Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
are binding upon citizens of the Philippines, even though living abroad Barretto Gonzalez vs. Gonzales March 7, 1933 Philippine Reports, Vol. 58 Nature: Appeal from a jud ment of the !ourt of "irst #nstance of Manila Ponente: $ull, %. Facts: Au usto &on'ales and Manuela (arretto &on'ales are citi'ens of the Philippines, married on 1919. "our children )ere *orn of the marria e. +n the ,prin of 19-., the/ 0oluntaril/ separated. 1e otiations ha0e *een made and it has *een a reed upon that &on'ales )ill support his )ife and children for P522 a month. After the a reement, Au usto &on'ales left the Philippines and settled in 1e0ada to secure an a*solute di0orce on the round of desertion dated 1o0em*er -8, 19-7. +n the same date, he married another "ilipina, and the/ had 3 children. #n 19-8, he returned to the Philippines. 3he defendant then reduced the a reed upon financial support and did not ma4e the pa/ments fi5ed in the di0orce. Manuela (arreto then filed a motion to ratif/ the di0orce the decree of di0orce, )ith modifications such as pa/in the counsel fees )orth P5,222. 3he !ourt of "irst #nstance ruled a ainst the defendant. And this is )h/ )e ha0e this appeal. Issues: 6+1 the !ourt has the jurisdiction to reco ni'e the di0orce in 1e0ada Held: 1o. 3he act of di0orce filed in 1e0ada must not *e credited and reco ni'ed since it is not allo)ed in the Philippine la). Ratio: 1. 3he residence ac7uired in 1e0ada */ the hus*and )asn8t a *ona fide residence and didn8t confer jurisdiction upon the court. -. All 7uestions relatin to marria e and di0orce or le al separation, to support *et)een mem*ers of the famil/, to the conju al partnership, are o0erned e5clusi0el/ */ the la) of the Philippines, )hen "ilipinos are in0ol0ed.
Tenchavez vs Escano 1o0em*er -9, 19.5 15 ,!RA 355 1ature9 :irect Appeal from a decision of the !ourt of "irst #nstance of !e*u Ponente9 Re/es, %.(.;., %. "acts9 a. "e*ruar/ -<, 19<8 = Pastor 3encha0e' >3-? and Vicenta @scano >-7? secretl/ e5chan ed marria e 0o)s in !e*u and planned to elope. 3he elopement didn8t push throu h *ecause her parents found a*out their plans of ettin married. Mamerto and Mena @scano, after *ein told */ Vicenta that she and Pastor alread/ ot married, immediatel/ su ested a recele*ration to 0alidate )hat the/ *elie0e )as an in0alid marriade. 3he recele*ration didn8t happen *ecause some of Vicenta8s collea ues at the school disclosed a lo0e letter *et)een Pastor and Pacita 1oel, their supposed matchma4er. (ecause of this amorous letter, Vicenta and Pastor8s relationship slo)l/ deteriorated. %une -<, 1952 A Vicenta applied for a passport and )ent to 1e0ada. Au ust --, 1952 A "iled a compliant for di0orce in the ,econd %udicial !ourt of the ,tate of 1e0ada. +cto*er -1, 1952 A 3he di0orce *ecame final and a*solute. ,eptem*er 13, 195< A Vicenta married an American, Russel ;ao Moran, in 1e0ada. ,he no) li0es )ith him and has *e otten children. ,he ac7uired American citi'enship on Au ust 8, 1958. %ul/ 32, 1955 A 3encha0e' filed for le al separation and as4ed for one million pesos in dama es. 3he jud ment didn8t decree a le al separation *ut freed 3encha0e' from supportin his )ife. 3encha0e' )as also as4ed to pa/ P<5,222 to Mamerto and Mena for moral and e5emplar/ dama es. 3encha0e' decided to ma4e an appeal.
*.
c.
d. e. f. . h.
i. j.
Issues: 6+1 3encha0e' is entitled to a di0orce or a le al separation from Vicenta @scano Held: Bes. (ut )ith modifications.
= Vicenta )ill pa/ P-5,222 for dama es and attorne/s8 fees. = 3encha0e' )ill pa/ Mamerto and Mena, P5,222 for dama es and attorne/s8 fees.
Ratio: 1. -. 3. 6hen the di0orce decree )as issued, Vicenta @scano )as still a "ilipino citi'en. ,he )as then su*ject to Philippine la). !! of the Philippines doesn8t admit a*solute di0roce, #t onl/ pro0ides le al separation. :i0orce and second marria e are in0alidC Relationship )ith Moran is an Dintercourse )ith a person not her hus*andE. Adulterous F justifies an action for le al separtion.