the marriage is still valid 4. Mayors --cannot solemnize marriage if under suspension      

Marriage License

*Must present proof of legal capacity (Certificate of Live Birth) *If for a subsequent marriage, the person previously married must present death certificate or certified true copy of the Final Judgment, Declaration of Nullity of a Void Marriage, or Judicial recognition of foreign divorce *For non-Filipino citizens: certificate issued by their proper consular office or embassy *If 18, 19, 20 years old: must obtain parental consent (preferably written or personal appearance of parents and declaration to the LCR that they give consent) Who Gives Consent: 1. Parents a. Legitimate child—both parents must give consent b. Illegitimate child—only mother is required to give consent 2. Guardian April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

3. For Orphans (Prof. Reyes’ opinion: orphan must go to thecourt and have the court appoint him/her a guardian) *If 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 years old: parental advice is required either in writing or through personal appearance Marriage Ce rtificate (D

istinguis

hed fro m License)

*Issued by the Solemnizing Officer after celebration for the purpose of registering the marriage *Must be in three (3) copies *Probative value: only proves fact of celebration Note: ( Marriage license proves legal capacity) NOTES:

**Unregistered marriage is a valid marriage **If contracted abroad, the requirement of marriage license must be dispensed with Marriage Ce remon y 26, Fe bru ary 6, 2004) : A valid marriage requires a public ceremony and at least two competent witnesses plus the presence of the Solemnizing Officer. *If no actual ceremony took place, the marriage is void and inexistent *It must at least appear (ostensibly) that the marriage is a valid one because the parties went through a ceremony NOTE: Pro hac vice Clarifica tion of the Msrco case : Mor igo v. People (G.R. No. 152

SC: Even an inexistent marriage must be judicially declared as such by the court (Art. 14) Art icle 4, Family Cod e

STATUS OF MARRIAGE Absence Defect Legal capacity Consent Authority of the Solemnizing Officer Marriage License Marriage Ceremony

When There Is Mere Irre

Void Void Void

Voidable Does not impair validity of marriage (subject to civil, criminal, and administrative liabilities)

Void Void

gularity In Form

Irregularity

al Requisites of Marriage (Jurisprud

ence)

1. Judge solemnized marriage outside of territorial jurisdiction (however: judge shallbe administratively sanctioned) April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

2. Marriage License was issued despite absence of parental advice or proof that they underwent marriage counselling. 3. Marriage license was issued by an LCR outside of the residence of the parties. 4. Marriage license was issued without the three month waiting period. 5. LCR neglected to post the application for marriage license. 6. Only one witness was present before the ceremony instead of two. 7. Absence of witnesses or witnesses were minors. 8. Proxy witnesses. Note: The solemnizing officer cannot appoint a proxy who is not qualified. Void Marriage s

**NOTE: Before a final judgment is rendered, marriage is considered valid; appropriate petition must be filed in order to seek judicial declaration. Grounds:

1. Parties are below 18 years of age (minors) (underage marriage, Article 35):lex loci celebracionis is inapplicable (Articles 17 & 18) 2. Solemnizing officer is without authority **Apparent Authority—no legal authority but it was made to appear that legal authority exists (e.g. Sheriff wearing the robe of the judge and proceeding to solemnize a marriage without informing the parties that he is not legally authorized to do so). ***Effect of GF: If one or both of the parties is/are led to believe that the person is authorized to solemnize marriage, goof faith of one or both of the parties will make the marriage valid. ***Effect BF: If both are aware of the lack of authority, the marriage is a sham, the marriage of is void 3. No valid marriage license at thetime of the celebration of the marriage. Except: a. Lex loci celebracionis: if the law of the place of the celebration of marriage does not require marriage license. (Proof of foreign law required) b. (Article 27) Marriage in articulo mortis where one or both of the parties is at the point of death. (Solemnizing Officer needs to execute an affidavit attesting to the fact that the marriage was in articulo mortis, that there were no legal impediments at the time of marriage, the same must be registered in the LCR). c. If the marriage was contracted and solemnized in a remote place (remote: isolated or so far from the office of the LCR that it becomes extremely inconvenient for the parties to apply for a license) (Note: In lieu of a license, the S.O.’s affidavit stating circumstances, no legal impediments, etc. must be executed) d. Customary marriages: for pagans, Mohammedans, and members of Indigenous Cultural Communities (required: S.O.’s affidavit) e. Convalidated or ratified cohabitation: do not have to bother with obtaining a licence. However, parties must execute a sworn statement alleging: April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

i. ii.

They have been living together as husband and wife for at least five years without the benefit of marriage. At the time they married one another, neither of them is suffcering from any legal impediment to marry each other) Note: Borja-Manzano v. Sanchez (stare desicis) overturned Niñal v. Bayadog **What is material is that they have been living with one another for five years Repu bli c v. CA (G.R. No. 175581, Marc h 28, 20 08): Parties were live-in partners. They did not apply for license but presented affidavit of the fact that they have been living together as husband and wife in lieu of the license was declared a void marriage by the Court. Ruling: Similarly, we are not impressed by the ratiocination of the Republic that as a marriage under a license is not invalidated by the fact that the license was wrongfully obtained, so must a marriage not be invalidated by a fabricated statement that the parties have cohabited for at least five years as required by law. The contrast is flagrant. The former is with reference to an irregularity of the marriage license, and not to the absence of one. Here, there is no marriage license at all. Furthermore, the falsity of the allegation in the sworn affidavit relating to the period of Jose and Felisas cohabitation, which would have qualified their marriage as an exception to the requirement for a marriage license, cannot be a mere irregularity, for it refers to a quintessential fact that the law precisely required to be deposed and attested to by the parties under oath. If the essential matter in the sworn affidavit is a lie, then it is but a mere scrap of paper, without force and effect. Hence, it is as if there was no affidavit at all. **Jurisprudence: Courts must accord due reliance on a certification by the LCR that the marriage license cannot be located.

***Contra: the LCR cannot because the license That was given renders thecertify marriage invalid.“no time or effort” to locate ***Contra: That the license was issued a year later renders the marriage void. 4. Bigamous or Polygamous Marriage: contracting subsequent marriagewhile a former marriage is valid and subsisting. **The Only Valid Bigamous Marriage: marriages contracted after the declaration of presumptive death Requisites: a. File a petition to declare presumptive death. Allege: i. Absentee was absent for at least four years (ordinary) or two years (extraordinary), as the case may be. ii. There is a well-founded belief that the absent spouse is already dead. iii. That the spouse present has obtained a judicial declaration of presumptive death. iv. That efforts have been exerted to locate the absentee (e.g. communicated with person who might know the whereabouts of the missing spouse) Republic v. Nolasco (G.R. NO. 94053 March 17, 1993) : There must April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

be a report to the Law Enforcement Agencies of the absence of the spouse (PNP, InterPol, etc.). Copies of letters of inquiries, if the same were sent, must be rpesented to the court. Active search in the area/s where the missing spouse was last seen must be done. FACTS: Nolasco, a seaman, first met Janet Monica Parker in a bar in England. After that, she lived with him on his ship for 6 months. After his seaman's contract has expired, he brought her to his hometown in San Jose, Antique. They got married in January 1982. After the marriage celebration, he got another employment contract and left the province. In January 1983, Nolasco received a letter from his mother that 15 days after Janet gave birth to their son, she left. He cut short his contract to find Janet. He returned home in November 1983. He did so by securing another contract which England is one of its port calls. He wrote several letters to the bar where he and Janet first met, but all were returned to him. He claimed that he inquired from his friends but they too had no news about Janet. In 1988, Nolasco filed before the RTC of Antique a petition for the declaration of presumptive death of his wife Janet. RTC granted the petition. The Republic through the Solicitor-General, appealed to the CA, contending that the trial court erred in declaring Janet presumptively dead because Nolasco had failed to show that there existed a well-founded belief for such declaration. CA affirmed the trial court's decision. ISSUE: Whether or not Nolasco has a well-founded belief that his wife is already dead. RULING: No. Nolasco failed to prove that he had complied with the third requirement under the Article 41 of the Family Code, the existence of a "well-founded belief" that Janet is already dead. Under Article 41, the time required for the presumption to arise has been shortened to 4 years; however, there is a need for judicial declaration of presumptive death to enable the spouse present to marry. However, Article 41 imposes a stricter standard before declaring presumptive death of one spouse. It requires a "wellfounded belief" that the absentee is already dead before a petition for declaration of presumptive death can be granted. In the case at bar, the Court found Nolasco's alleged attempt to ascertain about Janet's whereabouts too sketchy to form the basis of April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

a reasonable or well-founded belief that she was already dead. Nolasco, after returning from his employment, instead of seeking help of local authorities or of the British Embassy, secured another contract to London. Janet's alleged refusal to give any information about her was too convenient an excuse to justify his failure to locate her. He did not explain why he took him 9 months to finally reached San Jose after he asked leave from his captain. He refused to identify his friends whom he inquired from. When the Court asked Nolasco about the returned letters, he said he had lost them. Moreover, while he was in London, he did not even dare to solicit help of authorities to find his wife. The circumstances of Janet's departure and Nolasco's subsequent behavior make it very difficult to regard the claimed belief that Janet was dead a well-founded one

v.

That the declaration of presumptive death must be for the purpose of remarriage. b. Register the judgement with the LCR (Art. 41) in order to capacitate the petitioner to remarry Republic v. CA ( G.R. No. 163604. May 6, 2005) : The proceeding contemplated unter Art. 41 is summary in nature. **The decision declaring the absentee spouse presumptively dead becomes final and executory from notice. **The only way of review us through Rule 65 petition and not by ordinary appeal. (Article 43) Effects: Terminates subsequent marriage. Dissolves property relations.

Reappearance

i. ii.

**To nullify judgement under Rules of Court, there must be extrinsic fraud which is non-existent during the trial. **Subsequent marriage is valid until declared otherwise. (hence, if the court judicially declared a spouse to be presumptively dead despite said spouse’s whereabouts being known, any marriage contracted thereafter shall be considered valid) **Bad Faith: concealment of evidence; fabrication of evidence supposedly leading to the disappearance. 5. Mistake in Identity 6. Incestuous Marriage Quasi- Incestuous The following m

Marriage : by reason of adoptive relations

arriage s are void for being quasi-incestuous:

a. Between the adopter and adoptee April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

b. Between the surviving spouse of the adopter and the adoptee c. Between the surviving spouse of the adoptee and the adopter d. Between children of the same adopter and the adoptee Note: Illegitimate child of the adopter can marry the adoptee unless there is a blood relationship between the contracting parties that can invalidate the marriage. 7. Intentional killing of another’s spouse (Art. 34, last par.) 8. Psychological Incapacity (Art. 36) Origin: Cannon Law of the Catholic Church Purpose: To address situations where marriage is annulled by the church but such marriage is not against the law. Santos v. CA

(G.R. No. 112019 Janu

ary 4, 1995 ): Essential Attributes of Psychological

Incapacity: a. Gravity: The incapacity must be grave or serious such that the party would be incapable of carrying out the ordinary duties required in marriage b. Juridical antecedence: it must be rooted in the history of the party antedating the marriage, although the overt manifestations may emerge only after the marriage c. Incurability: it must be incurable or, even if it were otherwise, the cure would be beyond the means of the party involved

Repu bli c v. Moli na (G.R. No. 108763 Febru ary 13, 19 97) :

8 Guidelines in the interpretation and application of Art. 36 of the Family Code: 1. Burden of Proof to show psychological incapacity restsupon the petitioner. Requirement: Substantial and convincing evidence (not just preponderance of evidence). Petitioner must rely on the strength of his/her own evidence **Allows spouse with Psychological Incapacity to be the petitioner (clean hands doctrine is not applicable) 2. The root cause of the psychological incapacity must be: a. Medically or clinically identified: itis not enough to make a sweeping allegation, must be diagnosed and identified. Hence, the form of psychological incapacity must be designated (make reference to the DSM-V). b. Alleged in the complaint: srcinallyin Molina but the SC relaxed the guidelines. Mere allegation of Psychological Incapacity is enough as long as in trial, P.I. must be identified and proved c. Proved by expert evidence: P.I.must not be dependent on the interpretation given by the parties to the marriage; an independent assessment must be April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

conducted by a third person (Psychiatrist or Clinical Pscyhologist) Note: The testimony of the expert must of itself be reliable and scientific. 8, July 17, 2006) : expert’s testimony was pure hearsay because Psychiatrist merely relied on the allegations of Amy Perez and did not verify it with the husband. (meaning: collateral evidence must have been relied upon by the expert) Ferrar is v . Ferraris (G.R. No. 16236

**Expert testimony may be founded on an evaluation of only one of the parties (generally, both must be diagnosed). The court must take into account all relevant evidence and adjudge the case based on the totality of evidence. **The success of an Art. 36 petition is not dependent on expert testimony only (Marcos v. Marcos, G.R. No. 136 490, Octob er 19, 2000 : Psychological incapacity, as a ground for declaring the nullity of a marriage, may be established by the totality of evidence presented. There is no requirement, however, that the respondent should be examined by a physician or a psychologist as acondition sine qua non for such declaration.) 3. It must be further shown that theP.I. was existing at the time of the celebration of the marriage. 4. P.I. is permanent or incurable Absolute incurability: Of such extent that it will be present whenever that person marries a person of the opposite sex. Relative incurability: Spouse is psychologically incapacitated only as to the present spouse. Note: For purposes of nullification, it is enough to prove relative incurability. Note: P.I. is not a permanent bar to subsequent marriage. 5. Prove that P.I. is serious or grave. **Organic (natural) in the character or personality of the spouse. **Rooted in the family history. 6. Seriousness or gravity ofP.I. renders one spouse unable to comply with the essential obligations under Arts. 63-71 of the Family Code (personal obligations) and Arts. 221-225 of the Civil Code (obligation of parents as to their children). **Show that failure to comply does not arise from mere refusal or unwillingness or the manifestations of P.I. are not mere difficulties encountered in the marriage. (correlate P.I. with inability, contrast with unwillingness) April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

7. The decisions of the National Matrimonial Tribunal mustbe accorded great weight and respect but it is not binding. 8. (Applicable in all petitions): Appearance of the State through the Solicitor General or delegate must be secured in all stages of the proceeding. **defensor vinculum—defender of marital bond **failure to secure: nullification of any judgment rendered with respect thereto . **Mandatory whether contested or not.

Question: Should the Molina doctrine be applied strictly or liberally? ary 13, 200 9): The Molina Guideline was never intended to be a straightjacket for lower courts. Whether or not P.I. exists is a question of fact that must be resolved by the Family Court judge in accordance with the surrounding evidence. Every marriage is distinct. Answer: Apply liberally. Even if the only witness is the petitioner-husband, when there is no basis in questioning the evaluation of the expert, the court cannot substitute its judgment with that of the expert’s evaluation. It depends on the circumstances surrounding the marriage. Te v. Te (G.R. No. 161793, Febru

Psychological Incapacity is NOT: a. Abandonment – no matter how long b. Lack of cohabitation Villanueva v. CA, (G.R. No. 132955, October 27, 2006)

: “As to the second

assignment of error, appellant cannot claim that his marriage should be annulled due to the absence of cohabitation between him and his wife. Lack of cohabitation is, per se, not a ground to annul a marriage. Otherwise, the validity of a marriage will depend upon the will of the spouses who can terminate the marital union by refusing to cohabitate. The failure to cohabit becomes relevant only if it arises as a result of the perpetration of any of the grounds for annulling the marriage, such as lack of parental consent, insanity, fraud, intimidation, or undue influence x x x. Since the appellant failed to justify his failure to cohabit with the appellee on any of those grounds, the validity of his marriage must be upheld.” c. d. e. f. g. h. i. j. k.

Habitual drunkenness Drug addiction Homosexuality or lesbianism per se Womanizing or infidelity per se Immaturity Indolence or laziness Failure to provide support Joblessness Violence or abusive conduct


Instance when court nullified due to Psychological incapacity: a. Pathological liar or congenital liar b. Exposing one’s children to culture or gambling and any other instances that may corrupt their moral fiber. Kalaw v. Fernandez (G.R. No. 166357, 14 January 2015): (NOTE: MOLINA DOCTRINE IS NOT RELAXED IN THIS CASE. THE GUIDELINES REMAIN VALID AND BINDING) In 2015, with Justice Lucas Bersamin as ponente, the Supreme Court reconsidered its earlier decision. The Supreme Court, “lest it be misunderstood,” explicitly stated that it’s not abandoning Molina. The Court, bound by the same set of proven facts, clarified that the failure to show the frequency of mahjong sessions does not preclude a finding of psychological incapacity. It’s not the FREQUENCY of the mahjong sessions; it’s the fact that the respondent -wife should “have known that bringing her children along her children of very tender ages to her mahjong sessions would expose them to a culture of gambling and other vices that would erode their moral fiber.” This, based on the totality of facts in the case, supports the finding of psychological incapacity. This ruling is very much consistent with the Molina Doctrine. There is no “relaxation” of the rules in this respect .

Effect when granted: Serves as bar for the innocent spouse to claim damages from the other because the psychologically incapacitatedspouse’ Petitions for Declaration of Nullity of

Marriage

Presumption: Valid unless nullified. **Death and final judgment are the only ones that can terminate marriage. **Must be filed in the Family Court where the petitioner resides. Who may file: purely personal between husband and wife; only the spouse in the void marriage. **Third persons have no basis to file said petition because the right to file the petition is a purely personal right between the spouses. **In bigamous and polygamous marriage: innocent spouse in the valid and subsisting marriage. Fujiki v. Marinay

(G.R. No. 196049, Jun

e 26, 2013) :

Facts: Petitioner Minoru Fujiki (Fujiki) is a Japanese national who married respondent Maria Paz Galela Marinay (Marinay) in the Philippines On 23 January 2004. The marriage did not sit well with petitioners parents. Thus, Fujiki could not bring his wife to Japan where he resides. Eventually, they lost contact with each other. In 2008, Marinay met another Japanese, Shinichi Maekara (Maekara). Without the first marriage April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

being dissolved, Marinay and Maekara were married on 15 May 2008 in Quezon City, Philippines. Maekara brought Marinay to Japan. However, Marinay allegedly suffered physical abuse from Maekara. She left Maekara and started to contact Fujiki. Fujiki and Marinay met in Japan and they were able to reestablish their relationship. In 2010, Fujiki helped Marinay obtain a judgment from a family court in Japan which declared the marriage between Marinay and Maekara void on the ground of bigamy.On 14 January 2011, Fujiki filed a petition in the RTC for the Decree of Absolute Nullity of Marriage. Fujiki prayed that (1) the Japanese Family Court judgment be recognized; (2) that the bigamous marriage between Marinay and Maekara be declared voidab initiounder Articles 35(4) and 41 of the Family Code of the Philippines;and (3) for the RTC to direct the Local Civil Registrar of Quezon City to annotate the Japanese Family Court judgment on the Certificate of Marriage between Marinay and Maekara and to endorse such annotation to the Office of the Administrator and Civil Registrar General in the National Statistics Office (NSO). A few days after the filing of the petition, the RTC immediately issued an Order dismissing the petition and withdrawing the case from its active civil docket.The RTC cited the following provisions of the Rule on Declaration of Absolute Nullity of Void Marriages and Annulment of Voidable Marriages. The RTC ruled, without further explanation, that the petition was in "gross violation" of the provisions of the rule. Apparently, the RTC took the view that only "the husband or the wife," in this case either Maekara or Marinay, can file the petition to declare their marriage void, and not Fujiki. Fujiki moved that the Order be reconsidered. On 2 March 2011, the RTC resolved to deny petitioners motion for reconsideration. In its Resolution, the RTC stated that A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC applies because the petitioner, in effect, prays for a decree of absolute nullity of marriage.The trial court reiterated its two grounds for dismissal, i.e. lack of personality to sue and improper venue under Sections 2(a) and 4 of A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC. On 30 May 2011, the Court required respondents to file their comment on the petition for review.The public respondents, the Local Civil Registrar of Quezon City and the Administrator and Civil Registrar General of the NSO, participated through the Office of the Solicitor General. Instead of a comment, the Solicitor General filed a Manifestation and Motion.

The Solicitor General petition. He prayed that theaside" RTCs and "pronouncement the petitioner failed to agreed complywith withthe A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC be set that the casethat be reinstated in the trial court for further proceedings. The Solicitor General argued that Fujiki, as April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

the spouse of the first marriage, is an injured party who can sue to declare the bigamous marriage between Marinay and Maekara void. Moreover, the Solicitor General argued that there is no jurisdictional infirmity in assailing a void marriage under Rule 108, citing De Castro v. De Castroand Nil v. Bayadog which declared that "the validity of a void marriage may be collaterally attacked." Marinay and Maekara individually sent letters to the Court to comply with the directive for them to comment on the petition.Maekara wrote that Marinay concealed from him the fact that she was previously married to Fujiki. Maekara also denied that he inflicted any form of violence on Marinay.On the other hand, Marinay wrote that she had no reason to oppose the petition.She would like to maintain her silence for fear that anything she say might cause misunderstanding between her and Fujiki. RULING: RTC decision is reversed. REMEDIAL LAW: Proof of foreign judgments relating to the statues of a marriage where on of the parties is a citizen of a foreign country; AM 02-11-SC not applicable to petition for recognition of foreign judgment The Rule on Declaration of Absolute Nullity of Void Marriages and Annulment of Voidable Marriages (A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC) does not apply in a petition to recognize a foreign judgment relating to the status of a marriage where one of the parties is a citizen of a foreign country. Moreover, in Juliano-Llave v. Republic,this Court held that the rule in A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC that only the husband or wife can file a declaration of nullity or annulment of marriage "does not apply if the reason behind the petition is bigamy." For Philippine courts to recognize a foreign judgment relating to the status of a marriage where one of the parties is a citizen of a foreign country, the petitioner only needs to prove the foreign judgment as a fact under the Rules of Court. To be more specific, a copy of the foreign judgment may be admitted in evidence and proven as a fact under Rule 132, Sections 24 and 25, in relation to Rule 39, Section 48(b) of the Rules of Court. Petitioner may prove the Japanese Family Court judgment through (1) an official publication or (2) a certification or copy attested by the officer who has custody of the judgment. If the office which has custody is in a foreign country such as Japan, the certification may be made by the proper diplomatic or consular officer of the Philippine foreign service in Japan and authenticated by the seal of office. To hold that A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC applies to a petition for recognition of foreign judgment would mean that the trial court and the parties should follow its provisions, including the form April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

and contents of the petition, the service of summons, the investigation of the public prosecutor, the setting of pre-trial, the trial and the judgment of the trial court. This is absurd because it will litigate the case anew. It will defeat the purpose of recognizing foreign judgments, which is "to limit repetitive litigation on claims and issues." The interpretation of the RTC is tantamount to relitigating the case on the merits. In Mijares v. Rada, this Court explained that "if every judgment of a foreign court were reviewable on the merits, the plaintiff would be forced back on his/her srcinal cause of action, rendering immaterial the previously concluded litigation." CIVIL LAW: remarriage of a Filipino citizen whose alien spouse divorces him or her Article 26 of the Family Code confers jurisdiction on Philippine courts to extend the effect of a foreign divorce decree to a Filipino spouse without undergoing trial to determine the validity of the dissolution of the marriage. The second paragraph of Article 26 of the Family Code provides that "[w]here a marriage between a Filipino citizen and a foreigner is validly celebrated and a divorce is thereafter validly obtained abroad by the alien spouse capacitating him or her to remarry, the Filipino spouse shall have capacity to remarry under Philippine law." In Republic v. Orbecido, this Court recognized the legislative intent of the second paragraph of Article 26 which is "to avoid the absurd situation where the Filipino spouse remains married to the alien spouse who, after obtaining a divorce, is no longer married to the Filipino spouse" under the laws of his or her country. The second paragraph of Article 26 of the Family Code only authorizes Philippine courts to adopt the effects of a foreign divorce decree precisely because the Philippines does not allow divorce. Philippine courts cannot try the case on the merits because it is tantamount to trying a case for divorce. The second paragraph of Article 26 is only a corrective measure to address the anomaly that results from a marriage between a Filipino, whose laws do not allow divorce, and a foreign citizen, whose laws allow divorce. The anomaly consists in the Filipino spouse being tied to the marriage while the foreign spouse is free to marry under the laws of his or her country. The correction is made by extending in the Philippines the effect of the foreign divorce decree, which is already effective in the country where it was rendered. The second paragraph of Article 26 of the Family Code is based on this Courts decision in Van Dorn v. Romillo which declared that the Filipino spouse "should not be discriminated against in her own country if the ends of justice are to be served." The principle in Article 26 of the Family Code applies in a marriage between a Filipino and a foreign citizen who obtains a foreign judgment nullifying the marriage on the ground of bigamy. The Filipino spouse may file a petition abroad to declare the marriage void on the ground of bigamy. The principle in the second paragraph of Article 26 of the Family Code applies because the foreign spouse, thecountry. foreign If judgment nullifying the is marriage, is capacitated to remarry under the laws of hisafter or her the foreign judgment not recognized in the Philippines, the Filipino spouse will be discriminated the foreign spouse can remarry while the Filipino April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

spouse cannot remarry. Under the second paragraph of Article 26 of the Family Code, Philippine courts are empowered to correct a situation where the Filipino spouse is still tied to the marriage while the foreign spouse is free to marry. Moreover, notwithstanding Article 26 of the Family Code, Philippine courts already have jurisdiction to extend the effect of a foreign judgment in the Philippines to the extent that the foreign judgment does not contravene domestic public policy. A critical difference between the case of a foreign divorce decree and a foreign judgment nullifying a bigamous marriage is that bigamy, as a ground for the nullity of marriage, is fully consistent with Philippine public policy as expressed in Article 35(4) of the Family Code and Article 349 of the Revised Penal Code. The Filipino spouse has the option to undergo full trial by filing a petition for declaration of nullity of marriage under A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC, but this is not the only remedy available to him or her. Philippine courts have jurisdiction to recognize a foreign judgment nullifying a bigamous marriage, without prejudice to a criminal prosecution for bigamy. Summary of Doctrines 1. The petition should be treated as a Rule 108 petition (Petition to Correct entries in the live birth) and not Admn. 11-10-02 petition. The principle that the aggrieved spouse should file petition is not applicable. 2. Admn. 11-10-12 is also applicable due to the unique circumstances surrounding bigamous and polygamous marriage. Spouse 1 has a valid and legal interest in nullifying the second marriage. Notes:

*Common spouse can also file but tantamount to legal admission *In P.I., only the spouses can file *In incestuous and quasi-incestuous, either of the parties can file When filed: does not prescribe, either spouses may file anytime during their lifetime. Note: Applies to direct proceeding to question the validity of the marriage upon death, the surviving spouse can no longer file a direct petition to question the marriage. However, if successional rights are involved, heirs may now question that marriage in a settlement of estate proceeding (one of the issues that must be resolved is who the heirs are. Estate court has the authority to determine the validity of the marriage to determine if the second wife is an heir.) Carlo s v. Sando val (G.R. No. 179922 , Decemb er 16, 2008) : The general rule that only the

spouses may file the action is applicable only to cases filed before the effectivity of Adm. 11-1002 (March 15, 2003). “ONLY a spouse can initiate an action to sever the marital bond for marriages solemnized during the effectivity of the Family Code, except cases c omm enced prio r to March 15, 20 03. The nullity and annu lment o f a m arriage ca nnot be declared in a judg ” plea dings, summ ary judgment, or confession of judgment.

ment o n the


General Rule: Only spouses can initiate an action to sever marital bond. Exceptions: a. Those solemnized prior to the effectivity of the Family Code of the Philippines Ab laza v. Repu bli c (G.R. No. 15829 8, Au gu st 11, 20 10) : Facts: Brother of the deceased filed the petition for nullification. Ruling: Marriage was celebrated in 1929 (before the effectivity of the Civil Code and Adm. 11-10-02). Hence, the general rule does not apply. b. Marriages solemnized under the Family Code but before March 15, 2003 (date of effectivity of the Rules of Court). c. To all petitions for nullification asof March 15, 2003 (no retroactive effect). Notes: **The court in determining whether or not to grant the petition must be guided by the independent evidence substantial enough to show nullity. **No stipulation of facts. **If there is evidence of collusion: dismiss or deny the petition. ***Collusion: parties to the marriage fabricate a ground for its nullification or fabricate evidence to obtain relief or suppress evidence of a valid defense. Presumption of Validity: **applies to marriage solemnized abroad and in the Philippines between Filipino citizens. **Art. 26: valid even if celebrated abroad (take note of the exceptions) **Lex loci celebriacionis Rule on Foreign Divorce (Art. 26, par. 2) **an exception to the prevailing public policy that divorce is prohibited **Art. 26, par. 2 is the only divorce law in the Philippines and its applicability is limited when: Requisites 1. Marriage is a mixed marriage. **In interpreting the requisites: Republic v. Obrecido : citizenship of parties at the time of the divorce is what is controlling. **On people with Dual Citizenships: The intent of the law on Dual Citizenship relates to economic, investment, and political rights. Civil rights are not included. 2. Divorce was obtained abroad by the alien spouse. Basis: Filipino spouse is still, in fact, prohibited from obtaining divorce. April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

3. It must be according to the national law of the foreign spouse. If granted, the divorce must severe the marital bond and capacitate the parties to contract subsequent marriage. [If all requisites concur, Filipino spouse is capacitated to remarry provided the foreign divorce is judicially recognized in the Philippines because judgments rendered abroad are not binding in the Philippines unless recognized in the Philippines.] Corp uz v. Sto . Tomas (G. R. No. 186 571 Augu st 11, 2 010 ):

FACTS: Petitioner Gerbert R. Corpus is a naturalized Canadian citizen who married respondent Daisylyn Tirol Sto. Tomas but subsequently left for Canada due to work and other professional commitments. When he returned to the Philippines, he discovered that Sto. Tomas was already romantically involved with another man. This brought about the filing of a petition for divorce by Corpuz in Canada which was eventually granted by the Court Justice of Windsor, Ontario, Canada. A month later, the divorce decree took effect. Two years later, Corpuz has fallen in love with another Filipina and wished to marry her. He went to Civil Registry Office of Pasig City to register the Canadian divorce decree of his marriage certificate with Sto. Tomas. However, despite the registration, an official of National Statistics Office informed Corpuz that the former marriage still subsists under the Philippine law until there has been a judicial recognition of the Canadian divorce by a competent judicial court in view of NSO Circular No. 4, series of 1982. Consequently, he filed a petition for judicial recognition of foreign divorce and/or declaration of dissolution of marriage with the RTC. However, the RTC denied the petition reasoning out that Corpuz cannot institute the action for judicial recognition of the foreign divorce decree because he is a naturalized Canadian citizen. It was provided further that Sto. Tomas was the proper party who can institute an action under the principle of Article 26 of the Family Code which capacitates a Filipino citizen to remarry in case the alien spouse obtains a foreign divorce decree. RULING: The foreign divorce decree is presumptive evidence of a right that clothes the party with legal interest to petition for its recognition in this jurisdiction We qualify our above conclusion– i.e., that the second paragraph of Article 26 of the Family Code bestows no rights in favor of aliens– with the complementary statement that this conclusion is not sufficient basis to dismiss Gerbert’s petition before the RTC.In other words, the unavailability of the second paragraph of Article 26 of the Family Code to aliens does not necessarily strip Gerbert of legal interest to petition the RTC for the recognition of his foreign divorce decree. The foreign divorce decree itself, after its authenticity and conformity with the alien’s national law have been duly proven according to our rules of evidence, serves as a presumptive evidence of right in favor of Gerbert, pursuant to Section 48, Rule 39 of the Rules of Court which provides for the effect of foreign judgments. A remand, at the same time, will allow other interested parties to oppose the foreign judgment and overcome a petitioner’s presumptive evidence of a right by proving want of jurisdiction, want of notice to a party, collusion, fraud, or clear mistake of law or fact. Needless to state, every precaution must be taken to ensure conformity with our laws before a recognition is made, as April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

the foreign judgment, once recognized, shall have the effect of res judicata between the parties, as provided in Section 48, Rule 39 of the Rules of Court. Summary of Doctrines: 1. Either of the parties to the divorce may file the petition for recognition. For the alien spouse, it is tantamount to declaring his civil status. For the Filipino spouse, legal capacity to remarry is restored. 2. Nothing prohibits foreigners fromseeking such petition to be recognized. However, the courts cannot declare that the foreigner spouse is capacitated to remarry because the same is a benefit exclusively for Filipinos. Note: Even with the existence of a ground, marriage is still presumed valid. Hence, final judgment must be acquired to declare the same invalid. Van Dorn v. Romi llo (1985 ): if there is doubt as to who initiated or obtained the divorce decree,

Philippine courts must observe the mitigation of consequences principle. **Mitigation of consequences principle: mitigate the negative consequences of divorce and adjudge the case in favour of the Filipino spouse.

Judgement Arising From the Petition to Declare Nullity of a Void Marriage General Rule: Personal between the husband and wife. Exception: (facts same as that of Niñal v. Bayadog, but this case overturned Niñal). ISSUE: Do children of the deceased have the capacity to file petition to declare nullity of a void marriage? RULING: Legal personality: children are devoid of legal personality due to the Adm. 11-10-02. However, upon death, any interested third person may question the validity of marriage only through an estate proceeding. Requisite: third person must show a hereditary or successional interest in the estete. Enric o v . Heirs o f Medin aceli (G.R. N o. 17361 4, Se ptem ber 28, 2 007 ):

NOTE: To determine legal personality, date of marriage is controlling

When to file: imprescriptible ***during the lifetime of the parties ***death of one or both effectively abates the proceedings. Substitute proceeding with settlement of estate (G.R. No. 141528, Oct ob er 31, 2006) : FACTS: Husband filed a first petition against wife on the ground of P.I. The court dismissed the Mallion v. Alcantara


petition. After several years, Husband filed a second petition on the ground of lack of marriage license. The court dismissed the same. The CA upheld the RTC. RULING: The absence of lack of marriage license should have been alleged in the first petition. Estoppel applies. Res Judicata applies (identity of parties, identity of causes of action, identity of reliefs prayed for). “Petitioner, however, forgets that he is simply invoking different grounds for the same cause of action. By definition, a cause of action is the act or omission by which a party violates the right of another. In both petitions, petitioner has the same cause - the declaration of nullity of his marriage to respondent. What differs is the ground upon which the cause of action is predicated. These grounds cited by petitioner essentially split the various aspects of the pivotal issue that holds the key to the resolution of this controversy, that is, the actual status of petitioner and respondent’s marriage. Furthermore, the instant case is premised on the claim that the marriage is null and void because no valid celebration of the same took place due to the alleged lack of a marriage license. In Civil Case No. SP 4341-95, however, petitioner impliedly conceded that the marriage had been solemnized and celebrated in accordance with law. Petitioner is now bound by this admission. The alleged absence of a marriage license which petitioner raises now could have been presented and heard in the earlier case. Suffice it to state that parties are bound not only as regards every matter offered and received to sustain or defeat their claims or demand but as to any other admissible matter which might have been offered for that purpose and of all other matters that could have been adjudged in that case. It must be emphasized that a party cannot evade or avoid the application of res judicata by simply varying the form of his action or adopting a different method of presenting his case. ” “In sum, litigants are provided withthe options on the course of action to take in order to obtain judicial relief. Once an option has been taken and a case is filed in court, the parties must ventilate all matters and relevant issues therein. The losing party who files another action regarding the same controversy will be needlessly squandering time, effort and financial resources because he is barred by law from litigating the same controversy all over again. ”

Judgment must be based on independent evidence (no collusion, confession of ju d g m en t, s tip u lat io n o f f ac ts )

**Independent and distinct judgement. ***What may be stipulated: 1) identity of husband and wife, 2) fact of marriage, 3) presence of children and personal circumstances, 4) properties acquired, etc. Effects of Nullification

1. Between the spouses: dissolves the marital relationship **they no longer have the obligation or right to support each other **NOTE: in order to reacquire capacity to remarry, register in the LCR in( rem registration) 2. As to the properties acquired: Art. 147or 148 as the case may be. **Void marriage cannot establish ACP or CPG unless with a marriage settlement. April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

a. A. 147: Marriage declared voidwith no legal impediments (e.g.Art. 36) **Special kind of co-ownership is created with reference to all earnings. **limited co-ownership is imposed by law because covers only properties acquired during the marriage b. A. 148: covers marriage where the parties had legal impediments to marry each other. **Art. 43 is inapplicable (Marriage contracted in bad faith) **Applicable in valid bigamous marriage and voidable marriage subsequently annulled c. NULL AND VOID marriages: Arts. 147 and 148 will apply. 3. Children born or conceived during the subsistence of the marriage are now considered illegitimate. **Except: a. When there is failure to record the final judgment. b. When the ground is P.I. Ann ulm ent of a Voidable

Marriage

**valid until annulled (notab initio) Grounds:

(defective, vitiated, incomplete consent)

1. Lack of parental consent (parties mustbe aged 18, 20, 21) 2. Unsoundness of Mind (Insanity or Imbecility) **any mental illness or condition that deprives the spouse of intelligence **Hence, also in comatose, somnambulism, hypnosis, drunkenness imbecility (mental age: 15 and below) 3. **Includes Fraud a. Concealment of pregnancy by another man Bucc at v. Bucc at (Ap ril 25, 1941) : FACTS Godofredo Buccat and Luida Mangonon de Buccat met in March 1938, became engaged in September, and got married in Nov 26. On Feb 23, 1939 (89 days after getting married) Luida, who was 9 months pregnant, gave birth to a son. After knowing this, Godofredo left Luida and never returned to married life with her. On March 23, 1939, he filed for an annulment of their marriage on the grounds that when he agreed to married Luida, she assured him that she was a virgin. The Lower court decided in favor of Luida. ISSUE: Should the annulment for Godofredo Buccat’s marriage be granted on the grounds that Luida concealed her pregnancy before the marriage? RULING: No. Clear and authentic proof is needed in order to nullify a marriage, a sacred April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

institution in which the State is interested and where society rests. In this case, the court did not find any proof that there was concealment of pregnancy constituting fraud as a ground for annulment. It was unlikely that Godofredo, a first-year law student, did not suspect anything about Luida’s condition considering that she was in an advanced stage of pregnancy (highly developed physical manifestation, i.e. rounded belly) when they got married. **Concealment must be deliberate. If the wife did not know that she was pregnant at the time she entered into the marriage, she could not have committed concealment. **If the wife did not know who the father is, concealment would be a basis after the parternity test. b. Non-disclosure of previous conviction. **moral turpitude—penalty is immaterial, the nature of crime is controlling. c. Concealment of drug addiction, habitual alcoholism, homosexuality,or lesbianism. **alcoholism must be pervasive even before the marriage. d. Concealment of STD affliction **regardless of whether serious or incurable **depends on the nature 4. Obtained through force, intimidation, or undue influence **who should commit: the spouse or any other third person **undue influence must be of a serious degree as to substitute the will of the party to that of another. Factors considered: a. Family and spiritual relationship b. Mental weakness c. Moral dependence d. Poverty or indigence of the person unduly influenced (a.k.a improper pressure). 5. Impotence **physical inability to perform sexual relations (not P.I. —mental inability) **must be permanent **Doctrine of Triennial Cohabitation: if the wife remains a virgin after three years of cohabitation, Husband is presumed impotent. Exception to the rule that the medical/expert testimony must be presented. **Competent medical testimony must be presented. **In Republi c v. Jimenez, the wife was ordered to undergo physical examination. 6. Affliction of STD which is serious and incurable. **There are only two serious and incurable STDs: HIV/AIDs and Hepatitis C **Regardless of whether the spouses have engaged in sexual relations between themselves or are yet to do so.(Note: Hindi importante kung nagtalik na ba yung magasaw o hindi. Basta may serious and incurable STD yung isa sa kanila eh pwede nang maging ground yun.) Who May File April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

1. Lack of parental consent: the parent or the guardian before the child/ward reaches the age of 21 or the spouse within five years from reaching the age of 21. 2. Insanity. a. The spouse suffering from insanity. b. The parent or guardian. c. The spouse who is not suffering from insanity. 3. Fraud: only the defrauded spouse. {NOTE: the petition must be filed within five years from cessation or termination of the fraud.} When Prone To Dismissal

1. Prescription 2. Proof of free cohabitation between the spouses. Requisites of Free Cohabitation a. Knowledge on the part of the innocent spouse of the defect in the consent or wrongdoing when the marriage was solemnized. b. Despite such knowledge, the innocent spouse commenced and continuous to fulfil and discharge marital duties towards the other. Effects of Final Judgem

ent on th e Marria ge

1. The marital tie is extinguished. **The rights and obligations towards each other are also terminated, including support. **The wife can resume the use of her maiden surname. **The capacity to remarry will be restored after registration of the final judgment. 2. All the properties acquired shall formpart of the ACP or CPG. **The netequally remainder (after all debts have been paid) shall be divided between the spouses (1/2 each). **If one of the spouses contracted the marriage in bad faith, his share in the net remainder shall be forefeited. (also, in testamentary disposition, etc.) 3. Children born or conceived prior to the finality of the judgment shall be considered legitimate. September 5, 2014 Legal Separation A mensa et thoro

Relative divorce Separation of bed and board, marital tie exists

A vinculo

matrimonii

Absolute divorce Dissolution of marriage, capacitated to remarry

spouses

are


NOTE: There can be a valid joinder of action in this case. Ground s (Se e other grounds

under the law)

1. Abandonment: No intention of returning to the conjugal home or refusal to render support (deliberate refusal to provide physical company, moral, emotional, and spiritual support) Elements: a. No intention of returning. b. The abandonment lasts for more than one year. c. The spouse (who abandoned) left the conjugal home. Jurisprudence: a. The husband refused to admit the wife to the conjugal home: to be aground, abandonment must be unjustifiable. 2. Sexual Infidelity. **regardless of the outcome of the a criminal case of Bigamy if the same is filed Defenses: a. Condonation: pardon orforgiveness granted bythe offended spouse to the other. i. Express: verbally or in writing ii. Implied (jurisprudence) 1. After discovery of the infidelidity, the offended spouse resumes sexual marital relations with another. 2. After confirming the adulterous relationship of the wife, thehusband remains silent and no action against the wife was filed by him. NOTE: After the husband found out about the wife’s affairs, there is no duty on the part of the husband to bring the wife home. NOTE: Distinguish inaction from mere delay. Ordinary delay will not amount to a ground to bar an action for legal separation. April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

b. Prior Consent **There is no innocent or aggrieved spouse to speak of. **There must be a valid written agreement between husband and wife. Facts: There was an execution of a written agreement to separatede facto and to cohabitate with other persons. The wife repudiated the written agreement. Ruling: The written agreement is contrary to public policy. The same is a mere stipulation. However, the same can be proof of prior consent. A petition for legal separation will not prosper. c. Connivance: violative of the Clean Hands Doctrine May be be: i. Between the spouses (collusion) ii. One spouse with a third person (similar to the concept of instigation) d. Collusion: both spouses mutually agree to fabricate a ground, fabricate evidence, or suppress evidence of legal separation. (amounts tomotu proprio dismissal) e. Mutual guilt or recrimination: violated Clean Hands Doctrine f. Prescription: The petition must be filed within five years from occurrence of the cause. Substantive and Procedural Requirements

1. It must be filed in the Family Court where the petitioner resides. 2. Appearance of the State through the SolGen must be prodcured. (otherwise, any judgment rendered will be null and void). 3. Mandatory cooling-off periodof not more than 6 months. **Spouses may live apart but during the cooling off period, all efforts must be directed to reconciliation. **Enables the spouses to discuss possibilities of reconciliation. **No mandatory cooling-off period in nullity and annulment. **Entails that during the six months, no trial and hearing as to the main case or main issue. Except: (orders may be issued and hearings may be conducted) a. Issues pertaining to support. b. Issues pertaining to custody of minor children. c. Issues relating to property relations. General Exception: if the ground is violence under R.A. 9262, the mandatory cooling-off period is not applicable (immediately, hearing must be conducted). **If there is an application of protection order, within 24 hours, the court must issue a TPO, which will be valid for 30 days. (the court should conduct hearings to determine whether it should be converted to PPO). 4. Hearing: the court must be guided by independent evidence (nostipulation of facts). NOTE: If death takes place while the case is pending, the case should be dismissed. April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

Effects of Fina

l Judgm ent

1. Between the husband and wife, they are formally and legally separated frombed and board. Their right to consortium (right to live together) is suspended, including their right to sexual relations but the same does not affect other rights (must still observe mutual **support**). 2. Marital tie is not dissolved. Neither of the parties can contract subsequent marriages. (Jurisprudence: the wife cannot revert back to her maiden name.) 3. All properties acquired forms part of the ACP/CPG which shall be dissolved, liquated, and partitioned. **net remainder= 50% each. **however, the share of the guilty spouse is forfeited in favour of the children: (a) common children, (b) children from subsequent marriage, (c) children from previous marriage. NOTE: A decree of legal separation is one valid mode of changing property regime. NOTE: If one of the spouses is in bad faith, designation of such spouse in will, and donation propter nuptias is not revoked by operation of law as it requires a separate act. How Partition to Conversion Takes Place a. Hearings are conducted by the same court after judgment. (FJ to liquidation). b. By compromise agreement: must be judicially approved. 4. Children retain their legitimate status. What may be stipulated: Custody of the minor children (note: children below 7 years old must be with the mother’s custody; children aged 7 and above must be given the chance to choose whom they would like to have custody over them) **includes order of support (present and future) **if chosen custodial parent is found to be unfit, the other parent may be granted custody How lon g will it be effe

ctive?

1. Until death. 2. Reconciliation: resumption of friendly and cordial relations and duties. Requirement: Joint manifestation must be filed, no hearing necessary. **The Joint Manifestation is sufficient to vacate the judgment of legal separation. **The reconciled spouses may also stipulate on: a. Intent to retain property relations, or b. Resume ACP/CPG: they may also choose which to retain and which to bring back to the ACP/CPG. (NOTE: this is an exception to the rule that FJ cannot be disturbed. Ratio: it is the State’s policy to promote legal sanctity of marriage) NOTE: The right to file legal separation accrues every time a ground arises. Each act shall prescribe within five years from the time the cause of action accrues. JURISPRUDENCE: A decree of legal separation is not a bar to a subsequent petition of nullity of marriage. April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

PROPERTY RELATIONS **may be the subject of voluntary agreement Governed by:

1. Marriage settlement. 2. Family Code of New Civil Code. 3. Any other regime provided not contrary to law or public policy. (e.g. dowry system) Marriage Se ttlem ent : contract entered into by future spouses executed prior to the celebration

of marriage for the purpose of establishing or fixing their property relations during marriage. Parties:

1. Future husband and future wife. 2. Parent or guardian if one of the future spouse is under civil interdiction, requires parental consent (aged 18, 19, 20), or is a minor at the time of the celebration of the marriage (in which case, must be assisted by the parents or guardian). When executed:

prior to the celebration of the marriage, including any modification or

amendment. Form prohibite d : in writing (validity)

(for convenience: public instrument, to be bindingin rem requires registration in the LCR where the marriage was recorded and the Register of Deeds where the properties are located). Stipulations

1. 2. 3. 4.

:

ACP, or CPG, or CSP, or Combination

May include: 1. Civil penalty for causing legal separation or annulment. 2. Admission of paternity or filiation. 3. Devotion full time to the husband and the children. marriage settlement is void and ineffective except as to the provision not dependent on the celebration of marriage. (e.g. admission or acknowledgment Effect if marriage is not solemnized:

of paternity because such is immediately executor and can be used as proof of filiation).


at the precise moment of the celebration of the marriage. Note: [ no further modification or new marriage settlement can be effected while marriage is subsisting] When effective:

Effects

On Donation Propter Nuptias Under ACP: the donor can give the totality of present property. CPG/CSP: the donation cannot exceed 1/5 of the entire property of the donor. No prohibited from donating but by default, ACP will apply. Therefore, the Marriage donor canSettlement: donate all not present property. Form: Present: the from prescribed by law for donationinter vivos. a. Real property: in writing. b. Personal property: 5,000 ormore in value must be in writing, less than 5,000in value may be oral or in writing. **Can be incorporated in the marriage settlement. **Future properties may be donated, provided: a. It does not impair legitimes. b. It is in the form of a will. When Donee is a Third Person **only present property may be donated. Form: same form for ordinary donations. Limitations: a. cannot impair legitimes b. if the donor is a parent or are the parents: donation is notsubject to collation c. if the donation consists of clothing apparel or jewelry: must not exceed more than 1/10th of the free disposable portion (ratio: customary gifts) May be the subject of lien or encumbrance: GR: Donor has no obligation to free the property from encumbrance or lien. Except: if the subject property is foreclosed unless otherwise specified. When effective: when the acceptance of the donee of the donation comes to the knowledge of the donor (theory of cognition). Ground s for R evocation April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

1. Non-celebration of marriage. How done: a. If donation propter nuptias appears in a separate instrument: there is a need for a separate act (i.e. execution of Deed of Revocation of Donation) b. If the donation propter nuptias is integrated in the marriage settlement: the noncelebration of marriage automatically revokes the donation. Arc aba vs. Ta bancu ra Vda De Batoc ael

(GR No. 146683, November 22, 2001)

FACTS: Francisco Comille and his wife Zosima Montallana became the registered owners of Lot No. 437-A located at Balintawak St. and Rizal Avenue in Dipolog City, Zamboanga del Norte inJanuary 1956. Zosima died in 1980 hence Francisco and his mother in law executed a deed of extrajudicial partition with waiver of rights, where the latter waived her share consisting of ¼ of the property in favor of Francisco. Since Francisco do nothave any children to take care of him after his retirement, he asked Leticia, his niece, Leticia’s cousin, Luzviminda and Cirila Arcaba, the petitioner, who was then a widow and took care of Francisco’s house as well as the store inside. According to Leticia, Francisco and Cirila were lovers since they slept in the same room. On the other hand, Erlinda Tabancura, another niece ofFrancisco claimed that the latter told her that Cirila was his mistress. However, Cirila defensed herself that she was a mere helper who could enter the master’s edroom b when Francisco asked her to and that Francisco was too old for her. She denied having sexual intercourse with Francisco. When the nieces got married, Cirila who wasthen 34 year-old widow started working for Francisco who was75 year old widower. The latter did not pay him any wages as househelper though her family was provided with food and lodging. Francisco’s health deteriorated and became bedridden. Tabancura testified that Francisco’s only source of income was the rentals from his lot near the public streets. In January 1991, few months before Francisco died, he executed a “Deed of Donation Inter Vivos” where he ceded a portion of Lot 437 -A composed of 150 sq m., together with his houseto Cirila who accepted the same. The larger portion of 268 sq m. was left under hisname. This was made in consideration of the10 year of faithful services of the petitioner. Atty Lacaya notarized the deed and was later registered by Cirila as its absolute owner. In Octoer 1991, Francisco died and in 1993, the lot received by Cirila had a market value of P57,105 and assessed value of P28,550.The decedent’s nephews and nieces and his heirs by intestate succession alleged that Cirila was the common-law wife of Francisco. ISSUE: Whether or not the deed of donation inter vivos executed by Francisco in Arcaba’s favor was valid. HELD: April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

The court in this case considered a sufficient proof of common law relationship wherein donation is not valid. The conclusion was based on the testimony of Tabancura and certain documents bearing the signature of “Cirila Comille” such as application for business permit, sanitary permit and the death certificate of Francisco. Also, the fact that Cirila did not demand her wages is an indication that she was not simply a caregiver–employee. Cohabitation means more than sexual intercourse, especially when one of the parties is already old and may no longer be interested in sex at the very least, cohabitation is a public assumption of men and women holding themselves out to the public as such. Hence, the deed of donation by Francisco in favor of Cirila is void under Art. 87 of the Family Code.

2. Marriage takes place without the required parental consent (Presumption: donor is the parent whose consent was not required): through a separate Deed or act. 3. Marriage is subsequently declared void or annulled (Note: Art. 43- donation propter nuptias made in favour of the guilty spouse is revoked by operation of law) 4. Legal separation (regardless of who the donor is) **Arts. 63, 64, 65 (effects) **in favor of the guilty spouse: not automatic because there is no severance of the marital tie, reconciliation may still take place. 5. When the donation is conditioned upon a resolutory condition and such resolutory condition arises: the happening of the condition revokes the donation. 6. Donee commits an act of ingratitude: a. If the donee should commit some offense against the person, the honor or the property of the donor, or of his wife or children under his parental authority; b. If the donee imputes to the donor any criminal offense, or any act involving moral turpitude, even though he should prove it, unless the crime or the act has been committed against the donee himself, his wife or children under his authority; c. If he unduly refuses him support when the donee is legally or morally bound to give support to the donor. (Art. 765, New Civil Code). NOTE: Once the marriage is solemnized, spouses cannot donate to each other regardless of the pro

perty regime.

Ratio: a. To protect creditors b. To protect the weaker spouse **But spouses are allowed to give moderate gifts on special occasions (moderate: depends on the financial standing)Note: also applies to man and woman cohabiting with one another. April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

CORNELIA MATABUENA vs. PETRONILA CERVANTES[G.R. No. L-2877 (38 SCRA 284)], March 31, 1971 FACTS: In 1956, Felix Matabuena, the brother of the plaintiff, donated a property to his common-law spouse, Petronila Cervantes. In 1962, six years after the donation of property, Felix Matabuena and Petronila Cervantes got married. In the same year, after five months, Felix Matabuena died. Being the only sister and the nearest collateral relative of the deceased, Cornelia Matabuena filed a claim over the property. The lower court of Sorsogon then declared that the donation was valid as long as it happened before Felix Matabuena and Petronila Cervantes got married. This decision in accordance between was spouses is null andwith void.the Article 133 of Civil Code which states that donation made ISSUE: Whether or not the ban of donation between spouses applies to a common-law relationship. RULING: Supplying the legislative omission, the court ruled that the ban of donation between spouses applies to a common-law relationship. However, the lack of validity of the donation of Felix Matabuena to Petronila Cervantes does not necessarily result to plaintiff having exclusive rights to the disputed property. Because Petronila and Felix Matabuena were legally married before Felix died, Petronila is his widow. Hence, she is entitled to 1/2 of the property of the deceased. The other half would be given to Felix Matabuena’s sister, Cornelia Matabuena.

**subsequent marriage cures defect. (NOTE: the SC has ruled that if the right is not based on donation, this rule will not apply). Rights and Obligations Between Spouses

PURELY PERSONAL 1. To live together (a.k.a. consortium) **to establish conjugal and family life (joint right and responsibility to fix the family domicile) **cannot be compelled (violation of liberty of abode) Ilusorio vs. Ilusorio-Bildner (GR No. 139789, May 12, 2000) FACTS: Potenciano Ilusorio, a lawyer, 86 year old of age, possessed extensive property valued at millions of pesos. For many year, he was the Chairman of the Board and President of Baguio Country Club. He was married with Erlinda Ilusorio, herein petitioner,for 30 years and begotten 6 children namely Ramon, Lin Illusorio-Bildner (defendant), Maximo, Sylvia, Marietta and Shereen. They separated from bed and board in 1972. Potenciano lived at Makati every time he was in Manila and at Illusorio Penthouse, Baguio Country April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

Club when he was in Baguio City. On the other hand, the petitioner lived in Antipolo City. In 1997, upon Potenciano’s arrival from US, he stayed with her wife for about 5 months in Antipolo city. The children, Sylvia andLin, alleged that duringthis time their mother overdose Potenciano which caused the latter’s health to deteriorate.In February 1998, Erlinda filed with RTC petition for guardianship over the person and property of Potenciano due to the latter’s advanced age, frail health, poor eyesight and impaired judgment. In May 1998, after attending a corporate meeting in Baguio, Potenciano did not return to Antipolo instead lived atCleveland Condominium in Makati. In March 1999, petitioner filed with CA petition for habeas corpus to have the custody of his husband alleging that the respondents refused to her demands to see and visit her husband and prohibited Potenciano from returning Antipolo. ISSUE: Whether or not the petitioned writ of habeas corpus should be issued. HELD: A writ of habeas corpus extends to all cases of illegal confinement or detention, or by which the rightful custodyof a person is withheld from the oneentitled thereto. To justify the grant for such petition, the restraint of liberty must an illegal and involuntary deprivation of freedom ofaction. The illegal restraint of liberty must beactual and effective not merely nominal or moral. Evidence showed that there was no actual and effective detention or deprivation of Potenciano’s liberty that would justify issuance of the writ.The fact that the latter was 86 years of age and under medication does not necessarily render him mentally incapacitated. He still has the capacity to discern his actions. With his full mental capacity having the right of choice, he may not be the subject of visitation rights against his free choice. Otherwise, he will be deprived of his right to privacy. **The case at bar does not involve the right of a parent to visit a minor child but the right of a wife to visit a husband. In any event, that the husband refuses to seehis wife for private reasons, he is at liberty to do so without threat or any penalty attached to the exercise of his right. Coverture, is a matter beyond judicial authority and cannotbe enforced by compulsion of a writ of habeas corpus carried out by the sheriffs or by any other process.** **To promote family solidarity. Hence, only a court order may exempt one spouse from living with the other on the following justifications: a. Professional or business occupation requires thatthe spouse lives away from the conjugal home. (i.e. husband works abroad) b. For some other valid and compelling reason. ARROYO v VASQUEZ de ARROYO (1921) FACTS:


Plaintiff Mariano and defendant Dolores were married in 1910, and lived in Iloilo City. They lived together with a few short intervals of separation. On July 4, 1920, defendant Dolores went away from their common home and decided to live separately from plaintiff. She claimed that she was compelled to leave on the basis of cruel treatment on the part of her husband. She in turn prayed for a decree of separation, a liquidation of their conjugal partnership, and an allowance for counsel fees and permanent separate maintenance. CFI ruled in favor of the defendant and she was granted alimony amounting to P400, also other fees. Plaintiff then asked for a restitution of conjugal rights, and a permanent mandatory injunction requiring the defendant toreturn to the conjugal home and live with him as his wife. ISSUES: 1. Whether defendant had sufficient cause for leaving the conjugal home 2. Whether plaintiff may be granted the restitution of conjugal rights or absolute order or permanent mandatory injunction HELD: 1. The wife had sufficient cause for leaving the conjugal home. Cruelty done by plaintiff to defendant was greatly exaggerated. The wife was inflicted with a disposition of jealousy towards her husband in an aggravated degree. No sufficient cause was present. Courts should move with caution in enforcing the duty to provide for the separate maintenance of the wife since this recognizes the de facto separation of the two parties. Continued cohabitation of the pair must be seen as impossible, and separation must be necessary, stemming from the fault of the husband. She is under obligation to return to the domicile. “When people understand that they must live together…th ey learn to soften by mutual accommodation that yoke which they know they cannot shake off;they become good husbands and wives…necessity is a powerful master in teaching the duties which it imposes…” (Evans v. Evans) 2. On granting the restitution of conjugal rights. It is not within the province of the courts to compel one of the spouses tocohabit with, and render conjugal rights to, the other.In the case of property rights, such an action may be maintained. Said order, at best, would have no other purpose than to compel the spouses to live together. Other countries, such as England and Scotland have done this with much criticism. Plaintiff is entitled to a judicial declaration that the defendant absented herself without April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

sufficient cause and it is her duty toreturn. She is also not entitled to support. **however, quarrel or misunderstanding between mother-in-law and daughter-in-law is not sufficient.**

Marital Rape PEOPLE v. JUMAWAN (2014) FACTS: The husband has a pattern of violent behaviour. The husband demanded sexual intercourse, violently forced himself upon the wife. RULING: The mere fact that there is a duty to live together does not justify the use of violence to enforce such right.

“Husbands are once again reminded that marriage is not a license to forcibly rape their wives. A husband does not own his wife's body by reason of marriage. By marrying, she does not divest herself of the human right to an exclusive autonomy over her own body and thus, she can lawfully opt to give or withhold her consent to marital coitus. A husband aggrieved by his wife's unremitting refusal to engage in sexual intercourse cannot resort to felonious force or coercion to make her yield. He can seek succor before the Family Courts that can determine whether her refusal constitutes psychological incapacity justifying an annulment of the marriage. Sexual intimacy is an integral part of marriage because it is the spiritual and biological communion that achieves the marital purpose of procreation. It entails mutual love and self-giving and as such it contemplates only mutual sexual cooperation and never sexual coercion or imposition.” (part of the SC’s Final Note on the case)

IMBONG v. OCHOA (April 8, 2014) (Decision re RH LAW Constitutionality) **for as long as living together and the marriage is subsisting, neither husband nor wife can undergo reproductive procedure or surgery without both consenting. “Decision-making involving a reproductive health procedure is a private matter which belongs to the couple, not just one of them. Any decision they would reach would affect their future as a family because the size of the family or the number of their children significantly matters. The decision whether or not to undergo the procedure belongs exclusively to, and shared by, both spouses as one cohesive unit as they chart their own destiny. It is a constitutionally guaranteed private right. Unless it prejudices the State, which has not shown any compelling interest, the State should see to it that they chart their destiny together as one family.”

2. Right to observe mutual love, respect, and fidelity. **reinforced by other provisions: RPC on adultery, concubinage and bigamy provisions 3. Marital privilege and communication rule. April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

**confidential treatment of all matters during the marriage as well as communication during the subsistence of a marriage. **Hence, one spouse cannot be compelled to testify against the other CHAN v. CHAN (G.R. No. 179786, July 24, 2013) FACTS: Wife filed a case against husband and offered in evidence the medical records of the husband proving drug addiction. The husband objected on the ground that those are violative of his right to priovacy. “This case is about the propriety of issuing a subpoena duces tecum for the production and submission in court of the respondent husband's hospital record in a case for declaration of nullity of marriage where one of the issues is his mental fitness as a husband.” RULING: Since the offer of evidence is made at the trial, Josielene’s request for subpoena duces tecum is premature. She will have to wait for trial to begin before making a request for the issuance of a subpoena duces tecum covering Johnny’s hospital records. It is when those records are produced for examination at the trial, that Johnny may opt to object, not just to their admission in evidence, but more so to their disclosure. Section 24(c), Rule 130 of the Rules of Evidence quoted above is about non-disclosure of privileged matters. It is of course possible to treat Josielene’s motion for the issuance of a subpoena duces tecum covering the hospital records as a motion for production of documents, a discovery procedure available to a litigant prior to trial under section 1, Rule 27 of the Rules of Civil Procedure. But the above right to compel the production of documents has a limitation: the documents to be disclosed are "not privileged." Josielene of course claims that the hospital records subject of this case are not privileged since it is the "testimonial" evidence thephysician physician"cannot that may regarded as privileged. Section 24(c) of Rule 130 states thatofthe in abecivil case, without the consent of the patient, be examined" regarding their professional conversation. The privilege, says Josielene, does not cover the hospital records, but only the examination of the physician at the trial. To allow, however, the disclosure during discovery procedure of the hospital records — the results of tests that the physician ordered , the diagnosis of the patient’s illness, and the advice or treatment he gave him—would be to allow access to evidence that is inadmissible without the patient’s consent. Physician memorializes all these information in the patient’s records. Disclosing them would be the equivalent of compelling the physician to testify on privileged matters he gained while dealing with the patient, without the latter’s prior consent.

***Ma’am’s discussion: medical records are absolutely confidential and cannot be admitted into evidence. (note: the remedy would be to avail of the Modes of Discover, i.e. mental examination of the patient because mental condition was at issue.


4. Render mutual health and support. a. Between spouses: charge to the marital property (ACP orCPG as the case may be), if insufficient, exclusive property may be liable **implies obligation to support common children b. Joint administration and management of the household c. Each spouse may practice profession or engage in business without the consent of the other. Note: one spouse may object to the act of the other on the basis of some valid, compelling ground (the court determines the propriety of the ground raised. If the objection is upheld: 1) the obligation resorted and benefit redounded to the family before the objection –charge to ACP or CPG, 2) if benefit redounded to the family after the objection – spouse who never obtained consent of the other spouse will answer with his/her exclusive property. RA10572: Curative legislation. GO v. CA and Sps. Ong (G.R. No. 114791. May 29, 1997) FACTS: Husband and wife maintained a photography and videography business. The wife entered into a contract with a soon-to-be wed couple for a wedding video coverage. After the wedding, there was a delay in the delivery of the wedding videos. Newlywed demanded delivery of the videotape. The wife admitted it was deleted by mistake. An action for damages was filed. RULING: ***Only the wife ordered should pay damages because the husband, through a MTD, alleged that throughout the negotiation, he was not present and he never participated in the perfection of the contract. *** Finally, petitioner Alex Go questions the finding of the trial and appellate courts holding him jointlyHeand severally liable his wifeinto Nancy regarding pecuniary liabilities imposed. argues that when his with wife entered the contract withthe private respondent, she was acting alone for her sole interest. We find merit in this contention. Under Article 117 of the Civil Code (now Article 73 of the Family Code), the wife may exercise any profession, occupation or engage in business without the consent of the husband. In the instant case, we are convinced that it was only petitioner Nancy Go who entered into the contract with private respondent. Consequently, we rule that she is solely liable to private respondents for the damages awarded below, pursuant to the principle that contracts produce effect only as between the parties who execute them. (Art. 73 as amended by R.A. 10572: "Art. 73. Either spouse may exercise any legitimate profession, occupation, business or activity without the consent of the other. The latter may object only on valid, serious, and moral grounds. "In case of disagreement, the court shall decide whether or not: "(1) The objection is proper, and "(2) Benefit has accrued to the family prior to the objection or thereafter. If the benefit accrued prior to the objection, the resulting obligation shall be enforced against the community property. If the benefit accrued thereafter, such obligation shall be April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

enforced against the separate property of the spouse who has not obtained consent. "The foregoing provisions shall not prejudice the rights of creditors who acted in good faith."

PROPERTY REGIMES GOVERNING MARRIAGES IN THE PHILIPPINES Abso lute Commu

nity of Property (

ACP)

**the property system that applies: a. When the same was agreed upon in a valid marriage settlement. b. In the absence of a valid marriage settlement and themarriage was solemnized under the Family Code (default property regime if marriage is under the FC, that is, celebrated during the effectivity of theFC). *excluded: i. property acquired by either or both a) during marriage OR b) by gratuitous title (DIV or succession) ii. property for personal and exclusive use by only one even if acquired before the marriage. (except: jewellery as it forms part of the ACP) (Question: What if acquired by gratuitous title? Lecturer’s Op.: Should be excluded. Question: What if diamond encrusted bra (e.g. Victoria’s Secret lingerie collections)? Lecturer’s Op.:Exclusive). c. Property acquired by one spouse from a previous marriage when there are children from such previous marriage. (reason: the property will be for the support of the children of the previous marriage) (ratio: to prevent comingling of properties). Exclusive (Not Included): ***power of disposition belongs to the owner-spouse ***all fruits and income belongs to the owner-spouse [Whatever was purchased using such fund shall be separate and exclusive property of the purchases.] ***administration and management is also exclusive ***subsidiarily liable for marital debts if ACP is insufficient. Inclusive (Included: 1. All properties acquired prior to the marriage. 2. All properties acquiredduring the marriage, provided acquisition isthrough onerous title. Note: as long as there is proof that the property was acquired during the subsistence of the marriage, the presumption is that such property belongs to the ACP. To overcome the presumption, there must be proof that it belongs to the separate and exclusive property of the spouse who acquired such property. April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

Note: properties acquired through government grant is considered onerous except if the same was acquired by virtue of the Free Patent law. Evidence to overcome presumption: a. Show that the property is among those excluded by law from ACP. b. Show that the property was acquired throughsome other title other than by onerous one. Quantum of Proof: Substantial evidence. **special form of co-ownership. Hence, the power to dispose, alienate, and encumber belongs to both of the spouses (written consent, authorization, or ratification is required; otherwise, the transaction entered into is null and void). When Property of ACP is encumbered, alienated, or disposed: 1. In the Deed and Instrument, both the husband and wife are the transferors. 2. “I, husband, …with my marital consent, wife…” (marital consent of the other spouse) 3. One spouse executes a Power of Attorney in favour of the other (denotes that one spouse is physically absent or cannot participate. (SPA is required) 4. Belated or written ratification. NOTE: estoppel cannot apply because the law requires written consent, authorization, and ratification. JUDICIAL CONSENT cannot be obtained nor can it operate to substitute for the consent of the wife. The same is only possible and valid if the management and administration is solely granted to the wife. NOTE: The power to dispose includes the power to donate: written consent required. Except: in moderate donations during special occasions NOTE: any void sale is void in its entirety (consequence of ACP being a special kind of coownership. **if ownership belongs to both spouses: also administration and management. **in case of conflict: acts of administration,modus vivendi (the husband’s decision shall prevail subject to judicial redress by the wife) **CASES: 1. 2. 3. 4.

Lease: act of administration (except:for lease of more than 1 year) Usufruct: act of dominion (involves parting away with benefit and use) Voluntary servitude: act of dominion (encumbrance) Repairs: act of administration.

NOTE: even if the property belongs to both spouses, one pouse may be granted sole administration powers in: a. When the other spouse is absent. April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

b. When other spouse is legally incompetent. c. In case of abandonment by the other spouse. **in which case, the other spouse is totally excluded from administering the property/ies. However, this does not include the power to dispose and encumber the property/ies because the same would still require a judicial authorization or consent (otherwise, void) but any such disposition without judicial authorization constitutes a continuing offer to the third person who bought the property/ies, which offer may be revoked if the court declares the transaction null and void or if the same results to a perfected contract. Payment of Debts **what can be charged: 1. Obligation arises from support between the husband andthe wife as well as their common children. If the same is insufficient, the separate and exclusive properties of both will be answerable. (expenses for support include: food, clothing, shelter, education, medical attendance) 2. Debts contracted by both spouses: **both spouses must have given their consent in writing **debt/s contracted by the sole administrator-spouse **debt/s contracted by one spouse with the written consent of the other (no need to prove that it benefited the family because the same is presumed) (ACP is liable to the full extent of such debt) 3. Debts contracted by one spouse without the consent of the other only insofar as the family was benefitted (creditor has to prove the extent of benefit) (if no proof: ACP is not 4. liable). All taxes imposed on the ACP as well as the cost and expenses relating to major or minor repairs to ACP. **on separate and exclusive property: if being used by the family **ante-nuptial debt: if the family was benefitted Mere Advances: debt/s of one spouse to the ACP a. Antenuptial debts thatdid not redound to the benefit of the family. b. Support for illegitimate children. c. Pecuniary fines and indemnities (final judgment) arising from delict or quasi-delict. d. Cost of litigation between the spouses if the suit is found to be groundless. Who pays: the spouse. If insolvent, ACP will pay but if ACP is liquidated, subtract from the share of the said spouse. **Par. 8: educational expense beyond the means of the family: considered advance from the legitime, subject to collation. (also for self-improvement and if beyond the means) Who must creditors sue: (enforcement of action) both the husband and the wife.


NOTE: the ACP has no juridical personality (when sued, the husband and wife are considered as solidary debtors) (Special Form: because the debt cannot be charged entirely on the ACP if the same is insufficient) NOTE: registration of property is not a mode of acquiring ownership. Conjugal Partnership o

f Gains (CPG)

**the property regime applicable if: 1. The same is validly agreed upon by the parties through a marriage settlement. 2. de facto (default) property regime for marriages contracted under the Civil Code. NOTE: FC provision: all existing CPG during the effectivity of the FC will be converted to ACP (But no retroactive effect if the same should impair vested rights) **No waiver of rights or interest in favour of the other or any other except if effective mortis causa (valid Will) or done and effective after marriage is dissolved. (Prior to death or dissolution of marriage, the right to the properties under CPG is merely inchoate). Excluded: (Capital= husband, Paraphernal= wife) 1. All properties belonging to either spouse prior to the celebration of the marriage. (however, fruits shall pertain to the CPG). 2. All properties acquiredby gratuitous title duringthe marriage. (*same rules as in ACP) 3. Properties acquired by barter, exchange, or right of redemption where the property is separate and exclusive property of the barterer or redemptionpacto ( de retro sale). 4. All properties acquired fromthe exclusive funds of only one of the spouses. [either owner: exclusive and sole right to dispose, encumber, alienate, and administer] [NOTE: all properties included in the CPG=joint ownership] Included: 1. All properties receivedonerously during themarriage even if registered to only one. 2. All salaries, earnings, compensation as well as all properties acquired therefrom. 3. Fruits, whether natural, civil, or industrial. How much: a. Derived from a property belonging to the CPG= entire b. Derived from a paraphernal or capital= only net fruits or income 4. All properties acquired through occupation. Occupation: mode of acquiring ownership by physical seizure of a movable property (e.g. animals, fruits, as well as abandoned properties considered as res nullius). 5. Share/s adjudicated toone of the spouses from hidden treasure. **presupposes that said spouse is the founder of the treasure or is the owner of the land where the treasure was found (hidden treasure: money or jewelry). 6. Livestock in excess of the number belonging to each spouse at the time the marriage was solemnized. (excess: fruits or gains) (e.g. at the time the marriage was celebrated April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

the husband had 10 chickens. After the marriage, the five of the chickens gave birth to 5 chicks each, thereby increasing the number of chickens to 35. The 25 chicks shall pertain to the CPG, the same considered as “in excess” of the number of chickens belonging to the husband when at the time the marriage was solemnized). 7. Everything else acquired during the subsistence of the marriage. [NOTE: Rules on written consent applies; administration is joint and equal but rules apply] In case of conflict: 1. Property acquired by installment: a. prior to the celebration of the marriage: CPG if title was vested during the marriage, regardless of whether or not the CPG contributed to the payment of installment (CPG will reimburse the spouse who paid for instalments). b. Prior to celebration, partially paid, ownership vested:partially by CPG, partially by one the spouse who paid for the instalments (CPG will only be liable as to the extent paid by the spouse who paid for the installment) c. After marriage: separate and exclusive d. Some or all instalments were paid during the marriage: owner-spouse shall reimburse the CPG (to be done during the liquidation of the CPG). Situation: Wife owes P1M to X, with the agreement that the same shall be paid in 10 yearly instalments. In 2007: paid P3M In 2008: paid 4M In 2009: married Husband The payment of the principal = charge to the separate and exclusive property of the wife The payment of interest = charge to the CPG (gains) 2. Determination of ownership Rules: a. Determine the value of the property prior to improvement. (e.g. land= P1M) b. Determine the cost of improvement paid by CPG (e.g. building = P5M) c. Determine the increment in the value of the property (e.g. value of the property increased to P8M) *correlate: A. 120 with the principle that the accessory follows the principal. **If increment is greater: the land and the building will belong to the CPG> April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

**If increment is less = separate and exclusive property (the improvement is considered an ordinary accession) [note: either way, reimburse; e.g. if ownership belongs to the CPG, the owner-spouse shall be reimbursed by the CPG but only upon liquidation and partition because it is only at this time that ownership vests. Charges: **Compare A. 121 with A. 93, nearly identical except: 1. Expenses on taxes 2. Major and minor repairs on exclusive property/ies= CPG isliable because the CPG has interest over the property (right to fruits) (whether or not the property is being used by the family is immaterial) **method or hierarchy: Ante-nuptial debts: *CPG has no obligation, it cannot be compelled to make those advances *hence, even if separate property is insufficient to pay suchante-nuptial debts, the CPG cannot advance without the consent of both the husband and the wife. Liquidation **can only proceed upon valid cause Grounds: 1. In case of death of one of the spouses, the widow or widower has the duty to liquidate within one year from death How done: a. Judicial i. Petition under FC: Summary with notice to creditors ii. Petition for Settlement of Estate of the deceased spouse: liquidation is incidental. b. Extrajudicial: execution of instrument or Deed in the appropriate form prescribed by law. *if separation is not done within one year and the spouse remarries = complete separation of property (CSP) by operation of law shall apply in order to prevent comingling. 2. Decree of Legal Separation *shifts the ACP or CPG to CSP subject to effects of reconciliation 3. Marriage declared void or annulled April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

a. Void (Arts. 41, 42, 43) Ratio: for other marriages, no ACP or CPG (Art. 41: only valid bigamous marriage, terminated by reappearance) b. Annulled: liquidation shallbe done as part of the annulment proceedings. 4. Judicial separation of property 2 Kinds: a. Joint petition by the husband and the wife during the marriage : for any cause and at any time during the marriage. b. Unilateral petition filed by one spouse against the other : Fault alleged (fault due to): i. Respondent-spouse is an absentee, guilty of abandonment, divested of parental authority, under civil interdiction, is a sole administrator but commits an act of abuse, that the spouses are separatedde facto for at least one year Note: emphasizes the rule that to modify ACP or CPG, judicial approval is necessary. Note: parties can restore the same in a joint manifestation Separation de facto: **Will not dissolve ACP or CPG no matter how long **All properties acquired by onerous title shall pertain to the ACP or CPG. However, if the ground is abandonment, the spouse may petition for: a) receivership, b) sole administration, or c) legal separation (if more than one year) Prima facie abandonment: after the lapse of three months and the spouse did not return or there is no news of such spouse’s whereabouts. Comp lete Se paration of Prop

erty

Governs: 1. If agreed upon in a valid marriage settlement **may stipulate as to: a. Total separation of property (both present and future) b. Partial separation Can separate: i. Present property only (future property/ies forms part of the ACP or CPG) ii. Future property only (present property/ies forms part of the ACP or CPG) iii. Only certain properties shall be separated, the remainder shall be considered conjugal or community property. 2. For subsequent marriages where the ACP orCPG of the prior marriage was never liquidated and partitioned. (correlate: one year to liquidate or partition after death; to avoid comingling; total CSP). *note: expenses of the family shall be governed by: i. Stipulation in a marriage settlement


ii.

if there is no marriage settlement, by the FC: husband and wife are responsible for the payment in proportion to the value of their exclusive property.

*will also apply after the decree of Legal Separation **Can husband and wife donate to each other? No because they are absolutely prohibited to do so under the law. **Can they sell to each other? NO. (Law on Sales) to prevent the weaker spouse from being coerced by the stronger spouse. **Who will authorize sale or disposition? GR: Only the owner-spouse; Exception: If there is partial separation of properties. Arts. 147 and 148 Art. 146: Presumptive Co-ownershipbetween a man and a woman under: 1. Cohabitation as husband and wife without the benefit of marriage. 2. Cohabitation under a void marriage. (CONDITION: there must be no legal impediment to marry each other) Included: Art. 35 (2) “authority of the S.O.,” (3) “lack of marriage license,” (5) “mistake in identity,” (6) “failure to register Decree of Annullment;” Art. 36 “P.I.;” marriages without legal ceremony. What Forms Part of Presumptive Co-Ownership:

1. Salaries and other forms of compensation earned by each or both during cohabitation. 2. All properties acquired by onerous title (neither candispose of the same without consent of the other) How m uch is their inte rest ?

**50-50 (half and half alike) **unless: one proves that he or she contributed a greater amount **however, if the participation of one party to the acquisition is moral, spiritual but not financial, such party is entitled to 50% if the participation consisted of taking care of the family. Maksi v. CA (not sure of the case title) FACTS: Man was cohabiting with common-law wife. They had several children. They lived together for more than 30 years. Man was gainfully employed. The wife died. Man disposed of all their properties. The children questioned the sale. The husband said the properties were purchased April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

out of his hard labor. RULING: The wife exerted hard labor by taking care of the needs of the family. The wife is entitled to 50% of the properties.

NOTE: If one party is guilty of bad faith, such party’s share is forfeited in favor of: a. The common children, or b. The party’s children from the previous marriage, or c. The innocent party. Art. 148: Limited Co-ownership *Between a man and a woman living together as husband and wife but where there is a legal impediment to marry each other (without a valid marriage): 1. adulterous relationship 2. concubinage 3. other void marriages Included: Art. 35 (1), (4), *(6); Arts. 37 and 38 (incestuous or quasi-incestuous) What forms part: all properties acquired through onerous title but based on an actual joint contribution. **no immediate legal presumption of nullity **prove: how much was contributed (to determine whether or not entitled to a greater share) **in the absence of proof to the contrary, law presumes equal share FRANCISCO v. MASTER IRON WORKS & CONSTRUCTION CORP. G.R. ( No. 151967. February 16, 2005) FACTS: A married man and a married woman lived together (married to other persons and not to each other) . The woman found employment abroad. She remitted her salaries to the man in the Philippines. They decided to buy a house. All Instruments were in the name of the man. Some receipts were in the name of the woman. Later, Master Iron Works filed a claim against the man for unpaid constructions materials purchased by man from them. Master Iron Works won and a writ of execution was issued against man. The woman filed a Third-Party complaint alleging that the prop erties were not man’s but hers because the same were all purchased using her money. RULING: Indeed, the Family Code has filled the hiatus in Article 144 of the New Civil Code by expressly regulating in Article 148 the property relations of couples living in a state of adultery or concubinage. Under Article 256 of the Family Code, the law can be applied retroactively if it does not prejudice vested or acquired rights. The petitioner failed to prove that she had any vested right over the property in April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

question. Since the subject property was acquired during the subsistence of the marriage of Eduardo and Carmelita, under normal circumstances, the same should be presumed to be conjugal property. Article 105 of the Family Code of the Philippines provides that the Code shall apply to conjugal partnership established before the code took effect, without prejudice to vested rights already acquired under the New Civil Code or other laws. Thus, even if Eduardo and Carmelita were married before the effectivity of the Family Code of the Philippines, the property still cannot be considered conjugal property because there can only be but one valid existing marriage at any given time. Article 148 of the Family Code also debilitates against the petitioners claim since, according to the said article, a co-ownership may ensue in case of cohabitation where, for instance, one party has a pre-existing valid marriage provided that the parents prove their actual joint contribution of money, property or industry and only to the extent of their proportionate interest thereon. We agree with the findings of the appellate court that the petitioner failed to adduce preponderance of evidence that she contributed money, property or industry in the acquisition of the subject property and, hence, is not a co-owner of the property Aside from her bare claims, the petitioner offered nothing to prove her allegation that she borrowed the amount of P320,000.00 from her mother and her sister, which she paid to the Imus Bank on August 31, 1984 to purchase the subject property. The petitioner even failed to divulge the name of her mother and the sources of her income, if any, and that of her sister. When she testified in Civil Case No. 95-0169, the petitioner declared that she borrowed part of the purchase price of the property from her brother, but failed to divulge the latters name, let alone reveal how much money she borrowed and when. The petitioner even failed to adduce any evidence to prove that her mother and sister had P320,000.00 in 1984, which, considering the times, was then quite a substantial amount. Moreover, the petitioners thirdparty-claim affidavit stating that the properties are the fruits of my own exclusive effort before I married Eduardo Francisco belies her testimony in the trial court and in Civil Case No. 95-0169. We note that, as gleaned from the receipt issued by the Imus Bank, the payment for the subject property was drawn via Check No. 002334 and issued by the Commercial Bank of Manila in the amount of P320,000.00. The petitioner failed to testify against whose account the check was drawn and issued, and whether the said account was owned by her and/or Eduardo Francisco or her mother, sister or brother. She even failed to testify whether the check was a managers check and, if so, whose money was used to purchase the same. We also agree with the findings of the CA that the affidavit of waiver executed by Eduardo on February 15, 1985, stating that the property is owned by the petitioner, is barren of probative weight. We are convinced that he executed the said affidavit in anticipation of claims by third parties against him and hold the property liable for the said claims. First, the petitioner failed to prove that she had any savings before her cohabitation with Eduardo. Second, despite Eduardos affidavit of waiver, he nevertheless affixed his marital conformity to the real estate mortgage executed by the petitioner over the property in favor of Leonila on January 13, 1986. Third, the petitioner testified that she borrowed the funds for the purchase of the property from her mother and sister. Fourth, the petitioner testified that Eduardo executed the affidavit of waiver because she discovered that he had a first marriage. Lastly, Eduardo belied the petitioners testimony when he testified that he executed the affidavit of waiver because his mother-in-law and sister-in-law had given the property to the petitioner. ***The court awarded only the amount reflected in the receipts under the woman’s name.***

*Constitutional provision against aliens owning properties apply. MULLER v. MULLER (G.R. No. 149615, August 29, 2006) FACTS: German husband married Filipino wife. German husband inherited properties from his parents. April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

They decided to live in the Philippines. German husband sold the inheritance and bought properties in the Philippines. Due to incompatibilities and respondents alleged womanizing, drinking, and maltreatment, the spouses eventually separated. On September 26, 1994, respondent filed a petition for separation of properties before the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City. On August 12, 1996, the trial court rendered a decision which term inated the regime of absolute community of property between the petitioner and respondent. It also decreed the separation of properties between them and ordered the equal partition of personal properties located within the country, excluding those acquired by gratuitous title during the marriage.With regard to the Antipolo property, the court held that it was acquired using paraphernal funds of the respondent. However, it ruled that respondent cannot recover his funds because the property was purchased in violation of Section 7, Article XII of the Constitution. RULING: Respondent was aware of the constitutional prohibition and expressly admitted his knowledge thereof to this Court. He declared that he had the Antipolo property titled in the name of petitioner because of the said prohibition. His attempt at subsequently asserting or claiming a right on the said property cannot be sustained. The Court of Appeals erred in holding that an implied trust was created and resulted by operation of law in view of petitioners marriage to respondent. Save for the exception provided in cases of hereditary succession, respondents disqualification from owning lands in the Philippines is absolute. Not even an ownership in trust is allowed. Besides, where the purchase is made in violation of an existing statute and in evasion of its express provision, no trust can result in favor of the party who is guilty of the fraud. To hold otherwise would allow circumvention of the constitutional prohibition. Invoking the principle that a court is not only a court of law but also a court of equity, is likewise misplaced. It has been held that equity as a rule will follow the law and will not permit that to be done indirectly which, because of public policy, cannot be done directly. He who seeks equity must do equity, and he who comes into equity must come with clean hands. The latter is a frequently stated maxim which is also expressed in the principle that he who has done inequity shall not have equity. It signifies that a litigant may be denied relief by a court of equity on the ground that his conduct has been inequitable, unfair and dishonest, or fraudulent, or deceitful as to the controversy in issue. Thus, in the instant case, respondent cannot seek reimbursement on the ground of equity where it is clear that he willingly and knowingly bought the property despite the constitutional prohibition. Further, the distinction made between transfer of ownership as opposed to recovery of funds is a futile exercise on respondents part. To allow reimbursement would in effect permit respondent to enjoy the fruits of a property which he is not allowed to own. Thus, it is likewise proscribed by law.

FAMILY dwelling occupied as residence along with the parcel of land where the dwelling is located (must be acquired in ownership or absolute ownership). Family Home:

Who constitutes: 1. Husband and wife (ACP or CPG or CSP, as the case may be) 2. Single, unmarried person April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

Who are the beneficiaries: 1. 2. 3. 4.

The ones who established the same Children and descendant Parents and ascendant Brothers and sisters (whether full or half-blood) (must show dependent on the constituting person for support)

How long recognized as Family Home 1. From the moment it is constituted as such up to ten years from the death of the person who constituted the same, or 2. Until such time a minor beneficiary reachesthe age of majority. **NOTE: as long as a property is considered a Family Home, any sale and disposition must be with the consent of the beneficiaries. **NOTE: In case of liquidation and partition, the Family Home is excluded, awarded to the spouse who majority of the children choose to live with Benefit of the Family Home Exempt from forced sale, attachment, or execution. **forced sale: expropriation proceedings **attachment: for identifying certain properties to be reserved in case of favorable judgment **execution EXCEPTIONS: a. When debt arises from non-payment of taxes b. When debts are secured by a mortgage on the premises c. When debt arose prior to the constitution of the Family Home d. Laborer’s lien, etc. (construction and suppliers of materials) e. For debts in excess of the exempt value of the Family Home Up to P300K for FH located in urban areas Up to P200K for FH located in rural areas  

When constituted: 1. Under the Family Code: from the moment a property is used and occupied by the family as their dwelling 2. Under the New Civil Code: a. Judicial constitution: 

Requires a petition to be filed in court to recognize the property as a Family Home o From the moment of filing if there are no debts.


o From the finality of judgment if there are debts. b. Extrajudicial constitution: by filing a petition on claim or manifestation with the Register of Deeds where the Family Home is located. 3. If occupied prior to Family Code but never constituted as such under the NCC, the house and lot will be constituted as Family Home upon effectivity of the Family Code (Aug. 3, 1988) [Hence, if debt arose before the Family Code, the Family Home is subject to execution, forced sale, attachment]

Filipino Family    

Foundation of the nation Constitution protects “sanctity of the family” Marriage is sacred Rearing of children shall be based on religious beliefs of the parents as well as their cultural heritage

Composition: 1. 2. 3. 4.

Husband and wife Parents and children (descendants) Other ascendants and descendants in the direct line Brothers and sisters

(also entitled and obligated to support each other) NOTE: earnest efforts toward compromise must be made before suit can commence between family members (Art. 151) to prevent members from suing each other and publicizing their grievances (must be specifically alleged that earnest efforts proved futile) When not applicable: 1. The cause of action is among those where compromise agreementis prohibited. a. When it affects civil status of a person (e.g. action to impugn legitimacy) (reason: fixed by law) b. When it involves marriage or legal separation. c. When any of the grounds of legal separation is present. d. When the action involves future support. e. When the action involves future inheritance. f. When it involves jurisdiction of courts. 2. When a third person is included in the suit. (includes: husband andwife= annulment of sale) Pate rnity and Filiation

**Paternity: father to child **Filiation: child to parents April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

Filiation: 1. Natural: whether legitimate or illegitimate 2. Artificial: always legitimate Legitimate Children: a. All those children born and/or conceived during a valid marriage. b. Those born and/or conceived under a void marriage but nullity proceeds from Art. 36 and Art. 53 (registration). NOTE: for as long as there is proof that the child is conceived during the subsistence of the marriage even if born after the marriage has been annulled or declared void, the child is considered legitimate. Conception 1. Natural 2. Artificial (during marriage) With the consent in writing of both parents The child will be considered legitimate evenif the sperm of a third person is used (becomes necessary only when the sperm donor and not the husband’s is used) The legitimate status of the child is conclusive declaration of law if the same is not impugned.  



Action to Impugn: o o o

Can only be filed by the husband The wife is prohibited from declaring against the legitimacy of her child Heirs of the husband may file if: a. The husband dies before filing the action as long as the action is within the prescriptive period b. The child is born after the death of the husband c. The husband dies during the pendency of the case and without having desisted therefrom

Grounds: 1. Physical impossibility of sexual intercourse between thehusband and the wife during the first 120 days of the 300 days preceding the birth of the child due to: a. Husband suffering from physical incapacity (impotency, whether permanent or temporary) b. Husband and wife living apart from each other, geographical distance makes the consummation impossible c. Husband was suffering from serious illness Reckoning period: April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

 

Date of birth of the child --  move back 300 days Conception  first day + 120 days

Conception ------120 days---------------------------------- Date of birth

300 days 2. Biological or scientific means proves that the child is not that of the husband’s a. DNA testing Probative value: o 99.9% math between the husband and the child  Legal presumption of paternity  Burden of Proof shifts to the husband o Below 99.9%  Corroborative evidence in parternity suit  Additional evidence is required as proof of parternity o No match = 100% conclusive  Excludes the husband as a potential father (100% accurate) NOTE: the court must always subject the DNA test results to the Vallejo Test Possibility of contamination Procedure of collection Standard procedure allowed for DNA testing Whether or not the DNA results were pursuant to the standard procedures 

    

Competence or expertise of the technician that conducted the test 3. The child is conceived through artificial insemination and there is a vice of consent in the written consent or ratification **the legitimate status of a child born through artificial insemination cannot be impugned on the first and second grounds EFFECT OF GRANT: the child will be declared illegitimate **essence: to protect the husband (re: support and succession) EFFECT OF DISMISSAL: the child will be declared as conclusively legitimate Formula to Determine Legitimacy 1. If the child is born during the 120-day period following the solemnization of the second marriage but within the 300-day period after the termination of the first marriage, the child will be considered as legitimate child of the first marriage. 2. If the child is born after the 180-day period, the child will be considered as a legitimate child of the second marriage whether or not the date of birth is within or after the 300day period after the termination of the first marriage. April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

Rights of Legitimate Children 1. Entitled to the use of a complete name (3 parts) a. Given name b. Mother’s maiden name (middle name in the Philippines, maternal lineage, identified through a middle initial) c. Father’s surname **use of names is governed by law IN RE: JULIAN LIN CARULASAN WANG (G.R. No. 159966. March 30, 2005)

FACTS: On 22 September 2002, petitioner Julian Lin Carulasan Wang, a minor, represented by his mother Anna Lisa Wang, filed a petition dated 19 September 2002 for change of name and/or correction/cancellation of entry in the Civil Registry of Julian Lin Carulasan Wang. Petitioner sought to drop his middle name and have his registered name changed from Julian Lin Carulasan Wang to Julian Lin Wang. Julian Lin Carulasan Wang was born in Cebu City on February 20, 1998 to parents Anna Lisa Wang and Sing-Foe Wang who were then not yet married to each other. When his parents subsequently got married on September 22, 1998, ...they executed a deed of legitimation of their son so that the childs name was changed from Julian Lin Carulasan to Julian Lin Carulasan Wang. The parents of Julian Lin Carulasan Wang plan to stay in Singapore for a long time because they will let him study there together with his sister named Wang Mei Jasmine who was born in Singapore. Since in Singapore middle names or the maiden surname of the mother are not carried in a persons name, they anticipate that Julian Lin Carulasan Wang will be discriminated against because of his current registered name which carries a middle name. Julian and his sister might also be asking whether they are brother and sister since they have different surnames. Carulasan sounds funny in Singapores Mandarin language since they do not have the letter R but if there is, they pronounce it as L. It is for these reasons that the name of Julian Lin Carulasan Wang is requested to be changed to Julian Lin Wang. The RTC denied the petition. RULING: Our laws on the use of surnames state that legitimate and legitimated children shall principally use the surname of the father. The Family Code gives legitimate children the right to bear the surnames of the father and the mother, while illegitimate children shall use the surname of their mother, unless their father recognizes their filiation, in which case they may bear the fathers surname. Applying these laws, an illegitimate child whose filiation is not recognized by the father bears only a given name and his mothers surname, and does not have a middle name. The name of the unrecognized illegitimate child therefore identifies him as such. It is only when the illegitimate child is legitimated by the subsequent marriage of his parents or acknowledged by the father in a public document or private handwritten instrument that he bears both his mothers surname as his middle name and his fathers surname as his surname, reflecting his status as a legitimated child or an acknowledged illegitimate child. Accordingly, the registration in the civil registry of the birth of such individuals requires that the middle name be indicated in the certificate. The registered name of a legitimate, legitimated and recognized illegitimate child thus contains a given or proper name, a middle name, and a surname. April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

Weighing petitioners reason of convenience for the change of his name against the standards set in the cases he cites to support his contention would show that his justification is amorphous, to say the least, and could not warrant favorable action on his petition. The factual antecedents and unique circumstances of the cited cases are not at all analogous to the case at bar. The instant case is clearly distinguishable from the cases of Oshita and Alfon, where the petitioners were already of age when they filed their petitions for change of name. Being of age, they are considered to have exercised their discretion and judgment, fully knowing the effects of their decision to change their surnames. It can also be unmistakably observed that the reason for the grant of the petitions for change of name in these two cases was the presence of reasonable or compelling grounds therefore. The Court, in Oshita, recognized the tangible animosity most Filipinos had during that time against the Japanese as a result of World War II, in addition to the fact of therein petitioners election of Philippine citizenship. In Alfon, the Court granted the petition since the petitioner had been known since childhood by a name different from her registered name and she had not used her registered name in her school records and voters registration records; thus, denying the petition would only result to confusion. Calderon, on the other hand, granted the petition for change of name filed by a mother in behalf of her illegitimate minor child. Petitioner cites this case to buttress his argument that he does not have to reach the age of majority to petition for change of name. However, it is manifest in Calderonthat the Court, in granting the petition for change of name, gave paramount consideration to the best interests of the minor petitioner therein. In the case at bar, the only reason advanced by petitioner for the dropping his middle name is convenience. However, how such change of name would make his integration into Singaporean society easier and convenient is not clearly established. That the continued use of his middle name would cause confusion and difficulty does not constitute proper and reasonable cause to drop it from his registered complete name. In addition, petitioner is only a minor. Considering the nebulous foundation on which his petition for change of name is based, it is best that the matter of change of his name be left to his judgment and discretion when he reaches the age of majority. As he is of tender age, he may not yet understand and appreciate the value of the change of his name and granting of the same at this point may just prejudice him in his rights under our laws. Atty. Reyes’ Summary: The petition cannot be allowed because: 1. 2.

It will confuse the status of the children (legitimate children have three parts in their name) (against public policy, tantamount to deleting the maternal lineage) There is no legal basis for such deletion (not a change or insertion based on status)

2. Entitled to support from the mother and the father 3. For minors, parental custody and authority shall be jointly exercised by the mother and the father (in case of legal separation, apply the SC guidelines. Under 7 years, mother has custody. 7 years old and above= let the child choose) 4. Entitled to full successional rights from themother and the father as well as the relatives. That shall inherit in their own right. They are entitled to represent and be represented.  

Illegitimate Filiation: Classes: April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

1. Those born out of wedlock and at the time of conception, the parents: a. Had no legal impediments tomarry each other (can benefit from legitimation), or b. Had legal impediments to marry each other 2. Those born or conceived during a void marriage provided the cause for nullification of marriage is not under Art. 36 of the Family Code or 35 (c) NOTE: at the time of birth, no paternal lineage, hence, there may be necessity to prove filiation with the father Proof of Illegitimate Filiation 1. Record of birth a. as appearing in the Civil Registry (Certificate ofLive Birth) **to be admissible as proof, show that the putative father actively and voluntarily participated in the preparation thereof (voluntarily signed the Affidavit of Acknowledgment at the back of the Cert. of Live Birth) If child is legitimate = all entries are complete If child is illegitimate = complete entries except the date and place of marriage o If recognized = back portion, Affidavit of Acknowledgment o If unrecognized = no name and signature of the father **Must be accomplished by the Local Civil Registrar Cases: SC disregarded the probative value of Birth Certificate if entries were mere fabrication or when only the mother filled out the entries. b. Final Judgment: may also consist of final judgment of the nullity of marriage 2. Written admission or acknowledgment of filiation. Provided, it is express and it is signed by the putative parent. Form: a. Sworn statements or Affidavit b. Private document NOTE: must contain an express or unmistakable recognition of paternity (mere terms of endearment do not constitute express acknowledgment, e.g. “Dear hijo,”) Written acknowledgment: includes Marriage Settlement that is nullified (with acknowledgment of filiation); also includes Last Will and Testament (except: if vitiated consent or insanity is the ground for nullifying the Will) NOTE: #1 and #2 are voluntary and conclusive, any court action in relation thereto is merely confirmatory 3. Open and continuous possession ofthe status of an illegitimate child Consists of evidence of commulative acts voluntarily performed by the defendant (putative father) E.g. payment for support (tuition fee), photos showing responsibility with the child, baptismal certificate Corroborative evidence: o For collection of this evidence, the same must show open or public acknowledgment and not clandestine ones.  








There must be continuous pattern or act of acknowledgment and not merely intermittent ones. 4. Other means under the Rules of Court. a. Proof of family reputation b. Genealogy c. Bible as an inheritance (from one generation to another) d. DNA evidence o

Who may file 1. Purely personal upon the child 2. If the child dies during minority or in a state of insanity, heirs may file (including the mother) When filed First 2 grounds Conclusive proof When/Who Lifetime of the child a. Child v. Father b. Child v. Heirs or Putative Father (not barred even after the death of the putative father) Within 5 years from the death of the child: c. Heirs of Child v. Putative Father d. Heirs of Child v. Heirs of the Putative Father Last 2 Grounds When: Lifetime of the putative father a. Child v. P. Father Within five years from death of the child: b. Heirs of the child v. P. Father

ONG v. DIAZ: (SC’s obiter dictum)as long as there are biological samples available from the putative father, an action for recognition is not barred just because of the death of the father. Hence: Child v. Heirs of Putative Father (basis: DNA)

Jurisprudence: if the mother presents proof that she had sex and got pregnant, the burden of proof shifts to the descendant (especially if sexual relationship is admitted)

Rights of Illegitimate Children 1. Use of name of the mother and father (if recognized) April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

2. Entitled to support a. From mother alone b. From father too if recognized 3. The mother has sole custody over minor illegitimate children unless such mother is proven unfit (the court may divest custody from the mother) 4. Compulsory heir of the mother Compulsory heir of the father if recognized Paid last in the payment of legitimes Illegitimate descendants cannot inherit by representation (Iron Barrier Rule) Cannot inherit from legitimate relatives of the mother and father But if entitled: ½ of the share of legitimate DIZON v. DIZON: if the husband never filed an action to impugn the legitimate status of the child, such status becomes conclusive.     

Legitimation 

Legal or juridical process of raising the status of an illegitimate child to that of a legitimate child

Requisites: 1. Prove that at the time of the conception, the parents were free to validly marry each other, or that their only impediment was their minority. 2. There was subsequent valid marriage between the parents. NOTES 

 





 

The child is legitimated by operation of law, no further deed or act is necessary, such status will retroact to the date of birth (as if the child was born legitimate) The final judgment nullifying marriage will prevent legitimation. If marriage is not valid (the second element is not complied with), the same will not result to legitimation) Opinion (Atty. Reyes’): If founded under Art. 36 or 35 (6) (nullified marriage), the child must be considered legitimate because all doubts must be resolved in favour of legitimacy. Question: What if the child died prior to the marriage of the parents? Answer: Will not prevent legitimation. Afterall, the effect of legitimation retroacts to the date of birth (entitlement to representation). Whoever is prejudiced may question the legitimation. The legitimated child is entitled to all the rights of a legitimate child. ABADILLA v. TABILIRAN (AM No. MTJ-92-716, October 25, 1995) FACTS: Ma. Blyth Abadilla, a Clerk of Court, filed a complaint against Judge Tabiliran on the grounds of gross immorality, deceitful conduct, and corruption unbecoming of a judge. With respect to the


charge on gross immorality, she contended that the judge scandalously and publicly cohabited with Priscilla Baybayan during subsistence of his marriage with Teresita Banzuela. Tabiliran and Priscilla got married in May 1986. On the other hand, with respect to the charge on deceitful conduct, petitioner claims that the judge caused his 3 illegitimate children with Priscilla be registered as “legitimate” by falsely executing separate affidavits stating the delayed registration was due to inadvertence, excusable negligence or oversight when in fact, he knew these children cannot be legally registered as legitimate. The judge averred that 25 years had already elapsed since the disappearance of her wife in 1966 when he married Priscilla hence the cohabitation was neither bigamous nor immoral. However, as early as 1970, based on the record, Priscilla had begotten her 3 children (1970, 1971 and 1975). ISSUE: Whether the three children can be considered legitimate. HELD: The 3 children cannot be legitimated nor in any way be considered legitimate since the time they were born, there was an existing valid marriage between Tabiliran and Teresita. Only natural children can be legitimated. Children born outside of wedlock of parents who, at the time of the conception of the former, were not disqualified by any impediment to marry each other, are natural. Under Article 177 of the Family Code, only children conceived and born outside of wedlock of parents who, at the time of the conception of the former, were not disqualified by any impediment to marry each other may be legitimated. Reasons for this limitation: 1) The rationale of legitimation would be destroyed; 2) It would be unfair to the legitimate children in terms of successional rights; 3) There will be the problem of public scandal, unless social mores change; 4) It is too violent to grant the privilege of legitimation to adulterous children as it will destroy the sanctity of marriage; 5) It will be very scandalous, especially if the parents marry many years after the birth of the child.

NOTE: Amendment to the Civil Registry can be made by the LCR upon proof of the requisites: 1. 2. 3. 4.

Through an affidavit stating the circumstances. A copy of the marriage certificate attached tothe affidavit. Requirements submitted to the LCR. LCR will annotate or inscribe legitimate statusof a child.

***If the “father” subsequently finds out that he is not the birth father, he may petition to cancel the entry in the Civil Registry and he may impugn the legitimate status of the child. ADOPTION 

 

The juridical process of creating legitimate filiation between two persons who are not related to each other. A formal and legal process. Simulation of birth cannot be the source of any filiation of the child (strangers to the child)




Requires formal requisites.

Domestic Adoption     

Always judicial Filed with the family court where the petitioner resides Proceeding in rem (jurisdiction is acquired through publication) Publish: order of the court and the petition once a week for three consecutive weeks. Allege: 1) qualified adopter/s and adoptee 2) complied with all requirements

Adopters (Who May Adopt): 1. Filipino Citizens Qualifications: a. Must be of legal age at the time of filing. b. Must be in possession of full civil personality and capacity. c. Must be of good moral character (proof: testimony of witnesses may be required) d. Must not be convicted of any crime involving moralturpitude. e. Must be financially capable of providingsupport to the child (ITR plus other proofs) f. Petitioner must be emotionally and psychologically capable of caring for the adoptee and children in general. (evidence: court may conduct psychological evaluation, HOME STUDY REPORT: inspection and evaluation report of the home environment of the adopter to determine suitability for development of the adoptee). g. Must at least be 16 years older than the adoptee. (unless: 1) adopter is the biological parent or 2) the adopter is the spouse of the biological parent of the adoptee). **no legal deterrent for a single, unmarried Filipino to file petition for adoption as long as possesses all the qualifications and none of the disqualifications. 2. Non-Filipino Citizens Qualifications: a. All qualifications forFilipino adopters andnone of the disqualifications. b. Must come from a country with which the Philippines enjoy diplomatic relations. c. Certification that the country of srcin of alien allows Filipinos (pertaining tothe child) to enter such country. (visa requirements) d. Alien adopter must becertified as capacitated toadopt by his own country (issued by embassy or consulate. Unless: a.1. petitioner or adopter is a former Filipino seeking to adopt his/her relative by consanguinity or affinity within the fourth degree. a.2. seeking to adopt the child of his/her Filipino child (the Filipino spouse does not need to join) a.3. Filipino married to an alien and both are jointly adopting a relative of the Filipino spouse within the fourth civil degree. **may be imposed even if adopter is guardian and adoptee is the ward (upon settlement of all the obligations of the guardian to the ward) April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

NOTE: must adopt jointly if the husband and the wife’s marriage is subsisting. Unless: Adopter seeks to adopt a legitimate child of his or her spouse. Seeking to adopt his/her illegitimate child (but: with written consent of the other spouse) In case of legal separation between the spouses.  



In Re Petition for Adoption of Michelle Lim and Michael Jude Lim In Re Petition for Adoption of Michelle Lim and Michael Jude Lim (GR No. 16899293, May 21, 2009)

FACTS: Monina Lim, petitioner, who was an optometrist was married with Primo Lim but were childless. Minor children, were entrusted to them by Lucia, whose parents were unknown as shown by a certification of DSWD. The spouses registered the children making it appears as if they were the parents. Unfortunately, in 1998, Primo died. She then married an American Citizen, Angel Olario in December 2000. Petitioner decided to adopt the children by availing of the amnesty given under RA 8552 to individuals who simulated the birth of a child. In 2002, she filed separate petitions for adoption of Michelle and Michael before the trial court. Michelle was then 25 years old and already married and Michael was 18 years and seven months old. Michelle and her husband including Michael and Olario gave their consent to the adoption executed in an affidavit.

ISSUE: Whether petitioner who has remarried can singly adopt. HELD: Petition was denied. The time the petitions were filed, petitioner had already remarried. Husband and wife shall jointly adopt except in 3 instances which was not present in the case at bar. In case spouses jointly adopts, they shall jointly exercised parental authority. The use of the word “shall” signifies that joint adoption of husband and wife is mandatory. This is in consonance with the concept of joint parental authority since the child to be adopted is elevated to the level of a legitimate child, it is but natural to require spouses to adopt jointly. The affidavit of consent given by Olario will not suffice since there are certain requirements that he must comply as an American Citizen. He must meet the qualifications set forth in Sec7 of RA8552. The requirements on residency and certification of the alien’s qualification to adopt cannot likewise be waived pursuant to Sec 7. Parental authority is merely just one of the effects of legal adoption. It includes caring and rearing the children for civic consciousness and efficiency and development of their moral mental and physical character and well-being.


e. Alien adopter must be a resident of the Philippines for at least three years from adoption and must maintain Philippine residence until the process of adoption is complete. When written consent must be presented: 1. Of the adoptee if at least 10 years at the time of petition. 2. Of the biological parents ofthe adopter if known. Diwata Ramos Landingin vs.Republic (G.R. No. 164948, July27, 2006) FACTS: Diwata Ramos Landingin, a citizen of the United States of America (USA), of Filipino parentage and a resident of Guam, USA, filed a petition for the adoption of minors Elaine Dizon Ramos, Elma Dizon Ramos and Eugene Dizon Ramos who was born on. The minors are the natural children of Manuel Ramos, petitioner’s brother (deceased), and Amelia Ramos- who went to Italy, re-married there and now has two children by her second marriage and no longer communicated with her children . ISSUE: Whether or not the petition for adoption is invalid for lack of consent of the biological mother? HELD: No. The general requirement of consent and notice to the natural parents is intended to protect the natural parental relationship from unwarranted interference by interlopers, and to insure the opportunity to safeguard the best interests of the child in the manner of the proposed adoption. When she filed her petition with the trial court, Rep. Act No. 8552 was already in effect. Section 9 thereof provides that if the written consent of the biological parents cannot be obtained, written consentmother of the legal guardian the minors will suffice. If, asshe claimed by petitioner,the that the biological of the minors of had indeed abandoned them, should, thus have adduced the written consent of their legal guardian.

Question: What if the adoptee is illegitimate? Answer: The mother shall give consent. In case the child is acknowledged, the father’s consent must be secured as well. Question: What if parents are unknown? Answer: The consent of the DSWD or the custodian of the child must give consent. 3. Other legitimate children ofthe adopter if such children are above 10 years of age. 4. The respective spouse of the adopter. 5. The illegitimate children ifsuch children are above 10 years of age. **failure/refusal to give consent is not a ground per se to dismiss, consider the best interest of the child. Question: What if the absence of consent is due to fraud? Answer: The same can be a ground for nullification of the adoption decree.


**The petition may also include a prayer for the change of name of the adoptee (requires notification and (impliedly) participation of the OSG because the same requires corresponding changes in the Civil Registry). **After submitted: CHILD & HOME STUDY Who will conduct: a. Court social worker b. Any social worker accredited by the DSWD Supervised Trial Custody: for no more than six months, subject to the discretion of the court (to allow binding with the prospective adoptee/er) **If court is satisfied, the trial custody will be terminated and upon consideration of all relevant evidence, the court can issue a decree of judgment of adoption and the same shall not be stopped or prevented by the death of the adopter. Not provided for by law: consequence of the death of the child. [support considerations i.e. fi the adoptee has children] Effect of Judgment 1. Adoptee is considered legitimate child ofthe adopter for all intents and purposes without discrimination whatsoever. a. The adoptee shall use the surname of the adopter and all names prayed for in the petition. (**srcinal Certificate of Live Birth shall be sealed and a new one shall be issued without annotation whatsoever that it is for adoption purposes, names of adoptee/er) b. The adoptee is now entitled but may likewise be obligated to support (reciprocal obligation under the law) 2. Sever all legal ties between biological parent/s andthe child and parental authority is now judicially transferred to the adopter. **However, the effects shall only take place upon finality of judgment. Tamargo vs CA (GR No. 85044, June 3, 1992) FACTS: In October 1982, Adelberto Bundoc, minor, 10 years of age, shot Jennifer Tamargo with an air rifle causing injuries that resulted in her death. The petitioners, natural parents of Tamargo, filed a complaint for damages against the natural parents of Adelberto with whom he was living the time of the tragic incident. In December 1981, the spouses filed aincident. petition to adopt Adelberto Bundoc. Such petition was granted on November 1982 Rapisura after the tragic ISSUE: Whether parental authority concerned may be given retroactive effect so as to make adopting April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

parents the indispensable parties in a damage case filed against the adopted child where actual custody was lodged with the biological parents. HELD: Parental liability is a natural or logical consequence of duties and responsibilities of parents, their parental authority which includes instructing, controlling and disciplining the child. In the case at bar, during the shooting incident, parental authority over Adelberto was still lodged with the natural parents. It follows that they are the indispensable parties to the suit for damages. “Parents and guardians are responsible for the damage caused by the child under their parental authority in accordance with the civil code”. SC did upon not consider that retroactive effect may be time givenwhen to the decree as to impose liability the adopting parents accruing at the they had of noadoption actual orso physical custodya over the adopted child. Retroactivity may be essential if it permits accrual of some benefit or advantage in favor of the adopted child. Under Article 35 of the Child and Youth Welfare Code, parental authority is provisionally vested in the adopting parents during the period of trial custody however in this case, trial custody period either had not yet begin nor had been completed at the time of the shooting incident. Hence, actual custody was then with the natural parents of Adelberto.

Support 

Legal Support: embraces only those which are essential or indispensable: 1. Food/sustenance 2. Clothing 3. Shelter 4. Medical attendance 5. Transportation 6. Education (covered: expenses that will allow a person to commence and finish vocational or professional degree even beyond the age of majority) NOTE: other support may be granted if judicially demanded. General Rule: Support cannot be waived. Exception: support in arrears (**however, support is not deemed waived just because there was delay in demand)



Personal in nature: anchored on legal relationship between payor and beneficiary (intransmissible)

Who are obligated: 1. Husband and wife 2. Parents and children (legitimate or illegitimate) (ascendant and descendant) 3. Brothers and sisters (full or half-blood) o Illegitimate: only if shown that lack of support is not due to their own negligence or fault April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

o

Prerequisite: prior recognition or acknowledgment

Entitlement and obligation: full extent (food, shelter, clothing, etc.) **if the obligation falls between two persons simultaneously, divide among them proportionately Hierarchy prescribed by law must be followed: **hence, for wife to demand from others (i.e. children), she must be able to prove that she first demanded from the husband and the husband is incapable of providing support. **payor must give full support unless he/she proves that his/her resources are insufficient. Insufficiency of means: e.g. recipients are adults and minors= prioritize minors (after deduction of living expenses) NOTE: not subject to levy, execution or attachment but not automatically granted because the same must be enforced by prior demand. How demand is made: 1. Extra-judicial: payor and beneficiary may enter into an agreement fixing the amount and/or manner of payment General Rule: It does not require judicial confirmation as long as voluntary. Exception: legal separation, judicial separation of properties, declaration of nullity. 2. Judicial: through a petition **If the mother of the child was the one who filed = prior proof of filiation is necessary ***Otherwise, the demand is premature if granted by the court despite consistent denial of the putative father. NEPUMOCENO case: There was a fixed written agreement. Agreement for Support is not evidence of filiation in the absence of express acknowledgment. **In case of legal separation and nullification: support may be a necessary incident, court may award support pendent lite. NOTE: even if demanded, it will never attain finality because support is variable (it is based on the needs of the recipient and the resources of the payor). Contractual Support   

Provided for in an agreement Becomes legal support if parties are those enumerated under the law If the contractor is a third person: no longer exempt from attachment or execution (reason: to protect creditors of payor)

Support by Will 

May be given to anyone by the testator


 

The heir is entitled only from the moment of the death of the testator Regardless of beneficiary, not exempt from attachment or execution

Form: a. Cash, or b. Keeping payee in the household of the payor (note: the abovestated are FC provisions and are merely directory, other arrangements are not prohibited) Who may object: any of the legitimate children or spouse. **May be filed even in favour of an unborn child. Note: if the child is never born, all support given is not subject to reimbursement. PARENTAL A UTHORI TY    

Sum total of obligations exercised by the parents over the child Rationale: parens patriae (parents as delegate of the State) Rights and obligations (read law provisions) Important matters: o Parents must keep their children in their custody o Who exercises custody over minors?  If the child is legitimate: both the husband and the wife (mother and father) 





 

In case of conflict: the husband’s decision shall prevail (subject to judicial redress by the wife) Parents are not permitted to use corporal punishment in disciplining the child In case one of the parents die: the surviving parent shall continue exercising parental authority even if such parent contracts subsequent marriage If both parents die: substitute parental authority In order: a. Grandparents (in case of conflict between paternal and maternal grandparents, the court decides) **petition shall be granted over the person of the child unless it includes guardianship over property (case: if the grandparent resides in the US, cannot be granted custody) b. Older brother or sister of the minor (must be 21 years old, capable and willing) c. Actual custodian of the child (another relative or a stranger)


**Foster Care Act: in case of the ground cited under the Family Code, the child may be placed under foster care and foster parent takes care of said child Consequences: (in case of legal separation or annulment of marriage) 1. Parental authority andcustody will still be exercised by both parents **If contested, the court appoints a. No child below 7 years shall be separated from the mother (tender age presumption) b. If the child is 7 years old and above, the child can choose. **the court may override the same depending on the best interest and welfare of the child: if the mother is found to be unfit or incapable, the court may appoint another person Who exercises custody over illegitimate children: a. Mother b. Mother and father, if the child is recognized Adopted child: the adoptive parent/s from the moment of the finality of the judgment. **if adoption is rescinded:the biological parents or the DSWD 2. In all proceedings involving minors,parent/s shall represent the child. Filial Privilege Rule (R. 130, ROC): no child or descendant may be compelled to testify against the parents or ascendants. However, if permission by the accused is granted to the child, the child may choose to testify (waiver) 3. Parent/s or substitute parents shall be civilly liable for the consequences of all acts or omissions of a child under their custody and living with them. Responsibility remains even if the child has reached the age of majority as long as the child is below 21 (R.A. 68-09). **Civil liability, to be enforceable, must be proven by showing that the defendant legally exercises parental authority over the child at the time of the commission or quasi-delict, and that the child was living with the defendant [note: if the parents petitioned for confinement, the Parental Authority is suspended] 

Termination or Suspension 

Emanates from a court order or judgment unless the cause is a natural one o Natural Causes: a. Death of the parent b. Death of the child o

c. Emancipation Judicial Causes of the child a. Absence of the parent *no separate petition needed, Decree of Absence is enough


b. Appointment of a general guardian *minor + property *guardian may be any of those in the Family Code c. Divestment of parental authority in a separate and distinct proceeding d. Parent is convicted by final judgment of a crime the penalty of which is civil interdiction (parental authority is restored upon service of sentence) GROUNDS for DIVESTMENT of PARENTAL AUTHORITY e. Sexual abuse or violence, excessive harshness, subjecting thechild to acts of lasciviousness, etc. Subject to criminal prosecution (R.A. 7610, R.A. 9262) 

Parental Authority over Property 1. The child is the owner of the property Parent/s shall exercise legal guardianship (automatically) o To manage and administer the property o The parent/guardian isrequired to post a bond equivalent to no less than 10% of the value of the property  Deposited in court and kept in court until the child reaches the age of majority  Answers for any wrongful or fraudulent act of the parent Cannot alienate or encumber without judicial authority New Law: place property underexpress trust, at least 8% of the income or value of the property must be used solely for the benefit of the child or devoted to the collective needs of the family. 

 

Special Parental Authority *responsibility and liability imposed by law on school, administrators, as well as teachers for minor children under their supervision, instruction and custody while said minor is in school or even outside of school but in duly authorized activities in ( loco parentis)(SIC= supervision, instruction, custody) **in connection: any harm borne by the child shall make the school liable. ***Sue the school and teacher-in-charge ***Defenses: due diligence, no direct supervision AQUINAS UNIVERSITY CASE: the teacher beat up the student. The parents sued the school, the principal, and the administration. The SC absolved the school and the administration because the school and the administration alleged that the teacher is not their employee and said teacher was only allowed to teach due to an agreement. In other words, the school and the administration had no choice/say in the hiring and firing of the teacher. ST. MARY’S CASE: Negligence was attributed to the driver because the driver failed to maintain the jeep (mechanical defect caused the jeepney to malfunction and result to the injury April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

of the students).

NOTE: waivers of liability are generally contrary to public policy unless such waiver is relative. (relative: only with respect to the amount, e.g. shall only be responsible up to the amount of P50,000 in case of injury sustained by the child…) Recent case: “lack of discipline” (if the student lacked discipline) was still considered absolute waiver because the student is under the supervision and control of the school, the waiver was disregarded. NOTE: If the child is beyond the age of majority, the provision of the Civil Code (art. 2180) applies (other schools of trade, etc.). **Quasi-Delict or breach of contract: if the student enrolls and is accepted, the school’s responsibility over such student commences. Case: the security guard shoots a student while said student was entering the school. The SC ruled that the security guard is an employee of the school. The student was going to school for a legitimate purpose (i.e. to attend classes). Summary Proceedings Remedy: R. 65 (immediately final and executor) ABSENCE 

Civil status or condition of an individual who left the domicile and the whereabouts are

unknown and there are no news or information regarding such absence. 1. Temporary or provisional o Left the residence, whereabouts are unknown o Petition the court for provisional absence for the purpose of managing the absentees properties 2. Declared absences o Absence persisted for 2 years of 5 years (if appointed somebody to take care of the property), may petition for judicial of absence by (order of preference): a. Spouse b. Any testamentary heir. Provided, a copy of the Will is presented. c. Any intestate heir. d. Any person whose right is contingent on the property of the absentee. (appoint as administrator of the property) 3. Presumptive death Persisted for 4, 7, 10 years = judicial declaration ofpresumptive death 

Ordinary

Remarriage

Other Purposes

AFTER

4 years

7 years

To Open Succession 10 years 5 years (if aged


75 and above)



Extraordinary AFTER a. Vessel/ship 2 years b. Action/battle c. Similar/analogous circumstances as long as there is danger of death Other purposes: o To dissolve partnership o o

4 years

4 years

Revocation of an agency Other than succession (e.g. insurance claim)

NOTE: never attains finality because conditioned upon: a. Confirmation of death, or b. Reappearance Effect of Reappearance *dissolution of partnership and revocation of agency are rendered without effect *succession: the heirs must return what they have received as inheritance, the heirs will only be liable up to the extent of what they received as inheritance fruits are not included. SITUATION: 2001= will disposition: I hereby give P1M to X (X was declared absent subsequently) 2014 = Testator died **The heirs of X must prove that X was alive in2014 when T’s sucession opened. Otherwise, they cannot claim the P1M. Funeral Arrangements 



Personal to the person who may leave written instructions duringhis/her lifetime, which instructions must be followed If none, the funeral arrangements must be consistent with the religious affiliations of the deceased o The right and authority devolves to (the decision of the oldest must be followed) a. Descendants of the nearest degree b. Ascendants of the nearest degree c. Brothers and sister CARISMO v. ABELLANO (?) FACTS: The paramour of the deceased made funeral and burial arrangements. The legal family protested because they did not give their consent to the paramour to do the same.


RULING: The petition to exhume the corpse is granted because the legal wife has the right under the law to arrange for the funeral and burial arrangement of the husband.

EUGENIO v. VELEZ (185 SCRA 45) FACTS: Vitaliana Vargas’ brothers and sisters unaware of the former’s death on August 28, 1988 filed a petition for Habeas Corpus on September 27, 1988 before the RTC of Misamis Oriental alleging that she was forcible taken from her residence sometime in 1987 and was confined by the herein petitioner, Tomas Eugenio in his palacial residence in Jasaan, Misamis Oriental. The court then issued a writ of habeas corpus but petitioner refused to surrender the Vitaliana’s body to the sheriff on the ground that a corpse cannot be subjected to habeas corpus proceedings. Vitaliana, 25 year old single, died of heart failure due to toxemia of pregnancy in Eugenio’s residence. The court ordered that the body should be delivered to a funeral parlor for autopsy but Eugenio assailed the lack of jurisdiction of the court. ISSUE: Whether the petitioner can claim custody of the deceased. HELD: The court held that the custody of the dead body of Vitaliana was correctly awarded to the surviving brothers and sisters pursuant to Section 1103 of the Revised Administrative Code which provides: “Persons charged with duty of burial- if the deceased was an unmarried man or woman or a child and left any kin; the duty of the burial shall devolve upon the nearest kin of the deceased. Albeit, petitioner claims he is the spouse as contemplated under Art. 294 of the Civil Code, Philippine law does not recognize common law marriages where “a man and a woman not legally married who cohabit for many years as husband and wife, who represent themselves to the public as husband and wife, and who are reputed to be husband and wife in the community where they live may be considered legally mauled in common law jurisdictions”. In addition, it requires that the man and woman living together must not in any way be incapacitated to contract marriage. Whereas, the petitioner has a subsisting marriage with another woman, legal impediment that disqualified him from even legally marrying Vitaliana.

**Any person who intervenes or shows disrespect may be held liable for damages. USE OF NAMES AND SURNAMES  

Governed by law, attached to the civil status, personality and condition of a person Fixed and absolute

A. LEGITIMATE No option or choice as to surname 


  



Use father’s surname (patrilineal) 3 parts: given n ame, middle name (mother’s maiden surname), and father’s surname ADOPTED= surname of adopted (even if the adopter is single and unmarried) (hence, if the adopter is a single and unmarried woman, the child has no middle name) IN Re: Stephanie Astorga Garcia:allowed to use the middle name of the biological mother although she was adopted by the biological father. Male descendants or ascendants: suffix may be added (e.g. Jr. without need for the father to amend his name to Sr.).

No prohibition for female descendants to add Jr. because merely directory Several male descendants: II, III, IV, etc.= middle name for subsequent generations should be the same. B. ILLEGITIMATE Mother’s surname will be used as their surname (no middle name) Except: if acknowle dged. Upon registration, the child may use the father’s surname (if through sworn affidavit, the same must bear the consent of the mother) = submitted to the LCR and the LCR may enter the surname of the father as the child’s surname. C. MARRIED WOMAN Several options: 1. Husband’s surname by adding it to her first name (e.g. Gloria Arroyo) 2. Husband’s surname by adding it to her maiden name (e.g. Gloria Macapagal -Arroyo) 3. By adding “Mrs.” (mistress of) to her husband’s name (e.g. Mrs. Miguel Arroyo) 4. Can retain maiden name (Gloria Macapagal) o o

 

REMO v. SEC. OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS (G.R. No. 169202, March 5, 2010) FACTS: Maria Virginia V. Remo is a Filipino citizen married to Francisco R. Rallonza. The following entries appear in her passport: “Rallonza” as her surname, “Maria Virginia” as her given name, and “Remo” as her middle name. Virginia’s passport was due to expire on October 27, 2000. She applied for her passport’s renewal with the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) office in Chicago, Illinois, USA. She also requested that her maiden name and surname be used in the replacement passport. The DFA office in Chicago and later on DFA Sec. Domingo Siason denied Virginia’s request. DFA Sec. Siason, through an undersecretary, stated:

This Office is cognizant of the provision in the law that it is not obligatory for a married woman to use her husband’s name. Use of maiden name is allowed in passport application only if the married name has not been used in previous application. The Implementing Rules and Regulations for Philippine Passport Act of 1996 clearly defines the conditions when a woman applicant may revert to her maiden name, that is, only in cases of annulment of marriage, divorce and death of the husband. Ms. Remo’s case does not meet any of thes e conditions. April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

ISSUE: Should Virginia be allowed to use her maiden surname in the replacement passport? HELD: [1] “A married woman has an option, but not a duty, to use the surname of the husband in any of the ways provided by Article 370 NCC. She is therefore allowed to use not only any of the three names provided in Article 370, but also her maiden name upon marriage.” “A married woman is not prohibited from continuously using her maiden name once she is married. When a woman marries, she does not change her name but only her civil status.” [2] The law governing passport issuance is RA 8239. Section 5(d) “limits the instances when a married woman may be allowed to revert to the use of her maiden name in her passport.” These instances are death of husband, divorce decree, annulment or nullity of marriage. Article 370 of the Civil Code and Section 5(d) of RA 8239 do not conflict with one another. RA 8239, including its implementing rules and regulations, does not prohibit a married woman from using her maiden name in her passport. In fact, in recognition of this right, the DFA allows a married woman who applies for a passport for the first time to use her maiden name. Such an applicant is not required to adopt her husband's surname. [3] Virginia “would not have encountered any problems in the replacement passport had she opted to continuously and consistently use her maiden name from the moment she was married and from the time she first applied for a Philippine passport.” [4] If Virginia’s request to use her maiden surname in the replacement passport is granted, “nothing prevents her in the future from requesting to revert to the use of her husband’s surname.” “Unjustified changes in one’s name and identity in a passport cannot be allowed. Undue confusion and inconsistency in the records of passport holders will arise.” For passport issuance purposes, a married woman whose marriage is subsisting, may not

change her family name at will. Passport Act: A woman may revert to her maiden name: 1. In case of death of the husband 2. When there is a final judgment of annulment 3. When there is a valid judgment of divorce

**married woman whose husband died may still use husband’s name **may also add suffix to identify her as the widow (i.e. Vda.,viuda” “ ) ***Unless: continued use thereof creates public confusion (e.g. when husband remarries)


YASIN V. SHARIA DISTRI CT COURT (G.R. No. 94986 February 23, 1995) FACTS: On May 5, 1990, Hatima C. Yasin filed in the Shari'a District Court in Zamboanga City a "Petition to resume the use of maiden name.” The respondent court ordered amendments to the petition as it was not sufficient in form and substance in accordance Rule 103, Rules of Court, regarding the residence of petitioner and the name sought to be adopted is not properly indicated in the title thereof which should include all the names by which the petitioner has been known. Hatima filed a motion for reconsideration of the aforesaid order alleging that the petition filed is not covered by Rule 103 of the Rules of Court but is merely a petition to resume the use of her maiden name and surname after the dissolution of her marriage by divorce under the Code of Muslim Personal Laws of the Philippines, and after marriage of her former husband to another woman. The respondent court denied the motion since compliance to rule 103 is necessary if the petition is to be granted, as it would result in the resumption of the use of petitioner’s maiden name and surname. ISSUE: Whether or not in the case of annulment of marriage, or divorce under the Code of Muslim Personal Laws of the Philippines, and the husband is married again to another woman and the former desires to resume her maiden name or surname, is she required to file a petition for change of name and comply with the formal requirements of Rule 103 of the Rules of Court. RULING: NO. When a woman marries a man, she need not apply and/or seek judicial authority to use her husband's name by prefixing the word "Mrs." before her husband's full name or by adding her husband's surname to her maiden first name. The law grants her such right (Art. 370, Civil Code). Similarly, when the marriage ties or vinculum no longer exists as in the case of death of the husband or divorce as authorized by the Muslim Code, the widow or divorcee need not seek judicial confirmation of the change in her civil status in order to revert to her maiden name as the use of her former husband's name is optional and not obligatory for her. When petitioner married her husband, she did not change her name but only her civil status. Neither was she required to secure judicial authority to use the surname of her husband after the marriage, as no law requires it. The use of the husband's surname during the marriage, after annulment of the marriage and after the death of the husband is permissive and not obligatory except in case of legal separation. The court finds the petition to resume the use of maiden name filed by petitioner before the respondent court a superfluity and unnecessary proceeding since the law requires her to do so as her former husband is already married to another woman after obtaining a decree of divorce from her in accordance with Muslim laws.

Use of Alias/Pseudonyms   

Only for creative purposes Also regulated by law Must file a petition in court to be permitted to use the same


 

Illegal use of alias= to protect the public, esp. creditors But if illegally used only once, the law is not violated

URSUA v. CA (256 SCRA 149 ) FACTS:

In 1989, Cesario Ursua was charged with bribery and dishonesty. His lawyer then asked him to get a copy of the complaint against him from the Office of the Ombudsman. His lawyer asked him that because the law firm’s messenger, a certain Oscar Perez, was unable to go to the Ombudsman. Before going to the Ombudsman, Ursua talked to Perez. He revealed to him that he feels uncomfortable asking for a copy of the complaint because he is the respondent in the said case. Perez then told him than he can go there as “Oscar Perez” so that he does not have to reveal his true identity. At the Office of the Ombudsman, Ursua signed the logbook there as “Oscar Perez”. When he was handed a copy of the complaint, he signed the receipt as “Oscar Perez”. However, a staff of the Ombudsman was able to learn that he was in fact Cesario Ursua. The staff then recommended that a criminal case be filed against Ursua. Eventually, Ursua was sentenced to three years in prison for violating C.A. No. 142, as amended, otherwise known as “An Act To Regulate The Use Of Aliases”.

ISSUE: Whether Cesario Ursua’s conviction is proper. HELD: No. Ursua should be acquitted. The Supreme Court ruled that a strict application of C.A. No. 142, as amended, in this case only leads to absurdity – something which could not have been intended by the lawmakers. Under C.A. No. 142, as amended, save for some instances, a person is not allowed to use a name or an alias other than his registered name or that which he was baptized. Under the law, what makes the use of alias illegal is the fact that it is being used habitually and publicly in business transactions without prior authorization by competent authority. In this case, Ursua merely used the name “Oscar Perez” once, it was not used in a business transaction, the use of the name was with the consent of Oscar Perez himself, and even if he used a different name, in this instance, he was not even required to disclose his identity at the Office of the Ombudsman. When he was requesting a copy of the complaint, he need not disclose his identity because the complaint is a public record open to the public. In short, the evils sought to be avoided by the C.A. No. 142 was not brought about when Ursua used a name other than his name. A strict application of the law is not warranted. When Ursua used the name of Oscar Perez, no fraud was committed; there was no crime committed punishable under C.A. No. 142. The purpose of the law is to punish evils defined therein so when no such evil was produced by Ursua’s act, said law need not be applied.

USURPATION OF A NAME: April M.B. Civil Law Review Notes. Culled from the lectures of Atty. Lulu Reyes. Please feel free to send me corrections if there is any needed. Passing on these notes to you is not to encourage you to slack off but only to help you concentrate on the lectures better if you are that type of learner. It is still best to make your own notes because most lawyers would tell you that having personal notes helped them in passing the Bar. I hope this helps, though. :D

Basis: A person’s name is his exclusive property. Hence, if a name is usurped, civil liability is incurred by the usurper. CIVIL REGISTER

Historical and legal repository of all legal events tracing the evolution of an individual. (hehehe, I dunno about this definition. I keep thinking Darwinian Evolution and I’m not sure our Civil Registrar has such records of our “evolution.” Events: a. Birth





b. Death c. Everything in between 1. Legal separation 2. Annulment 3. Legitimation 4. Adoption 5. Civil interdiction 6. Adoption 7. Loss, acquisition, re-acquisition of citizenship 8. Emancipation of a child (LCR must maintain separate books for each event) NOTE: all entries and records in the LCR is under the official custody of the LCR, hence, it is the only one allowed to change/correct entries Authorized: a. By judicial order in petition (R. 103, R. 108) b. Other appropriate petitions (e.g. adoption, annulment) R. 103 

 

for correction of entries where the entries contain clerical or typographical error (Summary Proceedings) but in rem: requires publication (once a week for three consecutive weeks) clerical or typographical errors: if obvious to sight and plain understanding

R. 108  

seeks to establish a right or fact that affects the civil status of owner of such status adversarial proceeding a. notice by publication b. notice must be served to all interested parties

REPUBLIC v. COSETENG-MAGPAYO (G.R. No. 189476, February 11, 2011) FACTS: Petitioner sought to correct his name as appearing in his Certificate of Live Birth. He


prayed that his surname be deleted and his mother’s surname be placed as his surname. He likewise prayed for the date of marriage, etc. be deleted because his father and mother never married. RULING: Upon examination of all records, the SC found that the requirements under R.108 were never followed (father, mother, grandparents) and such requirements are jurisdictional. Hence, the petition was dismissed.

NOTE: R. 108 is not a proper remedy to establish citizenship, filiation, and to nullify a marriage. R. 108= Wife v. Husband, H was absent for several years, marriage status should be deleted  not a proper remedy. Admin. Order (R.A. 8034, as amended) initiated through administrative petition limited to: 1. name or nickname a. name reflected is ridiculous, absurd, or subjects the owner of the name to public humiliation or embarrassment b. clear typographical or clerical error c. registered name is tainted with dishonour d. the person has been using such name for a long time and publicly known for that name (to avoid public confusion) 2. Typographical/clerical error as to sex of the person  Committed by birth personnel or medical attendant  Attach medical certificate to the petition showing that a medical expert conducted physical examination of the  

person The medical examination must reveal that change of sex sought is not due to sex reassignment 3. Date of Birth  Only because there’s an error in the date (e.g. February 30)  Obvious to the eye, plain understanding  Attach affidavits of 2 disinterested person attesting to the date sought to be corrected 

NOTE: R.A. 8034 is improper if there will be a change in the civil status, citizenship, etc. of the owner of the record. NOTE: Publication is still mandatory.


Civil-Law-Review-Notes-Atty.-Lulu-Reyes-Lecture_Persons-Family-Relations.pdf

Recommend Documents