Cabana, Adrian

Case Title : In the matter of the Petition for Habeas Corpus of Potenciano Ilusorio

vs. Erlinda K. Ilusorio-Bildner

Facts

Respondent - Erlinda Kalaw Ilusorio is the wife of lawyer Potenciano Ilusorio. Potenciano
Ilusorio is about 86 years of age possessed of extensive property valued at millions of pesos. For many
years, lawyer Potenciano Ilusorio was Chairman of the Board and President of Baguio Country Club. In
1972, they separated from bed and board for undisclosed reasons. The children of Potenciano alleged
that their mother gave Potenciano an overdose of 200 mg instead of 100 mg Zoloft, an antidepressant
drug prescribed by his doctor, as a consequence Potenciano’s health deteriorated. Erlinda filed with the
Regional Trial Court, Antipolo City a petition10 for guardianship over the person and property of
Potenciano Ilusorio due to the latter’s advanced age, frail health, poor eyesight and impaired judgment.

On May 31, 1998, after attending a corporate meeting in Baguio City, Potenciano Ilusorio did not
return to Antipolo City and instead lived at Cleveland Condominium, Makati. As a result Erinda filed with
the Court of Appeals a Petition for Habeas Corpus to have the custody of the lawyer

Issue

Whether or Not the wife may file a petition for habeas corpus to compel the husband to return to
her?

Ruling

No. The Supreme Court held that a writ of habeas corpus extends to all cases of illegal
confinement or detention,13 or by which the rightful custody of a person is withheld from the one
entitled thereto. It is available where a person continues to be unlawfully denied of one or more of
his constitutional freedoms, where there is denial of due process, where the restraints are not
merely involuntary but are unnecessary, and where a deprivation of freedom originally valid has later
become arbitrary.

The essential object and purpose of the writ of habeas corpus is to inquire into all manner of
involuntary restraint, and to relieve a person therefrom if such restraint is illegal.16
To justify the grant of the petition, the restraint of liberty must be an illegal and involuntary
deprivation of freedom of action.17 The illegal restraint of liberty must be actual and effective, not
merely nominal or moral.18

In the given case, there was no actual and effective detention or deprivation of lawyer
Potenciano Ilusorio’s liberty that would justify the issuance of the writ. The fact that lawyer
Potenciano Ilusorio is about 86 years of age, or under medication does not necessarily render him
mentally incapacitated. Soundness of mind does not hinge on age or medical condition but on the
capacity of the individual to discern his actions.