Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 283

UNDERSTANDING

FAMILY LAW

December 6, 2007
KATRINA LEGARDA
QUICK JOKE
• The human brain is most
outstanding. It functions 24 hours a
day, 365 days a year. It functions
right from the time you are born…
until you decide to get married.
QUICK JOKE
• The meaning of WIFE?

– HUSBAND: Without Information


Fighting Everytime!

– WIFE: With Idiot For Ever!


THE 1987 CONSTITUTION
• Sec. 12, Art. II:
– The State recognizes the sanctity of
family life and shall protect and
strengthen the family as a basic
autonomous social institution. …
THE 1987 CONSTITUTION
• Sec. 14, Art. II:
– The State recognizes the role of women
in nation-building and shall ensure the
fundamental equality before the law of
women and men.
THE 1987 CONSTITUTION
• Sec. 1, Art. XV:
– The State recognizes the Filipino family
as the foundation of the nation.
Accordingly, it shall strengthen its
solidarity and actively promote its total
development.
THE 1987 CONSTITUTION
• Sec. 2, Art. XV:
– Marriage, as an inviolable social
institution, is the foundation of the
family and shall be protected by the
State.
THE 1987 CONSTITUTION
• Sec. 3, Art. XV:
– The State shall defend:
• Right to found a family in accord with
religious convictions and demands of
responsible parenthood.
• Right to participate in policies and
programs that affect families.
Antonio vs. Reyes, 484
Scra 353 [2006]
• Article 36 should be deemed as an
implement of this constitutional
protection of marriage. x x x there is
a corresponding interest for the
State to defend against marriages ill-
equipped to promote family life.
Antonio vs. Reyes, 484
Scra 353 [2006]
• Void ab initio marriages under
Article 36 do not further the
initiatives of the State concerning
marriage and family, as they
promote wedlock among persons
who, for reasons independent of
their will, are not capacitated to
understand or comply with the
essential obligations of marriage.
QUICK JOKE
• A woman found a genie who granted
her three wishes. Genie was told to
provide all things she lacked:
– Genie found that she had no food, so he
gave her Jollibee.
– Genie saw that she had no money, so
she was given a bank.
– Genie then saw that she had no problem
• Genie gave her a HUSBAND.
REQUISITES FOR A VALID
MARRIAGE
• DIFFERENCE IN SEX - essential
– See Art. 51, NCC vs. Art. 2(1), FC
Rommel Silverio vs RP, GR
174689, Oct. 22, 2007
• When God created man, He made
him in the likeness of God; He
created them male and female.
(Genesis 5:1-2)
Rommel Silverio vs RP, GR
174689, Oct. 22, 2007
• When is a man a man and when is a
woman a woman? In particular, does the
law recognize the changes made by a
physician using scalpel, drugs and
counseling with regard to a person’s sex?
May a person successfully petition for a
change of name and sex appearing in the
birth certificate to reflect the result of a
sex reassignment surgery?
Rommel Silverio vs RP, GR
174689, Oct. 22, 2007
• Petitioner’s basis in praying for the
change of his first name was his sex
reassignment. He intended to make his
first name compatible with the sex he
thought he transformed himself into
through surgery. However, a change of
name does not alter one’s legal capacity
or civil status. RA 9048 does not sanction
a change of first name on the ground of
sex reassignment.
Rommel Silverio vs RP, GR
174689, Oct. 22, 2007
• Under the Civil Register Law, a birth
certificate is a historical record of the
facts as they existed at the time of birth.
Thus, the sex of a person is determined
at birth, visually done by the birth
attendant (the physician or midwife) by
examining the genitals of the infant.
Considering that there is no law legally
recognizing sex reassignment, the
determination of a person’s sex made at
the time of his or her birth, if not
attended by error, is immutable.
Rommel Silverio vs RP, GR
174689, Oct. 22, 2007
• The words “male” and “female” in
everyday understanding do not
include persons who have
undergone sex reassignment.
Rommel Silverio vs RP, GR
174689, Oct. 22, 2007
• The changes sought by petitioner will have
serious and wide-ranging legal and public policy
consequences. First, even the trial court itself
found that the petition was but petitioner’s first
step towards his eventual marriage to his male
fiancé. However, marriage, one of the most
sacred social institutions, is a special contract of
permanent union between a man and a woman.
One of its essential requisites is the legal
capacity of the contracting parties who must be
a male and a female.
Rommel Silverio vs RP, GR
174689, Oct. 22, 2007
• To grant the changes sought by
petitioner will substantially
reconfigure and greatly alter the
laws on marriage and family
relations. It will allow the union of a
man with another man who has
undergone sex reassignment (a
male-to-female post-operative
transsexual).
REQUISITES FOR A VALID
MARRIAGE
• SOME FORM OF CEREMONY - formal
– There must be a marriage ceremony
with both parties present in front of the
solemnizing officer and 2 witnesses of
legal age. (Art. 3(3), F.C.)
REQUISITES FOR A VALID
MARRIAGE
• A VALID MARRIAGE LICENSE -
formal
– Except in the exceptional cases
provided in the Code (Art. 3(2), F.C.)
Ninal vs. Bayadog, 328 SCRA
122
• Pepito, Sr. was married to Teodulfa
on September 26, 1974. Out of their
marriage were born Engrace, Ingrid,
Archie and Pepito, Jr.
• Teodulfa was shot by Pepito
resulting in her death on April 24,
1985.
Ninal vs. Bayadog,

• One year and 8 months thereafter, or on


December 11, 1986, Pepito and Norma,
his paramour, got married without a
marriage license.
• Pepito and Norma executed an affidavit,
dated December 11, 1986, stating that
they lived together as husband and wife
for at least 5 years and were thus exempt
from securing a marriage license.
Ninal vs. Bayadog
• On February 19, 1997, Pepito died in a car
accident.
• After their father’s death, Engrace and his
siblings filed a petition for declaration of nullity
of marriage of Pepito to Norma alleging that the
said marriage was void for lack of marriage
license.
• The case was filed under the assumption that the
validity or invalidity of the second marriage
would affect Engrace and the minors’
successional rights.
Ninal v Badayog
• Is the marriage of Pepito to Norma valid?

No. The marriage is void. A valid marriage


license is a requisite of marriage under our laws,
the absence of which renders the marriage void.
It was held that the requirement and issuance of
marriage license is the State’s demonstration of
its involvement and participation in every
marriage, in the maintenance of which the
general public is interested.
Ninal vs. Bayadog
• The five-year common-law cohabitation
period, which is counted back from the
date of celebration of marriage, should be
a period of legal union had it not been for
the absence of the marriage. This 5-year
period should be the years immediately
before the day of the marriage and it
should be a period of cohabitation
characterized by exclusivity – meaning no
third party was involved at any time
within the 5 years and continuity – that is
unbroken.
Republic Vs. Court of
Appeals, 236 SCRA 257
• Absence of a marriage license
renders a marriage void ab initio.
• The certification of “due search and
inability to find” issued by the civil
registrar enjoys probative value and
sufficiently proves that his office did
not issue a particular marriage
license.
REQUISITES FOR A VALID
MARRIAGE
• The priest or solemnizing officer
must be authorized (Art. 3 (1), F.C.)
- formal.
Republic Vs. Court of
Appeals, 236 SCRA 257
• The marriage was a civil ceremony
performed by a judge of a city
court. [It] is one of those commonly
known as a “secret marriage” – a
legally non-existent phrase but
ordinarily used to refer to a civil
marriage celebrated without the
knowledge of the relatives and/or
friends of either or both of the
contracting parties.
REQUISITES FOR A VALID
MARRIAGE
• LEGAL CAPACITY - essential
– 18-21 years old with consent of
parents; (Art. 5, FC)
– 21-25, with advise of parents (Art. 15,
F.C.).
REQUISITES FOR A VALID
MARRIAGE
• LEGAL CAPACITY - essential
– Both parties must be single or at least
has had a prior marriage annulled. (Art.
35 (4), F.C.)
Domingo vs. Court of
Appeals, 226 SCRA 572
• A marriage though void still needs a
judicial declaration of such fact
under the Family Code even for
purposes other than remarriage.
THE FAMILY CODE
• Art. 41 – A marriage contracted by any
person during the subsistence of a
previous marriage shall be null and void,
unless before the celebration of the
subsequent marriage, the prior spouse
has been absent for four consecutive
years and the spouse present has a well-
founded belief that the absent spouse
was already dead.
• (Two years if in case of disappearance
where there is danger of death: Art. 391,
Civil Code)
Art. 41, Family Code
• For the purpose of contracting the
subsequent marriage under the
preceding paragraph the spouse
present must institute a summary
proceeding as provided in this Code
for the declaration of presumptive
death of the absentee, without
prejudice to the effect of
reappearance of the absent spouse.
Art. 42, Family Code
• Art. 42. The subsequent marriage
referred to in the preceding Article
shall be automatically terminated by
the recording of the affidavit of
reappearance of the absent spouse,
unless there is a judgment annulling
the previous marriage or declaring it
void ab initio.
Art. 42, Family Code
• A sworn statement of the fact and
circumstances of reappearance shall be
recorded in the civil registry of the
residence of the parties to the subsequent
marriage at the instance of any interested
person, with due notice to the spouses of
the subsequent marriage and without
prejudice to the fact of reappearance
being judicially determined in case such
fact is disputed.
Art. 43, Family Code
• The termination of the subsequent
marriage referred to in the preceding
Article shall produce the following effects:
• (4) The innocent spouse may revoke the
designation of the other spouse who
acted in bad faith as beneficiary in any
insurance policy, even if such designation
be stipulated as irrevocable;
REQUISITES FOR A VALID
MARRIAGE
• LEGAL CAPACITY - essential
– You cannot marry siblings (whether full
or half blood, adopted, or step),
parents (whether natural or adoptive or
step), in-laws, and first cousins (Art.
37, F.C.).
REQUISITES FOR A VALID
MARRIAGE
• LEGAL CAPACITY - essential
– You cannot marry a person whose
spouse you killed to enable you to
marry that person (Art. 38 (9), F.C.).
REQUISITES FOR A VALID
MARRIAGE
• LEGAL CAPACITY - essential
– You must be able to consummate the
marriage (Art. 45 (5), F.C.).
REQUISITES FOR A VALID
MARRIAGE
• LEGAL CAPACITY - essential
– You must be psychologically
capacitated (Art. 36, F.C.).
REQUISITES FOR A VALID
MARRIAGE
• LEGAL CAPACITY - essential
– You must not be afflicted with a serious
and incurable STD (Art. 45 (6), F.C.).
REQUISITES FOR A VALID
MARRIAGE
• CONSENT - essential
– You must not be of unsound mind (Art.
45 (2), F.C.).
REQUISITES FOR A VALID
MARRIAGE
• CONSENT - essential
– Your consent must not have been
obtained by fraud (Art. 45 (3), F.C.).
REQUISITES FOR A VALID
MARRIAGE
• CONSENT - essential
– Both parties must consent freely (no
“shot-gun” weddings are valid.) (Art.
45 (4), F.C.).
REQUISITES FOR A VALID
MARRIAGE
• CONSENT - essential
– You must be marrying the right person
(Art. 35 (5), F.C.).
ESSENTIAL OBLIGATIONS
OF MARRIAGE
• To live together
• Observe mutual love
• Observe mutual help and support
• Observe mutual respect
• Observe mutual fidelity
• Fix the family domicile
• Exercise joint parental authority over
children
ESSENTIAL OBLIGATIONS
OF MARRIAGE
• Support the family
• Manage the household
• Exercise parental authority over the
children
• Be liable for the injuries and damages
caused by their children
• Exercise legal guardianship over the
property of their minor children
VOID MARRIAGES

• Party is below 18 years old, even


with consent of parents
• Solemnizing officer is not authorized
to perform marriages, unless good
faith
• No marriage license
• Bigamous or polygamous marriages
WHAT ARE VOID
MARRIAGES
• Same sex marriages
• Absence of a ceremony
• Absence of consent
• Absence of authority of solemnizing officer
• Absence of a marriage license
WHAT ARE VOID
MARRIAGES

• Art. 37, Family Code: Incestuous Marriages


• Art. 38, Family Code: Void By Public Policy
(Collateral Blood Relatives Within The 4th
Degree)
ART. 37 AND 38, FAMILY CODE
• Between ascendants and descendants of
any degree, whether legitimate or
illegitimate
• Between brothers and sisters, full or
half-blood
• Between collateral blood relatives, up to
4th civil degree, legitimate or illegitimate
ART. 37 AND 38, FAMILY CODE

• Between step-parents and step-children


• Between parents-in-law and children-in-
law
• Between adopting parent and adopted
child
• Between surviving spouse of adopting
parent and adopted child
ART. 37 AND 38, FAMILY CODE
• Between an adopted child and a
legitimate child of adopter
• Between adopted children of the same
adopter
• Between parties where one, with the
intention to marry the other, killed his
spouse or the other person’s spouse
VOID MARRIAGES

• When there is a mistake as to


identity
• When you marry without registering
nullity of prior marriage or delivering
legitime to children (Art. 35 and 53)
Congress's Omega Man
[from Business Mirror]

• “There is a buzz going on in the business


community about the sexual escapades of
a Visayan congressman whose wife is
heiress to a business brand. The object of
envy and admiration also from his
colleagues, the Visayan solon is being
touted as the " Omega Man. " Deemed
the ultimate accolade, the said solon
counts four mistresses as of now-and still
counting. Tongues are wagging about the
way the Visayan Lothario has managed
his sexual conquests.”
A BLOG FROM A CHILD
• “Situation: My parents are married for almost 29
years now with 3 kids but unfortunately my mom
found out that my dad has another woman. She
also found out that this relationship is been
going on for 10 years now and they have 2 kids.
My dad even bought a house for this other
woman and gave her a business. My dad's
reason was the girl is still a minor than when
they had the first child and he was afraid that
the parents or even the girl might accuse them
for rape and so he did all these. That actually
was a "toot tooot " because he had another child
after that so called incident.”
A BLOG FROM A CHILD
• Questions:
1. Is this concubinage?
2. Can we sue the Girl for adultery or if not adultery
what grounds can we sue her?
3. What are the rights of their kids (other girl's
children) if my dad acknowledge himself as a father?
4. Worst comes to Worst what can we do about the
house of the girl that was given by my dad?
5. We would like to threaten them in some way but
how? We have no Idea.”
ANSWER TO THE BLOG BY
A “LAWYER2”
• 1. Is this concubinage?

Yes, this is concubinage. under the Revised


Penal Code, there are only 3 instances where
both the man and his mistress is guilty of
concubinage:
– when the man allows his mistress and his wife to
live together in the conjugal home;
– or when the man lives with the mistress in another
home and they show themselves to be husband and
wife;
– or when the man and his mistress are engaging in
scandalous sexual acts.
ANSWER TO THE BLOG BY
A “LAWYER2”
• When your mother decides to file
a case for concubinage, ask
around for people who have seen
your dad and the mistress living
together in the house. ask these
people to make an affidavit
attesting to what they know. this
will be evidence to your mother's
complaint affidavit.
THE REVISED PENAL CODE
• Art. 334 – Any husband who shall
keep a mistress is the conjugal
dwelling, or shall have sexual
intercourse, under scandalous
circumstances, with a woman who is
not his wife, or shall cohabit with
her in any other place….
(concubinage).
ANSWER TO THE BLOG BY
A “LAWYER2”
• 2. Can we sue the Girl for adultery
or if not adultery what grounds
can we sue her?
if the woman is married she is
guilty. but only her husband can
file the case against her. if she is
single, see discussion number 1.
THE REVISED PENAL CODE
• Art. 333 – Adultery is committed by
any married woman who shall have
sexual intercourse with a man not
her husband and by the man who
has carnal knowledge of her
knowing her to be married, even if
the marriage be subsequently
declared void.
ANSWER TO THE BLOG BY
A “LAWYER2”
• 3. What are the rights of their kids
(other girl's children) if my dad
acknowledge himself as a father?
They get half of what you (as
legitimate heir) will get in your
father's estate.
ANSWER TO THE BLOG BY
A “LAWYER2”
• 4. Worst comes to Worst what
can we do about the house of the
girl that was given by my dad?
Any property bought in the
marriage is presumed to be
conjugal, hence, your mother
has a share in that property.
refer to Article 148 of the Family
Code.
ANSWER TO THE BLOG BY
A “LAWYER2”
• In the situation of your father and his
mistress, the code does not consider
them co-owners of the house. The
mistress MUST first show evidence
that she actually contributed to the
purchase of the house. If she did not
give money to purchase the house, it
is not considered co-owned by both of
them.
• Hence, it’s your father’s house, and
since its your father's house, its your
mother's house as well :).
THE REVISED PENAL CODE
• Art. 349 – (Bigamy is committed by)
any person who shall contract a
second or subsequent marriage
before the former marriage has
been legally dissolved, or before the
absent spouse has been declared
presumptively dead by means of a
judgment rendered in the proper
proceedings.
Article 40, Family Code
• “The absolute nullity of a previous
marriage may be invoked for
purposes of a remarriage on the
basis solely of a final judgment
declaring such previous marriage
void.”
CONSEQUENCES IF YOU
DON’T FOLLOW ART. 40
You will be liable for the crime of
bigamy because the nullity of the
first marriage is not a prejudicial
question to a prosecution for
bigamy. (Bobis v. Bobis, 336
SCRA 747, Mercado v. Tan, 337
SCRA 122, Te v. CA, 346 SCRA
327, Manuel v. People, GR
165842, 29 Nov. 2005)
THE REVISED PENAL CODE
• Art. 350 – (Even if conditions of Bigamy
are not met) any person who shall
contract marriage knowing that the
requirements of the law have not been
complied with or that the marriage is in
disregard of a legal impediment.
• Also penalizes one who obtains consent
through violence, intimidation or fraud.
THE REVISED PENAL CODE
• Art. 351 – (a Premature Marriage is
punished when) any widow marries within
301 days from the date of the death of
her husband, or before having delivered if
she was pregnant at the time of his
death, or even if her marriage was
dissolved, if she marries before her
delivery or before the expiration of the
period of 301 days.
The Family Code

• There are many ways to dissolve a


marriage under Philippine law –
despite the absence of a divorce
proceeding.
The Family Code

• The inimitable course is by way of


Article 36 – a finding of
psychological incapacity to comply
with the essential marital obligations.
Suntay vs. Cojuangco-
Suntay, 300 SCRA 760
• The terms “annul” and “null and void”
have different legal connotations and
implications. Annul means to reduce to
nothing… whereas null and void is
something that does not exist from the
beginning. A marriage that is annulled
presupposes that it subsists but later
ceases to have legal effect when it is
terminated through a court action. But in
nullifying a marriage, the court simply
declares a status or condition which
already exists from the very beginning.
Consequences
• The marriage bonds are completely
dissolved – as if no marriage took place.

• The children remain legitimate by legal


fiction

• The spouses have no right to alimony or


support
Consequences
• The children must be supported

• Properties are divided in accordance with


the relevant property regime of the
marriage.

• The woman reverts to her birth name


WHAT YOU MUST PROVE
FOR NULLITY
• Psychological incapacity,
characterized by:
– Gravity
– Juridical antecedence
– Incurability (Santos v. Santos, 240
SCRA 20 [1995])
WHAT IS NOT “PSYCHOLOGICAL
INCAPACITY”
• Vices
• Philandering/sexual infidelity/perversion
• Abandonment
• Habitual alcoholism
• Domestic violence
• Incompatibility
• Flagrant promiscuity
• Volatile nature, outbursts, overbearing
ways, obsession with cleanliness
BY THE WAY…
• The Supreme Court has declared
void only TWO marriages under
Article 36:
– 1. The man was a homosexual and
never had sex with his wife. (Chi Ming
Tsoi vs. CA, 266 SCRA 324)
– 2. The woman was an extraordinary
liar and was discovered to have lied
even about the existence of her son.
(Antonio vs. Reyes, 484 SCRA 353)
SO YOU FEEL IMPRISONED?
HANDICAPPED?

• Liam Fitzpatrick, “Getting Out,”


• TIME Magazine, April 5, 2004
QUICK JOKE
• MR: Gusto ko mag-file ng divorce sa
mrs. ko.
• ATTY: Bakit?
• Mr: Six months na ako di
kinakausap!
• ATTY: Mag isipisip ka. Mahirap
humanap ng mrs. na di nagsasalita!
DIVORCE STATISTICS – in Asia
• Singapore – 26% of marriages resulted in
divorce in 2002. Only 15% in 1990.
• South Korea – 47% of marriages in 2002.
Only 11% in 1990.
• Japan – a marriage every 42 seconds; a
divorce every 2 minutes. 38% of
marriages in 2002. Only 22% in 1990.
– 70% of divorces were initiated by older
women after 20+ years of marriage.
MARRIAGE STATISTICS – in
Asia
• India – 11 divorces per 1,000 marriages,
up from 7.41 per 1,000 in 1991.
• Hong Kong – 41% of marriages in 2002.
Only 13% in 1990.
• China – 15% of marriages in 2002, up
from 8% in 1990.
• Indonesia – divorce went up by 15% b/w
2001-2002.
Divorce is better than:
• Being a battered wife.
• Remaining an unhappy homemaker.
• Being cheated on.
• Suffering gambling, alcoholism.
• Abandonment.
Definition of LOVE:

• “A temporary insanity, curable by


marriage” [Ambrose Bierce]
What some experts say:
• Only 31% of conflicts in marriage are
resolved, the other 69% are perpetual,
unsolvable problems (John Gottman, UC
Berkeley)

• Don’t bother to try to fix the unfixable.

• Select a mate with whom you can manage


the inevitable annoyances.

• Learn how to manage them.


What some experts say:
• Admit some problems can’t be solved.

• Build up friendship, ability to repair


conflict and deal with gridlock.

• Imagine what your marriage looks like so


you can make repairs (e.g. a rusty
carburetor).
Corrosive negative factors
• Criticism (you never… you always…)

• Defensiveness (who me?)

• Contempt (you’re too stupid to realize…)

• Stonewalling (I’ll just let this blow over) –


85% are men.
Perennial problems!
• Sex

• Money

• Kids

• Lack of free time


TO KEEP YOUR
MARRIAGE
BRIMMING,
WITH LOVE IN THE
LOVING CUP,
WHENEVER
YOU’RE WRONG
ADMIT IT,
WHENEVER
YOU’RE RIGHT
SHUT UP.
[Ogden Nash]
STATUS OF FOREIGN DIVORCES

• We do not have a divorce law, thus,


our courts cannot grant a divorce.
STATUS OF FOREIGN DIVORCES

• While, as a general rule, foreign


divorces obtained by Filipino citizens
are not recognized by Philippine law
(Art. 15, NCC), there are exceptions:
EXCEPTIONS TO GENERAL RULE
• Van Dorn v. Romillo (139 SCRA 139
[1985]) and Quita v. CA (300 SCRA
406 [1998]): where one of the
spouses was a foreigner, the foreign
partner was not allowed to claim
any rights as spouse, either in the
sharing of the profits of the Filipino
spouse’s business or in being an heir
of the Filipino partner.
EXCEPTIONS TO GENERAL RULE
• Llorente v. CA (GR 124371, 23 November
2000): the Filipino husband was
naturalized in 1943 as a US citizen and he
divorced his Filipino wife in 1951. He
married another Filipina. He died in 1985.
His first wife went to court to claim rights
to conjugal estate and to the husband’s
estate as his legal wife. S.C. said divorce
obtained by the husband is valid (citing
Pilapil v. Ibay-Somera, 174 SCRA 653
[1989]).
Roehr v. Rodriguez, 404
SCRA 495
• Although a foreign divorce decree
obtained by a foreign spouse is
recognizable in our jurisdiction (Rule
39, Sec. 48, 1997 Rules), its legal
effects (such as custody of the
children) must still be determined
by our courts.
THE FAMILY CODE
• Art. 26 – All marriages solemnized
outside the Philippines in accordance
with the laws in force in the country
where they were solemnized, and
valid there as such, shall also be
valid in this country, except those
prohibited…
THE FAMILY CODE
• Art. 26 – Where 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.
REQUIREMENTS
• Marriage between a Filipino and a
foreigner
• A valid foreign divorce decree
• Decree is obtained at the instance of
the foreign spouse
• The foreign spouse acquires capacity
to marry by virtue of the divorce
decree.
NOTE: ART. 26 (2), FAMILY CODE

• Is there a need for a court proceeding in


the Philippine courts to declare the
Filipino spouse qualified to remarry?
– YES, per Garcia v. Recio, 366 SCRA 437.
– Also, because policy of law is not to leave the
determination of the issue of capacity to
remarry in the hands of the parties
themselves.
NOTE: ART. 26 (2), FAMILY CODE
• Does the benefit of this provision
apply in cases where the foreigner
spouse who obtained the divorce
was originally a Filipino citizen?
– YES, per Republic v. Orbecido, G.R. No.
154380, Oct. 5, 2005.
SHOULD THE FILIPINO
SPOUSE NOT REMARRY:
• What is his status is relation to the
foreign consort?
• Can he claim any share of the property or
income acquired by the foreign consort?
• Does he have a right to demand support
from the foreign consort?
• What is the status of the children they
may have after the divorce decree?
ANOTHER QUESTION:
• Will Art 26 apply to foreign divorces
obtained before the effectivity date
of the Family Code?
ANOTHER QUESTION:
• What about the situation where the
Filipino spouse who obtained a
divorce decree, remarries, and is
subsequently naturalized as a
foreigner?
THE FAMILY CODE
• Art. 55 – grounds for legal
separation:
– Repeated physical violence or grossly
abusive conduct
– Physical violence or moral pressure to
compel change in religious or political
affiliation
– Attempt to corrupt to engage in
prostitution, or connivance in such
corruption or inducement
THE FAMILY CODE
• Art. 55 – grounds for legal
separation:
– Final judgment sentencing spouse to
imprisonment of more than 6 years,
even if pardoned
– Drug addiction or habitual alcoholism
– Lesbianism or homosexuality
– Contracting of a subsequent bigamous
marriage
THE FAMILY CODE
• Art. 55 – grounds for legal
separation:
– Sexual infidelity or perversion
– Attempt against the life of other spouse
– Abandonment without justification for
more than one year
NOTE
• Art. 64. After the finality of the decree of
legal separation, the innocent spouse
may revoke the donations made by him
or by her in favor of the offending
spouse, as well as the designation of the
latter as beneficiary in any insurance
policy, even if such designation be
stipulated as irrevocable. . . . The
revocation of or change in the designation
of the insurance beneficiary shall take
effect upon written notification thereof to
the insured.
People v. Marivic Genosa
GR 135981, Jan. 15, 2004
• The Supreme Court found that
Genosa was suffering from
“battered woman syndrome,” but
she was not acquitted as she did
not prove “impending danger
(based on the conduct of the victim
in previous battering episodes)
prior to the defendant’s use of
deadly force.”
People v. Marivic Genosa
GR 135981, Jan. 15, 2004
• However, Genosa is on parole as
two mitigating circumstances were
found: an illness that diminished
the her exercise of her will power
(Arts. 9 and 10, RPC) and acting
upon an impulse so powerful as to
have naturally produced passion
and obfuscation.
VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND
THEIR CHILDREN
• Refers to any act or a series of acts
committed by any person against:
– A woman who is his wife
– Former wife
– A woman with whom he has or had a
sexual or dating relationship
– With whom he has a common child
– Against the woman’s child, whether
legitimate or illegitimate
VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND
THEIR CHILDREN
• Violence committed within or
without the family abode
• Results in or is likely to result in
physical, sexual, psychological harm
or suffering, or economic abuse
• Includes threats of such acts,
battery, assault, coercion,
harassment or deprivation of liberty.
Battered Woman Syndrome

• Refers to a scientifically defined


pattern of psychological and
behavioral symptoms found in
women living in battering
relationships as a result of
cumulative abuse.
PHYSICAL VIOLENCE
• Refers to acts that include bodily or
physical harm.
SEXUAL VIOLENCE
• Includes, but is not limited to:
– Rape, sexual harassment, acts of
lasciviousness
– Treating a woman or her child as a
sex object
– Making demeaning and sexually
suggestive remarks
– Physically attacking the sexual
parts of the victim’s body
SEXUAL VIOLENCE

– Forcing her/him to watch obscene


publications and indecent shows or
forcing the woman or her child to
do indecent acts and/or make films
thereof.
– Forcing the wife and mistress/lover
to live in the conjugal home or
sleep together in the same room
with the abuser.
SEXUAL VIOLENCE
• Acts causing or attempting to
cause the victim to engage in
any sexual activity by force,
threat of force, physical or
other harm or threat of
physical harm or other harm
or coercion.
SEXUAL VIOLENCE

• Prostituting the woman or her child.


Psychological Violence

• Refers to acts or omissions causing


or likely to cause mental or
emotional suffering of the victim
such as but not limited to:
– Intimidation
– Stalking
– Damage to property
– Public ridicule or humiliation
– Repeated verbal abuse
– Marital infidelity.
Psychological Violence
• Causing or allowing the victim
to witness the physical, sexual
or psychological abuse of a
member of the family to which
the victim belongs, or
• To witness pornography in any
form, or
Psychological Violence

• To witness abusive injury to


pets, or
• To unlawful or unwanted
deprivation of the right to
custody and/or visitation of
common children.
Economic Abuse
• Refers to acts that make or
attempt to make a woman
financially dependent which
includes, but is not limited to
the following:
– Withdrawal of financial support or
preventing the victim from
engaging in any legitimate
profession, occupation, business
or activity.
Economic Abuse
– Deprivation or threat of
deprivation of financial resources
and the right to the use and
enjoyment of the conjugal,
community or property owned in
common.
– Destroying household property.
– Controlling the victim’s own
money or properties or solely
controlling the conjugal money or
properties.
Battery
• Refers to an act of inflicting
physical harm upon the
woman or her child resulting
to physical and emotional
distress.
Stalking
• Refers to an intentional act
committed by a person who,
knowingly and without lawful
justification, follows the woman or
her child or places the woman or her
child under surveillance directly or
indirectly or a combination thereof.
CHARACTERIZED BY THE “CYCLE
OF VIOLENCE”

• THIS HAS THREE PHASES:


(1) the tension building phase
(2) the acute battering incident
(3) the tranquil, loving (or at
least, non-violent) phase
FOR ACQUITTAL USING THE BATTERED
WOMAN SYNDROME DEFENSE (per Genosa
case)

• Each of the phases of the cycle of


violence must be proven to have
characterized at least two battering
episodes between the woman and
her partner
FOR ACQUITTAL USING THE BATTERED
WOMAN SYNDROME DEFENSE (per Genosa
case)

• The final acute battering episode


preceding the killing of the batterer
must have produced in the battered
person’s mind an actual fear of an
imminent harm from her batterer
and an honest belief that she needed
to use force in order to save her life.
FOR ACQUITTAL USING THE BATTERED
WOMAN SYNDROME DEFENSE (per Genosa
case)

• At the time of the killing, the batterer


must have posed probable – not
necessarily immediate and actual –
grave harm to the accused, based on
the history of violence perpetrated by
the former against the latter.
Protection Orders
• The relief granted should serve the
purpose of safeguarding the victim from
further harm, minimizing any disruption
in the victim’s daily life, and facilitating
the opportunity and ability of the victim
to independently regain control over her
life.
• Shall be enforced by law enforcement
agencies.
• May be issued by the barangay also.
Relief under Protection
Orders

• Includes Removal and exclusion of


respondent from house regardless of
ownership of the residence
HOW DO YOU KNOW A
CHILD IS YOURS?
• PATERNITY – the civil status of the
father with respect to the child.
• MATERNITY – the civil status of the
mother with respect to the child.
• FILIATION – the status of the child
in relation to the father or the
mother.
HOW DO YOU KNOW A
CHILD IS YOURS?
• LEGITIMATE – one conceived or
born during a valid marriage of the
parents, or within lawful wedlock.
(Art. 164).
HOW DO YOU KNOW A
CHILD IS YOURS?
• LEGITIMATE – includes children
conceived as a result of artificial
insemination of the wife with the
sperm of the husband or that of a
donor, provided that both spouses
authorized or ratified such
insemination before the birth of the
child. (Art. 164).
HOW DO YOU KNOW A
CHILD IS YOURS?
• LEGITIMATE – includes children of
marriages void under Art. 36
(because of the psychological
incapacity of one of the spouses)
and Art. 53 (the second marriage of
a widow or widower who hasn’t
delivered the legitime to his/her 1st
children.)
HOW DO YOU KNOW A
CHILD IS YOURS?
• IMPUGNING LEGITIMACY:
– Physical impossibility for husband to
have sexual intercourse with wife
within the first 120 days of the 300
days immediately preceding the child’s
birth because of:
• Physical incapacity
• Living separately in such a way that sexual
intercourse not possible
• Serious illness of the husband, which
absolutely prevented intercourse
HOW DO YOU KNOW A
CHILD IS YOURS?
• IMPUGNING LEGITIMACY:
– It is proved that for biological or other
scientific reasons, the child could not
have been that of the husband (unless
by artificial insemination).
HOW DO YOU KNOW A
CHILD IS YOURS?
• IMPUGNING LEGITIMACY:
– In case of artificial insemination, the
written authorization or ratification of
either parent was obtained through
mistake, fraud, violence, intimidation,
or undue influence.
HOW DO YOU KNOW A
CHILD IS YOURS?
• IMPUGNING LEGITIMACY:
– You have only one year from knowledge of the
birth of the child to file a case impugning
legitimacy, if you live in place where birth
took place.
– Two years if you don’t and you live in the
Philippines.
– Three years if you live abroad.
– PERIOD COUNTED FROM DISCOVERY OR
KNOWLEDGE OF THE FACT OF REGISTRATION
OF THE BIRTH.
HOW DO YOU KNOW A
CHILD IS YOURS?
• NOTA BENE:
– THE CHILD SHALL BE CONSIDERED
LEGITIMATE ALTHOUGH THE MOTHER
MAY HAVE DECLARED AGAINST ITS
LEGITIMACY OR MAY HAVE BEEN
SENTENCED AS AN ADULTERESS. (Art.
167).
HOW DO YOU KNOW A
CHILD IS YOURS?
• ILLEGITIMATE – one conceived and
born outside a valid marriage or
outside lawful wedlock. (Art. 165).
HOW DO YOU KNOW A
CHILD IS YOURS?
• ILLEGITIMATE – are children born of:
– Couples who are not legally married.
– Incestuous marriages
– Bigamous marriages
– Adulterous relations
– Marriages void for reasons of public
policy and other void marriages.
– Couples below 18 years old, whether
married or not.
Agustin v. Court of
Appeals, 460 SCRA 315
• The Supreme Court categorically
ruled that DNA testing is a valid
means of determining paternity.
Cabatania v. Regodos, 441
SCRA 96
• A birth certificate unsigned by the
putative father was not competent
evidence of paternity.
HOW DO YOU KNOW A
CHILD IS YOURS?
• LEGITIMATED – one who is
originally illegitimate but later
considered legitimate by legal fiction
because of the subsequent marriage
of the parents who, at the time of
the child’s conception, had no
legal impediment to marry each
other. (Arts. 177 and 178).
HOW DO YOU KNOW A
CHILD IS YOURS?
• LEGITIMATED – effects of
legitimation retroacts to the time of
the child’s birth.
• Have same rights as legitimate
children.
RIGHTS OF LEGITIMATE
CHILDREN
• Bear surnames of both parents.
• Receive support from their parents,
ascendants, and brothers and sisters.
• Entitled to legitime: half of the parents’
estate divided by the number of
legitimate children in testate succession
(Art. 888, NCC), or equally in intestate
succession (Art. 979, NCC).
RIGHTS OF ILLEGITIMATE
CHILDREN
• Use surname of the mother.
– NOTE: Revilla Law [Rep. Act No. 9255]
allowing them to use surname of the
father if they are acknowledged.
• Receive support.
• Entitled to legitime: half of that of a
legitimate child.
SUPPORT
• Indispensable for:
– Sustenance
– Dwelling
– Clothing
– Medical attendance
– Education (even beyond the age of majority)
– Transportation (to and from school or work)
– IN KEEPING WITH THE FINANCIAL CAPACITY
OF THE FAMILY
SUPPORT
• Persons obliged to support each other:
– Spouses
– Legitimate ascendants and descendants
– Parents and their legitimate children and the
legitimate and illegitimate children of the latter
– Parents and their illegitimate children and the
legitimate and illegitimate children of the latter
– Legitimate brothers and sisters, whether full
or half-blood.
SUPPORT
• NOTA BENE:
– AFTER FINAL JUDGMENT OF A
DECLARATION FOR NULLITY OR
ANNULMENT, THE OBLIGATION OF
MUTUAL SUPPORT BETWEEN THE
SPOUSES CEASE. (Art. 198).
SUPPORT
• NOTA BENE:
– UNDER PROCEDURAL RULES, OUR
COURTS CANNOT ORDER A PERSON
ABROAD TO GIVE SUPPORT, UNLESS
THE ORDER IS RECOGNIZED BY THE
COURT IN THE COUNTRY WHERE THAT
PERSON RESIDES.
SUPPORT
• NOTA BENE:
– TWO WAYS OF COMPLYING WITH
SUPPORT OBLIGATION:
• Paying the allowance fixed, or
• Receive and maintain the child in his home
or family dwelling (unless there is a legal or
moral obstacle).
PARENTAL AUTHORITY
• The natural right and duty of
parents over the person and
property of their minor children.
• Cannot be renounced, transferred or
waived.
• Is jointly exercised by both parents
(but the father’s decision prevails).
• Is purely personal.
• Is temporary.
PARENTAL AUTHORITY
• Includes the caring for and rearing
of children for civic consciousness
and efficiency, and the development
of their moral, mental and physical
character and well-being. (Art. 209).
PARENTAL AUTHORITY
• In case of absence or death of either
parent, the parent present exercises
this right and duty. (Art. 212).
PARENTAL AUTHORITY
• In case of separation of parents, the
parent designated by the court
exercises this right and duty.
• A child over 7 years old can choose.
(Art. 213).
CUSTODY
• No child under seven years of age
shall be separated from the mother,
unless the court finds compelling
reasons to order otherwise. (Art.
213).
CUSTODY
• “COMPELLING REASONS”:
– Mother is insane , or
– Sick with a communicable disease, or
– She maltreats the child,
– Or other similar reasons.
– Mother’s open cohabitation with a man
not her husband.
PARENTAL AUTHORITY
• An illegitimate child is under the
parental authority of the mother.
(Art. 176).
Briones v. Miguel, 440 Scra
455
• Only if the mother defaults can the
father assume custody and authority
over an illegitimate child.
Silva v. CA, 275 SCRA 604
• A father has right to visit his
illegitimate children.
Perez v. CA, 255 SCRA 661
• Justification to deprive mother of custody:
– Neglect
– Abandonment
– Unemployment
– Immorality
– Habitual drunkenness
– Drug addiction
– Maltreatment
– Insanity
– Communicable disease
Gualberto v. Gualberto, 28
June 2005
• Sexual preference of a mother alone
does not prove parental neglect or
incompetence.
General Rule
• Absolute Community regime, if no
pre-nuptial agreement exists.
Art. 96, Family Code
• The administration and enjoyment of the
community property shall belong to both
spouses jointly. In case of disagreement,
the husband's decision shall prevail,
subject to recourse to the court by the
wife for proper remedy, which must be
availed of within five years from the date
of the contract implementing such
decision.
Art. 124, Family Code
• The administration and enjoyment of the
conjugal partnership shall belong to both
spouses jointly. In case of disagreement,
the husband's decision shall prevail,
subject to recourse to the court by the
wife for proper remedy, which must be
availed of within five years from the date
of the contract implementing such
decision.
Art. 96 and 124, Family
Code
• In the event that one spouse is
incapacitated or otherwise unable to
participate in the administration of the
common properties, the other spouse
may assume sole powers of
administration. These powers do not
include disposition or encumbrance
without authority of the court or the
written consent of the other spouse. In
the absence of such authority or consent,
the disposition or encumbrance shall be
void. ….
General Rule
• Whether the property between the
spouses be the absolute community
or the conjugal partnership of gains,
dispositions or encumbrances of
common property must be with the
consent of both spouses. Otherwise,
the transaction is VOID. (Articles 96
and 124, F.C.)
Arts 96 and 124, Family
Code
• Prohibition extends not only to acts
by one of the spouses disposing or
encumbering common property but
to any disposition or encumbrance
by one spouse of his or her
undivided interest therein. (Abalos v
Macatangay, 30 Sept. 2004,
Homeowners v Dailo, 11 March
2005)
ARTICLE 87, Family Code
• Every donation or grant of gratuitous
advantage, direct or indirect, between the
spouses during the marriage shall be
void, except moderate gifts which the
spouses may give each other on the
occasion of any family rejoicing. The
prohibition shall also apply to persons
living together as husband and wife
without a valid marriage.
VDA. DE CONSUEGRA vs.
GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE
SYSTEM, 37 SCRA 316 [1971].

• The late Jose Consuegra, at the


time of his death, was employed as
a shop foreman of the office of the
District Engineer in the province of
Surigao del Norte. In his lifetime,
Consuegra contracted two
marriages:
VDA. DE CONSUEGRA vs.
GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE
SYSTEM, 37 SCRA 316 [1971].

• The first with Rosario Diaz,


solemnized in the parish church of
San Nicolas de Tolentino, Surigao,
Surigao, on July 15, 1937, out of
which marriage were born two
children, namely, Jose Consuegra,
Jr. and Pedro Consuegra, but both
predeceased their father;
VDA. DE CONSUEGRA vs.
GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE
SYSTEM, 37 SCRA 316 [1971].
• and the second, which was
contracted in good faith while the
first marriage was subsisting, with
Basilia Berdin, on May 1, 1957 in
the same parish and municipality,
out of which marriage were born
seven children, namely, Juliana,
Pacita, Maria Lourdes, Jose, Rodrigo,
Lenida and Luz, all surnamed
Consuegra.
VDA. DE CONSUEGRA vs.
GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE
SYSTEM, 37 SCRA 316 [1971].

• Being a member of the Government


Service Insurance System (GSIS, for
short) when Consuegra died on
September 26, 1965, the proceeds of his
life insurance under policy No. 601801
were paid by the GSIS to petitioner
Basilia Berdin and her children who were
the beneficiaries named in the policy
VDA. DE CONSUEGRA vs.
GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE
SYSTEM, 37 SCRA 316 [1971].

• Having been in the service of the


government for 22.5028 years,
Consuegra was entitled to retirement
insurance benefits in the sum of
P6,304.47 pursuant to Section 12(c) of
Commonwealth Act 186 as amended by
Republic Acts 1616 and 3836.
• Consuegra did not designate any
beneficiary who would receive the
retirement insurance benefits due to him.
VDA. DE CONSUEGRA vs.
GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE
SYSTEM, 37 SCRA 316 [1971].

• Rosario Diaz, the widow by the first


marriage, filed a claim with the
GSIS asking that the retirement
insurance benefits be paid to her as
the only legal heir of Consuegra,
considering that the deceased did
not designate any beneficiary with
respect to his retirement insurance
benefits.
VDA. DE CONSUEGRA vs.
GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE
SYSTEM, 37 SCRA 316 [1971].

• Basilia Berdin and her children,


likewise, filed a similar claim with
the GSIS, asserting that being the
beneficiaries named in the life
insurance policy of Consuegra,
they are the only ones entitled to
receive the retirement insurance
benefits due the deceased
Consuegra.
VDA. DE CONSUEGRA vs.
GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE
SYSTEM, 37 SCRA 316 [1971].

• Resolving the conflicting claims, the GSIS


ruled that the legal heirs of the late Jose
Consuegra were Rosario Diaz, his widow
by his first marriage who is entitled to
one-half, or 8/16, of the retirement
insurance benefits, on the one hand; and
Basilia Berdin, his widow by the second
marriage and their seven children, on the
other hand, who are entitled to the
remaining one-half, or 8/16, each of
them to receive an equal share of 1/16.
VDA. DE CONSUEGRA vs.
GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE
SYSTEM, 37 SCRA 316 [1971].

• [In the S.C.]The question posed is:


to whom should this retirement
insurance benefits of Jose
Consuegra be paid, because he did
not, or failed to, designate the
beneficiary of his retirement
insurance?
VDA. DE CONSUEGRA vs.
GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE
SYSTEM, 37 SCRA 316 [1971].

• The GSIS offers two separate and


distinct systems of benefits to its
members — one is the life insurance
and the other is the retirement
insurance. These two distinct
systems of benefits are paid out
from two distinct and separate funds
that are maintained by the GSIS.
VDA. DE CONSUEGRA vs.
GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE
SYSTEM, 37 SCRA 316 [1971].

• In the case of the proceeds of a life insurance,


the same are paid to whoever is named the
beneficiary in the life insurance policy. As in the
case of a life insurance provided for in the
Insurance Act (Act 2427, as amended), the
beneficiary in a life insurance under the GSIS
may not necessarily be a heir of the insured. The
insured in a life insurance may designate any
person as beneficiary unless disqualified to be so
under the provisions of the Civil Code. And in the
absence of any beneficiary named in the life
insurance policy, the proceeds of the insurance
will go to the estate of the insured.
VDA. DE CONSUEGRA vs.
GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE
SYSTEM, 37 SCRA 316 [1971].

• Retirement insurance is primarily


intended for the benefit of the employee
— to provide for his old age, or
incapacity, after rendering service in the
government for a required number of
years. If the employee reaches the age of
retirement, he gets the retirement
benefits even to the exclusion of the
beneficiary or beneficiaries named in his
application for retirement insurance.
VDA. DE CONSUEGRA vs.
GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE
SYSTEM, 37 SCRA 316 [1971].

• The beneficiary of the retirement


insurance can only claim the proceeds of
the retirement insurance if the employee
dies before retirement. If the employee
failed or overlooked to state the
beneficiary of his retirement insurance,
the retirement benefits will accrue to his
estate and will be given to his legal heirs
in accordance with law, as in the case of
a life insurance if no beneficiary is named
in the insurance policy.
VDA. DE CONSUEGRA vs.
GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE
SYSTEM, 37 SCRA 316 [1971].

• It is Our view, therefore, that the respondent


GSIS had correctly acted when it ruled that the
proceeds of the retirement insurance of the late
Jose Consuegra should be divided equally
between his first living wife Rosario Diaz, on the
one hand, and his second wife Basilia Berdin and
his children by her, on the other; and the lower
court did not commit error when it confirmed the
action of the GSIS, it being accepted as a fact
that the second marriage of Jose Consuegra to
Basilia Berdin was contracted in good faith.
Matabuena v Cervantes
38 SCRA 284
• Matabuena donated a parcel of land to
Petronilla in 1956. They married in 1962.
After Cervantes died, childless, his sister
claimed the property.
• S.C: - “While Art. 183 of the Civil Code
considers as void a ‘donation between the
spouses during the marriage,’ policy
considerations of the most exigent
character as well as the dictates of
morality require that the same prohibition
should apply to a common-law
relationship.
Matabuena v Cervantes
38 SCRA 284
• So long as marriage remains the
cornerstone of our family law,
reason and morality alike demand
that the disabilities attached to
marriage should likewise attach to
concubinage.
Matabuena v Cervantes
38 SCRA 284
• …the policy of the law which
embodies a deeply-rooted notion of
what is just and what is right would
be nullified if such irregular
relationship instead of being visited
with disabilities would be attended
with benefits.
Matabuena v Cervantes
38 SCRA 284
• [NOTE: because, however,
Cervantes and Matabuena married,
she was able to get half of the
property as her share in his estate.
The sister got the other half….]
[G.R. No. 132529. February 2, 2001]
SUSAN NICDAO CARIÑO vs. SUSAN YEE
CARIÑO

• The marriage of respondent Susan


Yee and the deceased is a bigamous
marriage, having been solemnized
during the subsistence of a previous
marriage then presumed to be valid
(between petitioner and the
deceased), the application of Article
148 is therefore in order.
[G.R. No. 132529. February 2, 2001]
SUSAN NICDAO CARIÑO vs. SUSAN YEE
CARIÑO

• The disputed P146,000.00 from MBAI


[AFP Mutual Benefit Association,
Inc.], NAPOLCOM, Commutation, Pag-
ibig, and PCCUI, are clearly
renumerations, incentives and
benefits from governmental agencies
earned by the deceased as a police
officer.
[G.R. No. 132529. February 2, 2001]
SUSAN NICDAO CARIÑO vs. SUSAN YEE
CARIÑO

• Unless respondent Susan Yee


presents proof to the contrary, it
could not be said that she contributed
money, property or industry in the
acquisition of these monetary
benefits.
[G.R. No. 132529. February 2, 2001]
SUSAN NICDAO CARIÑO vs. SUSAN YEE
CARIÑO
• Hence, they are not owned in
common by respondent and the
deceased, but belong to the
deceased alone and respondent has
no right whatsoever to claim the
same.
• By intestate succession, the said
“death benefits” of the deceased
shall pass to his legal heirs. And,
respondent, not being the legal wife
of the deceased is not one of them.
[G.R. No. 132529. February 2, 2001]
SUSAN NICDAO CARIÑO vs. SUSAN YEE
CARIÑO
• Susan Nicdao, however, was married to
Carino. Her claim falls under Art. 147 of
the Family Code.
• In contrast to Article 148, under the
foregoing article, wages and salaries
earned by either party during the
cohabitation shall be owned by the
parties in equal shares and will be divided
equally between them, even if only one
party earned the wages and the other did
not contribute thereto.
[G.R. No. 132529. February 2, 2001]
SUSAN NICDAO CARIÑO vs. SUSAN YEE
CARIÑO
• Conformably, even if the disputed
“death benefits” were earned by the
deceased alone as a government
employee, Article 147 creates a co-
ownership in respect thereto,
entitling the petitioner to share one-
half thereof. As there is no
allegation of bad faith in the present
case, both parties of the first
marriage are presumed to be in
good faith.
[G.R. No. 132529. February 2, 2001]
SUSAN NICDAO CARIÑO vs. SUSAN YEE
CARIÑO
• Thus, one-half of the subject “death
benefits” under scrutiny shall go to
the petitioner as her share in the
property regime, and the other half
pertaining to the deceased shall
pass by, intestate succession, to his
legal heirs, namely, his children with
Susan Nicdao.
Art. 739, Civil Code
• Art. 739. The following
donations shall be void:
• (1) Those made between
persons who were guilty of
adultery or concubinage at the
time of the donation;
• (2) Those made between
persons found guilty of the same
criminal offense, in
consideration thereof;
Art. 739, Civil Code
• (3) Those made to a public officer or
his wife, descendants and
ascendants, by reason of his office.
• In the case referred to in No. 1, the
action for declaration of nullity may
be brought by the spouse of the
donor or donee; and the guilt of the
donor and donee may be proved by
preponderance of evidence in the
same action. (n)
SSS v. Davao, 17 SCRA 863
• Article 739 of the New Civil Code
does not apply to a case where the
concubine did not know that the
man was married.
Article 743, Civil Code
• Donations made to incapacitated
persons shall be void, though
simulated under the guise of
another contract or through a
person who is interposed.
Art. 1031, Civil Code
• A testamentary provision in
favor of a disqualified person,
even though made under the
guise of an onerous contract, or
made through an intermediary,
shall be void.
Art. 2012, Civil Code
• Any person who is forbidden
from receiving any donation
under Article 739 cannot be
named beneficiary of a life
insurance policy by the person
who cannot make any donation
to him, according to said article.
Art. 1337, Civil Code
• There is undue influence when a
person takes improper
advantage of his power over the
will of another, depriving the
latter of a reasonable freedom of
choice.
Art. 1337, Civil Code
• The following circumstances
shall be considered:
– the confidential, family, spiritual
and other relations between the
parties,
– or the fact that the person alleged
to have been unduly influenced
was suffering from mental
weakness,
– or was ignorant or in financial
distress.
Sec.3, Insurance Code
• The consent of the husband is
not necessary for the validity of
an insurance policy taken out by
a married woman on her life or
that of her children.

Well, what about the consent of the wife?


The spouses are JOINT administrators of
the community property….
Sec.3, Insurance Code
• Any minor of the age of eighteen
years or more, may, notwithstanding
such minority, contract for life,
health and accident insurance, with
any insurance company duly
authorized to do business in the
Philippines, provided the insurance is
taken on his own life and the
beneficiary appointed is the minor's
estate or the minor's father, mother,
husband, wife, child, brother or
sister.
Sec.3, Insurance Code
• The married woman or the minor
herein allowed to take out an
insurance policy may exercise all
the rights and privileges of an
owner under a policy.
Very very sexist and against the policy in
the Family Code.
Sec. 10, Insurance Code
• Sec. 10. Every person has an
insurable interest in the life and
health:
• (a) Of himself, of his spouse and
of his children;
• (b) Of any person on whom he
depends wholly or in part for
education or support, or in
whom he has a pecuniary
interest;
Sec. 10, Insurance Code
• (c) Of any person under a legal
obligation to him for the
payment of money, or
respecting property or services,
of which death or illness might
delay or prevent the
performance; and
• (d) Of any person upon whose
life any estate or interest vested
in him depends.
NON-MARITAL UNIONS
• Arts. 147 and 148, F.C. state the
rules of these inaccurately called
“common-law marriages.”
Art. 147, Family Code
• When a man and a woman who are
capacitated to marry each other, live
exclusively with each other as husband
and wife without the benefit of marriage
or under a void marriage, their wages
and salaries shall be owned by them in
equal shares and the property acquired
by both of them through their work or
industry shall be governed by the rules on
co-ownership.
Art. 147, Family Code
• In the absence of proof to the contrary,
properties acquired while they lived together
shall be presumed to have been obtained by
their joint efforts, work or industry, and shall be
owned by them in equal shares. For purposes of
this Article, a party who did not participate in the
acquisition by the other party of any property
shall be deemed to have contributed jointly in
the acquisition thereof if the former’s efforts
consisted in the care and maintenance of the
family and of the household.
Art. 147, Family Code
• Neither party can encumber or
dispose by acts inter vivos of his or
her share in the property acquired
during cohabitation and owned in
common, without the consent of the
other, until after the termination of
their cohabitation.
Art. 147, Family Code
• When only one of the parties to a void marriage
is in good faith, the share of the party in bad
faith in the co-ownership shall be forfeited in
favor of their common children. In case of
default of or waiver by any or all of the common
children or their descendants, each vacant share
shall belong to the respective surviving
descendants. In the absence of descendants,
such share shall belong to the innocent party. In
all cases, the forfeiture shall take place upon
termination of the cohabitation.
ARTICLE 147, FAMILY CODE
• The man and the woman have
capacity to marry each other.
• They cohabit
• Their cohabitation is exclusive
• There is no marriage or the
marriage is void.
ARTICLE 147, FAMILY CODE
• The parties are under a property
relationship of co-ownership,
covering:
– Their wages and salaries
– Property acquired through the work or
industry of both (if in the latter case
the other shared in family
care/maintenance)
Art. 148, Family Code
• In cases of cohabitation not falling under
the preceding Article, only the properties
acquired by both of the parties through
their actual joint contribution of money,
property, or industry shall be owned by
them in common in proportion to their
respective contributions. In the absence
of proof to the contrary, their
contributions and corresponding shares
are presumed to be equal. The same rule
and presumption shall apply to joint
deposits of money and evidences of credit.
Art. 148, Family Code
• If one of the parties is validly married to
another, his or her share in the co-
ownership shall accrue to the absolute
community or conjugal partnership
existing in such valid marriage. If the
party who acted in bad faith is not validly
married to another, his or her shall be
forfeited in the manner provided in the
last paragraph of the preceding Article.
• The foregoing rules on forfeiture shall
likewise apply even if both parties are in
bad faith.
JOAQUINO vs. REYES, G.R. No.
154645, July 13, 2004

• Though registered in the paramour’s


name, property acquired with the salaries
and earnings of a husband belongs to his
conjugal partnership with the legal
spouse. The filiation of the paramour’s
children must be settled in a probate or
special proceeding instituted for the
purpose, not in an action for recovery of
property.
JOAQUINO vs. REYES
• As to the facts, it is undisputed that the
deceased Rodolfo Reyes was legally
married to Respondent Lourdes Reyes on
January 3, 1947. It is also admitted that
for 19 years or so, and while their
marriage was subsisting, he was actually
living with petitioner. It was during this
time, in 1979, that the disputed house
and lot was purchased and registered in
petitioner’s name.
JOAQUINO vs. REYES
• When a common-law couple have a
legal impediment to marriage, only
the property acquired by them --
through their actual joint
contribution of money, property or
industry -- shall be owned by them
in common and in proportion to
their respective contributions.
JOAQUINO vs. REYES
• The present controversy hinges on
the source of the funds paid for the
house and lot in question. Upon the
resolution of this issue depends the
determination of whether the
property is conjugal (owned by
Rodolfo and Lourdes) or exclusive
(owned by Milagros) or co-owned by
Rodolfo and Milagros.
JOAQUINO vs. REYES
• Indeed, a preponderance of
evidence has duly established that
the disputed house and lot was paid
by Rodolfo Reyes, using his salaries
and earnings.
JOAQUINO vs. REYES
• By substantial evidence, respondents
showed the following facts:
– 1) that Rodolfo was gainfully employed as
comptroller at Warner, Barnes and Co., Inc.
until his retirement on September 30, 1980,
upon which he received a sizeable retirement
package;
– 2) that at exactly the same time the property
was allegedly purchased, he applied for a
mortgage loan -- intended for “housing” --
from the Commonwealth Insurance Company;
JOAQUINO vs. REYES
– 3) that he secured the loan with a real estate
mortgage over the same property;
– 4) that he paid the monthly amortizations for
the loan as well as the semi-annual premiums
for a Philam Life insurance policy, which he
was required to take as additional security;
and
– 5) that with the proceeds of his life insurance
policy, the balance of the loan was paid to
Commonwealth by Philam Life Insurance
Company.
JOAQUINO vs. REYES
• All told, respondents have shown that the
property was bought during the marriage
of Rodolfo and Lourdes, a fact that gives
rise to the presumption that it is
conjugal. More important, they have
established that the proceeds of the loan
obtained by Rodolfo were used to pay for
the property; and that the loan was, in
turn, paid from his salaries and earnings,
which were conjugal funds under the Civil
Code.
JOAQUINO vs. REYES
• In contrast, petitioner has failed to
substantiate either of her claims -- that
she was financially capable of buying the
house and lot, or that she actually
contributed to the payments therefor.
• Indeed, it does not appear that she was
gainfully employed at any time after 1961
when the property was purchased.
JOAQUINO vs. REYES
• Under the circumstances, therefore, the
purchase and the subsequent registration
of the realty in petitioner’s name was
tantamount to a donation by Rodolfo to
Milagros. By express provision of Article
739(1) of the Civil Code, such donation
was void, because it was “made between
persons who were guilty of adultery or
concubinage at the time of the
donation.”.
JOAQUINO vs. REYES
• Regarding the registration of the property
in petitioner’s name, it is enough to
stress that a certificate of title under the
Torrens system aims to protect dominion;
it cannot be used as an instrument for the
deprivation of ownership. It has been
held that property is conjugal if acquired
in a common-law relationship during the
subsistence of a preexisting legal
marriage, even if it is titled in the name
of the common-law wife.
JOAQUINO vs. REYES
• The registration of the property in
petitioner’s name was clearly designed to
deprive Rodolfo’s legal spouse and
compulsory heirs of ownership. By
operation of law, petitioner is deemed to
hold the property in trust for them.
Therefore, she cannot rely on the
registration in repudiation of the trust, for
this case is a well-known exception to the
principle of conclusiveness of a certificate
of title.
ARTICLE 148, FAMILY CODE
• The parties are cohabiting, but they
have no capacity to marry each
other or the cohabitation is not
exclusive. (Valdes v RTC, 260 SCRA
221 [1996])
ARTICLE 148, FAMILY CODE
• A limited co-ownership is
established covering:
– Actual joint contributions of money
– Actual joint contributions of property
– Actual joint contributions of industry
ARTICLE 148, FAMILY CODE
• Excluded are wages/salaries, and
also acquisitions where one of the
parties only participated in care and
maintenance.
QUERY:
• I have an Aunt, she lived with this man
for 20 years out of wedlock, because the
latter have a prior legal marriage. Now,
the man died, left in a bank is a certain
amount of money. I would just like to
know if my aunt has legal rights to claim
the money to the bank, if yes, what do
we need to do to have the bank agreed
on this process. Thanks in advance for
your reply. =)
ANSWER:
• As discussed in the article, only the properties
acquired by both parties through their actual
joint contribution of money, property or industry
shall be owned in common in proportion to the
respective contribution. In the absence of proof
to the contrary, the sharing is equal. I’m sure
that if you ask your bank about this, they will
refer that question to their lawyers. I suppose
they would say that since the account is under
the name of the guy (not a joint account), then
it goes to him or to his legal heirs (and that
would be the legitimate family and the
illegitimate children). Just try to ask the bank
and check what they would say. Thanks.
Agapay v. Palang, 276
SCRA 340
• Actual joint contribution is required
by Art. 148. if the actual
contribution of the party is not
proved, there will be no co-
ownership and no presumption of
equal shares.
Valdes v. RTC, 260 SCRA
221
• In a void marriage, regardless of the
cause thereof, the property relations
of the parties during the
cohabitation are governed by Arts.
147 or 148, as the case may be.
Valdes v. RTC, 260 SCRA
221
• The liquidation and partition of the
property owned in common by the
partners are governed by the rules
on co-ownership.
Karl Wilson
Agence France Presse
• Daza does give one piece of advice to
mistresses: "Make sure you insure him.
An insurance policy, paid for by the
beloved philanderer, with his mistress
and their offspring as beneficiaries, is a
piece of paper that's as good as a
substitute marriage contract," she said.
"Unless she has secured a house, jewels,
cars, bonds and a bank account in her
name, insurance is her best bet."