Gandioco v Penaranda

Petitioner: Froilan Gandionco

Respondent: Hon. Senen C. Penaranda (Presiding Judge) and Teresita C. Gandionco
Topic: Legal Separation Grounds
Summary: Private respondent (petitioners legal wife) filed a complaint for
concubinage and legal separation with petition for support and payment of damages
against petitioner. The Court ruled that the civil action for legal separation should not be
suspended in view of the criminal case and the decree of legal separation may be
issued upon proof by preponderance of evidence.
Facts:
Special action for certiorari to annul:
1.) Order of the respondent judge ordering petitioner to pay support pendente
lite to private respondent (his wife) and their child
2.) Order denying petitioners motion to suspend hearings in the action for legal
separation filed against him by private respondent; motion to inhibit
respondent Judge from further hearing and trying the case
Private respondent filed a complaint against petitioner for legal separation on the
ground of concubinage with a petition for support and payment of damages.
(RTC)
Private respondent also filed with the Municipal Trial Court a complaint against
petitioner for concubinage.
Private respondent applied for the provisional remedy of support pendente lite
pending decision for legal separation. Respondent judge ordered the payment of
support.
Issues:
1. WoN the civil action for legal separation and incidents should be suspended in
view of the criminal case for concubinage filed against petitioner
NO
o 1985 Rules on Criminal Procedure a civil action for legal separation
based on concubinage, may proceed ahead of, or simultaneously with, a
criminal action for concubinage because said civil action is not one to
enforce the civil liability arising from the offense
2. WoN the petitioner should first be convicted for concubinage before the action for
legal separation can prosper or succeed (as the basis of the action for legal
separation is his alleged offense of concubinage)
NO
o A decree of legal separation, on the ground of concubinage, may be issued
upon proof by preponderance of evidence.
o No criminal proceeding or conviction is necessary.
3. WoN the respondent judge erred in ordering the payment of support pendente
lite
NO
o No proof of grave abuse of discretion on the part of the respondent judge
o Support pendente lite can be availed of in an action for legal separation
and granted at the discretion of the judge
4. WoN the respondent Judge should be disqualified from hearing the case as the
grant of support and denial of the motion to suspend hearings are taken by
petitioner as a disregard of applicable laws and doctrines

 NO
o Divergence of opinions between a judge hearing a case and a partys
counsel is not a sufficient ground to disqualify the judge from hearing the
case.