PEB INCIONG | C2012

PART II
IRENE CORTEZ, LAW AS A FOUNDATION FOR A NEW
EGALITARIANISM
-

Law is not the sole factor determinative of the status

of women in society but the elimination of
discriminating law is an essential step in that
direction.
1. Domestic Relations Law
a. Civil law governing domestic relations fall
unequally on men and women in such
matters as legal capacity, rights and
obligations in marriage, guardianship and
inheritance
2. Children
a. The rearing of children does not now fully
bind the mother to the home; it may in fact
require her participation in activities of the
larger community, or make it necessary for
her to work outside to augment the family
income.
3. Status of Women in Society
a. Political and Civil Rights
i. Enfranchised but an insignificant
number of women hold public
office
b. Employment
i. 1/3 of the worlds total workforce
consists of women
ii. The higher the position in both
private and public institutions, the
lesser the women
c. Education
i. Own attitudes, which reinforce the
mens attitude of superiority
ii. Long-term process to bring about
attitudinal change
4. Women and the Penal System
a. Some laws exclusively applied to women
i. Premature marriage widow not to
marry within 301 days of her
annulment or husbands death
b. Charge of infidelity different for women
i. Mere suspicion is valid for a charge
of infidelity
5. Legal Literacy
a. Whether or not women are well-informed of
their legal rights and duties,
i. and if so to what extend?
ii. How many women avail of legal
processes?
Conclusion
1. Law is a starting point and basic foundation for the
attainment of equal right for women
2. Equality under the law is a matter of justice in which
every person is entitled
3. Legal equality is a social concern [equal development
of all persons]
4. Laws are merely starting points, enforcement is
important
5. Must benefit women in all levels of society
6. Change in attitude through education
7. Law reform shouldnt go faster than the present level
social acceptance
SEMPIO-DIY INTRODUCTION
History:
Family Code was born out of a joint effort of the: 1)
Family Law Revision Committee and 2) Civil Code
Revision Committee
Took 7 years and 8 months / 182 meetings
May 4, 1986 draft finished

July 6, 1987 Pres. Aquino signs 2nd draft as EO 209

o
Modifications at Cabinet meeting
July 17, 1987 EO 227
Effectivity:
Published at the Manila Chronicle on August 4, 1987
Took effectivity on August 3, 1988
Reasons for Enactment
40 years since enactment of the NCC change in
social context
More grounds for annulment in the Catholic Church
Unequal treatment of husband and wife vis--vis
rights and responsibilities
Inadequacy of safeguards to strengthening marriage
Absurdity of limiting grounds for legal separation
Paternity and filiation with new scientific discoveries?
Provisions in 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.
Sec 14, Art II Role of women in nation building
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 development.
Sec 2, Article XV Marriage inviolable
-

TOLENTINO, THE FAMILY CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES

(217-219)
Reasons:
1. 40 years since the adoption of the NCC change in
circumstances
2. Need to implement policies embedded in the
constitution
3. Ensure equality between man and woman
Need for Code doubtful:
1. New code not complete in itself, there are still many
references to provisions in the Civil Code
2. Couldve been an amendment to the NCC
3. Shouldve been passed by Congress (not that
technical) instead of an EO
4. Couldve been informed through public hearings and
debates
TITLE V, THE FAMILY AS AN INSTITUTION
Tolentino
Concept of Family
Ties of marriage and blood
Groups of persons, regardless of number, who live in
the same house, under the authority of a head who
furnishes the means which the members of the group
subsist.
o
More restricted sense: spouse and their
children
Bases of the Family
1. Matrimonial union
2. Relationship within degree determined by law,
whether legitimate or illegitimate
3. Adoption
New Provisions of the Code
Spanish Civil Code contained no provisions declaring
policy and attitude of the law towards the family
Art. 149: The family, being the foundation of the
nation, is a basic social institution which public policy
cherishes and protects. Consequently, family relations
are governed by law and no custom, practice or
agreement destructive of the family shall be
recognized or given effect.
Sphere of Law on Family
2 aspects of family relations:
1. Internal natural and moral; sacred to the family and
inaccessible to the law

PEB INCIONG | C2012

2.

External between spouses and between parent and

child, here law fixes rules regulating family relations.
Characteristics of Family Law
1. Increasing intervention of the State in the
consideration and solution of the problems affecting
the family.
2. Obligatory character of the laws relating to the family
because they affect public welfare.
Art. 150: Family relations include those:
1. Between husband and wife
2. Between parents and children
3. Among other ascendants and descendants; and
4. Among brothers and sisters, whether of the
full of half-blood
Classes of Family Relations
1. Natural consanguinity or by affinity (spouse and the
relatives of the other spouse)
a. May be legitimate or illegitimate
2. Civil Relations created by law, as by adoption
3. Religious Relations created by the administration of
religious sacraments, such as baptism and
confirmation
Religious relationship and relationship by affinity are
not given legal effects.
Sempio-Diy
1. Family relations exist even though theyre not living
together
2. Other relatives plus domestic helpers are members
of the household, not of the family.
3. Illegitimate children are not included in above article
because they have their own families.
4. Adopted children included
5. Nephews, nieces, aunts and uncles not included
6. Includes relatives of ones spouse
DANA BERKOWITZ, DECONSTRUCTING ESSENTIALISM:
A FEMINIST ANALYSIS OF GAY AND LESBIAN FAMILIES
Standard North American
Family (SNAF)
Legally married couple with
the adult male as provider
and adult female as nurturer,
caregiver and homemaker
-

Deconstructing the Gender-division of labor

Gay and lesbian families shared domestic tasks
equally
Higher wage earner reduces time at work to
contribute in household and rearing duties
Contribution in tasks according to skill and not to
gender
Deconstructing Gender Socialization
Daughter raised by lesbian families aspire to be
doctors, lawyers, architects... [they have no
apprehensions in taking up careers that are usually
attributed to men]
Sons raised by lesbian mother have lower levels of
aggressive behavior and exhibit preference for
gender-neutral toys.
Gay fathers more prone to buying gender-typed toys
Gender and sexuality interact in unique ways to
produce distinct child-socialization practices
Deconstructing Marriage
The institution of marriage is not inherently or
naturally a patriarchal institution, but is dependent
on an ever-changing historical, cultural and social
context.
Deconstructing the Privileging of Blood Ties
Adoptive families are seen as second-best
Their situation illuminates how individuals negotiate
bonds with children who are not genetically related
to one or both of them
You can become a family member simply by acting
like one
Discussion
Motherhood and fatherhood are socially and
culturally constructed ideas
Children can be socialized in a way that would not
necessarily promote gender equality and difference.
Familial bond can flourish even without the presence
of biological relatedness.

PART III

Gay and Lesbian Families

Womens Right to Nationality and Citizenship, IWRAW

Judged sufficient and

inadequate
Suffers from immediate social
stigma

Criteria for Acquiring Citizenship

I.
Jus Sanguinis citizenship of parents
a. Philippines: children can be granted
citizenship of parents of either sex; a female
Filipino citizen who marries a foreigner
retains her citizenship unless by act or
omission she is deemed under the law to
have renounced her citizenship.
II.
Jus Soli place of birth
III.
Naturalization voluntary act aimed at
establishing a relationship with a given political
society; operates independently of jus soli and
jus sanguinis

Ethnocentric and positivist thought... pathologizes

interracial families, single mothers, childless couples,
families of color, never-married couples and gay and
lesbian families

Deconstructs:
1) Motherhood, 2) Fatherhood, 3) Gender-division of
labor, 4) gender socialization, 5) marriage, and 6)
privileging blood ties.
Deconstructing Motherhood
Full domesticity and motherhood revered
Childrearing is actually one of the least-gender
neutral activities that we have in contemporary
society
For lesbian families:
o
More egalitarian approach
o
Parenthood no longer a lonely endeavor
o
Untangling notions of what a stereotypical
mother should be
Deconstructing Fatherhood
Vis-a-vis the notion of essentialized motherhood
Not as socially rewarding
Gay families challenge the notion of genered
parenting and the defense of parenting as being
biologically-intrinsic.

Gender Biases in Acquiring Citizenship

Many states still do not believe that a woman is
capable of supporting her foreign husband. Instead,
they universally acknowledge that a male citizen can
support his wife regardless of her original status,
thus perpetuating the problem.
Effects of Depriving Equal Citizenship Rights (6)
Impacts on the availability of services, benefits and
opportunities for women as well as their foreign
spouses and children.
I.
Restriction of freedom to choose residence and
domicile
a. Discriminates not only against female
citizens, but also against foreign males and
their children. Such legal provisions negate

PEB INCIONG | C2012

right to movement and right to live in a
residence of choice.
II.
Inability to transfer citizenship to children
a. Usually women are not given the right to
transfer citizenship to their children
b. Children automatically acquire the
citizenship of their fathers
c. Leads to limited civil and political rights for
the children
III.
Risk of becoming stateless
a. Particularly grave when a man denies
fathering (Nepal)
b. Children born out of wedlock are likewise at
risk. Under Nepalese law, the birth of a child
is registered by the male head of the family.
IV.
Restriction on employment opportunities
a. If a womans foreign husband or children
cannot acquire citizenship, they are
deprived of employment opportunities
V.
Risk of losing children
a. Fathers often gain custody of their children
due to the practice of denying women the
right to confer citizenship to their daughters
and sons.
VI.
Other consequences
a. Restrictions on acquiring property
b. Restrictions on establishing and running
business
c. Restrictions on participation in civil and
political life
d. Denial of access to juvenile justice
i. Under the UN Convention on the
Rights of the Child (CRC) to
exercise such a right an identity
document establishing the age and
nationality of the applicant is
needed
Violation of Rights (6)
I.
Right to equality
II.
Right to non-discrimination
III.
Right to family life
a. women usually leave their own country
given the husbands difficulty in acquiring a
visa
b. women lose their right to live with their own
family in their country of origin
c. cases:
i. Family K and W v. the Netherlands
ii. Berrhab v. the Netherlands
divorce, foreign husband deported
d. Womens inability to pass citizenship to their
children also violates their right to family life
IV.
Right to choose residence and national identity
V.
Freedom of movement
VI.
Other violations
a. Right to dignity and the rights of dependent
children
b. Berner v. Canada
c. Constitutional Court of South Africa
denying a temporary residence permit to an
individual married to a South African ciizen
violates that individuals constitutional right
to dignity because it would adversely affect
her or his ability to achieve personal
fulfillment through a relationship with his or
her partner
International Human Rights Standards on Nationality
2 approaches of states to international law
o
Monist international law directly applicable
to municipal law; International law supreme
of the two
o
Dualist two systems are separate and
cannot purport to have an effect on or
overrule the other.

Pacta sunt servanda treaties must be performed in

good faith
I.
Treaties (7)
a. UN Convention on the Elimination of all
Forms of Discrimination Against Women
(CEDAW), 1979.
i. Recognizes womens autonomy
and equality in the transfer and
acquisition of nationality, and
permits either spouse to confer
nationality on their children.
b. UN International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights (ICCPR), 1966.
i. Everyone shall have recognition
everywhere as persons before the
law
ii. Obligates states to guarantee
every child shall be registered
immediately after birth and [have]
the right to acquire nationality
c. UN International Covenant on Economic,
Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR)
i. Recognizes the right of everyone to
work and the need for the
strongest protection of the family,
which is perceived as the natural
and fundamental group unit of
society.
d. UN Convention on the Rights of the Child
(CRC)
i. Respect right of a child to preserve
his or her own identity, including
nationality, name and family
relations recognized by law.
ii. Child has the right to know and be
cared for by his or her parents
iii. State should ensure the upbringing
and development of the child and
his/her right to education
e. UN Convention on the Nationality of Married
Women, 1957.
i. Neither the celebration nor the
dissolution of a marriage between
a national of one country and an
alien, nor the change of nationality
by the husband during marriage
should automatically affect the
nationality of the wife.
f.
UN Convention Relation to the Status of
Refugees, 1951.
g. European Convention on Nationality, 1997.
II.
Declarations
a. Universal Declaration of Human Rights
(UDHR), 1948.
b. Beijing Declaration and Beijing Platform of
Action, 1995.
III.
Decisions (7)
a. Laws discriminating on the basis of sex and
between children born within and outside
wedlock declared unconstitutional
i. Atty. Gen. of the Republic of
Botswana v. Unity Dow
1. Botswana High Court ruled
that Sec. 4 and 5 of the 1984
Citizenship Act were ultra vires
the countrys constitution
because they discriminated
against women on the basis of
sex
2. Discrimination on 2 levels: 1)
between male and female
citizens, 2) Between the
children born to married and
unmarried mothers.

PEB INCIONG | C2012

3.

b.

c.
d.

e.

Court relied on liberal

authorities from various
jurisdictions and backgrounds,
including the Organization of
African Unity Convention on
Non-Discrimination and the
CEDAW Convention.
Requirement of skills not available in
Zimbabwe cannot be a ground for granting
or denying visas to spouses of Zimbabwean
women citizens
i. Rattigan v. Chief Immigration
Officer
ii. Salem v. Chief Immigration Officer
Cancellation of endorsement in a passport
declared without legal authority
i. Malkani v. Bangladesh
Rejection of residential visas to foreigner
husbands of native women represents
unequal treatment
i. Meera Gurung v. Dept. of
Immigration (Nepal) time limit for
husbands
Requiring Canadian womens children born
abroad to undergo security checks and oathswearing unlawful denial of equal protection
i. Benner v. Canada

1973 Philippine Constitution

ARTICLE III
Citizenship
Section 1. The following are
citizens of the Philippines:
(1) Those who
are citizens of
the Philippines
at the time of
the adoption of
this
Constitution.
(2) Those
whose fathers
and mothers
are citizens of
the Philippines.
(3) Those who
elect Philippine
citizenship
pursuant to
the provisions
of the
Constitution of
nineteen
hundred and
thirty-five.
(4) Those who
are naturalized
in accordance
with law.
Section 2. A female citizen of
the Philippines who marries an
alien retains her Philippine
citizenship, unless by her act or
omission she is deemed, under

1987 Philippine
Constitution
ARTICLE IV
Citizenship
Section 1. The following
are citizens of the
Philippines:
[1] Those who
are citizens of the
Philippines at the
time of the
adoption of this
Constitution;
[2] Those whose
fathers or
mothers are
citizens of the
Philippines;
[3] Those born
before January
17, 1973, of
Filipino mothers,
who elect
Philippine
citizenship upon
reaching the age
of majority; and
[4] Those who
are naturalized in
accordance with
law.

Section 2. Natural-born
citizens are those who are
citizens of the Philippines

RA 9139 The Administrative Naturalization Law of

2000
Sec. 12. Status of Alien Husband and Minor Children. If the applicant is a married woman, the approval of
the BI subject to the requirements of existing of laws.

PART IV

f.

IV.

V.

Validity of differential treatment for mother

and father challenged
i. Tuan Anh Nguyen v. Immigration
and Naturalization Services
g. Providing only women married to Costa
Rican citizens special naturalization status
deemed unconstitutional
Decisions by treaty monitoring bodies
a. Marrying men outside the tribe cannot be
grounds for losing ones status as a member
of the tribe
i. Lovelace v. Canada
b. Law discriminating against Mauritian women
on the basis of national security cannot be
justified
i. Shirin Aumeeruddy Cziffra et. al.
v. Mauritius
Decisions by a regional human rights body
(European Court of Human Rights)
a. Protection of the domestic labor market is
not a ground for denying visas to husbands
of women permanent residents in the U.K.

the law, to have renounced her

citizenship.
Section 3. Philippine citizenship
may be lost or reacquired in the
manner provided by law.
Section 4. A natural-born citizen
is one who is a citizen of the
Philippines from birth without
having to perform any act to
acquire or perfect his Philippine
citizenship.

from birth without having

to perform any act to
acquire or perfect their
Philippine citizenship.
Those who elect Philippine
citizenship in accordance
with paragraph (3),
Section 1 hereof shall be
deemed natural-born
citizens.
Section 3. Philippine
citizenship may be lost or
reacquired in the manner
provided by law.
Section 4. Citizens of the
Philippines who marry
aliens shall retain their
citizenship, unless by their
act or omission, they are
deemed, under the law, to
have renounced it.
Section 5. Dual allegiance
of citizens is inimical to
the national interest and
shall be dealt with by law.
Article 2, Section 14. The
State recognizes the role
of women in nationbuilding, and shall ensure
the fundamental equality
before the law of women
and men.

her petition for administrative naturalization will not

benefit her alien husband but her minor children may
file a petition for cancellation for their alien certificate
of registration with

PEB INCIONG | C2012

TITLE I
MARRIAGE

Chapter 1. Requisites of Marriage

Definition:

1) special contract

2) permanent union,

3) between a man and woman,

4) entered into in accordance with the law, and

5) with the purpose of establishing conjugal and

family life.
o
Purpose of procreation not necessary.
Two aspects of Marriage:
o
Contract
1) Exclusively for a man and a woman
2) Can only be dissolved by the death of one of
the spouses or through annulment or
declaration of nullity
3) The rights and duties of the parties are fixed
by law.
4) Does not give rise to action for damages
although there are civil and criminal
sanctions for adultery or concubinage, legal
separation and action for support.
o
Status
1) Inviolable social institution
2) Being an institution of public order or policy,
it is governed by law and not subject to
stipulation
3) Implications in two fields:

Personal rights between husband

and wife and not usually interfered
with by the court

Property rights several judicial

sanctions are available
Principal Effects (Reyes)
o
Personal and economic relations
o
Legitimacy of sex and family
o
Personal and economic relations between
parents and children
o
Rights and obligations in the family
o
Emancipation for parental authority
o
No donations can be given to the spouse
o
Disqualification of the spouses to testify
against each other
o
Modification of criminal liability
Requisites:
o
Essential Requisites [primary basis for validity] Art 2:

Legal capacity: 1) male and female, 2)

different sexes, 3) no existing impediment
[under-aged or married].

Appearance before a solemnizing officer to

give consent:

to give chance in ascertaining whether

consent was given in duress, jest,
mistake or fraud.
o
Formal requisites:

Authority of the solemnizing officer;

A valid marriage license

A marriage ceremony appearance of the

contracting
parties

before
the
solemnizing officer personal declaration
that they take each other as husband and
wife presence of not less than two
witnesses of legal age. (53a, 55a)
Total absence of formal requisites render the
marriage void from the beginning.
If parties believed in good faith that the
solemnizing officer had the authority to preside

over the marriage, even if the contrary was true,

then the marriage is valid.
Defect in an essential requisite render the
marriage merely voidable, while an irregularity
in a formal requisite would not even affect the
validity of the marriage, subject to the civil,
criminal, or administrative liability of the party or
parties responsible for such irregularity.
Void because of absence of essential requisites

Ceremony:

Parties personally appear before a solemnizing officer

with at least two witness present (Art 6)

Solemnized publicly: (Art 8)

o
chambers of the judge or in open court,
o
church, chapel or temple, or
o
office the consul-general, consul or viceconsul, as the case may be
o
except in cases of marriages contracted in
articulo mortis where both of the parties:

request the solemnizing officer in

writing

may be solemnized at a house or

place designated by them in a
sworn statement to that effect.
Solemnizing officer:
1. Incumbent judicial officer (within his/her jurisdiction)
2. Priest
a. Registered with the civil register general
b. Authorized by church
c. At least one of the parties is a member of
the religious sect
3. Ship captain or airplane chief
4. Military commander
a. Where a chaplain is assigned
b. Within zone of operation
5. Consul-general, consul or vice-consul
License:
-

Issued by local civil registrar

Each of the contracting parties shall file
separately a sworn application
If with parents, not required to present residence
certificate
Required to present original birth certificate, or
in default thereof, baptismal certificate
o
Loss or destruction of such sworn
affidavit
o
No need if parents of contracting party
in need of such are present and would
attest to the capacity and age of the
party
Notice posted by local civil register for 10
consecutive days in a conspicuous place within
the building and accessible to the general public.
Valid for 120 days from date of issuance
Free of charge for indigent parties or those who
have no visible means of income or those of
insufficient income (attested to in an affidavit)
Filed at the registry books by the local civil
registrar [with name and date]
o
To avoid fixing marriage dates/license
dates
Prior Marriage
Instead of birth or baptismal certificate
o
Death certificate of former spouse

w/o such affidavit

o
Judicial decree of annulment
Party 18-21 years of age (and not previously
emancipated):
o
Consent of parent/s or legal guardian

In writing

Parent/guardian appears personally

PEB INCIONG | C2012

If not w/ an affidavit
signed by two other
witnesses
o
Marriage counseling certificate
Party 21-25 years of age
Foreign Party Involved:
o
Must secure certificate of legal capacity in the form
of an affidavit issued by their respective diplomatic
or consular officials
o
Refugees or stateless persons affidavit stating
their circumstances and showing legal capacity
Marriage Certificate
o
Contents:
o
Name; sex; age; citizenship; religion;
residence
o
Date and precise time of celebration
o
Proper marriage license
o
If applicable:

Parental consent

Parental advice

Settlement
o
Distribution (solemnizing officer):
o
1st: Either one of the parties
o
2nd and 3rd: Local civil registrar (not later
than 15 days)
o
4th: Solemnizing officer with original of the
license and other pertinent documents
Outside the Philippines
Solemnized
o
Must be in accordance with the law in force in the
country of solemnization
o
Must also be valid in the Philippines
o
Except those covered by
o
Art 35

(1) below 18 yrs

(4) bigamous/polygamous

(5) mistake in identity

o
Art 36 psychological incapacity
o
Art 37 - incestuous
o
Art 38 against public policy
Divorce Decree [EO 227]
o
Between Filipino and Foreigner
o
Foreigner may obtain decree abroad and
remarry
o
Filipino spouse likewise free to remarry

o
o
o
o
o
o

Parent/s or legal guardians advice (Art 15)

If none, license shall not be issued

till after 3 months following the
completion of publication
Marriage counseling certificate
surviving spouse of the adopting parent and
the adopted child;
surviving spouse of the adopted child and
the adopter;
adopted child and a legitimate child of the
adopter;
adopted children of the same adopter; and
parties where one, with the intention to
marry the other, killed that other person's
spouse, or his or her own spouse.

Voidable [Art 46]:

1. Without consent of parents (party 18-21 years)
o
Unless by the age of 21 such party freely
cohabited with the other as husband and wife
2. Unsound mind
o
Unless after coming to reason, freely cohabited
with the other as husband and wife
3. Fraud
o
Unless after having knowledge of such freely
cohabited with the other as husband and wife

Art 47: Fraud consists of the concealment of:

previous conviction (moral interpitude}
Pregnancy by another man
Sexually
transmissible disease (any
nature)
Drug addiction, habitual alcoholism,
homosexuality, or lesbianism.
Not included: deceit in character, health,
rank, fortune or chastity
4. Force, Intimidation or Undue Influence
o
Unless after such no longer being present, freely
cohabited with the other as husband and wife
5. Physical Incapacity (incurable)
6. Sexually transmissible disease serious and
incurable

for the sake of the contract party whose consent may not
be elicited in a complete manner
Chapter 7. Property Regime of Unions Without
Marriage
Comparison Art. 147 and Art. 148

Chapter 3. Void and Voidable Marriages

Marriages Void Ab Initio:

Any party below eighteen years of age even with the

consent of parents or guardians;
Solemnized by any person not legally authorized to
perform marriages unless parties were in good faith
Without license,
Bigamous or polygamous marriages
mistake as to the identity of the other [Art 35]
Psychological Incapacity [Art 36]
Incestuouswhether
relationship
between
the
parties be legitimate or illegitimate:
o
Between ascendants and descendants
o
Between brothers and sisters [Art 37]
Against public policy, such as those between:
o
collateral blood relatives whether legitimate
or illegitimate, up to the fourth civil degree;
o
step-parents and step-children;
o
parents-in-law and children-in-law;
o
adopting parent and the adopted child;

Similarities
Must be in a state of
cohabitation, or living
together openly as
husband and wife
No absolute community
or conjugal partnership
of property is formed
between the parties
Common property of the
parties shall be owned in
common and governed
by the rules on coownership
Property separately
acquired will belong to
each other separately
and exclusively

Bad faith of a party

Differences
147
148
Capacity present Suffering from
some legal
impediment
Live with each
other exclusively
Salaries and
property owned
in common in
equal shares
Property
acquired during
period of
cohabitation is
presumed to be
obtained by
their joint effort
Contributions in

One or both
parties have
an existing
marriage
There must be
actual joint
contribution
No such
presumption

Not

PEB INCIONG | C2012

results in forfeiture of his
or her share

the household
are considered
Proof is not
necessary

considered
If actual
contribution is

CASES:
Navarro vs. Domagtoy
July 19, 1996
P: Rodolfo G. Navarro
R: Judge Hernando C. Domagtoy
N: ADMINISTRATIVE MATTER in the Supreme Court. Gross
Misconduct and Inefficiency
J: Romero
Facts:
Navarro: Municipal Mayor of Dapa, Surigao del Norte
Domagtoy: Municipal Circuit Trial Court Judge of Sta. MonicaBurgos, Surigao del Norte
2 cases against Domagtoy:
1. Solemnization of a wedding which resulted to a
bigamous and, therefore, void marriage
2. Solemnization of a wedding which is outside his
jurisdiction
I.
-

II.
-

Solemnization of a wedding which resulted to a

bigamous marriage
Sept 27 1994: Gaspar A. Tagadan and Arlyn F. Borga
Gaspar is only separated from Ida Pearada (Sept.
1983) : 13 years and 5 children
Ida left the conjugal house (Valencia, Bukidnon) and
was never heard from again for almost 7 years
already presumption: Ida is dead
Solemnization of a wedding outside the judges
jurisdiction
Oct 27 1994: marriage ceremony between Floriano
Dador Sumaylo and Gemma G. del Rosario
His jurisdiction is in Sta. Monica and Burgos, Surigao
del Norte
The marriage was solemnized at his residence in the
municipality of Dapa, which is some 40 to 45 km
away from Sta. Monica and Burgos

Ratio:
I. Solemnization of a wedding which resulted to a
bigamous marriage
- R: he relied on the joint affidavit by Maurecio A. Labado, Sr.
and Eugenio Bullecer, subscribed and sworn to before Judge
Demosthenes C. Duquilla, Municipal Trial Judge of Basey,
Samar
- R: Art 41 of the Family Code: allow a person, married to
another who has been absent for 4 consecutive years and has
a well founded belief that the absent spouse is already dead
- SC: spouse present must institute a summary proceeding for
the declaration of presumptive death of absentee (Art 41)
- SC: Law is clear and simple: a summary proceeding for the
declaration of presumptive death is necessary in order to
contract a subsequent marriage
- Gaspar is still married to Ida and the marriage with Arlyn
resulted to a bigamous marriage
- void marriage
II.

not proved
there will be
no coownership

Solemnization of a wedding outside the

judges jurisdiction
Article 3: formal requisite is the authority of the
solemnizing officer
Article 7: marriage may be solemnized by the
judiciary within the courts jurisdiction
Article 8: refers only to the venue of the marriage
ceremony and does not alter or qualify the authority
of the solemnizing officer, as provided in the

preceding provision. Can be held outside of his

jurisdiction in one of the ff circumstances:
o
At the point of death
o
Remote places in accordance with Art. 29
o
Request of both parties in writing in a sworn
statement to that effect
A judge may solemnize a marriage only within said
areas and not beyond
Only an irregularity: will not affect the marriage
Judgment: SUSPENDED for 6 months and given a STERN
WARNING
People vs. Borromeo
October 31 1984
Accused: Elias Borromeo
Victim: Susana Taborda-Borromeo
N: APPEAL from the decision of the Circuit Criminal Court of
Cebu-Bohol
J: Relova
Facts:
Circuit Criminal Court of Cebu-Bohol:
guilty of PARRICIDE
reclusion perpetua
P12000 to heirs of Susana
July 3 1981
4-yr old niece of Elias and Susana ran to Lola Matilda
Taborada (71): Susana is shouting for help because
Elias is killing her
Lola told 4-yr old kid to go to brother Geronimo
Taborada, who was then working in their mango
plantation
Geronimo went to daddy and they both went to
Susanas hut
Windows and doors were shut but through the
bamboo slats at the wall, they saw Susana lying
down, motionless and beside her was her 1-month
old baby crying
Elias was lying near Susana too holding to a bloody
kitchen bolo
Daddy called on the Mabolo police
Mabolo police told Elias to open the door. Elias said
he would smoke first
They found Susana dead: intestines spilled out of her
abdomen
Accused-appellant said he should only be guilty of
homicide, not parricide, because the officiating priest
testified that their marriage was not legal and valid
(no marriage contract)
Issue: WON the accused and the victim are legally married.
(YES.)
Ratio:
-

accused himself admitted in his testimony

Person living together in apparent matrimony are
presumed, in the absence of any counter
presumption or evidence special to the case, to be in
fact married.
The law presumes morality, and not immorality;
marriage, and not concubinage; legitimacy, and not
bastardy.
The fact that no record of the marriage exists in the
registry of marriage does not invalidate the said
marriage, as long as in the celebration thereof, all
requisites for its validity are present
The forwarding of a copy of the marriage certificate
to the registry is not one of said requisites
Judgment: AFFIRMED. 12000 to 30 000

PEB INCIONG | C2012

Mariategui vs. CA
January 24 1992
P: Maria del Rosario Mariategui, et al
R: CA, Jacitno Mariategui, Julian Mariategui, Paulina Mariategui
N: PETITION to review the decision of the CA
J: Bidin
Facts:
Lupo Mariateguis 3 wives:
1. Eusebia Montellano
a. Baldomera
Antero, Rufina, Catalino, Maria, Gerardo, Virginia,
Federico
b. Maria del Rosario
c. Urbana
d. Ireneo
Ruperto
2. Flaviana Montellano: Cresenciana
3. Felipa Velasco:
a. Jacinto
b. Julian
c. Paulina
Lupo died on June 26, 1953: w/o will
acquired properties when he was still unmarried
o
Muntinlupa Estate: Lots Nos. 163, 66, 1346,
156
o
Children by first and second wives divided
the lot among themselves (deed of
extrajudicial partition) :Lot 163
o
Land registration court: decree ordering the
registration of the lot
o
Apr 1 1971: OCT No. 8828: issued to the
above mentioned heirs
Apr 23 1973: children by 3rd marriage: annulment of the deed
of extrajudicial partition dated Dec 2 1967
RTC: denied the merit
Feb 16 1977: children of 3rd marriage has right to inherit
CA: affirmed second decision
Issue:
1.
2.

WON prescription barred private respondents right

to demand the partition of the estate of Lupo
Mariategui. (NO)
WON private respondents, who belatedly filed the
action for recognition, were able to prove their
successional rights over said estate. (YES)

Ratio:
I successional rights
Private respondents are legitimate children
Justice of the Peace of Taguig, Rizal Jacinto
No marriage certificate
Mere fact that no record of the marriage exists does
not invalidate the marriage, provided all requisites
for validity are present
Once a man and a woman have lived as husband and
wife and such relationship is not denied nor
contradicted, the presumption of their being married
must be admitted as fact
Jacintos birth certificate: evidence that they are
legitimate children
Lupo lived with 3rd marriage children til he died
II Prescription
Prescription of an action for parties does not lie
except when the co-ownership is properly repudiated
by the co-owner
Prescription may not be invoked by petitioners
because private respondents commenced the instant
action barely 2 months after learning that petitioners
had registered in their names the lots involved
Prescription happens when
o
Co-oner repudiates the co-ownership

o
o
o

Act of repudiation is clearly made known to

the other co-owners
Evidence thereon is clear and conclusive
He has been in possession through open,
continuous,
exclusive,
and
notorious
possession of the property fro the period
required by law

Judgment: PETITION DENIED.

Pugeda vs. Trias
March 31 1962
P: Fabian Pugeda, Teofilo Pugeda and Virginia Pugeda
R: Rafael Trias, Miguel Trias, Soledad Trias, Clara Trias, Gabriel
Trias || minors: Romulo Viniegra, Gloria Viniegra, Fernando
Viniegra
J: Labrador
N: APPEAL from a decision of CFI Cavite
Facts:
Subject: lands acquired from the Friar Lands Estate
Administration of the San Francisco de Malabon, General Trias,
Cavite
Maria C. Ferrer had 2 husbands:
1. Mariano Trias
2. Fabian Pugeda M: Jan 1916
Ferrer died Feb 11 1934
Marriage with Fabian Pugeda
Ricardo Ricafrente: Justice of the Peace
Jan 5 1916
Marriage contract: check
2 witnesses: Santiago Salazar and Amado Prudente
no
celebration
because
Pugeda
was
busy
campaigning for the office of Member of the
Provincial Board
lived at the house of Ferrer as husband and wife
the marriage was not recorded
helped with paying the installments for the friar lands
Issue:
1.
2.

Ratio:
1.
2.

WON there is an existence of marriage between

Fabian Pugeda and Maria C. Ferrer
WON the claim of the plaintiff to various lands
acquired from the Friar Lands Estate under
certificates of sale issued firtst in the name of
Mariano Trias and later assigned to Maria C. Ferrer,
but paid for in part during the marriage of Pugeda
and Maria
They were married
Land
a. A sale of friar lands is entirely different from
a sale of public lands under the provisions of
the Public Land Act
i. Title is already transferred to
Mariano
ii. And then to Maria when Mariano
died
b. Prescription
i. Judge Manuel V. Moran: partition in
favor of children and heirs of
Mariano but Pugeda didnt react
friars thought lands belonged to
Ferrer-Trias and Pugeda has no
interest in it
c. Improvements in the lands
i. He can only claim half of it most
probably used for his campaigning
funds
ii. Deed of partition didnt include
Pugeda: didnt react til 13 yrs after
prescribed

PEB INCIONG | C2012

Judgment: Complaint is denied
Tenebro v. Court of Appeals
February 18, 2004
Nature: Petition for review on certiorari of a decision of the
Court of Appeals
Ponente: Ynares-Santiago, J.
Facts:
April 10, 1990 - Veronico Tenebro contracted
marriage with Leticia Ancajas in Lapu-lapu City. They
lived together till the latter part of 1991
Tenebro informs Leticia that he was married to Hilda
Villareyes on November 10, 1986, and even shows a
photocopy of the marriage contract. He then leaves
her.
January 25, 1993 petitioner contracted a marriage
with Nilda Villegas in Cebu.
Ancajas sends a handwritten letter to Villareyes to
confirm if indeed she was Tenebros first wife.
Villareyes confirms the marriage.
Ancajas files a complaint of bigamy against
petitioner.
Petitioner contends that his marriage was not valid
given that there was no marriage ceremony and that
he only signed the marriage contract so that
Villareyes could attain benefits from his office
(seaman).
There was no record of said marriage in the Civil
Register of Manila.
Evidence of the petitioner:
o
certification issued by the NSO
o
certification by the City Register of Manila
Evidence of the respondents:
o
Photocopy of Tenebro and Villareyes
marriage contract
o
Letter from Villareyes
Disposition of the case in the RTC and CA:
RTC of Lapu-lapu finds the accused guilty of bigamy.
Court of Appeals affirms the decision of the RTC.
Issues: 1) Whether petitioners marriage to Villareyes was
valid
2) Whether the declaration of nullity of the second
marriage on the ground of psychological incapacity,
which is an alleged indicator that his marriage to
Ancajas lacks the essential requisites for validity,
retroacts to the date on which the second marriage
was celebrated
Ratio:
1) A valid marriage license can be considered as
sufficient proof as to the existence of a marriage.
a. Documentary evidence as to the absence of
a record is quite different from documentary
evidence as to the absence of a marriage
ceremony, or documentary evidence as to
the invalidity of the marriage between
Tenebro and Villareyes.
b. There is no requirement in law that a
marriage contract needs to be submitted to
the civil registrar as a condition precedent
for the validity of marriage.
2) There is no retroactivity given that the second
marriage was contract during the subsistence of the
first marriage.
a. Ancajas marriage with Tenebro is void ab
initio but his marriage with Villareyes was
merely voidable.
b. Art 349 of the RPC penalizes the mere act
of contracting a second or subsequent
marriage during the subsistence of a valid
marriage.
c. Although the judicial declaration of nullity of
a marriage on the ground of psychological
incapacity retroacts to the date of the

celebration of the marriage, the marriage

still has legal effects.
Disposition: Petition for review DENIED. CAs decision
AFFIRMED in toto.

MARRIAGES EXEMPT FROM LICENSE REQUIREMENT

Cario v. Cario
February 2, 2001
Nature: Petition for review on certiorari seeking to set aside
the decision of the CA which affirmed in toto the decision of
the RTC of Quezon City.
Petitioner: Susan Nicdao Cario
Respondent: Susan Yee Cario
Ponente: Ynares-Santiago, J.
Facts:
SPO4 Santiago Cario gets married to two women
o
Susan Nicdao June 20, 1969; 2 children
o
Susan Yee Nov 10, 1982
November 23, 1992 - He passes away due to
pulmonary tuberculosis.
Susan Nicdao claims P146,000 death benefits from
MBAI,PCCUI, Commutation, NAPOLCOM and PAG-IBIG.
Susan Yee claims P21,000 from GSIS Life, GSIS and
SSS.
Disposition of the case in the trial court and CA:
December 14, 1993 - Susan Yee files a case for
collection of the P146,000. Susan Nicdao declared in
default for failure to answer summons.
o
Susan Yee contends the validity of marriage
of Nicdao

No license number

Certification from local Civil

Registrar of San Juan that there no
record of said marriage.
o
Ruled in favor of Yee.
Issues: 1) WON the marriage of petitioner with Santiago
Cario is valid.
2) and if so, WON the marriage of respondent with
Santiago Cario is valid.
Ratio: Wohoo double whammy!!!
Article 40, FC
1) For purposes other than remarriage, no judicial
action is necessary to declare a marriage an absolute
nullity even if one of the parties are already
deceased at the time of the filing of the suit.
a. Nicdaos marriage invalid ab initio as stated
above
2) In contracting a second marriage though, there is the
need for a judicial declaration of nullity
a. Yees marriage is invalid given the lack of
judicial declaration (petition ka pa kasi
haha)
Article 147 Applicable to Nicdao given that their
cohabitation had no impediments
Entitled to share to death benefits, to her
children
Article 148 applicable to Yee given that her marriage
bigamous
Death benefits owned by deceased alone
Shall pass on to legal heirs
Disposition: Petition GRANTED, decision of CA which affirmed
the decision of the RTC of QC is REVERSED and SET ASIDE.
Republic v. Court of Appeals
September 2, 1994
Nature: Petition for review on certiorari of a decision of the
CA.
Petitioner: RP
Respondent: CA and Angelina Castro
Ponente: Puno, J.
Facts:

PEB INCIONG | C2012

-

June 24, 1970 Angelina Castro and Edwin Cardenas

were married in a civil ceremony in Pasay City.
Marriage celebrated without knowledge of Castros
parents
Cardenas took care of processing documents and
obtaining a marriage license. Marriage contract
stated marriage license issued in the name of the
contracting parties on June 24, 1970 in Pasig.
March 1971 couple lived together upon the
pregnancy of the respondent. Cohabitation lasted
only 4 months.
Baby adopted by Castros brother and now resides in
the U.S.
Castro wishes to join her child and thus seeks the
annulment of her marriage with Cardenas to clear
her marital status before departure.
She discovers that there was no marriage license.
Certification from Civil Registrar of Pasig as proof.
Disposition of the case in the trial court and CA
She testifies that she did not go to the civil registrar
of Pasic on or before June 24, 1970 in order to apply
for a license. Neither did she sign any application
therefor. She affixed her signature only on the
marriage contract on June 24, 1970 in Pasay City.
Trial Court denied petition declaring that there was
insufficient proof.
CA reversed the decision.
Issue: WON the documentary and testimonial evidence
presented by private respondent are sufficient to establish
that no marriage license was issued by the Civil Registrar of
Pasig prior to the celebration of the marriage of private
respondent to Edwin Cardenas.
Ratio: Evidence sufficient
NCC governed the marriage no marriage shall be
solemnized without a marriage license first issued by
a local civil registrar.
Sec 29, Rule 132 of the Rules of Court a written
statement signed by an officer having custody of an
official record can be considered as admissible
evidence of lack of record
Disposition: Petition is DENIED.
--------Nial v. Norma Bayadog
March 14, 2000
Nature: Petition for review on certiorari of a decision of the
CA.
Petitioner: Engrace Nial and her siblings
Respondent: Norma Bayadog
Ponente: Ynares-Santiago, J.
Facts:
September 26, 1974 Pepito Nial was married to
Teodulfa Bellones, out of marriage was born herein
petitioners.
April 24, 1985 Pepito shoots Teodulfa, resulting to
her death
Dec 11, 1986 Pepito and Norma Badayog got
married without any marriage license. The two
executed an affidavit that they have lived together
as husband and wife for at least five years and were
thus exempt from securing a marriage license.
Feb 19, 1997 - Pepito died from a car accident.
Disposition of the case in the trial court
Petitioners filed a petition for declaration of nullity of
the marriage of Pepito to Norma alleging that the
said marriage was void for lack of a marriage license.
Norma filed a motion to dismiss on the ground that
petitioners have no cause of action since they are not
among the persons who could file an action for
annulment of marriage
RTC judge, Ferdinand Marcos, dismissed the petition
after finding that the FC is rather silent, obscure,
insufficient to resolve the following issues:
o
WON plaintiffs have a cause of action

WON the second marriage of plaintiffs

deceased father with defendant is null and
void ab intio
o
WON plaintiffs are stopped from assailing
the validity of the second marriage after it
was dissolved due to their fathers death.
He also ruled that petitioners should have filed the
action before their fathers death.
o

Issues:
1) WON the heirs of a deceased person may file a
petition for the declaration of nullity of his marriage
after his death.
2) WON the cohabitation of Bayadog and Nial
constitutes an exemption from obtaining a marriage
license to validate their marriage.
Ratio: Civil Code applicable given that at that time FC not
yet in force.
1) Art. 47 pertains to the grounds, periods and persons
who can file an annulment suit, not a suit for
declaration of nullity of marriage.
a. Only parties to a voidable marriage can
assail it but any proper interested party may
attack a void marriage.
b. Void marriages
i. can be questioned even after the
death of either party
ii. no legal effects except those
declared by law concerning the
properties of alleged spouses, coownership or ownership through
actual joint contribution
iii. judicial decree not needed
c. Voidable marriage
i. can be assailed only during the
lifetime of the parties
ii. Conjugal partnership and the
children conceived before its
annulment are legitimate
d. Case at bar involves a void marriage.
2) 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 marriage.
a. No third party; would have been valid save
for the absence of a marriage contract
Disposition: Petition is GRANTED. RTC decision REVERSED
and SET ASIDE.
Republic vs. Obrecido
October 5, 2005
Nature: Petition for review on certiorari of the decision and
resolution of the RTC of Molave, Zamboanga del Sur
Ponente: Quisimbing, J.
Facts:

March 24, 1981 Cipriano Orbecido III married Lady

Myros Villanueva at the United Church of Christ in the
Philippines in Lam-an, Ozamis City

Two children Kristoffer Simbortriz and Lady Kimberly

1986 Lady Myros left for the United States with

Kristoffer

A few years later, Cipriano discovered that his wife had

been naturalized as an American citizen

Year 2000 Cipriano learned from his son that his wife
Lady Myros had obtained a divorce decree and then
married Innocent Stanley

Cipriano then filed a petition with the trial court for

authority to remarry, invoking Par. 2 Art. 26 of the FC

Trial court grants the petition after no opposition was

filed.

The Republic, through the OSG, sought reconsideration

but was denied.

In this petition, the OSG raises the issue which is purely a

question of law.

OSG contends that:

PEB INCIONG | C2012

Par 2 Art 26 of the FC is not applicable because it
only applies to a valid mixed marriage (a marriage
between a Filipino citizen and an alien)
o
The proper remedy is to file for a petition for
annulment or legal separation
o
There is no law that governs the respondents
situation, so this matter is not of judicial
determination but rather, of legislation

Respondent Art 26 is not directly applicable to his case

but insists that when his naturalized alien wife obtained a
divorce capacitated her to remarry, he is likewise
capacitated by operation of law pursuant to Sec. 12, Art II
of the Constitution
Issue: WON the respondent (Cipriano Orbecido III) can
remarry under Article 26 of the Family Code
Ratio:
1. Requisites of a petition for declaratory relief
a. there must be a justiciable controversy
b. the controversy must be between persons whose
interests are adverse
c. the party seeking relief has a legal interest in the
controversy
d. the issue is ripe for judicial determination
In the instant case, the four requisites are PRESENT
Justiciable controversy this case concerns the
applicability of Par. 2 Art 26 of the FC to a marriage
between two Filipino citizens where one obtained a
divorce decree and remarried
Interests of the parties are adverse: petitioner OSG
asserts its duty to protect the institution of marriage
while respondent insists on a declaration of his
capacity to remarry
Respondent, praying for relief, has legal interest over
the controversy
Issue is ripe for judicial determination when
respondent remarries, litigation will ensue to
question the validity of the second marriage
2. Legislative Intent
Proceedings of the FC deliberation show the intent behind
par. 2 Art 26 is to avoid the absurd situation where the
Filipino spouse remains married to the alien spouse who,
after obtaining a divorce, is no longer married to the
Filipino spouse
3. Quita vs. Court of Appeals (1998)
Factual similarities with the case at hand: parties were
Filipino citizens when they got married, but the wife
became a naturalized American citizen and obtained a
divorce. The Court hinted via the obiter dictum that a
Filipino divorced by his naturalized foreign spouse is no
longer married under Phil. Law, and can thus, remarry.
4. Par. 2 Art 26 of the FC shall be interpreted to include
cases such as the instant case where two Filipino citizens
marry but one spouse subsequently becomes a
naturalized foreign citizen and obtains a divorce decree.
The Filipino spouse is allowed to remarry.
5. Reckoning point: not the citizenship of the parties at the
time of the celebration of the marriage, but their
citizenship at the time a valid divorce is obtained abroad
by the alien spouse capacitating the latter to remarry.
6. Twin elements of Par. 2 Art 26
a valid marriage has been celebrated between a
Filipino citizen and a foreigner
a valid divorce is obtained abroad by the alien
spouse capacitating him or her to remarry
Both elements are present, so Par. 2, Art 26 is applicable
to the instant case.
7. Present petition: there is NO sufficient evidence
submitted and on record, SC is unable to declare that
respondent is now capacitated to marry (based on his
allegations alone)
Disposition: petition by OSG is granted, and decision of the
TC granting respondent the capacity to remarry is SET ASIDE
o

Llorente vs. Court of Appeals

November 23, 2000
Petitioner: Paula Llorente
Respondent: CA and Alicia LLorente
Nature: Petition for review on certiorari of the decision of the
Court of Appeals
Ponente: Pardo, J.
Facts:

The deceased, Lorenzo Llorente was an enlisted

serviceman of the US Navy from March 10, 1927 to
September 30, 1957.

February 22, 1937 Lorenzo and petitioner Paula were

married before a parish priest, Roman Catholic Church, in
Nabua, Camarines Sur

Before Pacific war outbreak Lorenzo left for the US while

Paula stayed in the conjugal home in barrio Antipolo,
Nabua, Camarines Sur

November 30, 1943 Lorenzo was admitted to US

citizenship and Certificate of Naturalization no. 5579816
was issued in his favor by the Southern District of New
York

1945 after Philippines was liberated, Lorenzo was granted

accrued leave by the US Navy and he visited his wife in
the Philippines

During his visit, he discovered that his wife Paula was

living in and having an adulterous relationship with his
brother, Ceferino Llorente and that she was pregnant with
his brothers child

December 4, 1945 Paula gives birth to a boy named

Crisologo certificate states that the child is not
legitimate and line for fathers name was blank

Lorenzo refused to forgive Paula and live with her

February 2, 1946 the couple drew a written agreement

signed by both Lorenzo and Paula, witnessed by Paulas
father and stepmother, properly notarized, that provides:
o
all the family allowances allotted by the US Navy as
part of Lorenzos salary and all other obligations for
Paulas daily maintenance would be suspended
o
marital union would be dissolved in accordance with
judicial proceedings
o
make a separate agreement regarding their conjugal
property acquired during their marital life
o
Lorenzo would not prosecute Paula for her adulterous
act since she voluntarily admitted her fault and was
willing to separate with Lorenzo peacefully

Lorenzo returns to the US and files for divorce on

November 16, 1951, Paula represented by Atty. John
Riley; SC of the State of California, San Diego County
finds all factual allegations to be true and issued an
interlocutory judgment of divorce

December 4, 1952 divorce decree becomes final

January 16, 1958 Lorenzo marries Alicia in Manila; Alicia

had no knowledge of the first wedding, even if the couple
resided in the same town as Paula who had no opposition
against their marriage or cohabitation

1958 to 1985 Lorenzo and Alicia lived together, and had

3 children [Raul, Luz and Beverly]

March 31, 1981 Lorenzo executes a Last Will and

Testament properly notarized and witness to that
bequeaths all his property to Alicia and his three children
with her as executor.

December 14, 1983 Lorenzo filed with the RTC of Iriga a

petition for the probate and allowance of his last will and
testament wherein Lorenzo moved that Alicia be
appointed Special Administratix of his estate.

January 18, 1984 trial court denied the motion because

Lorenzo was still alive

January 24, 1984 trial court admitted the will to probate

because it was duly executed

June 11, 1985 Lorenzo died before the proceedings

could be terminated

September 4, 1985 Paula filed on the same court a

petition for letters of administration over Lorenzos estate
in her favor, claiming that:

PEB INCIONG | C2012

She was Lorenzos surviving spouse
The various property were acquired during their
marriage
o
Lorenzos will disposed of all his property in favor of
Alicia and her children, encroaching on her legitimate
and share in the conjugal property

October 14, 1985 without terminating testate

proceedings, TC gave due course to Paulas petition

November 6, 13 and 20, 1985 order was published in

the newspaper Bicol Star

December 13, 1985 Alicia filed in the testate proceeding

a petition for the issuance of letters testamentary

May 18, 1987 RTC issues a joint decision finding the

case in favor of Paula, making her the administrator of
Lorenzos estate, declaring that Raul and Luz Llorente are
not Lorenzos children, legitimate or otherwise, since they
were not adopted by him

Alicia subsequently filed a motion for reconsideration but

was denied on Sept. 14, 1987 with a modified decision
that stated that only Beverly was Lorenzos illegitimate
child, entitling her to 1/3 of the estate and 1/3 of the free
portion of the estate

September 28, 1987 respondent appealed to the Court

of Appeals

July 31, 1995 Court of Appeals affirmed the lower

courts decision with a modification that Alicia is co-owner
of whatever properties she and Lorenzo may have
acquired in their years of cohabitation

August 25, 1995 petitioner filed a motion for

reconsideration

March 21, 1996 CA denied the motion for lack of merit

Issue: WON Alicia and her children with the deceased are
entitled to inherit from Lorenzos estate
Ratio:
1. The Applicable Law
Lorenzo was an American citizen at the time of:
a. his divorce from Paula
b. his marriage to Alicia
c. the execution of his will
d. his death
Therefore, issues arising from these incidents are
governed by FOREIGN law. Art 16 of the Civil Code
provides that in case of intestate and testamentary
succession, the national law of the person whose
succession is under consideration shall be followed.
SC holds that both the trial court and CA erred in using
the renvoi doctrine (referring back the case to the law of
the decedents domicile) so as not to admit the foreign
law and hastily applying Philippine law
- There is no such thing as one American law, so the
law of the State where the deceased was a resident
(New York) should apply
- There is no showing that the application of the renvoi
doctrine is called for or required by New York State
law.
Hasty application of Philippine law by TC and CA
- TC said that will was invalid because it favored Alice
who was a paramour
- CA disregarded will, applying Art 144 of the Civil
Code
2. SC cites the Van Dorn case(aliens may obtain divorce
abroad), Quita case (once Filipino citizen becomes an
alien, Van Dorn doctrine rules) and the Pilapil case
(divorce and its legal effects may be recognized in the
Philippines) to uphold that validity of the divorce decree
3. Validity of the Will
Art 17 of the Civil Code provides that wills shall be
governed by the laws of the country in which they are
executed
Disposition: petition is GRANTED, CA decision is SET ASIDE;
Court recognizes the validity of the divorce decree and
remands the cases to the court of origin for determination of
the intrinsic validity of Lorenzo Llorentes will
o
o

Republic vs. Iyoy

September 21, 2005
Nature: Petition for review on certiorari of a decision of the
Court of Appeals
Ponente: Chico-Nazario, J.
Facts:

December 16, 1961 Crasus Iyoy married Fely Ada Rosal

at Bradford Memorial Church in Cebu City

Five children Crasus, Jr., Daphne, Debbie, Calvert and

Carlos

After the marriage celebration, Crasus found out that Fely

was hot-tempered, a nagger and extravagant

1984 Fely left the Philippines for the US, leaving all five
children

Less than a year after Fely left, Crasus received a letter

requesting him to sign the enclosed divorce papers

1985 Crasus learned that Fely got married to an

American with whom she has a child

1987 Fely came back to the Philippines with her

American family but Crasus did not tealk to her

Fely returned several times more:

o
1990 for Crasus Jr.s wedding
o
1992 for the brain operation of Calvert
o
1995 for unknown reasons

March 25, 1997 Crasus files for declaration of nullity of

the marriage alleging that Felys acts brought danger and
dishonor to the family, and clearly demonstrated her
psychological incapacity to perform the essential
obligations of marriage incapacity is incurable and
continuing under Art. 36 in relation to Arts. 68, 70 and 72
of the FC

Fely contends that:

o
She was already an American citizen since 1988 and
married to Stephen Micklus
o
She was not hot-tempered and the times she became
indignant was caused by Crasus drunkenness,
womanizing and lack of sincere effort to find
employment.
o
She left for financial reasons and continued to
provide financial support for the family.
o
Her marriage to her American husband was legal
because she was an American citizen already and her
status shall be governed by the law of her present
nationality.
o
Crasus was also living with a woman who bore him a
child.

Crasus and Fely filed their pre-trial briefs, and Crasus was
subsequently able to submit evidence in support of his
Complaint.
Over a year after Crasus submitted his
evidence, Fely was still unable to do so.

October 05, 1998 RTC issued an order that considered

Fely as having waived her right to present evidence and
thus deemed submitted for decision

October 30, 1998 RTC declares the marriage null and

void ab initio based on Felys psychological incapacity

Petitioner Republic found the decision contrary to law and

evidence and filed an appeal with the Court of Appeals

July 30, 2001 CA affirmed the decision of the RTC

Issues:
1. WON the evidence presented during trial were sufficient
to prove the psychological incapacity of Fely (NO)
2. WON Art 26 par 2 of the FC is applicable to the case at
bar (NO)
Ratio:
1. Psychological Incapacity
Must be characterized by:
a. Gravity grave or serious enough that the spouse is
incapable of performing the ordinary duties of
marriage
b. Juridical Antecedence rooted in the history of the
party antedating the marriage
c. Incurability incurable or beyond the means of the
party involved to acquire the cure

PEB INCIONG | C2012

Republic vs. CA and Molina provides that:
burden of proof must be on the party alleging the
incapacity
the evidence must convince the court that the party
alleged to be incapacitated was mentally or
psychically ill to such an extent that s/he could not
have known the obligations s/he was assuming or on
knowing them, could not have given valid
assumption
incapacity must be proven to be existing at the time
of the celebration of the marriage
Marcos vs. Marcos no requirement that spouse be
personally examined by a physician or psychologist, but
the incapacity must be established by the totality of the
evidence presented during the trial
SC holds: Crasus only submitted a certificate of when the
marriage was celebrated and the invitation to their eldest
sons wedding where she used her American husbands
surname
Evidence not enough to convince the Court that Fely had
such grave mental illness that prevented her from
assuming the essential obligations of marriage.
2. The provision cannot be applied because when Fely
obtained her divorce, she was still a Filipino citizen.
Pursuant to Art 15 of the Civil Code, she was still
governed by Philippine laws which do not recognize
divorce between Philippine spouses.
Fely could not have obtained a valid divorce from Crasus.
Disposition: Petition is granted and the decision of the CA is
REVERSED and SET aside. The marriage of Crasus and
Fely remains valid and subsisting.

Republic vs. CA and Angelina Castro

September 2, 1994
Nature: Petition for review on certiorari of a decision of the
Court of Appeals
Ponente: Puno, J.
Facts:

June 24, 1970 Angelina M. Castro and Edwin Cardenas

were married in a civil ceremony performed by Judge
Pablo Malvar of Pasay City

Marriage celebrated without knowledge of Castros

parents

Cardenas personally attended the processing of the

documents required for the celebration of marriage,
including the license

Marriage contract stated a marriage license no. 3196182

issued on June 24, 1970 in Pasig

March 1971 Castro discovered she was pregnant so the

couple decided to live together

Cohabitation only lasted 4 months

October 19, 1971 Castro gives birth, and the baby was
later adopted by her brother with her consent

The baby is now in the United States. Castro seeks to

follow and decided to settle her marital status before
leaving.

Upon consultation with Atty. Frumencio Pulgar and

subsequent actions, it was found that there was no
license issued to Cardenas prior to the celebration of their
marriage.

Castro filed a petition seeking judicial declaration of

nullity of her marriage to Edwin Cardenas. She contends
that there was no marriage license issued prior to the
solemnization of the marriage.

Castro testified that she did not go the civil registrar to

apply for a license. She only affixed her signature on the
marriage certificate. She submitted as evidence a
certification of the Civil Registrar of Pasig that said license
number cannot be found in their records.

RTC denied the petition, stating that said certification is

inadequate to establish the alleged non-issuance of the
license.

Castro appealed to the CA which reversed the decision of

the trial court. CA declared the marriage null and void,
and directed the Civil Registrar of Pasig to cancel the
subject marriage contract.

Petitioner insists that the certificate and uncorroborated

testimony of private respondent are insufficient to
overthrow the legal presumption regarding the validity of
marriage.
Issue: WON the documentary and testimonial evidence
presented by the private respondent are sufficient to establish
that no marriage license was issued
Ratio:
Subject marriage solemnized on June 24, 1970 when the
Civil Code governed marital relations
Civil Code provides that no marriage shall be solemnized
without a marriage license issued by a local civil registrar
because a license is an essential requisite, the absence
of one made the marriage void ab initio
Certificate of due search and inability to find issued by
the CR of Pasig sufficiently proved that his office did not
issue the marriage license in question such certification
enjoys probative value, the CR being the officer charged
to keep a record of all data concerning the issuance of
marriage licenses
Sec 29, Rule 132 of the Rules of Court states that a
written statement signed by an officer having custody of
an official record is admissible as evidence
Lack of witnesses to corroborate Castros testimony
should not be taken against her, particularly due to the
unusual circumstances of the secret marriage
Disposition: the petition is DENIED, the documentary and
testimonial evidence presented by the private respondent are
sufficient to establish that no marriage license was issued

PART V (a and b ii)

Santos vs. CA
March 16, 1995
P: Leouel Santos, Sr
R: CA, Leopoldo and Ofelia Bedia
N: PETITION for review of a decision of CA
J: Romero
Facts:
1986: Leouel Santos, Sr (army lieutenant) and Julia Bedia
(nurse) were married in Iloilo City
July 18, 1987: Leouel Santos, Jr.

Since born, had always been in the custody of

grandparents, Leopoldo and Ofelia Bedia

R: they paid the hospital bills and all the subsequent

support of the boy
May 1988: Julia left for the U.S. to work

P: he doesnt know the whereabouts of his wife and

his efforts to locate her were futile

R: although abroad, Julia sent financial support for

her son
Sept 2, 1990: Leouel together with two other brothers visited
the Bedia household to see his son

R: through deceit, the petitioners took the boy to his

hometown in Bacong, Negros Occidental

P: Petition for Care, Custody and Control of Minor

Ward Leouel Santos, Jr. in the RTC of Iloilo City

PEB INCIONG | C2012

Oct 8, 1990: issued an order awarding the custody of the child
to his grandparents

P: CA (April 30 1992) affirmed RTC decision

Motion for reconsideration denied

Hence, this case
Issue:
WON the private respondents have proven the petitioners
inability/unsuitableness to be the childs father that they can
substitute parental authority over the petitioners son. [NO.]
Ratio:
Parental authority and responsibility are inalienable and may
not be transferred or renounced except in cases authorized by
law
The law allows waiver of paternal authority in cases
of:
1. Adoption
2. Guardianship
3. Surrender to a childrens home or orphanage
When a parent entrusts the custody of a minor to
another, such as a friend or godfather, even in a
document, what is given is merely temporary
custody and it does not constitute a renunciation of
parental authority
Only in cases of death, absence or unsuitability may
a surviving grandparent take over parental authority
(Article 214 of the Family Code)
Petitioners Unfitness:
CA
SC
Grandparents
have amply
shown their love
and care for the
child but the
dad shown little
interest in his
sons welfare

It has not been shown

that the dad is an
unsuitable and unfit
parent. Although the
grandparents have
shown their care for
the boy, the legitimate
father s still preferred
over the grandparents.
His temporary absence
is not equal to
abandonment
His efforts to gain the
childs custody may be
regarded as serious
efforts to rectify his
past misdeeds

Grandparents
are well-off
financially.
Removing the
child from the
grandparents
custody will
deprive the boy
of an eventual
college
education and
other material
advantages

Wealth is not a
deciding factor
Dads financial
condition might
improve in the future

Dads work, as a
military
personnel,
requires him to

Soldiers should not be

deprived of custody
over their children
Many soldiers are still
the natural guardians

shuttle from one

assignment to
another thus,
preventing him
from attending
to his son at the
times the boy
needs it most

of their children

Judgment: Petition granted. CA decision is reversed.

In the Matter of the Petition for a Writ of Habeas

Corpus of Minor Angelie Anne Cervantes, Nelson
Cervantes and Zenaida Carreon Cervantes,
petitioners, vs. Gina Carreon Fajardo and
Conrado Fajardo.
Nature: Petition for writ of Habeas Corpus re: Angelie
Anne Cervantes.
Facts:
14 February 1987 - Minor was born to
respondents Conrado Fajardo and Gina Carreon
(common-law husband and wife)
Offered child for adoption to Zenaida CarreonCervantes(Ginas sister) and Nelson Cervantes,
who took care and custody of the child when
she was barely two weeks old.
29 April 1987 - Affidavit of Consent to the
adoption executed by Gina Carreon.
20 August 1987 RTC of Rizal: granted the
petition. The court ordeed the child be freed
from parental authority of her natural parents
as well as from legal obligation and
maintenance to them and that from now on
hall be, for all legal intents and purposes,
known as Angelie Anne Cervantes
March April 1987 adoptive parents, Nelson
and Zenaida Cervantes, revieced a letter from
respondents demanding to be paid the amount
of P150,000 lest they would get bacj their child.
11 September 1987 Gina Carreon took the
child from her yaya
Gina Carreon says that she refuses to give up
the child for adoption and that the affidavit of
consent to the adoption she had executed was
not fully explained to her. However, she will
agree to giving back the child is she were paid
the amount of P150,000.
27 October 1987 Felisa Tansingco, social
worker who conducted the case study on the
adoption, submitted a report that in an
interview with Gina Carreon, the latter showed
her desire to have the child adopted by the
petitioners.
Issue: WON the custody of the child should be
awarded to the natural mother or the adoptive parents.
Judgment:
i.
The provision that no mother shall be
separated frm a child under five (5)
years of age, will not apply where the
Court finds compelling reasons to rule
otherwise.
Conrado Fajardo is legally married to a woman
other than respondent Gina Carreon .
His open cohabitation with co-respondent will
not accord the minor that desirable

PEB INCIONG | C2012

-

atmosphere where she can grow and develop

into an upright and moral-minded person.
Gina also had a child with a man who
abandoned her; minor growing up with such a
sibling may affect the moral outlook and values
of the child.
Petitioners are legally married appear to be
morally, physically, financially and socially
capable of supporting the minor and giving her
a future better than the mother who is jobless

Art 74 to 93 of the Family Code Sempio Diy

TITLE IV
PROPERTY RELATIONS BETWEEN HUSBAND AND WIFE
CHAPTER 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS
Theory of the Law on Property Relations of Spouses:
Only if they do not enter into a marriage settlement would the
provisions of the Family Code on absolute community regime
apply between them.
Meaning of Marriage Settlement:
Also called antenuptial agreement = a contract entered into
by a man and a woman who intend or plan to get married
fixing the future properties during the marriage.
Art. 75. The future spouses may, in the marriage
settlements, agree upon the regime of absolute
community, conjugal partnership of gains, complete
separation of property, or any other regime. In the
Property Regimes that may be agreed upon in Marriage
Settlements:
1) Regime of absolute community
2) Conjugal partnership of gains
3) Complete separation of property
4) Combination of above regimes
5) Dowry system
Must not be contrary to law, morals, good customs,
public order, or public policy (Art 1306, CC)
Once regime is chosen, all properties are governed
by that regime.
Parties must identify their specific properties to avoid
confusion
If there are ambiguities with the regime chosen:
1) Intent to be derived from the system chosen
[including contemporaneous and subsequent acts]
Art. 76. In order that any modification in the marriage
settlements may be valid, it must be made before the
celebration of the marriage, subject to the provisions
of Articles 66, 67, 128, 135 and 136. (121)
Must be made before the marriage
Only exception is judicial separation of property
extrajudicial separation of properties during the
marriage not allowed
Form of Marriage Settlement
1) As between the parties
a. In writing
b. Signed by parties
c. Executed before the marriage
d. Signature of parents [if needed by a party]
e. By guardian [civil interdiction or any other
disability except insanity]
2) In order to affect Third Persons
a. All the above requirements
b. Registered in the local civil registry [private
instrument will not suffice]

and maintains an illicit relation with a married

man.
ii. Adoption decree already final and executory.
Disposition:
Petition Granted. The custody and care of the minor
Angelie Anne Cervantes are hereby granted to
petitioners to whom they properly belong, and
respondents are ordered to deliver said minor to the
petitioners immediately upon notice hereof.

Art. 74. The property relationship between husband

and wife shall be governed in the following order:
(1) By marriage settlements executed before
the marriage;
(2) By the provisions of this Code; and
(3) By the local custom. (118)
Art. 118 of the Civil Code and Above Provision of the Family
Code Compared:
1) FC, Marriage settlements Art 118 NCC, Contract
executed before marriage
2) FC, By local custom Art 118 NCC, by custom
(less geographically specific)

absence of a marriage settlement, or when the regime

agreed upon is void, the system of absolute community
of property as established in this Code shall govern.
(119a)
2)
3)

If still ambiguous, local custom is to be applied.

If there is no local custom, rules on co-ownership
applies.

If marriage settlement is void or there is no marriage

settlement:
Apply the regime of absolute community. Finding some
provisions void would not nullify the valid ones.
Marriage Settlements that are void:
1) Prohibiting any party from marrying another
2) Spouses to live separately
3) Fine on infidelity
4) Deprivation of legal separation
5) Third person to manage the community or conjugal
properties
6) All properties would go to one party (Art 94)
Art. 77. The marriage settlements and any modification
thereof shall be in writing, signed by the parties and
executed before the celebration of the marriage. They
shall not prejudice third persons unless they are
registered in the local civil registry where the marriage
contract is recorded as well as in the proper registries
of properties. (122a)

Reason for Registration in order to Affect Third Persons

Settlements may affect/ prejudice Third Persons who may
enter into contracts with the spouses or either of them. Either
party can compel the other to reduce the marriage settlement
into a public document
Difference with the civil code
Art 122 NCC: governed by the Statute of Frauds [may be oral]
FC: must be in writing and signed by the parties.

PEB INCIONG | C2012

Art. 78. A minor who according to law may contract
marriage may also execute his or her marriage
settlements, but they shall be valid only if the persons
1) Minor 18 to 21 years
2) Parents/guardian of the minor must be parties to the
settlement and must sign the same
Art. 79. For the validity of any marriage settlement
executed by a person upon whom a sentence of civil
interdiction has been pronounced or who is subject to
any other disability, it shall be indispensable for the
guardian appointed by a competent court to be made a
party thereto. (123a)

Not valid without signature

Art. 80. In the absence of a contrary stipulation in a

marriage settlement, the property relations of the
spouses shall be governed by Philippine laws,
Philippine Law applies to Property Relations of Filipino Spouses
Irrespective of:
1) the place of the Celebration of their Marriage
2) their residence
3) location of their properties:
Exceptions:
1) both spouses are aliens
2) extrinsic validity of contracts over properties located
abroad and executed in the country where the
property is located (lex situs).
Art. 81. Everything stipulated in the settlements or
contracts referred to in the preceding articles in
consideration of a future marriage, including donations
between the prospective spouses made therein, shall
1. Marriage settlements dependent on the existence of the
intended marriage thus if no marriage occurs, the marriage
settlement will become void and ineffective.
2. Exception for stipulations that do not depend upon the
celebration of the marriage for their validity: ex. Recognition
of an illegitimate child in the marriage settlement.

CHAPTER 2. DONATIONS BY REASON OF MARRIAGE

Art. 82. Donations by reason of marriage are those
Requisites of Donations Propter nuptias:
1) Before the celebration of the marriage
2) In consideration of the marriage
3) In favor of one or both of the future spouses
Donations Excluded:
1) Ordinary wedding gifts
2) In favor of the future spouses but not in
consideration of marriage
3) In favor of other persons other than spouses even
though they may be founded on the intended
marriage
1.

Donations Propter nuptias

Does not require express

designated in Article 14 to give consent to the

marriage are made parties to the agreement, subject
to the provisions of Title IX of this Code. (120a)
3)

Participation of the parent/guardian is to be able to

capacitate the minor in entering the contract, not to
impose obligations on him/her.
regardless of the place of the celebration of the
marriage and their residence.
This rule shall not apply:
(1) Where both spouses are aliens;
(2) With respect to the extrinsic validity of
contracts affecting property not situated in the
Philippines and executed in the country where
the property is located; and
(3) With respect to the extrinsic validity of
contracts entered into in the Philippines but
affecting property situated in a foreign country
whose laws require different formalities for its
extrinsic validity. (124a)
3)

Art 124 of the Civil Code [National Law of the Husband to be

Applied]:
Art 124 abandoned; above article applies even if one
spouse is a Filipino and the other, an alien.

be rendered void if the marriage does not take place.

However, stipulations that do not depend upon the
celebration of the marriages shall be valid. (125a)
3. Donations propter nuptias are also rendered void. CC not
automatically revoked by the non-celebration of the marriage,
byt still need to be revoked by the donor under Art 132, Par
(2)
which are made before its celebration, in consideration
of the same, and in favor of one or both of the future
spouses. (126)

2.

acceptance
May be made by minors

3.

May include future property

4.

If present property is donated

and property regime is not
absolute community, limited
to 1/5.
5. Grounds for revocation
found in Art. 86

Ordinary Donations
Express acceptance is

Art. 83. These donations are governed by the rules on

ordinary donations established in Title III of Book III of
Forms of Donations Propter nuptias
1. Follows those of ordinary donations, including oral
donations as established in Title III of Book III of the
NCC on donations.
Art. 84. If the future spouses agree upon a regime
other than the absolute community of property, they
cannot donate to each other in their marriage
settlements more than one-fifth of their present
property. Any excess shall be considered void.

#2 applies also when properties are located abroad

even if the contract is entered into in the Philippines

necessary
Cannot be made by
minors
Cannot include future
property
No limit to donation of
present
property
provided legitimes are
not impaired
Grounds for revocation
are found in law on
donations.

the Civil Code, insofar as they are not modified by the

following articles. (127a)

2.

Amends Art. 127 of the NCC, which provides that the

form of donations propter nuptias shall be regulated
by the statue of frauds.
Donations of future property shall be governed by the
provisions on testamentary succession and the
formalities of wills. (130a)
Limitation to Donation of Present Property
1. Not applicable to regimes of absolute community

PEB INCIONG | C2012

2.
3.

In marriage settlements, more than 1/5 of present

property in donation would be considered as void.
Donations of Future Property Allowed

Art. 85. Donations by reason of marriage of property

subject to encumbrances shall be valid. In case of
foreclosure of the encumbrance and the property is
Art. 86. A donation by reason of marriage may be
revoked by the donor in the following cases:
(1) If the marriage is not celebrated or
judicially declared void ab initio except
donations made in the marriage settlements,
which shall be governed by Article 81;
(2) When the marriage takes place without the
consent of the parents or guardian, as required
by law;
Grounds for Revocation of Donations Propter nuptias
1. Marriage not celebrated
2. Marriage declared void ab initio. If a spouse acted in
bad faith, no declaration is required.
3. Without consent of parent/guardian.
4. Marriage annulled and done acted in bad faith.
5. Upon legal separation, the done being the guilty
party.
6. Donation is with a resolutory condition and the
condition is complied with
7. Done has committed an act of ingratitude (Art 765,
NCC)
Prescriptive Periods for Filing Action for Revocation of
Donations
Not
celebrat
ed

Void
ab
initi
o

Written
10 yrs
Oral 6
yrs

Sam
e

Without
parenta
l
consen
t
4 years

Resolutor
y
condition
complied
with
Written
10 yrs
Oral 6
yrs

Annulle
d

Ingratitud
e

4 years

1 year
from
knowledg
e of the
fact

Art. 87. Every donation or grant of gratuitous

advantage, direct or indirect, between the spouses
during the marriage shall be void, except moderate
Reasons for Prohibition of Donations between Spouses during
the marriage
1. To prevent the weaker spouse from being influenced
by the stronger spouse
2. To protect creditors
3. Prevent an indirect modification of the marriage
settlement
Who may question validity of donation
Only a person prejudiced thereby, like the donor or
his heirs.

CHAPTER 3. SYSTEM OF ABSOLUTE COMMUNITY

Section 1. General Provisions
Regime of Absolute Community Explained
While in the conjugal partnership of gains, only the net profits
of the partnership are divided between the spouses, in the
absolute community, the entire common mass of properties is
divided between them, each spouse losing the ownership of
the properties bought in the marriage.

sold for less than the total amount of the obligation

secured, the donee shall not be liable for the
deficiency. If the property is sold for more than the
total amount of said obligation, the donee shall be
entitled to the excess. (131a)

(3) When the marriage is annulled, and the

donee acted in bad faith;
(4) Upon legal separation, the donee being the
guilty spouse;
(5) If it is with a resolutory condition and the
condition is complied with;
(6) When the donee has committed an act of
ingratitude as specified by the provisions of
the Civil Code on donations in general. (132a)
a.
b.

c.

Offense against the person, honor, or

property of the donor, his wife or his
children under his parental authority.
Done imputes to the donor any criminal
offense or any act involving moral turpitude,
even though he should prove it, unless the
crime or act has been committed against
the done himself, his wife or his children
If the done unduly refuses to support the
donor when he is legally or morally bound to
give such support.

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. (133a)
Donations void under this Article
1. Between the spouses during the marriage
2. Gratuitous advantage between the spouses during
the marriage
a. Donation to a step-child or a child of the
other spouse by another marriage
b. Donation to a person of whom the other
spouse is a presumptive heir at the time of
donation. [Art 134, NCC, voidable at the
instance of the donors heirs within five
years from his death.
Prohibition applies to parties living together without wedlock
1. As in common-law marriages
2. Parties living in a state of adultery or concubinage.
Possibility of undue influence exists
Those living in gilt would turn out to be n a better
position than those in legal union.
Exception to prohibitions

a.

Moderate gifts on occasion of any family

rejoicing Determined by social and
financial condition of the family.

Art. 88. The absolute community of property between

spouses shall commence at the precise moment that
the marriage is celebrated. Any stipulation, express or
implied, for the commencement of the community
regime at any other time shall be void. (145a)
Reason Why the Family Code Adopts the System of Absolute
Community
Code Commission of the NCC wanted to adopt such
but considered it as too revolutionary.
Findings: according to established custom, in fact
there is an absolute community of property between
the spouses in the Philippines. The Committee

PEB INCIONG | C2012

believes that it is now time to go back to a Filipino

custom that is more in consonance with the nature
and ideals of marriage, and which brings about a
closer unity and oneness in the life and interests of
the Filipino husband and wife, since it is based
essentially on mutual trust and confidence.
Marriage Settlements: Those who have substantial
amounts of property are worried that they or their
children might fall into the hands of fortune-hunters
in marriage under the system of absolute community

Art. 89. No waiver of rights, shares and effects of the

absolute community of property during the marriage
can be made except in case of judicial separation of
property.
When the waiver takes place upon a judicial separation
of property, or after the marriage has been dissolved
1. Prohibits waivers in rights, interest, shares, and
effects NCC Art 146: gains or effects only
2. Reason: to avoid undue influence
3. Waiver of one spouse allowed in the following cases
a. With the marriage subsisting, in case of
judicial separation of property, which
includes the dissolution of the absolute
community or conjugal partnership
Art. 90. The provisions on co-ownership shall apply to
the absolute community of property between the
spouses in all matters not provided for in this Chapter.
(n)
rules on co-ownership are suppletory to the provisions of
this Chapter.
Section 2. What Constitutes Community Property
Art. 91. Unless otherwise provided in this Chapter or in
the marriage settlements, the community property
shall consist of all the property owned by the spouses
at the time of the celebration of the marriage or
acquired thereafter. (197a)

All property belonging to husband and wife before

and during the marriage, except those exluded by

1.

GRATUITOUS TITLE - Properties acquired by either

spouse during the marriage by gratuitous title:
a. gratuitous title donation, or testate or
intestate succession.
b. Fruits and income of the property acquired
by donation or succession also excluded.
c. Except when donor, testator, or grantor
expressly provides that it shall be included
in the absolute community.
EXCLUSIVE USE - Properties for the personal and
exclusive use of either spouse, except jewelry
a. Not only intended for the personal use of
either spouse but those susceptible only of
the exclusive use of each.
b. Jewelry excluded because they are valuable
and expensive.
LEGITIMATE DESCENDANTS - Properties acquired
before marriage by either spouse who has legitimate

2.

3.

Art. 93. Property acquired during the marriage is

presumed to belong to the community, unless it is
1. In order that the presumption be invoked, the
property must be shown to have been acquired
during the marriage
2. Rebuttable only by strong, clear and convincing
evidence
3. Stronger when creditors or the spouses are involved
[in comparison to successors-in-interest]

of property between spouses, all they or their

children have to do is to enter into marriage
settlements providing for the conjugal partnership of
gains or some other system of property relationship
during the marriage.
When System of Absolute Community between the Spouses
Begins
At the precise time of day in which the marriage is
solemnized and not before.
or annulled, the same shall appear in a public
instrument and shall be recorded as provided in Article
77. The creditors of the spouse who made such waiver
may petition the court to rescind the waiver to the
extent of the amount sufficient to cover the amount of
their credits. (146a)

4.

5.
6.

b. Marriage is dissolved (death) or annulled

Where waiver is allowed
a. Must appear in a public instrument
b. Recorded in the office of the local civil
registrar
Creditors may rescind the waiver to the extent of the
amounts sufficient to cover their credits
Limited to voluntary waivers.
Art. 92, are automatically converted into community
or common property of the spouses by the marriage.
Spouses have no option exclude specific properties
from the community.

Art. 92. The following shall be excluded from the

community property:
(1) Property acquired during the marriage by
gratuitous title by either spouse, and the fruits
as well as the income thereof, if any, unless it
is expressly provided by the donor, testator or
grantor that they shall form part of the
community property;
(2) Property for personal and exclusive use of
either spouse. However, jewelry shall form part
of the community property;
(3) Property acquired before the marriage by
either spouse who has legitimate descendants
by a former marriage, and the fruits as well as
the income, if any, of such property. (201a)
descendants by a former marriage, and the fruits as
well as the income, if any, of such property.
a. For the protection of rights of the legitimate
children and descendants of the first
marriage
b. Consolidates and simplifies pars (2) and (3)
of Art. 201 of the CC excluding from the
absolute community of the spouses
inheritance from a child by a former
marriage who has full-blood brother and
sisters, and the presumptive legitime of
children by a former marriage.
c. This doesnt affect the rights of the children
of the second marriage to inherit their
shares of the properties of their father or
mother acquired during his or her first
marriage under the law on succession.
proved that it is one of those excluded therefrom.
(160)
4.
5.

Registration of the property in the name of Spouse X,

married to Spouse Y, does not prove that properties
were acquired during their marriage.
Not rebutted by the mere fact that the deed of sale
or certificate of title is in the name of only one
spouse.

PEB INCIONG | C2012

6.

Does not apply to properties excluded from the

absolute community under Art. 92.