Q: Petition for legal separation, or annulment of marriage? What advice would you give?

A: Depends on the outcome the client wants

Q: A and B were married in Cotabato City. Both are Filipinos. A went to Saudi Arabia for
a 4 yr contract. A year after, he converted to Muslim. Months thereafter, he married
another Filipina in Saudi Arabia. B, upon being informed as to this marriage, filed a petition
for legal separation. Will the action prosper?

A: Yes, the law does not distinguish whether the subsequent bigamous marriage is void
or valid.

Q: A filed a petition for legal separation on the ground that B was found guilty of a crime.
The defense raised by B was that he was not imprisoned because he was able to avail of
the probation. Will the petition prosper?

A: No, the penalty imposed must have been more than 6 years, meaning that the crime
is serious and not probationable.

Q: In the case where the lawyer notarized a document allowing the spouses commit
concubinage or adultery, what can be a ground for legal separation? Will the petition for
prosper?

A: Sexual infidelity. The contract between the spouses implies consent. No the action will
not prosper.

Q: Difference between consent and condonation.

A:

Q: If a spouse having knowledge of a ground for legal separation (sexual infidelity) had
sexual relations with the guilty spouse, is this tantamount to consent?

A: No condonation if the reason for sexual intercourse was to save the marriage and
maintain harmony.

Q: A petition for legal separation was filed. Four weeks after filing, the court scheduled
the case for hearing. Was it proper for the court to schedule the hearing?

A: Yes. The cooling off period is not absolute as the court can hear cases that do not
affect the marriage like support and custody. What is prohibited is the trial on the merits
and not a hearing on preliminary remedies.

Q: The petition was filed September 11, 2018, but the acts alleged in the complaint were
committed by the respondent in 2011, 2012 and 2013. Will this petition prosper?

A: Action may prosper as to the acts made in 2013, as long as it falls within the prescriptive
period.
Q: Respondent may raise the defense that it was a continuing offense, thus should be
counted on the occurrence of the first offense.

A: Each act is a separation cause of action. People v. Zapata.

Q: The respondent admitted guilt. Thereafter, the court granted the petition. Was it
proper?

A: No. Even if the defendant admits the allegations of the petition or the complaint, if there
is evidence of the ground for legal separation independently of such admission, the
decree is still valid. What the law prohibits is a judgment based solely on the defendant’s
confession. Ocampo v. Florenciano.

Q: In the problem a while ago, assuming the act was committed in Dec. 2013, can this be
raised as a defense (petition should have been filed from 1 year of the occurrence of the
cause)?

A: No. Sempio-Diy page 106.

Q: What is recrimination? Is this a ground for legal separation? What if both committed
an act, would it not be a better reason to grant the petition?

A: The parties being guilty, there is no offended spouse who deserves to file the action,
and this is true even if one spouse has been pardoned by the other spouse, but the latter
has not been pardoned.

Q: During the pendency of the petition, the wife died. The heirs discovered that the will
the deceased left gives a condo unit to the guilty spouse. Is the inheritance given to the
guilty spouse valid?

A: Since there was no decree of legal separation, the guilty spouse will still be able to
inherit.

Q: Assuming there is a decree of legal separation before death of the innocent spouse,
will the heir inherit?

A: It would depend if the will was executed before or after decree of legal separation.

Q: What if it was executed during the pendency of the action? With knowledge of the act?

A: Then there is condonation as to right to inherit. The conviction of the guilty spouse
does not disqualify him/her to inherit from the offended spouse, if there is no decree of
legal separation between them. Art. 1032 does not make such act one of unworthiness
that would render the guilty spouse incapable of succeeding from the innocent spouse.
CSU: Art. 63(4) is premised on the execution of the will without knowledge or long before
the commission of the act.

Q: The will was executed before or during the pendency of the action. Petitioner would
not want guilty spouse to inherit. What advice would you give?

A: Revoke the will. Disinherit the guilty spouse.

Q: Is it required for disinheritance that a decree of legal separation be issued?

A: No need for a decree.

Q: B left the conjugal abode. A filed an action for the court to compel B to return to the
conjugal abode to perform marital obligations. Will the action prosper?

A: No. Arroyo v. Vasquez.

Q: Does it matter if there is just cause or not?

A: No.

Q: What are the remedies of the present spouse?

A: Refuse support, recover moral damages, ask the court to counsel his wife under Art.
72

Q: X died, survived by spouse and nephews and nieces. The heirs discovered a TCT over
a parcel of land which was registered in the name of “X married to Y”. Will this property
form part of the estate of X?

A: Depends on whether there is a marriage settlement. If there is none, it depends on

when the marriage was celebrated. If it happened before the Family Code, CPG applies.
Then it will depend on when and how the property was purchased. If it was before the
marriage, the land will be part of the estate of X. If it was bought during the marriage, it
will depend on how it was acquired. If it was acquired using conjugal funds, the property
will be conjugal. There is a presumption that it is conjugal property. The burden of proving
that it is a separate property will be on the nephews and nieces. If it was acquired using
the separate funds of X, the property will be part of the estate of X. If it happened under
the Family Code, ACP applies and only half of the property will form part of the estate of
X. “Married to” only indicates civil status, not ownership.

CSU: the most important factor to consider is the marriage settlement.

Q: Can the spouse execute 5 marriage settlements?

A: Yes.
Q: Marriage was celebrated 5 days ago. May the spouses execute a marriage settlement
in which they agree that ACP will govern?

Q: If X died in 1988. It was alleged that there was a marriage settlement, but it was not in
writing. What is the status of the marriage settlement?

A: Depends on when the marriage was solemnized. If marriage was solemnized before
the Family Code, Statute of Fraud will govern, and the settlement is unenforceable. If
under the Family Code, the marriage settlement will be void.

Q: In 1989, A and B got married. B was only 19 years old. They entered into a marriage
settlement without making the parent of B a party. Is the marriage settlement valid?

A: Consider RA 6809. If solemnized before the law, the marriage settlement will be void
because the law requires the parents of the minor should be made parties. If the marriage
was solemnized before the law…
CSU: the law mentions only of “minor”

Q: Are DPN covered by SOF?

A: YES. Art. 83 FC amends Art. 127 of the Civil Code which provides that the form of
DNP shall be regulated by the SOF.

Q: As A was so excited because he was getting married in 5 days, he donated a house

and lot. He wrote a letter which stated that he gave B a house and lot through this letter.
2 days before the marriage, B died. Are the heirs of B entitled to house and lot?

A: No because it was not in proper form. Since it is an immovable property, it should be

in a public document.

Q: Assuming donation was valid, and marriage was not solemnized, what would be the
effect?
A: Art. 86 FC

Q: The father of the groom donated his condo unit to the mother of the bride. What is the
status of the donation? Is this a DNP? What is the relevance in differentiating it to ordinary
donations?

A: Valid. This is not a DNP but an ordinary donation, therefore acceptance is necessary.
Also the solemnization of the marriage is immaterial. (Sempio-Diy p. 144). The grounds
for revocation are also different.