Guevarra v. Eala, A.C. No. 7136.

August 1, 2007
RATIO:
FACTS:
Wife of petitioner, Irene Moje was having an illicit affair with the respondent. After leaving the conjugal
home, petitioner found out that Irene and respondent was living together in a residential house few blocks
away from the church they were married. Few months thereafter, Irene gave birth to a baby girl and wrote
the name of the respondent as the father in the certificate of live birth.

Petitioner filed a petition for annulment of marriage to Irene and a criminal complaint for adultery against
respondent and Irene. (SC used concubinage to decide respondent's disbarment)
Petitioner also filed a complaint for disbarment before the IBP-CBD on the ground of gross immoral
conduct and unmitigated violation of the lawyer's oath

Respondent's defense: his relationship with Irene was not under scandalous circumstances nor
tantamount to grossly immoral conduct(grounds for disbarment) as it was kept low profile and known only
to the immediate members of their respective families. (he never denied the illicit relationship and him
being the father of the child of Irene)

Disbarment was dismissed by the IBP Board of Governors due to lack of merit. (no explanation from the
IBP)

Hence, the petition of complaint before the Supreme Court.

ISSUE/S:
WoN an illicit affair between a married lawyer and a married woman constitute gross immoral conduct.
(SC did not discuss much of adultery and concubinage as it was clear on this case and that this was an
admin case)

HELD: (Answer YES or NO first)

Yes. Whether a lawyer's sexual congress with a woman not his wife or without the benefit of marriage
should be characterized as 'grossly immoral conduct' depends on the surrounding circumstances. The
case at bar involves a relationship between a married lawyer and a married woman who is not his wife. It
is immaterial whether the affair was carried out discreetly. Sexual relations outside marriage is considered
disgraceful and immoral as it manifests deliberate disregard of the sanctity of marriage and the marital
vows protected by the Constitution and affirmed by our laws. Respondent has been carrying on an illicit
affair with a married woman, a grossly immoral conduct and indicative of an extremely low regard for the
fundamental ethics of his profession. This detestable behavior renders him regrettably unfit and
undeserving of the treasured honor and privileges which his license confers upon him. Respondent in fact
also violated the lawyer's oath he took before admission to practice law. Respondent admittedly is aware
of Section 2 of Article XV (The Family) of the Constitution reading: Section 2. Marriage, as an inviolable
social institution, is the foundation of the family and shall be protected by the State. In this connection, the
Family Code (Executive Order No. 209), which echoes this constitutional provision, obligates the husband
and the wife "to live together, observe mutual love, respect and fidelity, and render mutual help and
support." It is also immaterial that the marriage between complainant and Irene be annulled at a later
point as the crime was already consummated.
Respondent’s grossly immoral conduct runs afoul of the constitution and the laws, that he as a lawyer has
sworn to uphold. Hence the court declared Atty. Jose Emmanuel M. Eala DISBARRED.

People v. Elarde, G.R. No. L-58595. October 10, 1983

RATIO:
FACTS: Cecile, Efraim's wife, has an illicit relationship with their close family friend, Javellana. Due to
suspicions of this, Efraim then devised a plan to catch his wife in the act as confronting her would only
result in denial. The plan was a success resulting in to Efraim filing a complaint for adultery against the
two. He then executed an affidavit mentioning the details of the case and that he was charging the
offending party of the crime of adultery.
Before the conclusion of the preliminary investigation then being conducted by the Fiscal's Office, Efraim
learned that he was sick of cancer and decided to leave for the US for medical treatment. Before his
departure, he executed a holographic will mentioning the ff:
I do hereby disinherit my second wife Cecilia Sorianosos of any and all inheritance she is entitled
under the law as my wife on the ground that she had given cause for legal separation by committing acts
of adultery with Atty. Bob Javellana in the evening of November 3, 1980 in my conjugal abode at Candido
Subdivision and as a result of which I charged her and Atty. Bob Javellana for adultery with the Fiscal's
Office and I filed a case of legal separation against her in Civil Case No. SP- 11-309 of the Juvenile and
Domestic Relations Court in Iloilo City for which act of infidelity, I can never forgive her.
A month after, Efraim died due to his illness which prompted Cecile to quash the information as the crimes
of adultery and concubinage shall not be prosecuted except upon a complaint filed and the offended
spouse pursuant to the provisions of Art. 344 of the Revised Penal Code and Section 4, Rule 110 of the
Rules of Court.
CFI then granted the motion and dismissed the case. Reconsideration also denied.
Hence, this petition

ISSUE/S:
WoN the case should be dismissed

HELD: (Answer YES or NO first)

No. The legal requirement under Art. 344 was imposed "out of consideration for the aggrieved party who
might prefer to suffer the outrage in silence rather than go through the scandal of a public trial." Thus, the
law leaves it to the option of the aggrieved spouse to seek judicial redress for the affront committed by the
erring spouse. However, this case should be the overriding consideration in determining the issue of
whether or not the condition required by said Article has been complied with. The Court should be guided
by the spirit , rather than the letter, of the law.
In the case at bar, the desire of the offended party to charge his wife and her paramour of the crime of
adultery was manifest in the affidavit he executed, the legal separation case he filed, and the
disenheritance of his wife in his last will and testament.
CFI ordered to proceed with the trial of the case.