Professional Documents
Culture Documents
*
G.R. No. 85140. May 17, 1990.
_______________
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016d29b4135edfce3979003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 1/13
9/13/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 185
* EN BANC.
426
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016d29b4135edfce3979003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 2/13
9/13/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 185
427
legal tie and another who are husband and wife de facto. But this
view cannot even apply to the facts of the case at bar. We hold
that the provisions of the Civil Code, unless expressly providing to
the contrary as in Article 144, when referring to a “spouse”
contemplate a lawfully wedded spouse. Petitioner vis-a-vis
Vitaliana was not a lawfully-wedded spouse to her; in fact, he was
not legally capacitated to marry her in her lifetime.
Burials; Right to bury a dead person does not include a
commonlaw husband who is still married.—Custody of the dead
body of Vitaliana was correctly awarded to her surviving brothers
and sisters (the Vargases).
PADILLA, J.:
_______________
428
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016d29b4135edfce3979003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 4/13
9/13/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 185
_______________
(a) x x x
(b) That the court has no jurisdiction over the nature of the action or
suit;
429
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016d29b4135edfce3979003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 5/13
9/13/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 185
_______________
430
“It should be noted from the original petition, to the first amended
1petition, up to the second amended petition that the ultimate
facts show that if the person of Vitaliana Vargas turns out to be
dead then this Court is being prayed to declare the petitioners as
the persons entitled to the custody, interment and/or burial of the
body of said deceased. The Court, considering the circumstance
that Vitaliana Vargas was already dead on August 28, 1988 but
only revealed to the Court on September 29, 1988 by respondent’s
counsel, did not lose jurisdiction over the nature and subject
matter of this case because it may entertain this case thru the
allegations in the body of the petition on the determination as to
who is entitled to the custody of the dead body of the late
Vitaliana Vargas as well as the burial or interment thereof, for
the reason that under the provisions of Sec. 19 of Batas
Pambansa Blg. 129, which reads as follows:
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016d29b4135edfce3979003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 6/13
9/13/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 185
(1) In all civil actions in which the subject of the litigation is incapable
of pecuniary estimation;
x x x x x x x x x
(5) In all actions involving the contract of marriage and marital
relations;
(6) In all cases not within the exclusive jurisdiction of any court,
tribunal, person or body exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions:
x x x x x x x x x
_______________
431
case as an action for custody and burial of the dead body because
the body of the petition controls and is binding and since this case
was raffled to this court to the exclusion of all other courts, it is
the primary
10
duty of this court to decide and dispose of this case. x
x x.”
_______________
7 Supra.
8 Sec. 5—Inherent power of courts; Sec. 6—means to carry jurisdiction
into effect.
9 Sec. 1104. Right of custody to body—Any person charged by law with
the duty of burying the body of a deceased person is entitled to the custody
of such body for the purpose of burying it, except when an inquest is
required by law for the purpose of determining the cause of death; and, in
case of death due to or accompanied by a dangerous communicable
disease, such body shall until buried remain in the custody of the local
board of health or local health officer, or if there be no such, then in the
custody of the municipal council.
10 G.R. No. 86470, Rollo at 34.
11 Annexes 7 & 8, Petition, G.R. No. 85140, Rollo at 85 and 86.
432
‘ART. 294. The claim for support, when proper and two or more persons
are obliged to give it, shall be made in the following order:
(1) From the spouse;
xxx’
_______________
433
_______________
13 Ras v. Sua, G.R. No. L-23302, September 25, 1968, 25 SCRA 158-159; Nactor
v. IAC, G.R. No. 74122, March 15, 1988, 158 SCRA 635.
14 39 Am. Jur., 2d, Habeas Corpus §129.
15 Ibid., §130.
16 G.R. No. L-12772, 24 January 1959, 105 Phil. 55.
434
court below should not allow the technicality, that Teofilo Macazo
was not originally made a party, to stand in the way of its giving
the child full protection. Even in a habeas corpus proceeding the
court had power to award temporary custody to the petitioner
herein, or some other suitable person, after summoning and
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016d29b4135edfce3979003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 10/13
9/13/2019 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 185
_______________
17 Ibid.
18 PNB vs. CA, G.R. No. L-45770, 30 March 1988, 159 SCRA 933.
19 Fiel vs. Banawa, No. 56284-R, March 26, 1979, 76 OG 619.
435
_______________
436
———o0o———
437
www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/0000016d29b4135edfce3979003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 13/13