LMT Hernando Shofy

Shofy Hernando Last Minute Tips Midterms
1. Publication is indispensable (tanada v. Tuvera)

2. What are retroactive laws?
• General rule: Laws only have prospective application
• Exceptions:
a. Express
b. Necessarily Implied from the language used but if there is doubt then resolve against retroactivity
c. When the law is CURATIVE in nature
d. When the law is PROCEDURAL in nature. ( prima facie applies to present and future actions)
e. When the law is PENAL in nature AND favorable to the accused
3. CIVIL CODE
• Book 1 persons
• Book 2 property, ownership
• Book 3 Different modes of Acquiring ownership
• Book 4 Obligations and Contracts
• 2270 Articles
• RA 386
• Took effect :August 30 1950
4. Rights may be waived, unless the waiver is contrary to law, public order, public policy, morals, or good customs, or prejudicial to a
third person with a right recognized by law
• GR: Quitclaims of laborers and not valid
5. Repeals
● G.R. : repeals by implication are not favored
● 2 accepted instances of implied repeal:
1. Provisions on the 2 acts on the same subject matter are irreconcilably contradictory. Later act is an implied
repeal of the earlier one.
2. later act covers the whole subject of the earlier one and is clearly intended as a substitute.
6. Article 8 says Judicial decisions applying or interpreting the laws or the Constitution shall form a part of the legal system of the
Philippines. DOES NOT say it forms part of law of the land.
7. 1 year = 12 calendar months.
MEMORIZE:
Article 14. Obligatory Force of Penal Laws
Penal laws and those of public security and safety shall be obligatory upon all who live or
sojourn in the Philippine territory, subject to the principles of public international law and
to treaty stipulations. (8a)
Obligatory force of penal laws
● Everyone is subject to penal laws and other laws designed to maintain public security and safety
Exception
● While foreigners may be liable for committing offenses in violation of penal laws and those of public security and safety,
they may however be immune from suit
● (Vienna Convention 1961)
○ Diplomatic agent shall be inviolable and shall not be liable to any form of arrest or detention such as head of
mission or member of diplomatic staff
○ Heads of state
○ Ambassadors
■ Their maids and personal drivers
Article 15. Nationality Rule
Laws relating to family rights and duties, or to the status, condition and legal capacity of
persons are binding upon citizens of the Philippines, even though living abroad. (9a)
Nationality Rules
● Nationality rule governs SCLF (status, condition, legal capacity, family relations)
● PH laws cover Filipinos wherever they are.
● Filipinos cannot obtain a valid divorce abroad
Article 16. Law Governing Real Properties
Real property as well as personal property is subject to the law of the country where it is
stipulated.
However, intestate and testamentary successions, both with respect to the order of
succession and to the amount of successional rights and to the intrinsic validity of
testamentary provisions, shall be regulated by the national law of the person whose
succession is under consideration, whatever may be the nature of the property and
regardless of the country wherein said property may be found. (10a)
Law governing real properties
● For real property = law of situs

● Successional, order, amount of rights = national law of deceased
○ Testator cannot say that a different law shall govern his succession
Article 17. Extrinsic Validity
The forms and solemnities of contracts, wills, and other public instruments shall be
governed by the laws of the country in which they are executed.
When the acts referred to are executed before the diplomatic or consular officials of the
Republic of the Philippines in a foreign country, the solemnities established by Philippine
laws shall be observed in their execution.
Prohibitive laws concerning persons, their acts or property, and those which have for their
object public order, public policy and good customs shall not be rendered ineffective by
laws or judgments promulgated, or by determinations or conventions agreed upon in a
foreign country. (11a)
Extrinsic Validity
● Forms and solemnities of contracts = law of the place where it is executed

○ I.e. form of will
Acts before Diplomatic and Consular Officials
● Because the host country by rules of international law, waives its jurisdiction over the premises of the diplomatic office
of another country
Prohibitive laws
● example, is that a divorce procured by a Filipino abroad will remain not valid in the Philippines
8. Del Socorro v. Van Wilsem (parens patriae)

• Processual presumption - if the foreign law is not properly pleaded and proved, our courts will presume that the
foreign law is the same as our local laws. Thus, applying processual presumption, Van Wilsem has to give support
to his son.
• Applying the territoriality principle for penal laws under Art. 14 of the Civil Code, since Van Wilsem was sojourned
in the Philippines, he is subject to such laws. The courts acquired jurisdiction over his person upon his arrest.
• Even if under Dutch law he is not anymore obliged to give support, he is still obliged to give support under
Philippine law because it is contrary to our public policy.
9. Pantaleon v. AMEX
• It is an elementary rule in our jurisdiction that good faith is presumed and that the burden of proving bad faith rests
upon the party alleging it. 40 Although it took AMEX some time before it approved Pantaleon's three charge
requests, we find no evidence to suggest that it acted with deliberate intent to cause Pantaleon any loss or injury, or
acted in a manner that was contrary to morals, good customs or public policy.
• Because AMEX neither breached its contract with Pantaleon, nor acted with culpable delay or the willful intent to
cause harm, we find the award of moral damages to Pantaleon unwarranted
10. Prejudicial Questions

• General rule: Where both civil and criminal actions arise from the same facts, the criminal case takes precedence
• exceptions:
i. prejudicial questions (those which need to be resolved first before action can be taken on the criminal
case)
ii. independent civil actions (cases will run simultaneously)
11. Not Prejudicial questions:

a. Annulment of first marriage in a charge for bigamy
b. But a civil case for the annulment of the second marriage can be a prejudicial questions for bigamy
12. Unjust Enrichment
Every person who through an act of performance by another, or any other means, acquires or comes into possession of something at
the expense of the latter without just or legal ground, shall return the same to him.
Even when an act or event causing damage to another's property was not due to the fault or negligence of the defendant, the latter
shall be liable for indemnity if through the act or event he was benefited.
Its requisites are:

● There is enrichment on the part of the defendant
● There is impoverishment on the part of the plaintiff
● There is lack if a valid cause for the defendant to acquire the supposed property of the plaintiff
13. Article 29
When the accused in a criminal prosecution is acquitted on the ground that his guilt has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt,
a civil action for damages for the same act or omission may be instituted. Such action requires only a preponderance of
evidence. Upon motion of the defendant, the court may require the plaintiff to file a bond to answer for damages in case
the complaint should be found to be malicious.
If in a criminal case the judgment of acquittal is based upon reasonable doubt, the court shall so declare. In the absence of
any declaration to that effect, it may be inferred from the text of the decision whether or not the acquittal is due to that
ground.
• Bayotas case - civil liability arising from crime extinguished when criminal dies during appeal.
• GR: Extinction of Criminal not extinguish Civil (death or acquittal)

o E (not liable):
▪ Accused dies before final Judgment or pending appeal (after arraignment BUT if before arraignment, still
liable)
▪ Court declares that action upon which the civil liability is founded does not exist
o E2E (still liable):
▪ Dies after final judgment
▪ Predicated on a source of obligation other than a delict
▪ Injury to person or property - filed against executor or administrator of estate
▪ Arises from contract - filed against the estate of accused
▪ There was reservation of civil action
14. Least defective marriage is voidable then rescissible then unenforceable then void.
15. Sale of spouse without consent of other is void but is a continuing offer (it may be perfected if upon express or implied acts
of the other spouse show that he/she consents i.e. signing as witness, executing SPA)
o Sale is void (aggabao case) but is continuing offer that spouse must accept via writing or judicial order
o Marital consent in jurat is valid (Pan pacific case)
o Signing as witness, valid (Pelayo case)
16. Juridical capacity, which is the fitness to be the subject of legal relations, is inherent in every natural person and is lost only
through death. Capacity to act, which is the power to do acts with legal effect, is acquired and may be lost
o Inherent in every person
17. Concept of civil personality is different from life. CP @ birth while life @ time of fertilization (Imbong v. Ochoa)
• A parent cannot invoke the concept of “provisional personality” of a conceived child to obtain damages for and on behalf
of an aborted child
a. Claim for damages “on behalf of the aborted child” on the basis of “provisional personality” cannot be granted
if the child is not later born.
18. Juridical Persons

• The following are juridical persons:
o (1) The State and its political subdivisions;
o (2) Other corporations, institutions and entities for public interest or purpose, created by law; their personality
begins as soon as they have been constituted according to law;
o (3) Corporations, partnerships and associations for private interest or purpose to which the law grants a juridical
personality, separate and distinct from that of each shareholder, partner or member. (35a)
o Barangay, ARMM is a political subdivision
o PARTNERSHIP BY ESTOPPEL IS NOT A JURIDICAL PERSON.
19. Take note of case of Romualdez v. Marcos (for election law, domicile is same as residence & domicile of kid = parents)
20. Marriage solely for immigration purpose is valid
No marriage shall be valid, unless these essential requisites are present:

(1) Legal capacity of the contracting parties who must be a male and a female; and
(2) Consent freely given in the presence of the solemnizing officer. (53a)
The formal requisites of marriage are:
(1) Authority of the solemnizing officer;
(2) A valid marriage license except in the cases provided for in Chapter 2 of this Title; and
(3) A marriage ceremony which takes place with the appearance of the contracting parties before the solemnizing officer and
their personal declaration that they take each other as husband and wife in the presence of not less than two witnesses of
legal age. (53a, 55a)
21. Republic v. Orbecido

• Paragraph 2 of Article 26 of the Family Code (E.O. No. 209, as amended by E.O. No. 227), should be interpreted to allow a
Filipino citizen, who has been divorced by a spouse who had acquired foreign citizenship and remarried, also to remarry
22. Vandorn v. Romillo

● It is true that owing to the nationality principle embodied in Article 15 of the Civil Code, 5 only Philippine nationals are covered
by the policy against absolute divorces the same being considered contrary to our concept of public police and morality.
However, aliens may obtain divorces abroad, which may be recognized in the Philippines, provided they are valid according
to their national law. 6 In this case, the divorce in Nevada released private respondent from the marriage from the standards
of American law, under which divorce dissolves the marriage.
● Thus, pursuant to his national law, private respondent is no longer the husband of petitioner. He would have no standing to
sue in the case below as petitioner's husband entitled to exercise control over conjugal assets. As he is bound by the
Decision of his own country's Court, which validly exercised jurisdiction over him, and whose decision he does not repudiate,
he is estopped by his own representation before said Court from asserting his right over the alleged conjugal property.
Special Notes on Proving Foreign Laws by SHofy
SHOFY Conclusion:
● BOTH foreign Judgment and Foreign law must be offered as evidence and must be
authenticated using the following method (How do you prove it):
This Section requires proof, either by (1) official publications or (2)

copies attested by the officer having legal custody of the documents. If
the copies of official records are not kept in the Philippines, these must
be (a) accompanied by a certificate issued by the proper diplomatic or
consular officer in the Philippine foreign service stationed in the foreign
country in which the record is kept and (b) authenticated by the seal of
his office.
● BUT for the foreign judgment to be enforceable in the Philippines, it must be

further shown that: (for presumption of regularity to apply)
○ there has been an opportunity for a full and fair hearing before a court of
competent jurisdiction;
○ that the trial upon regular proceedings has been conducted, following
due citation or voluntary appearance of the defendant and under a
system of jurisprudence likely to secure an impartial administration of

justice;
■ and that there is nothing to indicate either a prejudice in court
and in the system of laws under which it is sitting or fraud in
procuring the judgment
● If the law requires a valid judgment it must be FURTHER SHOWN that:
○ That it was based on a law and such was valid under that law
23. Garcia v. Recio

● Thus, in Garcia v. Recio, it was pointed out that in order for a divorce obtained abroad by the alien spouse to be
recognized in our jurisdiction,
○ it must be shown that the divorce decree is valid according to the national law of the foreigner.
○ Both the divorce decree and the governing personal law of the alien spouse who obtained the divorce must be
proven.
24. Medina v. Kioke

• The RTC ruled that while the divorce documents presented by Doreen were successfully proven to be public or official records of
Japan, she nonetheless fell short of proving the national law of her husband, particularly the existence of the law on divorce. The
RTC observed that the "The Civil Code of Japan 2000" and "The Civil Code of Japan 2009," presented were not duly authenticated by
the Philippine Consul in Japan as required by Sections 24 and 25 of the said Rules, adding too that the testimony of Doreen relative
to the applicable provisions found therein and its effect on the matrimonial relations was insufficient since she was not presented as
a qualified expert witness nor was shown to have, at the very least, a working knowledge of the laws of Japan, particularly those on
family relations and divorce.
25. Divorce by consent, would it be valid in the Philippines?

26. Fujiki v. Marinay
● Fujiki filed action for recognition of foreign judgment in Philippines and order to CANCEL THE STATUS OF MARRIAGE
OF MAEKARA AND MARINAY in LCR
○ the prior spouse has a personal and material interest in maintaining the integrity of the marriage he contracted and t he
property relations arising from it.
○ There is also no doubt that he is interested in the cancellation of an entry of a bigamous marriage in the civil registry, which
compromises the public record of his marriage.
● A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC does not apply in a petition to recognize a foreign judgment relating to the status of a marriage where one of
the parties is a citizen of a foreign country.
● Juliano-Llave v. Republic, 47 this Court held that the rule in A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC that only the husband or wife can file a declaration
of nullity or annulment of marriage "does not apply if the reason behind the petition is bigamy
○ does not preclude a spouse of a subsisting marriage to question the validity of a subsequent marriage on the ground of
bigamy
○ solely by the husband or the wife"75—it refers to the husband or the wife of the subsisting marriage
● Thus, the parties in a bigamous marriage are neither the husband nor the wife under the law. The husband or the wife of the p rior
subsisting marriage is the one who has the personality to file a petition for declaration of absolute nullity of void marriage under
Section 2(a) of A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC.
● Article 35(4) of the Family Code, which declares bigamous marriages void from the beginning, is the civil aspect of Article 349 of the
Revised Penal Code,76 which penalizes bigamy. Bigamy is a public crime. Thus, anyone can initiate prosecution for bigamy because
any citizen has an interest in the prosecution and prevention of crimes
27. 2nd husband cannot file nullity of the 2nd bigamous marriage
28. Zamoranos case
• The subject matter of the offense of Bigamy dwells on the accused contracting a second marriage while a prior valid
one still subsists and has yet to be dissolved.
a. At the very least, the RTC, Branch 6, Iligan City, should have suspended the proceedings until Pacasum had
litigated the validity of Zamoranos and De Guzman's marriage before the Shari'a Circuit Court and had
successfully shown that it had not been dissolved despite the divorce by talaq entered into byZamoranos and
De Guzman.
29. What marriages are exempt from the License requirement?
Articles 27, 28, 31,32,33, and 34
a. Need not obtain a marriage license
Solemnizing officer MUST still be authorized under Article 7 (plus mayor) and such must not be void under the Family
Code
30. What is articulo mortis?

• Still valid if other party lived
31. Cohabitation
● Two requisites must concur:
○ They must live as husband and wife for at least five years characterized by exclusivity and continuity that is
unbroken
○ They must be without legal impediment to marry each other. (required only at the time of the actual marriage
celebration)
● During the 5 year period, it is not necessary that they must have not suffered from any legal impediment.
● At time of marriage celebration is controlling (Manzano v. Sanchez)
● No tacking of cohabitation
● False affidavit = void marriage
32. Art. 41
Rule on Re-appearance
Requirements for presumptive death before re-marry Failure to secure presumptive death
(otherwise void) a. Spouse can be charged with bigamy, adultery, concubinage
a. Four years absent (2 years if in danger of death b. Second marriage is void
under Art. 391)
b. Spouse has a well-founded belief that missing spouse
is dead
c. Summary proceeding to declare as PD
Reappearance of the Missing spouse Recording of Reappearance of Missing Spouse

a. affidavit of Reappearance (sworn statement) a. Second marriage AUTOMATICALLY terminated upon
b. First marriage was NOT declared void recording
c. Recorded at registry of residence of the parties of the b. If Reappearance not recorded, two valid marriages.
SUBSEQUENT MARRIAGE
d. Due notice to spouses of subsequent marriage
e. Instance of ANY interested person
Effects of Termination of Subsequent Marriage Effect if both spouses are in bad faith
a. Subsequent marriage is void ab initio
1) The children of the subsequent marriage conceived prior to its b. All donations by reason of marriage revoked by operation
termination shall be considered legitimate of law
2) The absolute community of property or the conjugal partnership,

shall be dissolved and liquidated,
-IF BAD FAITH- -his or her share of the net profits shall
be forfeited
To: common children -> children of guilty spouse in
previous marriage -> innocent spouse
3) Donations by reason of marriage shall remain valid,

- IF BAD FAITH - revoked by operation of law
4&5) IF BAD FAITH - may revoke designation in any insurance

policy & disqualified to inherit either by testate or intestate
succession.
• REVIEW of declaration under Article 41 is via Certiorari since it is summary in nature
Republic v. Sarenogon
● Well-founded belief requisite under Art. 41 of the Family Code is complied with only upon a showing that sincere honest-
to-goodness efforts had been made to ascertain whether absent spouse is still alive or already dead.
● Mere absence of spouse or lack of news that such absentee is alive and failure to communicate of such spouse will not lead
to the presumption of death of the absent spouse.
● Court applies the strict standard approach to prevent possible collusion of spouses to nullify their marriage.
● Here Jose’s effort to determine if his wife, Netchie, was dead was insufficient because he only tried to contact her parents
and asked her relatives and friends.
33. Antonio v. Reyes

a. Gravity
b. Incurability
c. Juridical antecedence
d. Totality of evidence
• Mere irreconcilable difference not enough must be failure to recognize essential marital obligations
• No need to present experts of psychologists (Te v. Te)
• Civil courts can only nullify civil weddings (Dedel case)
• No damages for those under Art. 36
34. If previous marriage void under Art. 36, can still remarry
35. Memorize Void marriages
36. Can ex wife marry adopted child? (depends on w/n adoption was joint) SIR says YES.
37. Audley & In re sims case
Audley v. Audley ● the issue presented was whether

or not the provision in a marital
statute prohibiting marriages
between uncles and nieces or
aunts and nephews also include
“half-blood relationships.”
● SC of New York answered in the
affirmative
● The prohibition was enacted for
the benefit of public health and
the perpetuation of the human
race
● The marriage on which the
action is predicated being void,
there is no basis for the
maintenance of the action for
divorce.
In Re Simms Estate ● where the New York Court of

Appeals stated that a marriage
between uncle and niece by the
half blood is not incestuous and
void
● NOT specifically included by
law as a void marriage and,
therefore, cannot be considered
as such.
● The second case of In Re Simms
Estate, 26 NY2d 163, 46 ALR 3d
1398 appears to be the proper
view. All doubts must be
construed in favor of marriage
38. Art. 40 has retroactive effect (Jarillo v. People) but not apply if both marriages were contracted under Civil Code.
39. If spouse is absent for 8 years do you still need to declare under Art. 40? Yes. Art. 390 is NOT for remarriage (7 years absent)
40. List under Art. 45 is exclusive [MEMORIZE 45 & 46]
• Can child still ratify the marriage if parents filed annulment before he/she turned 21? Yes (sir)
41. What is the concept of vices in consent? Same sa olbicon
42. Under article 46 it is limited,
. Annulment on Fraud
Any of the following circumstances shall constitute fraud referred to in Number 3 of the
preceding Article:
1) Non-disclosure of a previous conviction by final judgment of the other party of a crime

involving moral turpitude;
2) Concealment by the wife of the fact that at the time of the marriage, she was pregnant
by a man other than her husband;
3) Concealment of sexually transmissible disease, regardless of its nature, existing at the

time of the marriage; or
4) Concealment of drug addiction, habitual alcoholism, or homosexuality or lesbianism

existing at the time of the marriage.
No other misrepresentation or deceit as to character, health, rank, fortune or chastity shall

constitute such fraud as will give grounds for action for the annulment of marriage. (86a)
EXCLUSIVITY OF GROUNDS FOR ANNULMENT.

43. OSG participation

NOTE:
Prosecutor must participate always except when heavily threshed by both parties. OSG is optional. BUT look at Mendoza case (SIR)
Mendoza v. Republic
● Appeal by the OSG is still required. The OSG has to actively participate in all stages of a proceeding involving either a case
for annulment or declaration of nullity of marriage as reflected in Art. 48 of the Family Code.
● Intent of A.M. No. 02-11-10 is for OSG to appear as counsel for the State in the capacity of a defensor vinculi (i.e., defender
of the marital bond) to oppose petitions for, and to appeal judgments in favor of declarations of nullity of marriage under
Article 36 of the Family Code, thereby ensuring that only the meritorious cases for the declaration of nullity of marriages
based on psychological incapacity-those sufficiently evidenced by gravity, incurability and juridical antecedence-would
succeed
44. Yu v. Reyes
• Secs. 19 and 21 of the Rule clearly allow the reception of evidence on custody, support, and property relations after the
trial court renders a decision granting the petition, or upon entry of judgment granting the petition.
• FC not require to include in the decree of annulment collateral matters
• Judgment of support never final
45. Dino v Dino
Dino v. Dino
● Art. 51 of the Family Code

○ The rule here on delivery of presumptive legitimes and liquidation (Art. 50 of the FC) will not apply to marriages
which are declared void ab initio under Art. 36 of the Family Code.
○ Since the marriage here was void due to psychological incapacity, this provision will apply and the property
relations here will be governed by the rules on co-ownership
46. RECORDING IN THE CIVIL REGISTRY AND REGISTRY OF PROPERTY.

● Non-compliance with the liquidation and partition requirements, as well as the delivery of the presumptive legitime shall
be a cause for the non-issuance of a decree of nullity or annulment.
● Recording is necessary to bind third persons
● Such recordings are also necessary for the parties to be able to validly contract a subsequent marriage
● observance or non-observance of the requirements of liquidation, partition, distribution and the delivery of the presumptive
legitimes is crucially material in determining whether or not the subsequent marriage is void only if the previous marriage
has been judicially nullifi ed or annulled in accordance with law.
○ If due to death of one of the party The failure to liquidate in this instance will only be determinative of the
property regime that will govern the subsequent marriage
Article 52. Recording of Judgement
The judgment of annulment or of absolute nullity of the marriage, the partition and
distribution of the properties of the spouses, and the delivery of the children’s presumptive
legitimes shall be recorded in the appropriate civil registry and registries of property;
otherwise, the same shall not affect third persons. (n)
47. Memorize grounds for denial of Legal separation

48. Memorie grounds for legal separation
49. 6 month cooling off period is mandatory for LS
50. Prescriptive period is 5 years from time of occurrence

51. Lapus v. Eufemio (IMPORTANT!!!)
• When an action for legal separation is converted by the counterclaim into one for a declaration of nullity of a
marriage, does the death of a party abate the proceedings?
• Does the death of the plaintiff before final decree, in an action for legal separation, abate the action? If it does,
will abatement also apply if the action involves property rights? .
• Action for legal separation - Being personal in character, it follows that the death of one party to the action
causes the death of the action itself — actio personalis moritur cum persona.
• is apparent that the right to the dissolution of the conjugal partnership of gains (or of the absolute
community of property), the loss of right by the offending spouse to any share of the profits earned by the
partnership or community, or his disqualification to inherit by intestacy from the innocent spouse as well as
the revocation of testamentary provisions in favor of the offending spouse made by the innocent one, are
all rights and disabilities that, by the very terms of the Civil Code article, are vested exclusively in the
persons of the spouses; and by their nature and intent, such claims and disabilities are difficult to conceive
as assignable or transmissible. Hence, a claim to said rights is not a claim that "is not thereby
extinguished" after a party dies, under Section 17, Rule 3, of the Rules of Court, to warrant continuation of
the action through a substitute of the deceased party.
• As to the petition of respondent-appellee Eufemio for a declaration of nullity ab initio of his marriage to Carmen
Lapuz, it is apparent that such action became moot and academic upon the death of the latter, and there could
be no further interest in continuing the same after her demise, that automatically dissolved the questioned
union. Any property rights acquired by either party as a result of Article 144 of the Civil Code of the Philippines 6
could be resolved and determined in a proper action for partition by either the appellee or by the heirs of the
appellant.
• In fact, even if the bigamous marriage had not been void ab initio but only voidable under Article 83, paragraph
2, of the Civil Code, because the second marriage had been contracted with the first wife having been an
absentee for seven consecutive years, or when she had been generally believed dead, still the action for
annulment became extinguished as soon as one of the three persons involved had died, as provided in Article
87, paragraph 2, of the Code, requiring that the action for annulment should be brought during the lifetime of
any one of the parties involved. And furthermore, the liquidation of any conjugal partnership that might have
resulted from such voidable marriage must be carried out "in the testate or intestate proceedings of the
deceased spouse", as expressly provided in Section 2 of the Revised Rule 73, and not in the annulment
proceeding.
52. Donations
Article 64. Donations and Beneficiary in Insurance
After the finality of the decree of legal separation, the innocent spouse may revoke the
donations made by him or by her in favor of the offending spouse, as well as the
designation of the latter as a beneficiary in any insurance policy, even if such designation
be stipulated as irrevocable. The revocation of the donations shall be recorded in the
registries of property in the places where the properties are located. Alienations, liens and
encumbrances registered in good faith before the recording of the complaint for revocation
in the registries of property shall be respected. The revocation of or change in the
designation of the insurance beneficiary shall take effect upon written notification thereof
to the insured.
The action to revoke the donation under this Article must be brought within five years
from the time the decree of legal separation has become final. (107a)
53. Objection to Profession
Article 73. Legitimate Profession
Either spouse may exercise any legitimate profession, occupation, business or activity
without the consent of the other. The latter may object only on valid, serious, and moral
grounds.
In case of disagreement, the court shall decide whether or not:
1) The objection is proper, and
2) Benefit has accrued to the family prior to the objection or thereafter. If the benefit accrued
prior to the objection, the resulting obligation shall be enforced against the separate
property of the spouse who has not obtained consent.
The foregoing provisions shall not prejudice the rights of creditors who acted in good faith.
(117a)
LEGITIMATE PROFESSION
● the law does not make it a requirement that a spouse has to get the prior consent of the other before entering into any
legitimate profession, occupation, business or activity
● if the husband compels the wife to desist from pursuing a profession or any other conduct which the wife has the right to
engage in
○ considered acts of violence against women under RA 9262
● But an isolated transaction of a spouse such as being a guarantor for a third person’s debt is not per se considered as
redounding to the benefit of the family
○ to hold the absolute community or the conjugal partnership property liable for any loss resulting from such
isolated activity, proofs showing a direct benefit to the family must be presented
● disagreements between the spouses regarding a certain profession, occupation, business or activity which one of them
desires to engage in
○ the objection must be anchored only on valid, serious and moral grounds
● “what is legal is moral and what is moral is legal” may not apply in the above provision since there are occupations, like
escort service, which are legal and immoral
SEPARATE PROPERTY LIABILITY
● as a general rule, debts and obligations, whether before or after the marriage ceremony, but redounding to the benefit of
the family, shall be chargeable to the conjugal partnership of gains or the absolute community property
● “if the benefit accrued prior to the objection, the resulting obligation shall be enforced against the separate property of the
spouse who has not obtained consent.”
○ in case of professions which are seriously invalid and immoral, the separate property of the erring spouse shall
be liable for all obligations relating to such exercise of profession even if benefits actually accrued in favor of the
family.
● Article 73, 2nd paragraph, item number 2 is an exception to the general rule
● the innocent spouse must have no knowledge of the other spouse’s engagement in an immoral activity
● if the creditor friend lent the money to the wife on the belief that it will be used for a legitimate business, such creditor will
not be prejudiced and he can collect from the community or conjugal property by demanding from the husband the
payment of the obligation
54. Marriage settlement

• In writing
• Signed
• Recorded in LCR (both)
55. Heirs of Juanite case
Pana v. Heirs of Juanite

○ The Family Code itself provides in Article 76 that marriage settlements cannot be modified except prior to
marriage
○ Clearly, therefore, the conjugal partnership of gains that governed the marriage between Efren and Melecia who
were married prior to 1988 cannot be modified except before the celebration of that marriage.
○ Post-marriage modification of such settlements can take place only where:
■ (a) the absolute community or conjugal partnership was dissolved and liquidated upon a decree of
legal separation;
■ (b) the spouses who were legally separated reconciled and agreed to revive their former property
regime;
■ (c) judicial separation of property had been had on the ground that a spouse abandons the other
without just cause or fails to comply with his obligations to the family;
■ (d) there was judicial separation of property under Article 135; (e) the spouses jointly filed a petition
for the voluntary dissolution of their absolute community or conjugal partnership of gains. None
of these circumstances exists in the case of Efren and Melecia.
56. Article 84, if agree that ACP is regime, can they donate more than 1/5? (i.e. if there are separate properties
involved) SIR says NO.
57.Donation proper nuptias 1/5 requirement apply only if made ins same instrument as marriage settlement
58. Art. 87 (prohibited donations) apply to cohabitation and bigamous marriage.
59. Matthews case
Matthews v. Taylor
● The rule is clear and inflexible: aliens are absolutely not allowed to acquire public or private lands in the Philippines, save
only in constitutionally recognized exceptions. There is no rule more settled than this constitutional prohibition, as more
and more aliens attempt to circumvent the provision by trying to own lands through another
Benjamin has no right to nullify the Agreement of Lease between Joselyn and petitioner. Benjamin, being an alien, is
absolutely prohibited from acquiring private and public lands in the Philippines.
60. Foreigners can own condo units

61. In ACP what are contractual and statutory exclusions? See art. 91 & 92
Section 2. What Constitutes Community Property (ACP)
Article 91. Property Consisting
Unless otherwise provided in this Chapter or in the marriage settlements, the community
property shall consist of all the property owned by the spouses at the time of the
celebration
of the marriage or acquired thereafter. (197a)
Article 92. Excluded from Community Property
The following shall be excluded from the community property:
1) Property acquired during the marriage by gratuitous title by either spouse, and the
fruits as well as the income thereof, if any, unless it is expressly provided by the donor,
testator or grantor that they shall form part of the community property;
2) Property for personal and exclusive use of either spouse. However, jewelry shall form
part of the community property;
3) Property acquired before the marriage by either spouse who has legitimate
descendants by a former marriage, and the fruits as well as the income, if any, of such
property. (201a)
62. ACP - fruits and income of donated property excluded in CPG they are included
63. MEMORIZE ARTCILE 92 SURE MIDTERMS
Section 3. Charges upon and Obligations of the Absolute Community
Article 94. Liable for
The absolute community of property shall be liable for:
1) The support of the spouses, their common children and legitimate children of either
spouse; however, the support of illegitimate children shall be governed by the provisions
of this Code on Support;
2) All debts and obligations contracted during the marriage by the designated
administrator spouse for the benefit of the community, or by both spouses, or by one
spouse with the consent of the other;
3) Debts and obligations contracted by either spouses without the consent of the other to
the extent that the family may have been benefited;
4) All taxes, liens, charges and expenses, including major or minor repairs, upon the
community property;
5) All taxes and expenses for mere preservation made during marriage upon the separate
property of either spouse used by the family;
6) Expenses to enable either spouse to commence or complete a professional or vocational

course, or other activity for self-improvement; 7) Antenuptial debts of either spouse insofar
as they have redounded to the benefit of the family;
8) The value of what is donated or promised by both spouses in favor of their common
legitimate children for the exclusive purpose of commencing or completing a professional
or vocational course or other activity for self-improvement;
9) Antenuptial debts of either spouse other than those falling under paragraph (7) of this
Article, the support of illegitimate children of either spouse, and liabilities incurred by
either spouse by reason of a crime or a quasi-delict, in case of absence or insufficiency of
the exclusive property of the debtor-spouse, the payment of which shall be considered as
advances to be deducted from the share of the debtor-spouse upon liquidation of the
community; and
10) Expenses of litigation between the spouses unless the suit is found to be groundless.
If the community property is insufficient to cover the foregoing liabilities, except those
falling under paragraph (9), the spouses shall be solidarily liable for the unpaid balance
with their separate properties. (161a, 162a, 163a, 202a-205a)
SUPPORT.
64. IMPORTANT (BUT CONFLICTING RULING PLEASE CLARIFY ) for liabilities arisng from from delicts and quasi delicts
can CPG be held liable?
• Spouses Buado - No
• Heirs of Pana - Yes (more recent(=)
• SIR: no instance where CPG liable for criminal act of spouse
65. Memorize Article 99
Article 99. Dissolution of Community Property
The absolute community terminates:

1) Upon the death of either spouse;
2) When there is a decree of legal separation;
3) When the marriage is annulled or declared void; or
4) In case of judicial separation of property during the marriage under Articles 134 to 138.
(175a)
● The termination of the absolute community of property does not necessarily mean the termination of the marriage.
66. Memorize Article 100
Article 100. Effect of Separating in Fact
The separation in fact between husband and wife shall not affect the regime of absolute
community except that:
1) The spouse who leaves the conjugal home or refuses to live therein, without just cause,
shall not have the right to be supported;
2) When the consent of one spouse to any transaction of the other is required by law,
judicial authorization shall be obtained in a summary proceeding;
3) In the absence of sufficient community property, the separate property of both spouses
shall be solidarily liable for the support of the family. The spouse present shall, upon
proper petition in a summary proceeding, be given judicial authority to administer or
encumber any specific separate property of the other spouse and use the fruits or proceeds
thereof to satisfy the latter’s share. (178a)
● Generally, the absolute community of property will not be affected by the separation in fact between the spouses
67. Memorize
Article 106. Conjugal Partnership of Gains
Under the regime of conjugal partnership of gains, the husband and wife place in a
common fund the proceeds, products, fruits and income from their separate properties and
those acquired by either or both spouses through their efforts or by chance, and upon
dissolution of the marriage or of the partnership, the net gains or benefi ts obtained by
either or both spouses shall be divided equally between them, unless otherwise agreed in
the marriage settlements. (142a)
68. CPG exclusions
Section 2. Exclusive Property of Each Spouse
Article 109. Exclusive Properties
The following shall be the exclusive property of each spouse:
1) That which is brought to the marriage as his or her own;
2) That which each acquires during the marriage by gratuitous title;
3) That which is acquired by right of redemption, by barter or by exchange with property

belonging to only one of the spouses; and
4) That which is purchased with exclusive money of the wife or of the husband. (148a)
69. Javellanos v. CA
Jovellanos v. Court of Appeals
DOCTRINE
It is the conjugal partnership of the marriage that is subsisting at the time of the issuance of the deed of absolute sale over the
property, and not the marriage subsisting when the deed tantamount to a contract to sell was issued, where the property in question
will belong to. Pursuant to Article 118 of the Family Code, any amount advanced by the partnership or by either or both spouses shall
be reimbursed by the owner/s upon liquidation of the partnership
70. MEMORIZE 147 & 148 (SEE SHOFY NOTES)

71. Valdez Case
Valdes v. RTC

○ The rule here on delivery of presumptive legitimes (plus provisions of Arts. 50 and 52) apply only to liquidation
of the ACP and CGP under valid and voidable marriages and to void marriages under Art. 40 of the Family Code.
○ Since the marriage here was void due to psychological incapacity, this provision will apply and the property
relations here will be governed by the rules on co-ownership.
72. Read Go bangayan

Go-Bangayan v. Bangayan (SIR SAYS DAPAT 147 nag apply)
FACTS
● Sally files a case of bigamy against Benjamin

● Benjamin was already married to Azucena when he signed marriage contract with Sally
● Sally claims that in acquiring real property, Benjamin wrote he was married to her
RULING
● Marriage was void ab initio and non existent

○ Marriage was void due to lack of marriage license, civil registrar testified she never issued marriage license to
Benjamin and Sally
○ Marriage was non-existent because marriage contract was absolutely simulated from beginning
○ They both knew he was married when it was signed
○ Benjamin and Sally cohabited without the benefit of marriage so the properties acquired by them through their
actual joint contribution of money, property or industry shall be owned by them in common in proportion to their
respective contributions.
○ Lower courts were correct in excluding the 37 properties inherited by Benjamin from his late father
○ With regard to the other properties, the words “married to” preceding the name of a spouse are merely descriptive
of the civil status of the registered owner and do not prove co-ownership.
○ Thus, the titles shown by Sally (except 1) using those words are not proof of their actual contribution and thus
there can be no co-ownership over those properties
73. Olivia v. Acero
Olivia-De Mesa v. Acero
● Rules on constitution of family homes, for purposes of exemption from execution:

1. Family residences constructed before the effectivity of the Family Code or before August 3, 1988 must be
constituted as a family home either judicially or extrajudicially in accordance with the provisions of the Civil Code
in order to be exempt from execution;
2. Family residences constructed after the effectivity of the Family Code on August 3, 1988 are automatically deemed
to be family homes and thus exempt from execution from the time it was constituted and lasts as long as any of
its beneficiaries actually resides therein;
3. Family residences which were not judicially or extrajudicially constituted as a family home prior to the effectivity
of the Family Code, but were existing thereafter, are considered as family homes by operation of law and are
prospectively entitled to the benefits accorded to a family home under the Family Code
4. The settled rule is that the right to exemption or forced sale under Article 153 of the Family Code is a personal
privilege granted to the judgment debtor and as such, it must be claimed not by the sheriff, but by the debtor
himself before the sale of the property at public auction. It is not sufficient that the person claiming exemption
merely alleges that such property is a family home. This claim for exemption must be set up and proved to the
Sheriff.
74. Article 154 - 156 IMPORTANT SEE SHOFY TABLE on FAMILY HOME
75. Euglio v. Vero - nature of improvement should be voluntary (to be executed and prove that the value of the family home
is greater than what required by law)
76. MEMORIZE art. 164
ARTICLE 164. Children conceived or born during the marriage of the parents are legitimate. acd Children conceived as a result of
artificial insemination of the wife with the sperm
of the husband or that of a donor or both are likewise legitimate children of the husband and his wife, provided, that both of them
authorized or ratified such insemination in a written instrument executed and signed by them before the birth of the child. The
instrument shall be recorded in the civil registry together with the birth
certificate of the child. (255a, 258a
77. Conception v. CA
Concepcion v. Court of Appeals
● The status and filiation of a child cannot be compromised as per Art. 164 of the Family Code which states, “A child who is
conceived or born during the marriage of his parents is legitimate.
● It is fully supported by Art. 167 of the Family Code which states, “The child shall be considered legitimate although the
mother may have declared against its legitimacy or may have been sentenced as an adulteress.”. The law requires that every
reasonable presumption be made in favor of the legitimacy. It is grounded on the policy to protect the innocent offspring
from the odium of illegitimacy.
● It is, therefore, undeniable – established by the evidence in this case – that the appellant [Ma. Theresa] was married
to Mario Gopiao, and that she had never entered into a lawful marriage with the appellee [Gerardo] since
the so-called "marriage" with the latter was void ab initio. It was [Gerardo] himself who had established
these facts. In other words, [Ma. Theresa] was legitimately married to Mario Gopiao when the child Jose
Gerardo was born on December 8, 1990. Therefore, the child Jose Gerardo – under the law – is the
legitimate child of the legal and subsisting marriage between [Ma. Theresa] and Mario Gopiao; he cannot
be deemed to be the illegitimate child of the void and non-existent ‘marriage’ between [Ma. Theresa] and
[Gerardo], but is said by the law to be the child of the legitimate and existing marriage between [Ma. Theresa] and Mario
Gopiao (Art. 164, Family Code).
● Gerardo invokes Article 166 (1)(b) of the Family Code. He cannot. He has no standing in law to dispute the status of Jose
Gerardo. Only Ma. Theresa’s husband Mario or, in a proper case, his heirs, who can contest the legitimacy of the child Jose
Gerardo born to his wife. Impugning the legitimacy of a child is a strictly personal right of the husband or, in
exceptional cases, his heirs. Since the marriage of Gerardo and Ma. Theresa was void from the very beginning, he
never became her husband and thus never acquired any right to impugn the legitimacy of her child.
● Having only his best interests in mind, we uphold the presumption of his legitimacy.
In case of annulment or declaration of absolute nullity of marriage, Article 49 of the Family Code grants visitation rights to a parent
who is deprived of custody of his children. Such visitation rights flow from the natural right of both parent and child to each other’s
company. There being no such parent-child relationship between them, Gerardo has no legally demandable right to visit Jose
Gerardo.
78. DNA can be accepted

Cabatania v. Court of Appeals
● The fact that Florencia’s husband is living and there is a valid subsisting marriage between them gives rise to the
presumption that a child born within that marriage is legitimate even though the mother may have declared against its
legitimacy or may have been sentenced as an adulteress. 11 The presumption of legitimacy does not only flow out of a
declaration in the statute but is based on the broad principles of natural justice and the supposed virtue of the mother. The
presumption is grounded on the policy to protect innocent offspring from the odium of illegitimacy.
● In this age of genetic profiling and deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) analysis, the extremely subjective test of physical
resemblance or similarity of features will not suffice as evidence to prove paternity and filiation before the courts of law.
79. Mother cannot declare against legitimacy of child
80. Dela cruz v. Civ reg
1. Where the private handwritten instrument is the lone piece of evidence submitted to prove
filiation, there should be strict compliance with the requirement that the same must be signed by
the acknowledging parent; and
2. Where the private handwritten instrument is accompanied by other relevant and competent
evidence, it suffices that the claim of filiation therein be shown to have been made and
handwritten by the acknowledging parent as it is merely corroborative of such other evidence.
81. Grande v. Antonio

Grande v. Antonio

○ The sole issue at hand is the right of a father to compel the use of his surname by his illegitimate children upon
his recognition of their filiation
○ The general rule is that an illegitimate child shall use the surname of his or her mother. The exception provided
by RA 9255 is, in case his or her filiation is expressly recognized by the father through the record of birth appearing
in the civil register or when an admission in a public document or private handwritten instrument is made by the
father. In such a situation, the illegitimate child may use the surname of the father.
○ Art. 176 gives illegitimate children the right to decide if they want to use the surname of their father or not. It is
not the father (herein respondent) or the mother (herein petitioner) who is granted by law the right to dictate the
surname of their illegitimate children.
○ On its face, Art. 176, as amended, is free from ambiguity. And where there is no ambiguity, one
must abide by its words. The use of the word "may" in the provision readily shows that an
acknowledged illegitimate child is under no compulsion to use the surname of his illegitimate
father. The word "may" is permissive and operates to confer discretion upon the illegitimate
children.
○ Parental authority over minor children is lodged by Art. 176 of the Family Code on the mother. Since parental
authority is given to the mother, then custody over minor children shall also be given to her, unless she is shown
to be unfit.
○ Thus, father’s prayer here that he be given sole parental authority over the minor will not be given
82. Maternal preference rule (See shofy notes)
83. St mary and amadora case (see shofy notes ON LIABILITY OF THOSE having special parental authority )
84. Memorize article 221
85. Memorize aricle 236
86. Libi v. IAC
Libi v. Intermediate Appellate Court
● Petitioner Amelita Yap Libi, mother of Wendell, testified that her husband, Cresencio Libi, owns a gun which he kept in a
safety deposit box inside a drawer in their bedroom. Each of these petitioners holds a key to the safety deposit box and
Amelita’s key is always in her bag, all of which facts were known to Wendell. They have never seen their son Wendell taking
or using the gun. She admitted, however, that on that fateful night the gun was no longer in the safety deposit box. We,
accordingly, cannot but entertain serious doubts that petitioner spouses had really been exercising the
diligence of a good father of a family by safely locking the fatal gun away. Wendell could not have gotten
hold thereof unless one of the keys to the safety deposit box was negligently left lying around or he had free
access to the bag of his mother where the other key was.
● The diligence of a good father of a family required by law in a parent and child relationship consists, to a large extent, of the
instruction and supervision of the child. Petitioners were gravely remiss in their duties as parents in not
diligently supervising the activities of their son, despite his minority and immaturity, so much so that it
was only at the time of Wendell’s death that they allegedly discovered that he was a CANU agent and that
Cresencio’s gun was missing from the safety deposit box. Both parents were sadly wanting in their duty and
responsibility in monitoring and knowing the activities of their children who, for all they know, may be engaged in dangerous
work such as being drug informers, 17 or even drug users. Neither was a plausible explanation given for the photograph of
Wendell, with a handwritten dedication to Julie Ann at the back thereof, 18 holding upright what clearly appears as a
revolver and on how or why he was in possession of that firearm
● We believe that the civil liability of parents for quasi-delicts of their minor children, as contemplated in
Article 2180 of the Civil Code, is primary and not subsidiary.
● Under the foregoing considerations, therefore, we hereby rule that the parents are and should be held primarily
liable for the civil liability arising from criminal offenses committed by their minor children under their
legal authority or control, or who live in their company, unless it is proven that the former acted with the
diligence of a good father of a family to prevent such damages.
● Notes:
○ Parents principally/primarily liable due to negligence
○ Safety box not locked properly
○ Lack of diligence of good father of a family
87. Aggabao case

AGGABAO PARULAN CASE
● Purchaser in good faith must be protected if he bough conjugal property (application of the MIRROR doctrine)
○ Has the right to rely on what is in the face of the title
● BUT for conjugal property inquiry must be made on:
1. Title of the Land
2. SPA of the selling spouse
● Absent such consent of other spouse, the SALE IS VOID AND CANNOT BE RATIFIED.
● If there is diasgreement, then contract is annullable within 5 years.
88. 147 & 148

147 148
• void marriages under Articles 36 (Gonzales v. • 1. a man and a woman living together as husband and
Gonzales, G.R. No. 159521, December 16, 2005, 478 wife, without benefit of marriage, but are not
SCRA 327), capacitated to marry
• 44 (both spouses acted in bad faith - re-appearance) • 2. an adulterous relationship even if it occurred prior to
the effectivity of the Family Code
• 53 (fail to do liquidation, distribution, register)
• 3. a bigamous or polygamous marriage;
o No need to wait for liquidation, partition,
• 4. incestuous void marriages under Article 37; and
and distribution before nullity decree is
• 5. void marriages by reason of public policy under Article
issued except Art. 40 38.
• absence of consent,
• authority of the solemnizing officer,
• a valid marriage license,
• a marriage ceremony
1) Salaries and wages shall be owned by them in equal shares; 1) The salaries and wages are separately owned by the parties and if
any of the spouses is married, his or her salary is the property of the
2) Property acquired by either of the parties exclusively by his conjugal partnership of gains of such legitimate marriage;
or her own fund belongs to such party provided that there is
2) Property solely acquired by funds of any of the parties belongs to
proof that he or she acquired it by exclusive funds
such party;
3) Property acquired by both of them through their work or 3) Only the properties acquired by both of the parties through their
industry shall be governed by the rules on co-ownership. actual joint contribution of money, property, or industry shall be
Consequently, either spouse may alienate in favor of the other owned by them in common in proportion to their respective
his or her share in the property; contributions;
4) Property acquired while they live together shall be 4) The respective shares of the parties over properties owned in
presumed to have been obtained by their joint efforts, work or common are presumed to be equal. However, proofs may be shown
to show that their contribution and respective shares are not equal.
industry and shall be owned by them in equal shares. A party
Without proof of actual contribution by both parties, there can be
who did not participate in the acquisition by the other party of
no presumption of co-ownership and equal sharing
any property shall be deemed to have contributed jointly in 5) The rule and presumption mentioned above shall apply to joint
the acquisition thereof if the former’s efforts consisted in the deposits of money and evidences of credit; and
care and maintenance of the family and of the household;
6) If one of the parties is validly married to another, his or her share
5) The fruits of the couple’s separate property are not included in the co-ownership shall accrue to the absolute community or
in the co-ownership (Valdes v. RTC, 72 SCAD 967, 260 SCRA conjugal partnership existing in such valid marriage. If the party who
221); acted in bad faith is not validly married to another, his or her share
shall be forfeited in the manner provided in the last paragraph of
Article 147.
6) Property acquired by any of the parties after separation
shall be exclusively owned by the party who acquired it;
7) Neither party can encumber or dispose by acts inter vivos of

his or her share in the property acquired during cohabitation
and owned in common, without the consent of the other, until
after the termination of their cohabitation. However, either
spouse may alienate in favor of the other his or her share in the
property co-owned. But no one can donate or waive any
interest in the co-ownership that would constitute an indirect
or direct grant of gratuitous advantage to the other which is
void pursuant to Article 87;
8) When only one of the parties to a void marriage is in good

faith, the share of the party in bad faith in the co-ownership
shall be forfeited in favor of their common children. In case of
default of or waiver by any or all of the common children
or their descendants, each vacant share shall belong to the

respective surviving descendants. In the absence of
descendants, such share shall belong to the innocent party.

LMT Hernando Shofy

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

LMT Hernando Shofy

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Shofy Hernando Last Minute Tips Midterms

1. Publication is indispensable (tanada v. Tuvera)

Article 14. Obligatory Force of Penal Laws

Obligatory force of penal laws

Article 15. Nationality Rule

Article 16. Law Governing Real Properties

Law governing real properties

● For real property = law of situs

Article 17. Extrinsic Validity

● Forms and solemnities of contracts = law of the place where it is executed

Acts before Diplomatic and Consular Officials

8. Del Socorro v. Van Wilsem (parens patriae)

10. Prejudicial Questions

11. Not Prejudicial questions:

12. Unjust Enrichment

Its requisites are:

• GR: Extinction of Criminal not extinguish Civil (death or acquittal)

18. Juridical Persons

No marriage shall be valid, unless these essential requisites are present:

The formal requisites of marriage are:

(1) Authority of the solemnizing officer;

21. Republic v. Orbecido

22. Vandorn v. Romillo

Special Notes on Proving Foreign Laws by SHofy

This Section requires proof, either by (1) official publications or (2)

● BUT for the foreign judgment to be enforceable in the Philippines, it must be

system of jurisprudence likely to secure an impartial administration of

23. Garcia v. Recio

24. Medina v. Kioke

25. Divorce by consent, would it be valid in the Philippines?

30. What is articulo mortis?

Reappearance of the Missing spouse Recording of Reappearance of Missing Spouse

2) The absolute community of property or the conjugal partnership,

3) Donations by reason of marriage shall remain valid,

4&5) IF BAD FAITH - may revoke designation in any insurance

• REVIEW of declaration under Article 41 is via Certiorari since it is summary in nature

33. Antonio v. Reyes

Audley v. Audley ● the issue presented was whether

In Re Simms Estate ● where the New York Court of

1) Non-disclosure of a previous conviction by final judgment of the other party of a crime

3) Concealment of sexually transmissible disease, regardless of its nature, existing at the

4) Concealment of drug addiction, habitual alcoholism, or homosexuality or lesbianism

No other misrepresentation or deceit as to character, health, rank, fortune or chastity shall

EXCLUSIVITY OF GROUNDS FOR ANNULMENT.

43. OSG participation

● Art. 51 of the Family Code

46. RECORDING IN THE CIVIL REGISTRY AND REGISTRY OF PROPERTY.

Article 52. Recording of Judgement

47. Memorize grounds for denial of Legal separation

50. Prescriptive period is 5 years from time of occurrence

Article 64. Donations and Beneficiary in Insurance

53. Objection to Profession

Article 73. Legitimate Profession

In case of disagreement, the court shall decide whether or not:

1) The objection is proper, and

SEPARATE PROPERTY LIABILITY

54. Marriage settlement

Pana v. Heirs of Juanite

● Art. 76 of the Family Code

60. Foreigners can own condo units

Article 91. Property Consisting

of the marriage or acquired thereafter. (197a)

Article 92. Excluded from Community Property

The following shall be excluded from the community property: