part iii legal separation

8/12/2019 Part III Legal Separation

1/46


2/46

&| P a g e

.ed:

No Arti#le 3& o t!e Ci$il Code reads: t!e respondent is psy#!ologi#ally in#apa#itated to perorm !is essential marriageo%ligations

.EL:SC denied. !e a#tion originally fled "as annulment o marriage %ased on Arti#le (5'paragrap! 5 o t!e Gamily Code. Arti#le (5@5 o t!e Gamily Code reers to la#, o po"er to #opulate.N1/O 6n#apa#ity to #onsummate denotes t!e permanent ina%ility on t!e part o t!e spouses to perormt!e #omplete a#t o seual inter#ourse. :o e$iden#e "as presented in t!e #ase at %ar to esta%lis! t!atrespondent "as in any "ay p!ysi#ally in#apa%le to #onsummate !is marriage "it! petitioner.Petitioner e$en admitted during !er #ross-eamination t!at s!e and respondent !ad seual inter#ourseater t!eir "edding and %eore respondent let or a%road. Petitioner "as a#tually see,ing orde#laration o nullity o !er marriage to respondent %ased on t!e latter2s psy#!ologi#al in#apa#ity to#omply "it! !is marital o%ligations o marriage under Arti#le 3/ o t!e Gamily Code. !e Court de#lared

t!at Hpsy#!ologi#al in#apa#ityI under Arti#le 3/ o t!e Gamily Code is not meant to #ompre!end allpossi%le #ases o psy#!oses. 6t s!ould reer' rat!er' to no less t!an a mental @not p!ysi#al in#apa#ityt!at #auses a party to %e truly in #ogniti$e o t!e %asi# marital #o$enants t!at #on#omitantly must %eassumed and dis#!arged %y t!e parties to t!e marriage. Psy#!ologi#al in#apa#ity must %e#!ara#terized %y7777777

J!a"0e,a ,) Co0rt of Appea)GR No ;46=?? $c%ober 7, ##'

P8KCEJB8AL +6SK8M

!e SC ruled t!at Krlando2s allegation o raud and intimidation is untena%le. Kn its a#e' it is o%$ious

t!at Krlando is only see,ing to annul !is marriage "it! Lilia so as to !a$e t!e pending appealed%igamy #ase Nfled against !im %y LiliaO to %e dismissed.Kn t!e merits o t!e #ase' Krlando2s allegation o ear "as not #on#retely esta%lis!ed. !e Court is not#on$in#ed t!at appellant2s appre!ension o danger to !is person is so o$er"!elming as to depri$e !imo t!e "ill to enter $oluntarily to a #ontra#t o marriage. 6t is not disputed t!at at t!e time !e "asallegedly %eing !arassed' appellant "or,ed as a se#urity guard in a %an,. *i$en !is employment att!at time' it is reasona%le to assume t!at appellant ,ne" t!e rudiments o sel-deense' or' at t!e $eryleast' t!e proper "ay to ,eep !imsel out o !arm2s "ay. Gor sure' it is e$en dou%tul i t!reats "ereindeed made to %ear upon appellant' "!at "it! t!e a#t t!at !e ne$er soug!t t!e assistan#e o t!ese#urity personnel o !is s#!ool nor t!e poli#e regarding t!e a#ti$ities o t!ose "!o "ere t!reatening


11/46

11| P a g e

!im. And neit!er did !e inorm t!e udge a%out !is predi#ament prior to solemnizing t!eir marriage.Graud #annot %e raised as a ground as "ell. +is allegation t!at !e ne$er !ad an ere#tion during t!eirseual inter#ourse is in#redi%le and is an outrig!t lie. +is #ounsel also #on#eded %eore t!e lo"er #ourtt!at !is #lient !ad a seual relations!ip "it! Lilia.

.OLING:

%&us, t&e )etition (or annul*ent +as ranted, but t&e a+ard o( moral and eemplary damagesis deeted or la#, o %asis.77777777777777777

TITLE:ONE ENG IAM aa WILLIAM ONG$petitioner $s LUCITA ONG$respondentATEmont! "it!out interest. !ereater' on 1(Septem%er 1995' t!is Court' in *.8. :o. 11=5=5' ruled "it! fnality t!at t!e etraudi#ial ore#losureand sale "ere $alid.

!e lo"er #ourts ruled t!at t!e fling o Ci$il Case :o. =5-33933 suspended t!e running o t!e one-yearredemption period or "!i#! spouses Elisa and Antonio an #an eer#ise t!eir rig!t o redemption. !etender and oer o redemption made %y spouses Elisa and Antonio an "as "it!in t!e one-yearredemption period. Kn t!e ot!er !and' etro%an, insists t!at t!e fling o said #ase did not toll t!erunning o said redemption period and t!at t!ey ailed to eer#ise said rig!t "it! t!e allo"a%le periodo one year.

!e fling o Ci$il Case :o. =5-33933 @Annulment and Can#ellation o Etra-udi#ial Gore#losure Saledid not toll t!e running o t!e one-year redemption period. Settled is t!e rule t!at t!e period "it!in"!i#! to redeem t!e property sold at a s!eri2s sale is not suspended %y t!e institution o an a#tion toannul t!e ore#losure sale.3& !us' %ot! lo"er #ourts erred in ruling t!at t!e one-year redemptionperiod "as interrupted.

6t is apparent rom t!e #omplaint fled in Ci$il Case :o. =5-33933 t!at t!e issue ad$an#ed %yrespondents is "!et!er t!e etraudi#ial ore#losure' as "ell as t!e au#tion sale' is $oid %e#ause t!ereal estate mortgages #onstituted on t!e property #o$ered %y C :o. 15&33 !a$e %een etinguis!ed


26/46


27/46

&| P a g e

Can#ellation o Etra-udi#ial Gore#losure Sale to %e an a#tion or udi#ial redemption %e#ause itspurpose "as not or redemption %ut or nullif#ation o etraudi#ial ore#losure sale.

6n t!e #ase at %ar' respondents spouses Elisa and Antonio an ailed to s!o" good ait! on t!eir part.!ey !a$e ailed to $alidly tender any redemption pri#e nor #onsigned any amount' in any o t!e #asest!ey !a$e fled' "!i#! t!ey %elie$ed "as t!e #orre#t amount' i only to s!o" t!eir "illingness anda%ility to pay. 6t is not di;#ult to understand "!y t!e redemption pri#e s!ould eit!er %e ully oered in

legal tender or else $alidly #onsigned in #ourt. Knly %y su#! means #an t!e au#tion "inner %e assuredt!at t!e oer to redeem is %eing done in good ait!.((

6n t!e #ase %eore us' t!oug! t!e respondents spouses ar#ial See and Lilian an signed a do#umententitled Jeed o 8edemption and 8e#on$eyan#e "!erein t!ey "ere #alled t!e 8edemptioners andt!at t!ey paid t!e amount o P11'5'. or t!e su%e#t property' t!is Court fnds t!at "!at "asentered into %y t!em and etro%an, "as not a redemption' %ut a sale. ?eing already t!e a%soluteo"ner o t!e su%e#t property %e#ause spouses Elisa and Antonio an ailed to properly eer#ise t!eirrig!t o redemption' etro%an, #an sell' to a pri#e o its li,ing' t!e ore#losed property to interested%uyers "!i#! in t!is #ase are respondents spouses ar#ial See and Lilian an. !e pri#e itsel@P11'5'. is indi#ati$e o a sale. 6 it "ere a redemption' t!e pri#e "ould only %e t!e "inning%id pri#e @P1'5'(. plus interest up to t!e time o redemption' toget!er "it! t!e amount o anyassessments or taes paid %y t!e pur#!aser ater t!e au#tion sale' and interest on su#! last-namedamount at t!e same rate.

!e appellate #ourt2s ruling t!at etro%an, !ad no rig!t to demand rom spouses Elisa and Antonioan t!e a#tual deli$ery o t!e redemption pri#e %e#ause it is not legally #apa#itated to surrender t!epossession and title o t!e su%e#t property to said spouses until su#! time t!e redemption o spousesar#ial See and Lillian an is de#lared null and $oid' is Ta"ed.

etro%an,' as t!e !ig!est %idder in t!e pu%li# au#tion sale' #an demand rom t!e redemptioner' in t!is#ase spouses Elisa and Antonio an' t!e pur#!ase pri#e and taes it !ad paid or t!e property' toget!er"it! interests "it! t!e one-year redemption period. 6 same is not paid %y t!e redemptioner "it!in t!etime pres#ri%ed %y la"' t!e latter loses !is>!er rig!t to redeem' and t!e %uyer o t!e ore#losedproperty %e#omes its a%solute o"ner. Prior to selling t!e property to spouses ar#ial See and Lilian an$ia t!e Jeed o 8edemption and 8e#on$eyan#e' etro%an, already #onsolidated its o"ners!ip o$ert!e ore#losed property. De "ill not nulliy t!e redemption @pur#!ase made %y spouses ar#ial Seeand Lilian an so t!at respondents spouses Elisa and Antonio an #an eer#ise t!eir rig!t o redemption"!i#! !as long %een lost or t!eir ailure to eer#ise t!e same in a##ordan#e "it! la".

!e trial #ourt2s ruling t!at respondents spouses Elisa and Antonio an s!ould %e allo"ed to redeemt!e ore#losed property %e#ause etro%an, allo"ed t!e ee#ution o t!e Jeed o 8edemption and8e#on$eyan#e to a "rong person and or "rong reason is erroneous. As eplained a%o$e' "e #onsidert!e redemption or P11'5'. made %y spouses ar#ial See and Lilian an to %e a sale in t!eguise o a redemption. Su#! redemption "ill not restore respondents spouses Elisa and Antonio an2srig!t to legally redeem t!e su%e#t property "!i#! rig!t t!ey !a$e lost.

8espondents spouses Elisa and Antonio an "ere granted %y t!e la" t!e rig!t o redemption "!i#!t!ey ailed to eer#ise $alidly and ee#ti$ely. +a$ing ailed to redeem t!e ore#losed property in t!emanner and "it!in t!e period pres#ri%ed %y la"' t!ey !a$e lost any rig!t and interest o$er t!e su%e#tproperty. 6n so doing' etro%an, !as t!e rig!t to dispose o said property as it deems ft.

D+E8EGK8E' all t!e oregoing #onsidered' t!e instant petition or re$ie" on #ertiorari is *8A:EJ andt!e Je#ision o t!e Court o Appeals dated 31 0anuary & and its 8esolution dated 15 0une & inCA-*.8. CF :o. =/&1( are !ere%y 8EFE8SEJ and SE AS6JE. !e #omplaint in Ci$il Case :o. 9-=51&%eore t!e 8egional rial Court o anila' ?ran#! 3&' is J6S6SSEJ.

SK K8JE8EJ.7777777777777777777CARLOS JS SANOJAL

eoflo Carlos and petitioner 0uan Je Jios Carlos "ere %rot!ers "!o ea#! !a$e t!ree par#els o land %y$irtue o in!eritan#e. Later eoflo died intestate. +e "as sur$i$ed %y respondents Geli#idad Sando$aland t!eir son' eoflo Carlos 66. Bpon eoflo2s deat!' t"o par#els o land "ere registered in t!e name oGeli#idad and eoflo 66. 6n August 1995' Carlos #ommen#ed an a#tion against respondents %eore t!e#ourt a 6uo. 6n !is #omplaint' Carlos asserted t!at t!e marriage %et"een !is late %rot!er and Geli#idad"as a nullity in $ie" o t!e a%sen#e o t!e re)uired marriage li#ense. +e li,e"ise maintained t!at !isde#eased %rot!er "as neit!er t!e natural nor t!e adopti$e at!er o eoflo Carlos 66. +e argued t!at

t!e properties #o$ered %y su#! #ertif#ates o title' in#luding t!e sums re#ei$ed %y respondents aspro#eeds' s!ould %e re#on$eyed to !im.

.EL:The (ro0"d) for de'arat!o" of a%)o0te "0!t+ of 2arr!a(e 20)t %e pro,ed Ne!ther0d(2e"t o" the pead!"() "or )022ar+ 0d(2e"t !) ao*ed So !) 'o"fe))!o" of 0d(2e"td!)ao*edCarlos argues t!at t!e CA s!ould !a$e applied 8ule 35 o t!e 8ules o Court go$erningsummary udgment' instead o t!e rule on udgment on t!e pleadings. Petitioner is misguided.D!et!er it is %ased on udgment on t!e pleadings or summary udgment' t!e CA "as #orre#t inre$ersing t!e summary udgment rendered %y t!e trial #ourt. ?ot! t!e rules on udgment on t!e


28/46

&=| P a g e

pleadings and summary udgments !a$e no pla#e in #ases o de#laration o a%solute nullity omarriage and e$en in annulment o marriage.

A pet!t!o" for de'arat!o" of a%)o0te "0!t+ of ,o!d 2arr!a(e 2a+ %e &ed )oe+ %+ theh0)%a"d or *!fe ED'ept!o"): ;@ N0!t+ of 2arr!a(e 'a)e) 'o22e"'ed %efore thee#e't!,!t+ of AM No >6-;;-;>-SC a"d 6@ Marr!a(e) 'ee%rated d0r!"( the e#e't!,!t+ ofthe C!,! Code Bnder t!e R0e o" e'arat!o" of A%)o0te N0!t+ of Jo!d Marr!a(e) and

Annulment o Foida%le arriages' t!e petition or de#laration o a%solute nullity o marriage may not%e fled %y any party outside o t!e marriage. A petition or de#laration o a%solute nullity o $oidmarriage may %e fled solely %y t!e !us%and or t!e "ie. Knly an aggrie$ed or inured spouse may flea petition or annulment o $oida%le marriages or de#laration o a%solute nullity o $oid marriages.Su#! petition #annot %e fled %y #ompulsory or intestate !eirs o t!e spouses or %y t!e State. !eCommittee is o t!e %elie t!at t!ey do not !a$e a legal rig!t to fle t!e petition. Compulsory orintestate !eirs !a$e only in#!oate rig!ts prior to t!e deat! o t!eir prede#essor' and' !en#e' #an only)uestion t!e $alidity o t!e marriage o t!e spouses upon t!e deat! o a spouse in a pro#eeding or t!esettlement o t!e estate o t!e de#eased spouse fled in t!e regular #ourts. Kn t!e ot!er !and' t!e#on#ern o t!e State is to preser$e marriage and not to see, its dissolution. !e 8ule etends only tomarriages entered into during t!e ee#ti$ity o t!e Gamily Code "!i#! too, ee#t on August 3' 19==.

!e ad$ent o t!e 8ule on Je#laration o A%solute :ullity o Foid arriages mar,s t!e %eginning o t!eend o t!e rig!t o t!e !eirs o t!e de#eased spouse to %ring a nullity o marriage #ase against t!e

sur$i$ing spouse. ?ut t!e 8ule ne$er intended to depri$e t!e #ompulsory or intestate !eirs o t!eirsu##essional rig!ts.D!ile A.. :o. &-11-1-SC de#lares t!at a petition or de#laration o a%solute nullity o marriage may%e fled solely %y t!e !us%and or t!e "ie' it does not mean t!at t!e #ompulsory or intestate !eirs are"it!out any re#ourse under t!e la". !ey #an still prote#t t!eir su##essional rig!t' or' as stated in t!e8ationale o t!e 8ules on Annulment o Foida%le arriages and Je#laration o A%solute :ullity o Foidarriages' #ompulsory or intestate !eirs #an still )uestion t!e $alidity o t!e marriage o t!e spouses'not in a pro#eeding or de#laration o nullity %ut upon t!e deat! o a spouse in a pro#eeding or t!esettlement o t!e estate o t!e de#eased spouse fled in t!e regular #ourts.6t is emp!asized' !o"e$er' t!at t!e 8ule does not apply to #ases already #ommen#ed %eore ar#! 15'&3 alt!oug! t!e marriage in$ol$ed is "it!in t!e #o$erage o t!e Gamily Code. !is is so' as t!e ne"8ule "!i#! %e#ame ee#ti$e on ar#! 15' &3 is prospe#ti$e in its appli#ation.Petitioner #ommen#ed t!e nullity o marriage #ase against respondent Geli#idad in 1995. !e marriagein #ontro$ersy "as #ele%rated on ay 1(' 19/&. D!i#! la" "ould go$ern depends upon "!en t!emarriage too, pla#e.

!e marriage !a$ing %een solemnized prior to t!e ee#ti$ity o t!e Gamily Code' t!e appli#a%le la" ist!e Ci$il Code "!i#! "as t!e la" in ee#t at t!e time o its #ele%ration. ?ut t!e Ci$il Code is silent as to"!o may %ring an a#tion to de#lare t!e marriage $oid. Joes t!is mean t!at any person #an %ring ana#tion or t!e de#laration o nullity o marriageZ

rue' under t!e :e" Ci$il Code "!i#! is t!e la" in or#e at t!e time t!e respondents "ere married' ore$en in t!e Gamily Code't!ere is no spe#if# pro$ision as to "!o #an fle a petition to de#lare t!e nullityo marriage4 !o"e$er' only a party "!o #an demonstrate ?)ro)er interest@ #an fle t!e same. A petitionto de#lare t!e nullity o marriage' li,e any ot!er a#tions' *ust be )rosecuted or de(ended in t&e na*eo( t&e real )artyininterest and *ust be based on a cause o( action. !us' in ial '. Badayo,t!eCourt !eld t!at t!e #!ildren !a$e t!e personality to fle t!e petition to de#lare t!e nullity o marriage ot!eir de#eased at!er to t!eir stepmot!er as it ae#ts t!eir su##essional rig!ts.77777777777777777777

*racisco vs. 6as%er ro or8s Cos%ruc%io Corpora%ioR. !o. 151&'7, *ebruary 1', ##5

FACTS:

0osefna Castillo "as &( years old "!en s!e and Eduardo Gran#is#o got married on 0anuary 19=3. !elatter "as t!en employed as Fi#e President in a Pri$ate Corporation. 0osefna a#)uired t"o par#els oland "!ere 6mus ?an, ee#uted a deed o a%solute sale in a$or o 0osefna' married to Eduardo. Ana;da$it o "ai$er "as ee#uted %y Eduardo "!ere !e de#lared t!at prior to !is marriage "it! 0osefna't!e latter pur#!ased t!e land "it! !er o"n sa$ings and t!at !e "ai$ed "!ate$er #laims !e !ad o$ert!e property. D!en 0osefna mortgaged t!e property or a loan' Eduardo a;ed !is marital #onormityto t!e deed. 6n 199' Eduardo "!o "as t!en a *eneral anager' %oug!t %ags o #ement romdeendant %ut ailed to pay t!e same. !e latter fled a #omplaint or re#o$ery and trial #ourt renderedudgment against Eduardo. !e #ourt t!en issued a "rit o ee#ution and t!e s!erii issued a noti#e o

le$y on ee#ution o$er t!e alleged property o 0osefna or t!e re#o$ery o t!e %alan#e o t!e amountdue under t!e de#ision o t!e trial #ourt. Petitioner fled a t!ird party #laim o$er t!e & par#els o landin "!i#! s!e #laimed as !er parap!ernal property.

ISSUE: DK: t!e su%e#t property is t!e #onugal property o 0osefna and Eduardo.

.EL:

!e Court ruled t!at petitioner ailed to pro$e t!at s!e a#)uired t!e property "it! !er personal unds%eore !er #o!a%itation "it! Eduardo and t!at s!e "as t!e sole o"ner. !e Jeed o A%solute Sale on


29/46

&9| P a g e

re#ord s!o"ed it "as issued ater !er marriage. !eir #ase all under Arti#le 1(= and sin#e t!ey gotmarried %eore t!e Gamily Code' t!e pro$ision' pursuant to Art &5/' #an %e applied retroa#ti$ely i itdoes not preudi#e $ested rig!ts. Petitioner li,e"ise ailed t!at s!e !ad any $ested rig!t.

D!ere t!e parties are in a $oid marriage due to a legal impediment t!at in$alidates su#! marriage' Art1(= s!ould %e applied. 6n t!e a%sen#e o proo t!at t!e "ie>!us%and !as a#tually #ontri%uted money'property' or industry to t!e properties a#)uired during su#! union t!e presumption o #o-o"ners!ip "ill

not arise.

!e petition "as denied or la#, o merit. !e de#ision o CA t!at t!e property "as #onugal "asa;rmed.

77777777777777777Sa" L0!) ,) Sa" L0!)

S!ort Summary< Gormer Laguna go$ernor !ad 1st spouse "!o prede#eased !im' t!en married again toan Ameri#an #itizen "!o di$or#ed !im' t!en remarried again. +e died "it! !is 3rd "ie %ut !is &nd "ieand t!e #!ildren in t!e 1st marriage #ontested t!e standing o t!e 3rd "ie' #laiming t!at t!e saidmarriage "as %igamous sin#e t!e &nd marriage "as still su%sisting under 8P la" @#ant apply GCretroa#ti$ely. Court !eld t!at e$en "it! GC not applied retroa#ti$ely' Fan Jorn and ot!er urispruden#esu;#iently pro$ides t!e $alidity to t!e 3rd marriage' t!us re#ognizing di$or#e o%tained %y an alien

spouse against t!e Gilipino spouse. +o"e$er' as t!e 3rd marriage "as not su;#iently pro$ed' t!e #ase"as remanded in order or t!e 3rd spouse to present urt!er e$iden#e on t!is.Ga#tsGEL6C6S6K SA: LB6S #ontra#ted 3 marriages#ommon propertyZ

!ere s!ould %e no dispute t!at eit!er spouse #annot alienate or dispose o #onugal property "it!outt!e "ritten #onsent o t!e ot!er.!e #odal reeren#e to t!is is t!e se#ond paragrap! o Arti#le 9/ and 1&( o t!e Gamily Code "!i#!states6$ Apr! 6>;>

FACTS< Kn' K#t 11' 19=&' ar#iano 8o#a %oug!t a 35=-s)uare meter lot in \am%ales rom !is mot!er.Si years later in 19==' ar#iano oered to sell t!e lot to t!e petitioners Guentes spouses t!roug! t!e!elp o Atty. Plagata "!o "ould prepare t!e do#uments and re)uirements to #omplete t!e sale. 6n t!e

agreement %et"een ar#iano and Guentes spouses t!ere "ill %e a P!p /' do"n payment and P!p1(' "ill %e paid upon t!e remo$al o ar#iano o #ertain stru#tures on t!e land and atert!e #onsent o t!e estranged "ie o ar#iano' 8osario' "ould %e attained. Atty. Plagata t!us "enta%out to #omplete su#! tas,s and #laimed t!at !e "ent toanila to get t!e signature o 8osario %utnotarized t!e do#ument at \am%oanga . !e deed o sale "as ee#uted 0anuary 11' 19=9. As timepassed' ar#iano and 8osario died "!ile t!e Guentes spouses and possession and #ontrol o$er t!e lot.Eig!t years later in 199' t!e #!ildren o ar#iano and 8osario fled a #ase to annul t!e saleandre#on$ey t!e property on t!e ground t!at t!e sale "as $oid sin#e t!e #onsent o 8osario "as notattained and t!at 8osarios2 signature "as a mere orgery. !e Guentes spouses #laim t!at t!e a#tion!as pres#ri%ed sin#e an a#tion to annul a sale on t!e ground o raud is ( years rom dis#o$ery.
http://coffeeafficionado.blogspot.com/2011/12/fuentes-v-conrado-roca-gr-178902-april.htmlhttp://coffeeafficionado.blogspot.com/2011/12/fuentes-v-conrado-roca-gr-178902-april.html


34/46

3(| P a g e

!e 8C ruled in a$or o t!e Guentes spouses ruling t!at t!ere "as no orgery' t!at t!e testimony oAtty. Plagata "!o "itnessed t!esigning o 8osario must %e gi$en "eig!t' and t!at t!e a#tion !asalready pres#ri%ed.

Kn t!e ot!er !and' t!e CA re$ersed t!e ruling o t!e CA stating t!at t!e a#tion !as not pres#ri%edsin#e t!e appli#a%le la" is t!e 195Ci$il Code "!i#! pro$ided t!at t!e sale o Conugal Property

"it!out t!e #onsent o t!e ot!er spouse is $oida%le and t!e a#tion must %e %roug!t "it!in 1 years.*i$en t!at t!e transa#tion "as in 19=9 and t!e a#tion "as %roug!t in 199 !en#e it "as "ell "it!in t!epres#ripti$e period.

ISSUES:;. D!et!er or not 8osario2s signature on t!e do#ument o#onsent to !er !us%and ar#iano2ssale o t!eir #onugal land to t!e Guentes spouses "as orged4

6. D!et!er or not t!e 8o#as2 a#tion or t!e de#laration o nullity o t!at sale to t!e spouses alreadypres#ri%ed4 and

4. D!et!er or not only 8osario' t!e "ie "!ose #onsent "as not !ad' #ould %ring t!e a#tion to annult!at sale.

RULING: ;!e SC ruled t!at t!ere "as orgery due to t!e dieren#e in t!e signatures o 8osario

in t!e do#ument gi$ing#onsent and anot!er do#ument ee#uted at t!e same time period. !e SCnoted t!at t!e CA "as #orre#t in ruling t!at t!e !ea$y !and"riting in t!e do#ument "!i#!stated #onsent "as #ompletely dierent rom t!e sample signature. !ere "as no e$iden#e pro$ided toeplain "!y t!ere "as su#! dieren#e in t!e !and"riting.

6. Alt!oug! ar#iano and 8osario "as married during t!e 195 #i$il #ode' t!e sale "as done in 19=9'ater t!e ee#ti$ity o t!e Gamily Code. !e Gamily Code applies to Conugal Partners!ips alreadyesta%lis!ed at t!e ena#tment o t!e Gamily Code. !e sale o #onugal property done %y ar#iano"it!out t!e #onsent o 8osario is #ompletely $oid under Art 1&( o t!e amily #ode. Dit! t!at' it is agi$en a#t t!at assailing a $oid #ontra#t ne$er pres#ri%es. Kn t!e argument t!at t!e a#tion !as alreadypres#ri%ed %ased on t!e dis#o$ery o t!e raud' t!at pres#ripti$e period applied to t!e Guentes spousessin#e it "as t!em "!o s!ould !a$e assailed su#! #ontra#t due to t!e raud %ut t!ey ailed to do so. Knt!e ot!er !and' t!e a#tion to assail a sale %ased on no #onsent gi$en %y t!e ot!er spouse does notpres#ri%e sin#e it is a $oid #ontra#t.

4. 6t is argued %y t!e Spouses Guentes t!at it is only t!e spouse' 8osario' "!o #an fle su#! a #ase toassail t!e $alidity o t!e sale %ut gi$en t!at 8osario "as already dead no one #ould %ring t!e a#tionanymore. !e SC ruled t!at su#! position is "rong sin#e as stated a%o$e' t!at sale "as $oid rom t!e%eginning. Conse)uently' t!e land remained t!e property o ar#iano and 8osario despite t!at sale.D!en t!e t"o died' t!ey passed on t!e o"ners!ip o t!e property to t!eir !eirs' namely' t!e 8o#as. Asla"ul o"ners' t!e 8o#as !ad t!e rig!t' under Arti#le (&9 o t!e Ci$il Code' to e#lude any person romits enoyment and disposal.7777777777777

GR No ;5;=>H$ A0(0)t >5$ 6>;4BOBBY TAN$;5

GRACE ANRAE$ C.ARITY A SANTIAGO$ .ENRY ANRAE$ ANREW ANRAE$ ASMINBLAQA$ MIRIAM ROSE ANRAE$ AN OSEP. ANRAE$


35/46

35| P a g e

su%e#t properties' and t!e Cs1&t!ereor "ere issued in !is name.

Kn K#to%er ' 199' 8osario2s #!ildren' namely' *ra#e' Pro#eso' 0r.' +enry' Andre"' *lory' iriam 8ose'0osep! @all surnamed Andrade' 0asmin ?laza' and C!arity A. Santiago @Andrades' fled a#omplaint13or re#on$eyan#e and annulment o deeds o #on$eyan#e and damages against ?o%%y%eore t!e 8C' do#,eted as Ci$il Case :o. CE? &9/9. 6n t!eir #omplaint' t!ey alleged t!at t!etransa#tion %et"een 8osario and ?o%%y @su%e#t transa#tion "as not one o sale %ut "as a#tually an

e)uita%le mortgage "!i#! "as entered into to se#ure 8osario2s inde%tedness "it! ?o%%y. !ey also#laimed t!at sin#e t!e su%e#t properties "ere in!erited %y t!em rom t!eir at!er' Pro#eso Andrade'Sr. @Pro#eso' Sr.' t!e su%e#t properties "ere #onugal in nature' and t!us' 8osario !ad no rig!t todispose o t!eir respe#ti$e s!ares t!erein. 6n t!is lig!t' t!ey argued t!at t!ey remained as #o-o"ners ot!e su%e#t properties toget!er "it! ?o%%y' despite t!e issuan#e o t!e Cs in !is name.

6n !is deense' ?o%%y #ontended t!at t!e su%e#t properties "ere solely o"ned %y 8osario per t!e Csissued in !er name1(and t!at !e !ad $alidly a#)uired t!e same upon Pro#eso' 0r.2s ailure to eer#ise!is option to %uy %a#, t!e su%e#t properties.15+e also interposed t!e deenses o pres#ription andla#!es against t!e Andrades.1/#rala" $irtuala" li%raryThe RTC R0!"(

Kn April /' &1' t!e 8C rendered a 0udgment1dismissing t!e Andrades2 #omplaint.

6t ruled t!at t!e su%e#t transa#tion "as a bona desale and not an e)uita%le mortgage as #an %egleaned rom its terms and #onditions' noting urt!er t!at t!e su%e#t deed o sale "as not e$en)uestioned %y t!e Andrades at t!e time o its ee#ution. As Pro#eso' 0r. ailed to eer#ise !is option to%uy %a#, t!e su%e#t properties' t!e titles t!ereto "ere $alidly #onsolidated in ?o%%y2s a$or' resultingto t!e issuan#e o Cs in !is name "!i#! are deemed to %e #on#lusi$e proo o !is o"ners!ipt!ereto.1=As regards t!e nature o t!e su%e#t properties' t!e 8C ound t!at t!ey Happeared to %e t!ee#lusi$e properties o 8osario.I19Ginally' it ound t!at t!e Andrades2 #laim o$er t!e su%e#t properties!ad already pres#ri%ed and t!at lac&es!ad already set in.rala" $irtuala" li%rary

Jissatisfed' t!e Andrades ele$ated t!e matter on appeal.The CA R0!"(

Kn 0uly &/' &5' t!e CA rendered t!e assailed Je#ision &1up!olding in part t!e 8C2s ruling.

6t ound t!at t!e su%e#t deed o sale "as indeed "!at it purports to %e' i.e.' a bona de#ontra#t o

sale. 6n t!is a##ord' it denied t!e Andrades2 #laim t!at t!e su%e#t transa#tion "as an e)uita%lemortgage sin#e t!eir allegation t!at t!e pur#!ase pri#e "as unusually lo" "as let unsupported %y anye$iden#e. Also' t!eir a$erment t!at t!ey !a$e %een in #ontinuous possession o t!e su%e#t properties"as %elied %y t!e testimony o Andre" Andrade @Andre" "!o stated t!at ?o%%y "as already inpossession o t!e same. &rala" $irtuala" li%rary

:e$ert!eless' t!e CA ruled t!at t!e su%e#t properties %elong to t!e #onugal partners!ip o 8osarioand !er late !us%and' Pro#eso' Sr.' and t!us' s!e #o-o"ned t!e same toget!er "it! !er #!ildren' t!eAndrades.&36n t!is respe#t' t!e sale "as $alid only "it! respe#t to 8osario2s pro-indi$iso s!are in t!esu%e#t properties and it #annot preudi#e t!e s!are o t!e Andrades sin#e t!ey did not #onsent to t!esale.&(6n ee#t' a resulting trust "as #reated %et"een ?o%%y and t!e Andrades&5and' as su#!'pres#ription and>or la#!es !as yet to set in so as to %ar t!em rom instituting t!e instant#ase.&/A##ordingly' t!e CA ordered ?o%%y to re#on$ey to t!e Andrades t!eir s!are in t!e su%e#tproperties.rala" $irtuala" li%rary

6n $ie" o t!e CA2s pronoun#ement' t!e parties fled t!eir respe#ti$e motions or re#onsideration. Gort!e Andrades2 part' t!ey soug!t t!e re#onsideration o t!e CA2s fnding as to its #!ara#terization o t!esu%e#t transa#tion as one o sale' insisting t!at it is a#tually an e)uita%le mortgage. &=As or ?o%%y2spart' !e maintained t!at t!e sale s!ould !a$e #o$ered t!e entirety o t!e su%e#t properties and notonly 8osario2s pro-indi$iso s!are.&9?ot! motions or re#onsideration "ere' !o"e$er' denied %y t!e CAin a 8esolution3dated ar#! 3' &/.

+en#e' t!e present #onsolidated petitions.I))0e) Before the Co0rt

!e present #ontro$ersy re$ol$es around t!e CA2s #!ara#terization o t!e su%e#t properties as "ell aso t!e su%e#t transa#tion %et"een 8osario and ?o%%y.

6n *.8. :o. 1&1' t!e Andrades su%mit t!at t!e CA erred in ruling t!at t!e su%e#t transa#tion is in

t!e nature o a sale' "!ile in *.8. :o. 119(' ?o%%y #ontends t!at t!e CA erred in ruling t!at t!esu%e#t properties are #onugal in nature.The Co0rt3) R0!"(

A. C;arac%eriza%io of %;e sub


36/46

3/| P a g e

su%e#t transa#tion "as one o sale and not an e)uita%le mortgage. 8e#ords readily re$eal t!at %ot!t!e 8C and t!e CA o%ser$ed t!at t!ere is no #lear and #on$in#ing e$iden#e to s!o" t!at t!e partiesagreed upon a mortgage. +en#e' a%sent any glaring error t!erein or any ot!er #ompelling reason to!old ot!er"ise' t!is fnding s!ould no" %e deemed as #on#lusi$e and peror#e must stand. As e#!oedin t!e #ase oA*)o '. A


37/46

3| P a g e

W.EREFORE' t!e Court !ere%y @a GRANTSt!e petition o ?o%%y an in *.8. :o. 119(4 and@%ENIESt!e petition o *ra#e Andrade' C!arity A. Santiago' +enry Andrade' Andre" Andrade'0asmin ?laza' iriam 8ose Andrade' and 0osep! Andrade in *.8. :o. 1&1. A##ordingly' t!e Je#isiondated 0uly &/' &5 and 8esolution dated ar#! 3' &/ o t!e Court o Appeals in CA-*.8. CF :o.19= are !ere%y REJERSEand SET ASIE' and t!e April /' &1 Je#ision o t!e 8egional rialCourt o Ce%u City' ?ran#! 19 in Ci$il Case :o. CE? &9/9 is REINSTATE.

SO ORERE777777777777P8KPE8M 8ELA6K: 6: A 6^EJ A886A*E

C.EESMAN J IAC ;=4 SCRA =4GR No 5H44 a"0ar+ 6;$ ;==;GACS< !is appeal #on#erns t!e attempt %y an Ameri#an #itizen @petitioner !omas C!eesman toannulor la#, o #onsent on !is partt!e sale %y !is Gilipino "ie @Criselda o a residential lot and%uilding to Estelita PadillabJe#em%er (' 19 R !omas C!eesman and Criselda C!eesman "ere married %ut !a$e %eenseparated sin#e Ge%ruary 15' 19=1b0une (' 19( R a Jeed o Sale and ranser o Possessory 8ig!ts "as ee#uted %y Armando Altares'#on$eying a par#el o land in a$or o HCriselda C!eesman' married to !omas C!eesman.I !omas'

alt!oug! a"are o t!e deed' did not o%e#t to t!e transer %eing made only to !is "ie. a de#larationsor t!e said property "ere issued in t!e name o Criselda C!eesman alone and s!e assumed e#lusi$emanagement and administration o t!e propertyb 0uly 1' 19=1 R Criselda sold t!e property to Estelita Padilla "it!out ,no"ledge and #onsent o !omasb0uly 31' 19=1 R !omas fled a suit or t!e annulment o t!e sale on t!e ground t!at t!e transa#tion!ad %een ee#uted "it!out !is ,no"ledge and #onsent. Criselda fled an ans"er alleging t!at t!eproperty sold "as parap!ernal' !a$ing pur#!ased t!e property rom !er o"n money4 t!at !omas' anAmeri#an "as dis)ualifed to !a$e any interest or rig!t o o"ners!ip in t!e land and4 t!at Estelita "asa %uyer in good ait!bJuring t!e trial' it "as ound out t!at t!e transer o property too, pla#e during t!e eisten#e o t!eirmarriage as it "as a#)uired on 0une (' 19(b0une &(' 19=& R 8C de#lared t!e sale ee#uted %y Criselda $oid a% initio and ordered t!e deli$ery ot!e property to !omas as administrator o t!e #onugal propertyb!omas appealed to 6AC "!ere !e assailed t!e granting o Estelita2s petition or relie and resolutiono matters not su%e#t o said petition4 in de#laring $alid t!e sale to Estelita "it!out !is ,no"ledge and

#onsent. Kn 0anuary ' 19=/' 6AC a;rmed summary udgment de#ision6SSBE< D!et!er or not t!e "ie #an dispose o t!e property in )uestion4 D!et!er or not C!eesman'%eing an Ameri#an #itizen' #an )uestion t!e sale +ELJ< Se#tion 1(' Art. ^6F o 193 Constitutionpro$ides t!at< Hsa$e in #ases o !ereditary su##ession' no pri$ate land s!all %e transerred or #on$eyede#ept to indi$iduals' #orporations' or asso#iations )ualifed to a#)uire or !old lands o t!e pu%li#domain.I !us' assuming t!at it "as !is intention t!at t!e lot in )uestion %e pur#!ased %y !im and !is"ie' !e a#)uired no rig!t "!atsoe$er o$er t!e property %y $irtue o t!at pur#!ase4 and in attemptingto a#)uire a rig!t or interest in land' !e "as ,no"ingly $iolating t!e Constitution.As su#!' t!e sale to !im "as null and $oid. At any rate' C!eesman !ad and !as :K CAPAC6M KUBES6K: +E SB?SEUBE:SALE KG +E SAE P8KPE8M ?M +6S D6GE K: +E +EK8M +A 6: SKJK6:* +E6S E8ELM E^E8C6S6:* +E P8E8K*A6FE KG A +BS?A:J 6: 8ESPEC KGCK:0B*ALP8KPE8M. o sustain su#! a t!eory "ould permit indire#t #ontro$ersion o t!e Constitutionalpro!i%ition.6 t!e property "ere to %e de#lared #onugal' t!is "ould a##ord to t!e alien !us%and a not insu%stantialinterest and rig!t o$er land' as !e "ould t!en !a$e a de#isi$e $ote as to its transer or disposition. !isis a rig!t t!at t!e Constitution does not permit !im to !a$e.E$en i t!e "ie did use #onugal unds to ma,e t!e a#)uisition' !is re#o$ering and !olding t!e property#annot %e "arranted as it is against t!e #onstitution. Conse)uently' Estelita is a pur#!aser in goodait! sin#e s!e ,ne" t!at !omas #annot inter$ene in t!e sale or disposition o t!e said property.JEC6S6K:< !e Court AGG68EJ t!e appealed de#ision.

7777777777777WILLEM BEUMER$Pet!t!o"er$ ,)AJELINA AMORES$Re)po"de"tGR No ;=? e'e2%er 4$ 6>;6

SUMMARY

Jut#! national see,s to reim%urse unds !e in$ested in allo"ing !is Gilipina spouse to%uy par#els oGilipino land ater t!eir marriage "as de#lared null.

GACSPetitioner' a Jut#! :ational' and respondent' a Gilipina' married in ar#! &9'19=. Ater se$eral years' t!e 8C de#lared t!e nullity o t!eir marriage. Conse)uently' petitioner fleda Petition or Jissolution o Conugal Partners!ip dated praying or t!e distri%ution o properties#laimed to !a$e %een a#)uired during t!e su%sisten#e o t!eir marriage. Juring trial' petitionertestifed t!at "!ile Lots D' ^' M' and \' par#els o land' "ere registered in t!e name o respondent't!ese properties "ere a#)uired "it! t!e money !e re#ei$ed rom t!e Jut#! go$ernment as !is


38/46

3=| P a g e

disa%ility %eneft sin#e respondent did not !a$e su;#ient in#ome. +e also #laimed t!at t!e ointa;da$it t!ey su%mitted "as #ontrary to Arti#le =9 o t!e Gamily Code' !en#e' in$alid. !e 8C ruledt!at' regardless o t!e sour#e o unds or t!e a#)uisition o Lots D' ^' M and \' petitioner #ould not!a$e a#)uired any rig!t "!atsoe$er o$er t!ese properties as petitioner still attempted to a#)uire t!emnot"it!standing !is ,no"ledge o t!e #onstitutional pro!i%ition against oreign o"ners!ip o pri$atelands. !is "as made e$ident %y t!e s"orn statements petitioner ee#uted purporting to s!o" t!at t!esu%e#t par#els o land "ere pur#!ased rom t!e e#lusi$e unds o !is "ie' t!e !erein respondent.

Petitioner2s plea or reim%ursement or t!e amount !e !ad paid to pur#!aset!e oregoing properties on t!e %asis o e)uity "as li,e"ise denied or not !a$ing #ometo #ourt "it!#lean !ands. CA a;rmed. Petitioner appealed.

6SSBED>: a oreigner may reim%urse !is in$estment in t!e pur#!ase o Gilipino land JEC6S6K: !eCourt AGG68EJ t!e rulings o t!e 8C and CA. 6n

I" Re: Pet!t!o" For Separat!o" of Propert+-Ee"a B0e"a,e"t0ra M0er , .e20t M0er

t!e Court !ad already denied a##laim or reim%ursement o t!e $alue o pur#!ased par#els oP!ilippine land instituted %y a oreigner against !is ormer Gilipina spouse. 6t !eld t!at t!e oreigner#annot see, reim%ursement on t!e ground o e)uity "!ere it is #lear t!at !e "illingly and ,no"ingly%oug!t t!e property despite t!e pro!i%ition against oreign o"ners!ip o P!ilippine land ens!rined

under Se#tion ' Arti#le ^66 o t!e 19= P!ilippine Constitution. Bndenia%ly' petitioner openly admittedt!at !e is "ell a"are o t!e a%o$e-#ited #onstitutional pro!i%ition and e$en asse$erated t!at'%e#ause o su#! pro!i%ition' !e and respondent registered t!e su%e#t properties in t!e latter2s name.Clearly' petitioner2s a#tuations s!o"ed !is palpa%le intent to s,irt t!e #onstitutional pro!i%ition. Kn t!e%asis o su#! admission' t!e Court fnds no reason "!y it s!ould not apply t!e uller ruling. !e time-!onored prin#iple is t!at !e "!o !as done ine)uity s!all not %e a##orded e)uity. !us' litigant may %edenied relie %y a #ourt o e)uity on t!e ground t!at !is #ondu#t !as-%een ine)uita%le' unair anddis!onest' or raudulent' or de#eitul. Surely' a #ontra#t t!at $iolates t!e Constitution and t!e la" isnull and $oid' $ests no rig!ts' #reates no o%ligations and produ#es no legal ee#t at all.:eit!er #an t!e Court grant petitioners #laim or reim%ursement on t!e %asis o unust enri#!ment. 6tdoes not apply i t!e a#tion is pros#ri%ed %y t!e Constitution.77777777777777777777777777777

FAMILY RELATIONS/ FAMILY .OME

6aalo vs CAR !o. 1&4, auary 1', ##1

FACTS:

roadi# analo "!o died on Ge%ruary 199&' "as sur$i$ed %y !is Pilar and !is 11 #!ildren. !ede#eased let se$eral real properties in anila and a %usiness in arla#. 6n :o$em%er 199&' !ereinrespondents' = o t!e sur$i$ing #!ildren' fled a petition "it! 8C anila or t!e udi#ial settlement ot!e estate o t!eir late at!er and or appointment o t!eir %rot!er 8omeo analo as administratort!ereo. +earing "as set on Ge%ruary 11' 1993 and t!e !erein petitioners "ere granted 1 days "it!in"!i#! to fle t!eir opposition to t!e petition.

ISSUE:DK: t!e #ase at %ar is #o$ered under Arti#le 151 "!ere earnest eorts to"ard #ompromises!ould frst %e made prior t!e fling o t!e petition.

.EL:

6t is a undamental rule t!at in t!e determination o t!e nature o an a#tion or pro#eeding' t!ea$erments and t!e #!ara#ter o t!e relie "ere soug!t in t!e #omplaint or petition' s!all %e #ontrolling.!e #areul s#rutiny o t!e petition or t!e issuan#e o letters o administration' settlement anddistri%ution o t!e estate %elies !erein petitioners2 #laim t!at t!e same is in t!e nature o an ordinary#i$il a#tion. !e pro$ision o Arti#le 151 is appli#a%le only to ordinary #i$il a#tions. 6t is #lear rom t!eterm HsuitI t!at it reers to an a#tion %y one person or persons against anot!er or ot!er in a #ourt ousti#e in "!i#! t!e plainti pursues t!e remedy "!i#! t!e la" aords !im or t!e redress o an inuryor enor#ement o a rig!t. 6t is also t!e intention o t!e Code Commission as re$ealed in t!e 8eport ot!e Code Commission to ma,e t!e pro$ision %e appli#a%le only to #i$il a#tions. !e petition orissuan#e o letters o administration' settlement' and distri%ution o estate is a spe#ial pro#eeding andas su#! a remedy "!ere%y t!e petitioners t!erein see, to esta%lis! a status' a rig!t' or a parti#ular

a#t. +en#e' it must %e emp!asized t!at !erein petitioners are not %eing sued in su#! #ase or any#ause o a#tion as in a#t no deendant "as pronoun#ed t!erein.77777777777777GAYON JS GAYON

FACTS:!e re#ords s!o" t!at on 0uly 31' 19/' Pedro *ayon fledsaid#omplaint against t!e spouses Sil$estre *ayon and *eno$e$a de*ayon' alleging su%stantially t!at'on K#to%er 1' 195&' said spousesee#uted a deed #opy o "!i#! "as atta#!ed to t!e #omplaint'asAnne A "!ere%y t!ey sold to Pedro *elera' or t!e sum o P5.' a par#el o unregistered


39/46

39| P a g e

land t!erein des#ri%ed' and lo#atedin t!e %arrio o Ca%u%ugan' muni#ipality o *uim%al' pro$in#e o6loilo'in#luding t!e impro$ements t!ereon' su%e#t to redemption "it!inf$e@5 years or not later t!an K#to%er 1' 1954 t!at said rig!t o redemption !ad not %een eer#ised %ySil$estre *ayon' *eno$e$a de*ayon' or any o t!eir !eirs or su##essors' despite t!e epiration ot!eperiod t!ereor4 t!at said Pedro *elera and !is "ie Estelita Jamaso!ad' %y $irtue o a deed o sale #opy o "!i#! "as atta#!ed tot!e#omplaint' as Anne ? dated ar#! &1' 19/1' sold t!eaorementioned land to plainti Pedro

*ayon or t!e sum o P/1(.4t!at plainti !ad' sin#e 19/1' introdu#ed t!ereon impro$ements"ort!P1'4 t!at !e !ad' moreo$er' ully paid t!e taes on said property upto 19/4 and t!at Arti#les1// and 1/1/ o our Ci$il Code re)uirea udi#ial de#ree or t!e #onsolidation o t!e title in and to a landa#)uired t!roug! a #onditional sale'and' a##ordingly' praying t!at anorder %e issued in plaintis a$or or t!e #onsolidation o o"ners!ipinand to t!e aorementioned property.6n !er ans"er to t!e#omplaint' rs. *ayon alleged t!at !er!us%and' Sil$estre *ayon' died on 0anuary /' 195(' long %eoret!einstitution o t!is #ase4 t!at Anne A to t!e #omplaint is f#titious' ort!e signature t!ereonpurporting to %e !er signature is not !ers4t!atneit!er s!e nor !er de#eased !us%and !ad e$er ee#uted anydo#ument o "!ate$er nature inplaintis a$or4 t!at t!e #omplaint ismali#ious and !ad em%arrassed !er and !er #!ildren4 t!at t!e!eirs o Sil$estre *ayon !ad to employ t!e ser$i#es o #ounsel or a ee o P5. and in#urredepenses o at least P&.4 and t!at %eing a%rot!er o t!e de#eased Sil$estre *ayon' plainti didnot eert eortsor t!e ami#a%le settlement o t!e #ase %eore fling !is #omplaint.S!e prayed'

t!ereore' t!at t!e same %e dismissed and t!at plainti %esenten#ed to pay damages.

ISSUE :D!et!er or not t!e #ontention o t!e r.*ayon t!at anearnest eort to"ard a #ompromise %eoret!e fling o t!e suit istena%le..EL:

As regards' plainti2s ailure to see, a #ompromise' as an alleged o%sta#le to t!e present #ase' Art. &&&o our Ci$il

Code pro$ides< :o suit s!all %e fled or maintained %et"een mem%erso t!e same amily unless it s!ould appear t!at earnest eorts to"ard a #ompromise !a$e %een made'%ut t!at t!e same !a$e ailed' su%e#t to t!e limitations in arti#le &35.6t is note"ort!y t!at t!eimpediment arising rom t!is pro$ision applies to suits fled or maintained %et"een mem%ers o t!esame amily. !is p!rase' mem%ers o t!e same amily' s!ould' !o"e$er' %e#onstrued in t!e lig!t o

Art. &1 o t!e same Code' pursuant to "!i#!< Gamily relations s!all in#lude t!ose


40/46

(| P a g e

Tr!%!a"a ,) Tr!%!a"aGR No ;454?=

Fa't): t!is is a petition or !a%eas #orpus fled %y respondent Lourdes ri%iana against !er !us%andpetitioner Ed"in ri%iana. 6n !er petition' respondent #laims t!at petitioner let t!eir #onugal !ome"it! t!eir daug!ter and !as sin#e depri$ed !er o la"ul #ustody.Petioner mo$ed to dismiss t!e petition on t!e ground t!at t!e petition ailed to allege t!at earnest

eorts at a #ompromise "ere made %eore its fling as re)uired %y Arti#le 151 o t!e amily #ode.!e 8C denied ed"in2s motion' !en#e t!is petition.

I))0e:"!et!er or no t!e ailure to indi#ate in !er petition pr !a%eas #orpus t!at t!e parties eertedeorts to rea#! a #ompromise is a ground or t!e dismissal o said petition.

.ed: alt!oug! respondent ailed to allege t!at s!e resorted to #ompNromise pro#eedings %eorefling t!e petition' atta#!ing a %arangay #ertif#ation to fle a#tion' nonet!elss ee#ti$ely esta%lis!edt!at parties tried to #ompromise %ut "ere unsu##essul.6n addition' t!e ailure o a party to #omply "it! #ondition pre#edent is not urisdi#tional dee#t.oreo$er' in !a%eas #orpus pro#eedings in$ol$ing t!e "elare and #ustody o a #!ild o tender years't!e paramount #on#ern is to resol$e immediately t!e issue o "!o !as legal #ustody. e#!ni#alitiess!ould not stand in t!e "ay o gi$ing su#! #!ild ull prote#tion.7777777777777777777

+o%iveros vs. RCR !o. 154'5, ue &, 1&&&

FACTS:

Petitioner spouses Augusto and aria +onti$eros fled a #omplaint or damages against pri$aterespondents *regorio +onti$eros and eodora Ayson. !e petitioners alleged t!at t!ey are t!e o"nerso a par#el o land in Capiz and t!at t!ey "ere depri$ed o in#ome rom t!e land as a result o t!e flingo t!e land registration #ase. 6n t!e reply' pri$ate respondents denied t!at t!ey "ere married andalleged t!at *regorio "as a "ido"er "!ile eodora "as single. !ey also denied depri$ing petitionerso possession o and in#ome rom t!e land. Kn t!e #ontrary' a##ording to t!e pri$ate respondents' t!epossession o t!e property in )uestion !ad already %een transerred to petitioners %y $irtue o t!e "rito possession. rial #ourt denied petitioner2s motion t!at "!ile in t!e amended #omplaint' t!ey allegedt!at earnest eorts to"ards a #ompromise "ere made' it "as not $erifed as pro$ided in Arti#le 151.

ISSUE: DK: t!e #ourt #an $alidly dismissed t!e #omplaint due to la#, o eorts eerted to"ards a#ompromise as stated in Arti#le 151.

.EL:

SC !eld t!at t!e in#lusion o pri$ate respondent eodora Ayson as deendant and aria +onti$eros aspetitioner ta,es t!e #ase out o t!e s#ope o Arti#le 151. Bnder t!is pro$ision' t!e p!rase Hmem%ers ot!e same amilyI reers to t!e !us%and and "ie' parents and #!ildren' as#endants and des#endants'and %rot!ers and sisters "!et!er ull or !al-%lood. 8eligious relations!ip and relations!ip %y a;nityare not gi$en any legal ee#ts in t!is urisdi#tion. eodora and aria as spouses o t!e +onti$eros2 areregarded as strangers to t!e +onti$eros amily or purposes o Arti#le 151.77777777777777777

Tr!%!a"a ,) Tr!%!a"aGR No ;454?=

Fa't): t!is is a petition or !a%eas #orpus fled %y respondent Lourdes ri%iana against !er !us%andpetitioner Ed"in ri%iana. 6n !er petition' respondent #laims t!at petitioner let t!eir #onugal !ome"it! t!eir daug!ter and !as sin#e depri$ed !er o la"ul #ustody.Petioner mo$ed to dismiss t!e petition on t!e ground t!at t!e petition ailed to allege t!at earnesteorts at a #ompromise "ere made %eore its fling as re)uired %y Arti#le 151 o t!e amily #ode.!e 8C denied ed"in2s motion' !en#e t!is petition.

I))0e:"!et!er or not t!e ailure to indi#ate in !er petition pr !a%eas #orpus t!at t!e parties eertedeorts to rea#! a #ompromise is a ground or t!e dismissal o said petition.

.ed: Alt!oug!' respondent ailed to allege t!at s!e resorted to #ompromise pro#eedings %eorefling t!e petition' atta#!ing a %arangay #ertif#ation to fle a#tion' nonet!eless ee#ti$ely esta%lis!ed

t!at parties tried to #ompromise %ut "ere unsu##essul.6n addition' t!e ailure o a party to #omply "it! #ondition pre#edent is not urisdi#tional dee#t.oreo$er' in !a%eas #orpus pro#eedings in$ol$ing t!e "elare and #ustody o a #!ild o tender years't!e paramount #on#ern is to resol$e immediately t!e issue o "!o !as legal #ustody. e#!ni#alitiess!ould not stand in t!e "ay o gi$ing su#! #!ild ull prote#tion.7777777777777777777777

What happe") !f the per)o" 'o")t!t0t!"( the fa2!+ ho2e d!e)86 t!ere are %enef#iaries "!o sur$i$e and are li$ing in t!e amily !ome' it "ill #ontinue or 1 years'unless at t!e epiration o 1 years' t!ere is still a minor %enef#iary' in "!i#! #ase t!e amily !ome
http://famcode.blogspot.com/2014/01/what-happens-if-person-constituting.htmlhttp://famcode.blogspot.com/2014/01/what-happens-if-person-constituting.html


41/46

(1| P a g e

#ontinues until t!at %enef#iary %e#omes o age. /


42/46

(&| P a g e

eempt rom ee#ution or t!e payment o o%ligations in#urred %eore t!e ee#ti$ity o t!e GamilyCode on August 3' 19==. Sin#e petitioner in#urred de%t in 19=' it pre#eded t!e ee#ti$ity o t!e Codeand !is property is t!ereore not eempt orm atta#!ment.

!e petition "as dismissed %y SC.7777777777777GR No

OSE MOEUILLO$ petitioner'$s..ON AUGUSTO J BREJA FRANCISCO SALINAS$ FLORIPER ABELLAN-SALINAS$ UANITOCULAN-CULAN a"d EPUTY S.ERIFF FERNANO PLATA respondents.GANCAYCO$.0FACTS: As lia%ility or a $e!i#ular a##ident on ar#! 1/' 19/ "!i#! ,illed Audie Salinas and "!i#! inured

8enato Culan' 0ose ode)uillo and ?enito alu%ay "ere ordered to pay indemnity or damages tospouses Salinas and to 0uanito.

Conse)uently on 0uly ' 19==' a "rit o ee#ution and le$y "ere issued against a par#el oresidential lot and an agri#ultural land' t!e titles o "!i#! "ere under t!e name o ode)uillo.

ode)uillo t!en motioned to )uas!' ae(!"( that the re)!de"t!a ot *a) the!r fa2!+ ho2ethat had %ee" 'o")t!t0ted )!"'e ;=


43/46

(3| P a g e

6ssue< D!et!er or not t!e su%e#t !ouse is #o$ered %y t!e udgement o partition8uling

I))0e):D!et!er or not petitioners timely raised and pro$ed t!at t!eir property is eempt rom ee#ution..ed:!e trial #ourt #riti#ized petitioners #laim t!at t!e su%e#t property "as t!eir amily !ome. !e #ourtopined t!at t!e #laim "as ne$er su%stantiated %y petitioners aside rom t!e a#t t!at t!ey assertedt!is deense only ater t"o years sin#e t!e au#tion sale !as transpired. 6t added t!at i not or t!epri$ate respondents E-parte otion or 6ssuan#e o Confrmation o 0udi#ial Sale o 8eal Property oSps. Eduardo and Elsa Fersola fled on 5 August &&' petitioners "ould not !a$e raised t!e issue oamily !ome %eore t!e said #ourt.Arti#le 153 o t!e Gamily Code pro$ides


44/46


45/46

(5| P a g e

R0!"(:Mes. Gor t!e amily !ome to %e eempt rom ee#ution' distin#tion must %e made as to "!at

la" applies %ased on "!en it "as #onstituted and "!at re)uirements must %e #omplied "it! %y t!eudgment de%tor or !is su##essors #laiming su#! pri$ilege. +en#e' t"o sets o rules are appli#a%le. 6t!e amily !ome "as #onstru#ted %eore t!e ee#ti$ity o t!e Gamily Code or %eore August 3' 19=='t!en it must !a$e %een #onstituted eit!er udi#ially or etra-udi#ially as pro$ided under Arti#les &&5'&&9-&31 and &33 o t!e Ci$il Code. ean"!ile' Arti#les &( to &(& go$erns etraudi#ial #onstitution.

Kn t!e ot!er !and' or amily !omes #onstru#ted ater t!e ee#ti$ity o t!e Gamily Code onAugust 3' 19==' t!ere is no need to #onstitute etra udi#ially or udi#ially' and t!e eemption isee#ti$e rom t!e time it "as #onstituted and lasts as long as any o its %enef#iaries under Art. 15(a#tually reside t!erein. oreo$er' t!e amily !ome s!ould %elong to t!e a%solute #ommunity or#onugal partners!ip' or i e#lusi$ely %y one spouse' its #onstitution must !a$e %een "it! #onsent ot!e ot!er' and its $alue must not e#eed #ertain amounts depending upon t!e area "!ere it is lo#ated.Gurt!er' t!e de%ts in#urred or "!i#! t!e eemption does not apply as pro$ided under Art. 155 or"!i#! t!e amily !ome is made ans"era%le must !a$e %een in#urred ater August 3' 19==. 6n %ot!instan#es' t!e #laim or eemption must %e pro$ed.

6n t!e present #ase' sin#e petitioners #laim t!at t!e amily !ome "as #onstituted prior toAugust 3' 19==' or as early as 19((' t!ey must #omply "it! t!e pro#edure mandated %y t!e Ci$il Code.!ere %eing a%solutely no proo t!at t!e Panda#an property "as udi#ially or etra udi#ially #onstituted

as t!e 8amos2 amily !ome' t!e la" prote#ting t!e amily !ome #annot apply t!ere%y ma,ing t!e le$yupon t!e Panda#an property $alid.

77777777777SPOUSES ARACELI OLIJA-E MESA$ et a , SPOUSES CLAUIO ACERO$ R$ et a GR No;?>


46/46

(/| P a g e

At t!e sale' t!e #reditors2 son Jr. 8aul Lapitan and !is "ie 8ona emerged as t!e !ig!est%idders. !en' t!ey "ere issued a Certif#ate o Sale t!at "as registered "it! t!e 8egistry o Jeeds oCalam%a City. !e one-year redemption period epired "it!out t!e spouses Gortaleza redeeming t!emortgage. !us' spouses Lapitan ee#uted an a;da$it o #onsolidation o o"ners!ip on :o$em%er &'&3 and t!e registration o t!e su%e#t property in t!eir names on Ge%ruary (' &(. Jespite t!eoregoing' t!e spouses Gortaleza reused spouses Lapitan2s ormal demand to $a#ate and surrender

possession o t!e su%e#t property.

I))0e:D!et!er or not t!e +onora%le #ourt o appeals gra$ely erred in not !olding t!at t!e petitioners

"ere pre$ented %y t!e respondent rom eer#ising t!eir rig!t o redemption o$er t!e ore#losedproperty %y demanding a redemption o$er t!e ore#losed property %y demanding a redemption pri#eo a !ig!ly e)uita%le and more t!an dou%le t!e amount o t!e ore#losed property' espe#ially t!at t!eore#losed mortgaged property is t!e amily !ome o petitioners and t!eir #!ildren.

R0!"(:!e Supreme Court !eld t!at Arti#le 155@3 o t!e Gamily Code epli#itly allo"s t!e or#ed sale

o a amily !ome or de%ts se#ured %y mortgages on t!e premises %eore or ater su#! #onstitution.6n t!is #ase' t!ere is no dou%t t!at spouses Gortaleza $oluntarily ee#uted on 0anuary &=' 199= a deedo 8eal Estate ortgage o$er t!e su%e#t property' "!i#! "as e$en notarized %y t!eir original #ounsel

o re#ord. And assuming t!at t!e property is eempt rom or#ed sale' spouses Gortaleza did not set upand pro$e to t!e S!eri su#! eemption rom or#ed sale %eore it "as sold at t!e pu%li# au#tion.

part iii legal separation

Documents