Ordinary contract

Due on that said date even though it falls a holiday or a Sunday

Rules of court, order of the statue, applicable statute allowed it to be on the next day Rules of NEXT WORKING DAY Penal laws and those of public security and safety

It would be on the next day provided that it is not a legal holiday or Sunday Do not apply to public sales, foreclosures of mortgages nor to trial dates fixed by law PRINCIPLE OF TERRITORIALITY; Punished crimes/offense on the land where it was committed

EXCEPTIONS:
1. PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW -diplomatic officials, foreign ambassadors and visiting heads of states, provided the latter do not travel INCOGNITO

EXCEPTION TO THE EXCEPTION: -CONSULS

1. Foreign army is exempt from civil and criminal jurisdiction of the place where they are permitted to march or to station therein 2. TREATY STIPULATIONS- Phil US Military Bases Agreements, International agency like SEAFDAC (Southeast Asean Fisheries Development Center) may be granted immunity from suit. Not applicable to aliens May be enjoyed by aliens NATIONALITY OR CITIZENSHIP THEORY; Laws of the land of that said person governs LEX REI SITAE/ LEX SITUS; Law of the land where it is situated LEX NATIONALI; National law of the person Rules laid down by Manresa and Valverde in Article 17: IF INTRINSIC VALIDITY IS SILENT 1. a. The law stipulated by the parties shall be applied 2. b. In the absence of any stipulations, and the parties are of the same nationalities, their national law shall be

Civil laws Civil Rights Laws relating to family rights and duties, or to the status, condition and legal capacity of persons PROPERTIES Real or Personal INCIDENTS OF SUCCESSIONS Intestate or Testamentary INTRINSIC VALIDITY OF THE WILL

applied 3. c. If the parties are not of the same nationalities, the law of the place of the perfection of the obligation (where the contract was made) shall govern its essence and nature and the law of the place of the performance shall govern its fulfillment. 4. d. If the above places are not specified and they cannot be deduced from the nature and circumstances of the obligation, then the law of the domicile of the passive shall apply.

Or

LEX NATIONALI; National law of the person

RENVOI DOCTRINE Forms and solemnities of contracts, wills, and other public instruments Law of the country where it was referred back (after referring to the other country) LEX LOCI CELEBRACIONIS; laws of the country in which they are executed

EXCEPTION: Marriage contract Extrinsic Validity of a contract

Marriage of Filipino abroad Not recognized; Void in the Philippines

EXCEPTION: Contracted in Philippine Embassy or Consular departments, embassy etc. or anywhere that is an extension of the Philippine Islands recognized in the Philippines
Divorce of Filipino Abroad Not recognized; Void in the Philippines

BUT

FILIPINO

DIVORCEE

WHO

WAS

DIVORCED BY HER ALIEN SPOUSE ABROAD CAN REMARRY AGAIN.

Marriages, contracts etc. contracted in the offices of Philippine diplomats or ambassadors in a foreign country EXTRERRITORIALITY PRINCIPLE

Valid and recognized in the Philippines

DEFICIENCIES/ INSUFFICIENCIES in the code of commerce or special laws Moral damages

Shall be supplied by the provision of CIVIL CODE TO COMPENSATE AND ALLEVIATE THE PHYSICAL SUFFERING, MENTAL ANGUISH, FRIGHT, SERIOUS ANXIETY, BESMIRCHED REPUTATION, WOUNDED FEELINGS, MORAL SHOCK, SOCIAL HUMILIATION, AND SIMILAR HARM UNJUSTLY CAUSED TO A PERSON. In quasi-delicts, if the defendant acted with gross negligence

Exemplary Damages

In contracts and quasi-contracts, if the defendant acted in a wanton, fraudulent, reckless, oppressive, or malevolent manner
ARTICLES 19, 20, 21 There is a common element

under Articles 19 and 21, and that is, the act must be intentional. However, Article 20 does not distinguish: the act may be done either willfully, or negligently
No civil liability shall arise 1. The fact from which the civil action may arise did not exist 2. The accused did not commit the crime 3. No crime existed 1. The accused did not commit the crime 2. The crime complained of did not exist 3. The acquittal is based on pure innocence and not on reasonable doubt 4. The act or omission from which the civil liability may arise did not exist 1. The guilt of the accused has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt 2. Prescription of criminal action 3. where the court expressly declares that the liability of the accused is not criminal but only civil in nature 1. The guilt of the accused has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt 2. The accused did not commit the crime 3. The crime complained of did not exist Filed independently to the criminal case; may

Bars a subsequent action for damages on the same act or omission

DOES NOT bar a subsequent action for damages on the same act or omission

ACQUITTAL could be based on the following

INDEPENDENT CIVIL ACTIONS

DEPENDENT CIVIL ACTIONS EXTINGUISHMENT OF CIVIL LIABILITY

not wait for the acquittal of the accused 1. Article 32 Violation of ones civil liberties 2. Article 33 Defamation, fraud, physical injuries 3. Article 34- Refusal or failure of city or municipal police to give protection 4. Article 2176 Quasi Delict or Culpa Aquiliana Filed after the acquittal of the accused WHEN THE ACT from which the civil liability might arise does not exist.

Rights and Obligations Betw een Husband and Wife

FAMILY CODE, FAMILY CODE NOTES, NOTES, NOTES FROM PINEDA, PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS, PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS NOTES

September 24th, 2012 | No Comments

Art. 68 Obligations of husband and wife: a. observe mutual love b. observe mutual respect and fidelity c. render mutual help and support

Right of cohabitation - husband and wife must live together under one roof - exception: when there are valid legal grounds Note: parties cannot be compel by the courts to live together

Remedies: a. if the wife leaves: the husband can refuse support to her

b. if the husband leaves (without justifiable reasons): he can be ordered to pay to wife her alimony and indemnity for damages

What are the legal remedies available when one spouse neglects his or her duties? 1. apply to the proper court for appropriate relief (Art. 72) 2. seek the admonition of the spouse who committed the wrong act 3. seek legal separation (check grounds for legal separation) 4. apply for the sole administration of the absolute community of property or conjugal partnership of gains 5. seek for the separation of property

Art. 69 General rule: Both the husband and wife shall fix the family domicile. Exception: In case of disagreement, the Court shall decide. (Either of the spouses may bring the matter to the court.)

When is the other spouse exempted from living with the other? 1. if the latter shall live abroad 2. other valid and compelling reasons

Art. 70 Who are responsible for the support of the family? Both spouses, jointly. Expenses for Support (Sources of Payment) a. community property or conjugal property

b. if none (a), from the income or fruits of the spouses separate property c. if none or insufficient (b), from separate properties

Note: If the property regime is absolute separation of property, family expenses shall be paid based on the proportion of the spouses income. If insufficient, the current value of their separate properties (Art. 146).

Absolute Community of Property Support of the Spouses Community property (Art. 94, par. 1)

Conjugal Partnership of Absolute Separation of Gains Property Conjugal property (Art. Both spouses shall 121, par. 1) proportionately bear the family expenses. Liability to creditors for family expenses are solidary. (Art. 146) Support of the Community property Conjugal property (Art. Same as above Common Children (Art. 94, par. 1) 121, par. 1) Legitimate Children of Community property Conjugal property (Art. Same as above Either Spouse (Art. 94, par. 1) 121, par. 1) Notes If community property If community property is insufficient:a. is insufficient:a. spouses are solidarily spouses are solidarily liable for the balance liable for the balance with their separate with their separate properties properties
exception: Art. 49 par. 9

Illegitimate Children Notes

Separate property of Separate property of their parents their parents If none or Same (left) insufficient:a. absolutely community or conjugal partnership (only if financially capable)

Separate property of their parents Same (left)

Art. 71 What is the right and duty of BOTH the spouses? Management of the household.

Note: No spouse can be deprived of this right without due process but he or she can be held accountable for the neglect of this duty.

Art. 72 Relief by the court can be sought be the aggrieved party when one of the spouses: a. neglects his or her duties to the conjugal union b. commits acts which tend to bring danger, dishonor, or injury to the other or to the family

Art. 73 General Rule: Either spouse may exercise any legitimate profession, occupation, business or activity WITHOUT the consent of the other. Exception: When there are valid, serious and moral grounds.

What happens when the other spouse insists to continue her objectionable work? The other spouse may file a petition in the court.

Liability before objection is made: If it redounded to the benefit of the family, the absolute community or conjugal partnership shall be made liable. If the property regime is absolute separation of property, spouses are jointly liable for the obligation. (Note: Creditors acting in good faith will not be prejudiced in their rights.)

Liability after objection is made: Separate property of the spouse who acted without the consent of the other shall be made liable for the payment of the obligation incurred.

Note: From R.A. 9262 (Sections 5-6) The act of preventing a woman in engaging in a any legitimate profession, occupation, business or activity or controlling the victims own money or properties or solely controlling the victims own money or properties or solely controlling the conjugal or common money, or properties constitutes a violation of the law. It is punishable by prision correccional. [when there are no valid, serious or moral grounds]

Persons and Family Relations Cases for Final Exam

CASES, FAMILY CODE CASES, LINKS - FULL TEXT CASES, PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS, PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS CASES, PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS PAST EXAMS

October 8th, 2012 | No Comments

inShare Click on the links below each case to read the full text. THE FAMILY Olaco vs. Co Cho Chit and Court of Appeals http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1993/mar1993/gr_58010_1993.html Guerrero vs. Regional Trial Court (RTC- Branch XVI) http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1994/jan1994/gr_109068_1994.html Hiyas Savings vs. Acuna http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/aug2006/gr_154132_2006.html FAMILY HOME Modequillo vs. Breva http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1990/may1990/gr_86355_1990.html Manacop vs. Court of Appeals http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1997/aug1997/97898.htm Taneo, Jr. vs. Court of Appeals http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1999/mar99/108532.htm Kelly, Jr. vs. Planters Products http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/decisions.php?doctype=Decisions%20/%20Signed%20Resolutions &docid=121627396844445990 Josef vs. Santos http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/decisions.php?doctype=Decisions%20/%20Signed%20Resolutions &docid=12287210771902509097 Cabang vs. Basay http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2009/mar2009/gr_180587_2009.html Patricio vs. Dario III http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/november2006/170829.htm PATERNITY AND FILIATION Badua vs. Court of Appeals http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1994/jan1994/gr_105625_1994.html Babiera vs. Catotal http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2000/june2000/138493.htm

De Jesus vs. Dizon http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2001/oct2001/142877.htm Liyao, Jr. vs. Tanhoti-Liyao http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/mar2002/138961.htm Concepcion vs. Court of Appeals http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2005/aug2005/123450.htm Ong vs. Diaz http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/dec2007/gr_171713_2007.html PROOF OF FILIATION Fernandez vs. Court of Appeals http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2000/oct2000/115813.htm Fernandez vs. Fernandez http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2001/aug2001/143256.htm Labagala vs. Santiago http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2001/dec2001/132305.htm Locsin vs. Locsin Jr. Bernabe vs. Alejo http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/jan2002/140500.htm De La Rosa vs. Vda. De Damian http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/jan2006/gr_155733_2006.html Verceles vs. Posada http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/apr2007/gr_159785_2007.html De La Cruz vs. Gracia http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/july2009/177728.htm Nepomuceno vs. Lopez http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2010/mar2010/gr_181258_2010.html LAWS ON ADOPTION Landingin vs. Republic http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/jun2006/gr_164948_2006.html In Re: Petition for Afoptiong of Michelle Lim and Michael Jude Lim http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/may2009/168992-93.htm SUPPORT De Asis vs. Court of Appeals http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1999/feb99/127578.htm Gan vs. Reyes http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/may2002/145527.htm Mangonon vs. Court of Appeals http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/jun2006/gr_125041_2006.html Lim vs. Lim http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/october2009/163209.htm PARENTAL AUTHORITY Espiritu vs. Court of Appeals http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1995/mar1995/gr_115640_1995.html Santos Sr. vs. Court of Appeals http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1995/mar1995/gr_113054_1995.html Eslao vs. Court of Appeals http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/1997/jan1997/116773.htm Laxamana vs. Laxamana http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/sep2002/144763.htm Gualberto vs. Gualberto

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2005/jun2005/154994.htm Salientes vs. Abanilla http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/aug2006/gr_162734_2006.html Gamboa-Hirsch vs. Court of Appeals http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2007/july2007/174485.htm Dacasin vs. Dacasin http://www.philippine-lawyer.com/dacasin-vs-dacasin-february-5-2010/ School of the Holy Spirit vs. Taguiam http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/decisions.php?doctype=Decisions%20/%20Signed%20Resolutions &docid=12166842031590179442 TITLE XI Republic vs. Court of Appeals Republic vs. Lorino http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2005/jan2005/160258.htm SURNAMES Republic vs. Court of Appeals In Re: Petition of Julian Lin Carulasan Wang http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2005/mar2005/159966.htm In the Matter of Adoption of Nathy Astorga Garcia http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2005/mar2005/148311.htm Republic vs. Capote http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/feb2007/gr_157043_2007.html Remo vs. Secretary of Foreign Affairs http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/march2010/169202.htm CIVIL REGISTER Silverio vs. Republic http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2007/oct2007/gr_174689_2007.html Republic vs. Cagandaha http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/decisions.php?doctype=Decisions%20/%20Signed%20Resolutions &docid=1221805563131007007

Persons and Family Relations 3rd Exam Question #1

FAMILY CODE, PAST EXAMS, PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS PAST EXAMS, REVIEWS

October 4th, 2012 | No Comments

Widower but legally separated Edgardo contracted a subsequent marriage with Loren without liquidating the community property of the first marriage. no ante-nuptial agreement was executed by the parties prior to the marriage. Edgardo is a surgeon-cardiologist while Loren stayed in the house to attend to Edgardos needs as well as the maintenance of the household. Loren however, would sell imported goods like cosmetics, bags, custom jewelry and clothes to friends. They were able to acquire properties of sizeable value which was placed at around 30 million pesos. On their first wedding anniversary, Edgardo mortgaged

his car to Lance for 600 thousand pesos and used the proceeds in buying a diamond ring which he gave to Loren as an anniversary gift.

Six years after the marriage however, Edgardo filed a complaint for declaration of nullity of his marriage with Loren alleging that the latter has a prior marriage with one Tony and the said marriage was not terminated bu death, annulment or declaration of nullity.

The court granted the petition and was ordered to liquidate the properties acquired during the marriage. The decision further stated that a decree of finality o the nullity of marriage shall only be issued upon compliance with the requirements under Article 50 in relation to Article 43 (2), (3), (4) and (5) and Article 52 of the Family Code.

Questions 1. What is the standing of the donation made by Edgardo to Loren on the occasion of their first wedding anniversary? Explain. (5%) 2. How shall the properties be liquidated, divided and distributed? Reason. (10%) 3. Is forfeiture applicable? If yes, who will forfeit and the manner of forfeiture. Explain. (10%) 4. Was the court correct ion refusing to issue the certificate of finality of judgment of nullity unless compliance of the aforesaid provisions had been made? Explain. (5%)

Leave a Reply