SAINT LOUIS UNIVERSITY A Bonifacio Street 2600 Baguio City, Philippines Tel Nos (46374) 442.3043 + 443.2001 + 444.8246 to 48 Fax (96374) 442.2842 wo. stu.edu.ph An wsatons ef ihe? Laring ASAD ant Anam Cale Coluges and Unverties STAC School of Law [REF [ SOL-JD-LAW 411-2022 I SYLLABUS IN LAW 411- CIVIL LAW REVIEW 1 (PFR and SUCCESSION) Department ‘CIVIL AND LABOR LAWS ‘Course Name/Title CIVIL LAW REVIEW I (PFR and Succession) ‘Course Number Law 411 ‘Semester Offered FIRST Year Level Offered FOURTH ‘Credit Units 2 Pre-requisites (ifany) Persons. and _Famiy Relations, Property, Succession, Obligations & Contracts, Sales, Credit Transactions, Torts & Damages, Agency, Trust & Partnership, Conflict of Laws, Public intemational Law This course Isapre- Civil Law Review requisite to ‘Course Description This course is a comprehensive integration of the principles of ‘civillow governing the effects and application of laws, the law ‘on human relations, persons and famly relations ond Succession. Pertinent provisions of special laws are also Teviewed. (per LEB Memo Orcer No. }) Prepared By Judge Liybeth Sindayen-Libiran, Ally. Maria Lulu G. Reyes and Judge Morietta Brawner-Cuating Updated By ‘Aity. Jennifer N, Asuncion, 11 August 2022 Learning Outcomes By the end of the course, the low student is expected: ‘A. To gain sound understanding of the legol provisions, general principles and concepts, doctrines and jurisprudence related to affects and application of laws, the law on human relations, personal and family law, and succession; 8. To build proficiency and mastery in the application and interpretation of the law to theoretical and actual judicial cases: C. Todevelop an analytical ability and critical skilin examining established, evolving. ‘emerging ond contlicting doctrines in civil law based on dacisions of the Supreme Court and the socio-cultural context in which these laws and legal doctrines operate: and, D. Toestabiish confidence in the subject matter as adequate preparation for the bar exominations. Scanned with CamScannerCourse Requirements ond Grading Plan To pass the course. the student must pass the following requirements os o minimum: 1. Satisfactory performance in all quizzes and examinations: ond, 2. Satistactory performance in class recitations. Student performance shall be evaluated based on: 1. Class Standing (wtitten quizzes and recitation) =50% 2. Departmental Examination (Midterm and Final) = 50% 3. Final Grade would be the average of the Midlerm Grade and the Tentative Final Grade. Course Outline (Based on the 2023 Bar Examinations Syllabus released last August 8, 2022) _ BOOK 1 - PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIO! PERSONS; |. EFFECT AND APPLICATION OF LAWS ‘A. When law lakes effect Doctrine ‘11, 2, NCC, as amended by E.O No. 200, 18 June 1987 ‘Computation of date of effectivity - general rule & exceptions ‘Computation of time - Section 1, Rule 22, Rules of Court Cases: Taftada v. Tuvera, G.R. No. L-63915, 24 Apri 1985 (En Banc). Tafiada v. Tuvera. G.R. No. L-63915, 29 December 1786 (En Banc). © Basa v. Mercado. G.R. No, L-42226, 26 July 1935. (newspaper of general circulation) © Notional Electrification Administration v. Gonzaga, G.R. No. 158761, 4 December 2007. (Administrative Rules) © Phisa International Placement and Services Corp. v. Secretary of Labor and Employment G.R, No, 103144, 4 Apt! 2001. (Administrative Rules} ‘©. Fortuna v. Republic of the Philippines, GR. No. 173423. 5 March 2014 {Hoke effect upon promulgation} © Nagkakaisang Maralita ng Sitio Masigasig, Inc. v. Miltary Shrine Services - Philippine Veterans A\faits Office. Department of National Defense, G. R. No. 187587. § June 2013. (handwritten note not published) © Cojvance Jt. v. Republic, G.R, No. 180705, 27 November 2012. {Incorporation by reference, annex not published) © Municipality of Tupi v. Tamayo, GR, No. 231896, 20 August 2019 [En Bone]. (Ordinance) © Gorcilano v. House of Representatives Committees, G.R. No. 170338. 23 December 2008. (Senate Rules of Procedure) © Commissioner of Inlemal Revenue v. Primelown Properly Group. Inc... GR, No. 162158, 28 August 2007. (NCC v. Administrative Code: Lex posteriori derogat prior) © People v. Del Rosario, |-7234, 21 May 1955. (Prescription of Crimes in the RPC) I IGNORANTIA LEGIS NON EXCUSAT (Presumption of Knowledge of the Law) 2 Scanned with CamScannerWhen applied; exceptions Ignorance of law v. Ignorance of fact Cases: D.M. Consunji Inc. v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 137873. 20 April 2001. (applies only to mandatory and prohibitory laws) 0 Yao Kee v. Sy Gonzales, 167 $736 © Board of Commissioners v. Dela Rosa, 197 $ 853 Ill, PROSPECTIVITY AND RETROACTIVITY OF LAWS, Art. 4 NCC; Lex prospicit, non respicit + Concept of retroactive law and general rule © Tan. Crisologo. G.R. No. 193993, 8 November 2017. Rationale Exceptions Retroactive application of the Family Code, Art. 256, FC Coses: © Aruego, Jt. v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 112193, 13 March 1996. (vested or acquired rights) © Bemabe v. Alejo, G.R. No. 140500, 21 January 2002. (tight to seek recognition by illegitimate minors under the civil code) © Montofez v. Cipriono. GR, No. 181089, 22 October 2012 (retroactivity or Att, 40; final judgment requirement of subsequent marriage) © Casillo v. De Leon Costilo, G.R. No. 189607, 18 April 2016. (FC not made retroactive due to vested tights} © Sumiran v. Damaso. G.R. No.162518. 19 August 2009. (Procedural rules may be given retroactive effect to pending actions) © Inmates of the New ibid Prison, Muntiniupa City v. De Lima. GR. No, 212719/G.R. No. 214637, 25 June 2019 [En Banc]. (Retroactive application of penal lows favorable to the accused) © Philippine Intemational Trading Corporation v. Commission on Audit, GR. No. 205837, 21 November 2017. [Prospective application of judicial decisions) IV, MANDATORY AND PROHIBITORY LAWS, ART, 5, NCC * Concept of Mandatory, Prohibitory and Directory Laws * Effect of violation of mandatory/prohibitory laws * Exceptions + Cases ‘0 Home Bankers Savings & Trust Co v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 128354, 26 April 2005. (Mandatory/Prohibitery v. Directory) WAIVER OF RIGHTS, ART. 6, NCC + Concept of rights, waiver and requisites for validity of waiver = Cases: ‘9 Guy v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 183707, 15 September 2006. (clear and unequivocal terms) © FF, Cruz & Co. Inc. v. HR Construction Corp., G.R. No. 187521, 14 Morch 2012. © People v, Morial, G.R. No. 129295, 15 August 2001. © Mabugay-Otamias v. Republic, G.R. No. 189516, 8 June 2016, Vi, HOW LAWS LOSE THEIR EFFECTIVITY, ART7, NCC + Lopse of a Law Scanned with CamScanner+ Declaration of Unconstitutionality + Att Vill, Section 4(2), 1987 Constitution i. Supremacy of the Constitution i, Effect of declaration of unconstitutionality ik Cos jortolome v. Social Security System, G.R. No, 192531, 12 November 2014. © Grande v, Antonio, G.R. No. 206248, 18 February 2014 (En Bone}, (contemporaneous construction, rules of procedure) © Fim Development Council of the Philippines v. Colon Heritage Realty Corporation, GR, No. 203754, 15 October 2019. [operative tact) + Repeal 1 Express and implied repeal iL Cases: © CIRy,Primetown, GR. No, 162155, 28 Augus! 2007, (repeated case) © Magkalas v. National Housing Authority, G.R, No, 198823, 17 September 2008. i, Effect of Repeal of Repeating Law on Law First Repealed © Garcia v. Sandiganbayon, G.R. No. 165835, 22 June 2005. VI, JUDICIAL APPLICATION AND INTERPRETATION OF LAWS. + Jurisprudence, Art, 8, NCC 1 Stare decisis jnon quieta movere) i Coses: © Pesca. Pesca. GR. No. 136921, 17 Apri 2001, © Negros Navigation Co., Inc, v. ‘Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 110398, 7 November 1997. © Umaliv. The Judicial and Bar Council, G.R, No, 228628, 25 July 2017, Law of the Case © Fulgencio ¥. National Labor Relations Commission, G.R. No. 141600, 12 September 2003. iv. Obiter Dictum © Ayala Corporation v. Rosa-Diana Really and Development Corporation, G.R. No. 134284, 1 December 2000. © Dee v. Harvest All Investment Limited, G.R. No. 224834, 15 March 2017. v. Ratio Decidendi ‘+ Duty of the Courts to Decide, Art. 9, NCC. i Duratex sed tex © People v. Veneracion, G.R, No. 119987, 12 October 1995 (En Banc}. (Judge's religious convictions) i, Effect of Silence, Obscurity or insufficiency of Laws ‘© Chu Jun v. Bernas, G.R. No, L-10010, 1 August 1916 (En Banc) ii, Judical Aids Customs, Art. 9, 11-12, NCC Concept and Requisites Custom Propter Legem v. Custom Contra Legem © Inthe Matter of the Petition for Authorily to Continue the Use of the Firm Name Ozaeta, Romulo, atc... 30 July 1979. © Yookee v. Sy Gonzales, G.R. No, |-55960, 24 November 1988. © Anabon v. Anaban-Alfiler, G.R. No. 24901 1, 15 March 2021, 4 Scanned with CamScanner+ Equity in the Application of Law, Art. 10, NCC. + Legislative intent: Interpret not by the teller that killeth but by the spirit that giveth lite © Ursua v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 112170, 10 April 1996. © Barceliano v. Banas, G.R. No. 165287, 14 September 2011. © Alonzo v. Intermediate Appellate Court, G.R. No. 72873, 28 May 1987 (En Banc}. VIL APPLICATION OF LAWS/ CONFLICT OF LAW RULES a. Application of Penal Laws, and Laws on Public Secutly and Safety, Art.14, NCC Ariicle 2, Revised Penal Code 1 Principle/Theory of Tertiforiality, Generafity, and Extraterttoriality Article J, 1987 Constitution © Asaali_v. Commissioner of Customs, G.R. No. 124170, December 16, 1968 [En Bonc) b. Application of Laws on Family Rights and Dulles, Status, Condition, and Legal Capacity of Persons, Art.15, NCC i” Concept of family rights ond duties, status, condition, legal capacity 5, Principle/theory of Nationaiity/citzenship, ‘ond Domiciliary Hertitoriality © Uorente v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 124371, 23 November 2000, fi, AMZ, par. 3, NCC © Del Socorro v. Brinkman Van Wisem, G.R. No. 193707. 10 December 2014, ¢. Law on Property Art, 16, NCC 1 Principle/Theory of Lex Rel Stae/ Lex Situs i. Exception: incidents of succession Mm Cases: © Miciano v. Brimo, G.R. No. L-22595, 1 November 1927 (En Banc) Renvol © Amer v. Garcia, G.R. No, L-16749, 31 January 1963 (En Bone). d. Forms, Solemnities of Contracts, and Wils Art. 17, par. | and 2, NCC 1 Extinsle validity and Principle Theory of Lex loci celebrationis. 1, Inkrinsie validity and applicable principles © Philippine Exporl and Foreign Loan Guarantee Corporation v. V.P. Eusebio Construction, Inc.. G.R. No. 140047, 13 July 2004, © Industrial Personnel & Management Services, Inc. (IPAMS) v. De Vera, G.R. No. 205703, 7 March 2016. . Proof of Foreign Law and Foreign Judgment i. Proof: Section 19, 23, and 24 of Ruie 132 of the Rules of Court © Nedlloyd Linen B.V. Ralterdam v. Glow Laks Enterprises. Ltd. G.R. No, 156330, 19 November 2014. © Mercantile Insurance Co. Inc. v. Yi, G.R. No. 234501. 18 March 2019. i, Processual_Presumption/ Presumption of | identity or similarity /Presumed-identity approach © Yao Kee v. Sy Gonzales, G.R. No. |-55960, 24 November 1968. HUMAN RELATIONS (AR7.19-38, NCC) CONCEPT OF HUMAN RELATIONS, RIGHTS, AND OBLIGATIONS 1. PRINCIPLE OF ABUSE OF RIGHTS, ART. 1, NCC Scanned with CamScanner@. Elements and Concept of Actionable Wrong, Damage and Injury b. Cases: © Globe Mackay Coble and Radio Corporation v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 81262, 25 August 1989. © GF Equity. nc. v. Volenzona, G.R. No. 156841, 30 June 2005. ©. Philippine Commercial Intemational Bank v. Gomez, G.R. No. 199601, 23 November 2015. © Aidiente v. Pastorfide, G.R. No. 161921. 17 July 2013. © University of the East v. Jader, G.R. No. 132344, 17 February 2000. © Gov, Cordero, GR. No. 164703, 4 May 2010. © Villanueva v. Rosqueta. G.R. No. 180764, 19 January 2010. © Melroheights Subdivision Homeowners Association Inc. v. CMS Construction and Development Corp...G.R. No, 209359, 17 October 2018, Damnum absque Injuria © Custodio v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 116100, 9 February 1996, © Equitable Banking Corporation v, Calderon, G.R. No. 156168, 14 December 2004, © Heirs of Nola v, Cabansag, G.R. No. 161188, 13 June 2008. © Carbonell v. Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company, G.R. No, 178467, 26 April 2017. . Volenti non fit injuria Hotel Nikko v. Reyes, G.R. No. 154259, 28 February 2005. 2, Uabilily Ex-Maleficlo or Ex-Delicto, Art. 20, NCC Arl. 100 of the Revised Penal Code Manuel y. People of the Philippines, G.R, No. 165842, 29 November 2005. 3. Acts contra bonus mores, Art. 21, NCC Pe v. Pe, G.R. No. L-17396, 30 May1962. Breach of promise to many Natividad v. Tunac, G.R. No, 143130, 10 July 2000. Hermosisima v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-14628, 30 September 1960 (En Banc). Goshem Shookat Baksh v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 97336. 19 February 1993 Wassmer v. Velez, G.R. No. L-20089, 26 December 1964. 4. Unjust Enrichment, Arts. 22-23, NCC Concept of Unjust Enrichment, Accion In rem verso, and Solutio Indebiti © Car Cool Philippines, Inc. v. USHIO Really and Development Corporation, G.R. No. 138088, 23 January 2006. Elegir v. Philippine Airlines, Inc., G.R. No. 181995, 16 July 2012. Beumer v. Amores, G.R. No. 195670, 3 December 2012. Hulst v. PR Builders, Inc.,.G.R. No. 156364, 3 September 2007. Gonzalo v. Tanate, Jr., G.R. No. 160600, 15 January 2014. Velayo v. Shell Company of the Philippine Islands, Lid.. G.R. No. 31 October 1956 (En Banc}. 5, Art, 24, NCC; Parens Pairlae Doctrine © Tanv.Mandop, G.R. No. 150925, 27 May 2004. 6 Scanned with CamScanner4. Thoughiless Exavagance, Art. 25, NCC Requisites for fling action to enjoin 7. Att, 26, NCC; Right to Privacy © Concepcion v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 120708, 31 January 2000. 2 Padalhin v. Lavifia, G.R. No. 183026, 14 November 2012. 8. Retusal or neglect of public servant to perform duties, Art. 27, NCC a. Requisites for liability . Difference between non-feasance. misleasance, malfeasance © Ledesma v, Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-54598, 15 April 1988. 9%. Unfair competition, Art. 28, NCC 9 Willaware Products Corporation v. Jesichris Manulacturing Corporation, GAR. No, 195549, 3 September 2014. 10. Action for damages based on crime/delict, Arts. 20, 29, 30, 35, NCC Art. 100. Revised Penal CodeSections 1 and 2 of Rule 133 of the Rules of Court: Proo! of guilt beyond reasonable doubt v. Preponderance of evidence @. Sections 1, 2, 3, 4 of Rule 111 of the Rules of Court: Insiltution of civil action, Separate civil action, Necessity of reservation, Suspension, Effect of Acquittal 9 Daiuraya v. Oliva, G.R. No. 210148, 8 December 2014. ©. Eslate of Poblador, Jr. v. Manzano, G.R. No. 192391, 19 June 2017. 2 Calang v. People, G.R. No. 190696. 3 August 2010. b. Effect of Death, Art. 89, Revised Penal Code © People v. Bayotas, G.R. No. 102007, 2 September 1994 (En Banc}. © People v, Santiago. G.R. No. 228819, 24 July 2019. 11. Independent Civil Lobitities @. Civil Action Based on Other Sources of Obligations, Art. 31, NCC © Cancio, Jr v. sip, G.R. No. 133978, 12 November 2002, 2 Heirs of Guaring v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No, 108395, 7 March 1997, 'b. Civil Action in Defamation, Fraud, Physical Injuries, Art. 33, NCC © Ruiz v, Ucol, G.R. No, L-45404, 7 Augus! 1987 (En Banc). ¢. CWvil Action for Violation of Constitutional Rights, Art. 32, NCC. ‘© Cojuangco v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 119398, 2 July 1999. © Manila Electric Company v. Casillo, G.R, No. 182976, 14 January 2013. . Civil Acilon against City or Municipal Police Who Refuses or Falls to Render Aid or Protection, Art. 34, NCC @. Quasl-delict/Torts, Art. 2176-2177 © Borredo v. Garcia, G.R. No. 48006, 8 July 1942 (En Banc). © Safeguard Security Agency. Inc. v. Tangco, G.R. NO. 165732, 14 December 2006. 12, Prejudicial Question, Art. 36, NCC Section 6 and 7 of Rule 111 of the Rules of Court: Concept, Elements, Effect Revised Guidelines for Continuous Trial of Criminal Cases on prohibited motions, metitorlous motions, archiving of cases Beltran v. People, G.R. No. 137567. 20 June 2000. Merced v. Diez, G.R. No. L-15315, 26 August 1960 (En Banc}. Donato v. Luna, G.R. No. L-53642, 15 April 1988 (En Banc). CConsing, Jr. v. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 161075, 15 July 2013. Pimentel v Pimentel, G.R. No. 172060, 13 September 2010. Scanned with CamScanner© Domingo v. Singson, G.R. No. 203287, 5 April 2017. © Alsons Development and Investment Corp. v. Heirs of Confesor, G.R. No. 215671. 19 September 2018. Penson AND Civit Pexsonatity (Ants. 37-47, NCC) 1. Concept and classes of Persons. Civil Personally. Juridical Capacity and Capacity to Act, Art. 37, NCC. 2. Natural Persons ©. Birth, Art. 41, NCC © Geluzv, Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-16439, 20 July 1961. bb. Presumptive Civil Personality, Art. 40. NCC ©. Quimiguing v Icao, G.R, No. 26795, 31 July 1970 (En Bone). . Restrictions or Modification on capacity to act, Art. 38-39, NCC 2 Cotalan v. Basa, GR. No. 159567, 31 July 2007. 2 Domingo v. Court of Appeals. G.R. No. 127540. 17 October 2001. 2 Mendezona v. Ozomiz. G.R, No. 143370, é February 2002. 4. Absence Concept, Art. 381. NCC Stages of Absence Provisional absence, Art, 381-383, NCC Declored absence, Art. 384-396, NCC Period. who may file. Effectivity date, Administrator, Termination of administration, Coniingent rights of absentee Presumptive death, At,390-392, Civ Code © Tadeo-Malias v. Republic. G.R. No, 230751, 25 April 2018. €. Death, Art, 42, NCC © Continental Stee! Manufacturing Corporation v. Montaio, G.R. No. 182836, 13 October 2009. 1. Survivorship, Art 43, NCC Section 5, par. jl and kk of Rule 131 of the Rules of Court ‘2 _ Joaquin v. Navarro, G.R. No. L-5426, 19 May 1953. 3. Juridical Persons, Art, 44-48, NCC 4, Domicite (Anrs. 50 AND 51, NCC) 1. Concept of Domicile and Residence 2. Kinds of Domicile and Requisites for Change of Domicile © Marcos v, COMELEC, G.R. No, 119974, 18 September 1995 {En Banc). ‘Manace 1. Definition and Nature, Ar. 1, FC: Article XV, 1987 Constitution Presumption In favor of existence and validity of mariage © Falcis, Il v. Civil Registrar General, GR, No. 217910, 3 September 2019. © Anchela v. Ancheta, G.R. No. 145370, 4 March 2004. © Abadilla v. Tabilican, Adm. Matter No, MTJ-92-716, 25 October 1995 (En Bane). © Mor v. Tar, G.R. No. 214529, 12 July 2017. © Venzon v. Peleo ill, A.C. No. 9354, 20 August 2019 [En Banc}. 2. Requisiies Essential and Formal requisites, Art. 2 & 3, FC Eflect of Absence of an Essential or Formal Requisite, Art. 4, 35 & 45, FC Effect of Delect/Iregularity of Essential or Formal Requisite, Art. 4, FC Three-Fold Liability At, 350, Revised Penal Code Scanned with CamScannerG SSSONIG. AM. 2. Arts. 1, 5, 35 par. 1, 26 par. 1, 37-38, FC i Legal capacity, Arts. 1, 2 par. .1 5, 35 par. 1, 26 par. 1, 37-38, FC Art, 350-351, Revised Penal Code © Silverio v, Republic. G.R. No. 174689. 22 October 2007. 0 Republic v, Cagandchan, G.R. No. 166676, 12 September 2008. i, Consent, Art. 2 par. 2, 6, FC 0 Republic v, Albios, G.R. No. 198780, 16 October 2013. b, Formal, Art. 3, FC i Authority of Solemnizing Officer, Arts. 3 por. 1, 7, 8, 10, 31, 32, 35 par. 2, FC Sec. 444, RA 7160 0 Navarro v. Domagtoy. A.M. No. MTJ-96-1088. 19 July 1976, © Keuppers v. Murcia, A.M, No. MTJ-15-1860, 3 April 2018, i, Marriage Ucense, Arts. 3 par. 2, 9, 11-21, 24-25, FC Purpose, Requirements, Parental Consent, Parental Advice, Duty of Local Civil Registrar, Suspension of issuance, Validity perlod © Alcantara v. Alcantara, G.R. No. 167746, 28 August 2007. Republic v. Cour! of Appeals. G.R. No, 103047, 2 September 1994, Corifio v, Carifio, G.R. No. 132529, 2 February 2001. Sy v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 127263, 12 April 2000. Sevilla v. Cardenas, G.R. No. 167684, 31 July 2006. ‘Abbas v. Abbas, G.R. No. 183896, 30 January 2013. © Go-Bangayan v. Bangayan, Jr, G.R. No. 201061, 3 July 2013. Marriages exempt from mariage license requirement, Arts. 27-24, fc Marriage in articulo mortis * Martiage in remote place * Martiage among Muslims or members of ethnic cultural communities * Convalidation of cohabitation o Republic v. Dayol, G.R. No. 175581, 28 March 2008. © Nifial v, Bayadog, G.R. No. 133778, 14 March 2000, © DiazSalgado v. Salgado, G.R. No, 204494, 27 July 2016. ii, Marrlage Ceremony, Arts. 3 par. 3, 6, 8 FC ‘0 Morigo v. People. G.R. No. 145226, 6 February 2004. 3. Marriage Certificate, Arts. 6, 22-23, FC 4, Proof of existence and validity of mariage @. Marriages celebrated in the Philippines © Dela Rosa v. Heirs of Rustia vda. De Damian, G.R. No. 155733. 27 January 2006. © Balogbog v. Court of Appeals. G.R. No. 83598, 7 March 1997. © Colimag v. Heirs of Macapaz. G.R. No. 191936, | June 2016 b, Marriages celebrated outside the Philippines, Art. 26, par. 1, Art. 35, pars. 1, 4,5, 6, Arts. 36-38, FC, Arts, 15 and 17, par. 3 of the Civil Code 5. Remedies a. Mixed Marriages and Foreign Divorce, Art. 26 par. 3, FC 1 Arts, 1S. and 17, par. 3 of the Civil Code © Van Dom v. Romillo, G.R. No. |-68470, 8 October 1985. i, Who can file and obtain © Republic v, lyoy, GR, No, 152577, 21 September 2005, 9 Scanned with CamScanneria. w e000 Effects Republic v, Orbecida Il, G.R, No, 154380, § October 2005 Lavadia v. Heirs of Luna, G.8.No, 171914. 23 July 2014, Republic v, Manolo, G.R. No. 221029, 24 April 2018. Golopon v. Republic, G.R. No. 243722, 22 January 2020, San Luis v. San Luis. G.R. No. 133743, 6 February 2007. Action for recognition and proof ° 000000 ° Corpuz v. Sto. Tomas. G.R. No. 186571, 11 August 2010. Garcia-Recio v. Recio, G.R. No. 138322, 2 October 2001. Medina v, Michiyuki Koike, G.R. No. 215723, 27 July 2016. Republic v. Cote, G.R. No. 212860, 14 March 2018. ‘Asreza v. Toyo, G.R. No. 213198, 1 July 2019. Juego-Sakai v. Republic, G.R. No. 224015, 23 July 2018. Nullada v. Civil Registrar of Manila, G.R. No. 224548, 23 January 2019. In Re: Petition for Judicial Recognition of Divorce Between Minuro Takahashi and Juliet Rendora Morafo, G.R. No. 227605, 5 December 2019. b. Declaration of Nullity of Mariage © Santos v. Santos, G.R. No. 214593, 17 July 2019. Concept of void mariage Difference between void and voidable mariages, ond between declaration of nulty, annulment, legal separation and absolute divorce Grounds: 1) Parties below 18 years of age, Art. 35 par. 1, 5 and 26, por. 1. Fo 2) Solemnized by person without authority, Art, 35 par. 2. FC; Art. (352, Revised Penal Code 3) No mariage license, Art. 35 por. 3, 27-34, FC Exceptions 4) Bigamous/polygamous mamiages. Art. 35 par. 4, 41-44, FC; Att. 390 and 391, NCC © Enriquez Vda. De Catalan v. Catolan-tee, G. R. No. 183622, 8 February 2012. © Quita v. Court of Appeals. G.R. No. 124862, 22 December 1998. ‘© Tenebro v, Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 150758, 18 February 2004 (En Banc). © Jorilo v. People of the Philippines. G.R. No. 164435, 29 September 2009. © Weigel v. Sempio Diy. G.R. No. L-53703, 19 August 1986. 9 Social Security Commission v. Azote, G.R. No. 209741, 15 ‘April 2015. «Exception: valid bigamous mariage - upon declaration of presumptive death Distinctions between Art. 390 CC and Ast. 41 FC. © Bienvenido v. Court of Appeals. G.R. No. 111717, 24 ‘October 1994. © Tadeo-Matias v. Republic, G.R. No. 230751. 25 April 2018. © Manvel v. Philippines, G.R. No. 165842, 27 November ‘2008. © Amas v. Calisterio, G.R. No. 136467, 6 April 2000. © Republic v, Nolasco, G.R. No. 94053, 17 March 1993, © Republic v. Court of Appeals. G.R. No. 159614. 9 December 2005. © Santos v. Santos, G.R. No. 187061, 8 October 2014. 10 Scanned with CamScanner© Republic v. Catubag. G.R. No. 210580, 18 April 2018. © Republic v. Quifionez, G.R. No. 237412, 6 January 2020. © Republic v. Granada, G.R. No. 187512, 13 June 2012. © Republic v. Cantor, G.R. No. 184621, 10 December 2013 (En Banc}, Republic v. Fenol, G.R. No. 212726, 10 June 2020. 5) Mariage in violation of Art. 40, 52-53, FC ‘0 Domingo v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 104818, 17 September 1993. © Alienza v. Brilantes, Adm. Matter No. MIJ-92706, 29 March 1995 (En Banc}. © Marbella-Bobis v. Bobis, G.R. No. 138509, 31 July 2000. © Ty v. Court of Appeals, G.R, No. 127406, 27 November 2000. De Guzman v. People, G.R. No. 224742, 7 August 2019. 4) Mistake in Kdentty, Ar. 35 por. 5, FC 7), Incestvous marriage. Ari. 37, 5, and 26 par. 1, FC 8) Vold by reason of public policy/ quasi-incestuous marriages, Arts, 38, 5, and 26 par. 1, FC Determination of Degrees of Relationship; Relatives in the direct and collateral lines 9) Psychological incopacity, Art. 36, FC Canon 1095 of the New Code of Canon Law; History of provision Concept! of psychological Incapacity as distinguished trom insanity Choracteristics of psychological incapacity Guidelines In determining psychological Incapacity © Chi Ming Tsoi v. Court of Appeals and Lao, G.R. No. 119190, 16 January 1997. © Santos v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 112019, 4 January 1995 (En Banc) ‘© Republic v, Court of Appeals and Molina, G.R. No. 108763, 13 February 1997. Hemandez v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 126010. 8 December 1999. © Yambao v. Republic of the Philippines. G.R. No. 184063, 24 January 2011. © Republic v. De Gracia, G.R. No. 171557. 12 February 2014. © Barcelona v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 130087, 24 September 2003. © Republic v. Quintero-Hamano, G.R. No. 149498, 20 May 2004. © Tongol v. Tongol. G.R. NO. 157610, 19 October 2007. © Marcos v. Marcos. G.R. No. 136490, 19 October 2000. © Tev. Yute. GR. No. 161793, 13 February 2009. © Arcueta v. G.R. No. 180668, 26 May 2009. © Padila-Rumbava v. Rumbava, G.R. NO. 166738, 14 August 2009. © Agtaviador v. Agraviador, G.R. No. 170729, 8 December 2010. © Camacho-Reyes v. Reyes, G.R. No. 185286, 18 August 2010. Toring v. Toring, G.R. No. 165321, 3 August 2010. Suazo v. Sy020. G.R. No. 164493, 10 March 2010. Aspillaga v. Aspillaga, G.R. No. 170925, 26 October 2009. Aicazar v. Alcazar, G.R. No. 174451, 13 October 2009. Nojera v. Nojera, G.R. No. 164817, 3 July 2009. Halil v. Sontos-Holli, G.R. No. 165424, 9 June 2009. Scanned with CamScanner© Paras v. Paras. G. R. No. 147824, 2 August 2007. Antonio v. Reyes. G.R. No.155800, 10 March 2006. Carating-Siayngco v. Siayngco, G.R. No. 158%, 27 ‘October 2004. © Buenaventura v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 127358, 31 ‘March 2005. ‘Marable v. Marable. G.R. No. 178741, 17 Janvary 2011. Aurelio v. Aurelio, G.R. No. 175367, 6 June 2011. Republic v. Encelan: G.R. No. 170022, 9 January 2013. ‘Mendoza v. Republic, G.R. No. 157649, 12 November 2012. Republic v. Galang. G.R. No. 168335, 6 June 2011. Kalaw v, Fernandez. G.R. No. 166357, 14 January 2015. Vitis v. Parel-Vifias, G.R. No. 208790, 21 January 2015. Republic v. Romero Il, G.R. No. 209180, 24 February 2016. Garlet v. Garlet, G.R. No. 193544, 2 August 2017. Lontoc-Crvz v. Cruz, G.R. No. 201988, 11 October 2017. Republic v. Mola Cruz. G.R. No. 236629, 23 July 2018. Singson v. Singson, G.R. No. 210766, 8 January 2018. Republic v. Javier, G.R. No. 210518, 18 Apti 2018. Cortez v. Cortez. G.R. No. 224638, 10 April 2019. Go-Yu v. Yu. G.R. No. 230443, 3 Apri 2019. ‘Cahapisan-Santiago v, Santiago, G.R. No. 241144, 26 June 2019. Castro v. Castro, G.R. No. 210548, 2 March 2020. © Santos-Gantan v. Ganton, G.R. No. 225193, 14 October 2020. Ton-Andal v. Andol, G.R. No. 196359, 11 May 2021. Jerik 8. Estella Vs. Nia Monrla Ava M. Perez G.R. No. 249250. September 29, 2021 Republic v. Claur, G.R. No. 246868, 15 February 2022. iv. Action for declaration of nullity of mariage, Art, 48, FC; A.M. No. 02 11-10-SC Applicability of rules (0 Bolos v. Bolos, G.R. No. 186400, 20 October 2010. 0 Minoru Fujiki v. Marinay. G.R. No. 196049, 26 June 2013. 1) Presctiplive period, Art. 39 2) Parties ‘© Nifial v, Bayadog. G.R. No. 133778,14 March 2000. ‘© Carlos v. Sandoval. G.R. No. 179922. 16 December 2008. © Enrico v. Heirs of Medinaceli, G.R. No. 173614, 28 September 2007, © Juligivo-Llave v. Republic, G. R. No. 169766, 30 March 2011. 3) Proper action, Procedure, Prohibited: defaull judgment and Judgment on the pleadings Rule 9, Sec. 3 and Rule 34, Sec. 1 ‘ofthe Rules of Court © Mollion v. Alcantara, G.R. No. 141528, 31 October 2006. © Leonor v. Court of Appeals. G.R. No. 112597, 2 April 1996. © Yuv.Reyes-Compio, G.R. No. 189207, 15 June 2011. © Yuv.Lim-Yu, G.R. No. 200072, 20 June 2016. 4) Appearance of the State. Art. 48, FC © Maquilan v. Maquian, G.R. NO. 155409, 8 June 2007. © Molcampo‘Sin v. Sin, G.R. No. 137590, 26 March 2001 ‘0 Tuason v. Court of Appeals. G.R. No. 116607, 10 April 1996, 0 Corpus v. Ochotorena, AM. No. RTJ-04-1861, 30 July 2004. 5) Support and custody during pendency of the action, Art. 49 and 213, FC; A.M, 02- 11-12-SC 4) Final judgment, Subsequent proceedings and Effects, Art. 40, 43-44, 50-53. FC o. Sevilla Castro v. Castro, G.R. No. 140484, 28 January 2007. 0° eoce000000000000 Scanned with CamScanneroo Valdes v. RIC and Valdes, G.R. No. 122749, 31 July 1996. © Diflo v. Diflo, G.R. No, 178044, 19 January 2011. 7) Status of children born of void marriage, Art. 54 and 165, FC ¢. Annulment of mariage i. Concept of voidable mariage i, Grounds 1) Lack of parental consent, Ari. 45 par. I. Ar, 14, FC: RAG8O9 2) Insanity, Art. 45 par. 2, FC 3) Fraud, art. 45 por. 3and 46, FC © Anaya v. Paloroan, G.R. No. 1-27930, 26 November 1970 (En Banc). © Buccat v, Buccat-Mangonon, GR No. 47101 25 April Ia, © Amar v. RIG Branch 254, 6.8, No, 179620, 26 August 4) Force. Intimidation, Undue Influence Art. 45, par. 4, FC Arts. 1338. 1336. 1337 of the Civil Code © Villanueva v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 132955, 27 October 2006. © Macamubo v. Macarubo, A.C. No. 6148, 27 February 2004 (En Bone). 5) impotency. Art. 45. par. 5. FC Impotentia_ copulendi and Impotentia _generandi Absolute/incurable Impotency and Temporary/Curable Impotency Relative Impotency Doctrine of Triennial Cohabitation © Alcazar v. Alcazar, G.R. No. 174451, 13 October 2009. © Villanueva v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 132955, 27 October 2006. o_ Jimenez v. Canizares, G.R. No. L-12790. 31 August 1960. 6) Affliction of Sexually Transmissible Disease Art. 45, por. 6. FC Distinguish from Art. 46, par. 3, FC Ul, — Ralification/Convalidation, Art. 45 and 47, FC Manner ond Effects Iv. Action for Annulment of Martiage, Art. 47, FC: A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC Prescriptive period 1) Patties - who can file 2) Appearance of the State, Art, 48, FC 3) Prohibited: defauit judgment and judgment on the pleadings: Rule 9, Sec. 3 and Rule 34, Sec. 1 of the Rules of Court 4) Support and custody during pendency of the action, Art, 49 and 213, FC 5) Necessity of Final Judgment/ Requirements for Remarriage, Arts. 52-53, 6) FC Effects of Annument, Arts. 50-51 and 43-44, FC 7) Status of Children. Art. 54. FC 4. Legal Separation i. Concept and difference from Separation de facto and Separation ‘of Property i, Grounds, Art, 55 (1) to (10). Art. 101 and 128, FC: Art. 247, 333 and 334, Revised Penal Code ‘© Ong Eng Kiam v. Ong, G.R. No. 153206, 23 October 2006. © Gandioncov. Penoranda, G.R. No. 79284. 27 November 1987. © Prima Partosa-Jo v. Court of Appeals. G.R. No. 82606, 18 December 1992. i, Defenses, Art. 56. FC 1) Condonation/Pardon, Ari. 56, par. 1, FC Concept and Forms a Scanned with CamScannero Ginez v. Bugayong. G.R. No. L-10033, 26 December 1956 (En Banc). © People v. Zapata, G.R. No. 1-3047, 16 May 1951 (En Banc). © De Ocampo ¥. Florencicno, G.R. No. 1-13553, 23 February 1960 (En Banc). 2) Consent, Art. 54, par. 2, FC Distinguished from Condonation: Forms © Matubis v. Praxedes, G.R, No, L-11766, 25 October 1960. © People v. Schneckenburger, G.R. No. 48183, 10 November 1941 (En Banc). © People v. Sensano, G.R. No. 37720. 7 March 1933 (En Bane). 3) Connivance, Art. 56, par. 3, FC Distinguished from consent ‘and collusion 4) Collusion, Art. 56. por. 5 and Art. 60, par. 2, FC How committed © De Ocampo v. Florenciano, G.R. No. 1-13553, 23 February 1960 (En Banc). 5) Recrimination/Mutval Guill, Art. 56, par. 4, FC 6) Prescription, Art. 56, por. 6 ond Art, 57, FC © Brown v. Yambao, G.R. No. L-10699, 18 October 1957. © De Ocampo v. Florenciano, G.R. No. L-13553, 23 February 1960 (En Banc). © Contreras v. Macaraig, G.R. No. L-29138, 29 May 1970. ¥, Action for Legal Separation: AM. No. 02-11-11-SC Parties and Procedure © Bafiez v. Banez. G.R. No. 132592, 23 January 2002. 1) Mandatory Cooiing-Olf Period and Duty of the Court to Effect Reconciliation, Art, 58-59, FC Rationale © Araneta v. Concepcion. G.R. No. L-9667, 31 July 1956 (En Bone}. © Somosa-Romos v. Vamenta, Jr., G.R. No. L-34132, 29 July 1972 (En Bane). 2) Necessity of Tria! and intervention of State, Art, 60, FC ° y, ! 3) Legal Separation Pendente lite, Art. 61-62 and Art. 49, FC © Sabalones v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 106169, 14 February 1994. © Lapuz Sy v. Eulemio, G.R. No. L-30977, 31 January 1972 (En Bone}. 4) Decree of Legol Separation, Arts, 63-64 to Art, 43 and 213, FC © Laperal v. Republic, G.R. No. L-18008, 30 October 1962 (En Banc). ‘© Siochiv. Gozon, G.R. No, 169900, 18 March 2010. 5] Reconciliation. Art. 65-67. FC Requiements ond Effects 6 Rights and Obligations of Spouses, Arts. 68-81, 100 and 127, FC Republic Act No. 10572; Art. 247 and 11(2), Revised Penal Code; Rule 130, Rules of Evidence ‘on Marriage Privilege Rule and Marital Communication Rule: Marlage Privilege Rule - Sec, 22 & Marital Communication Rule - Sec. 24. Eugenio v. Velez. G.R. No. 85140, 17 May 1990. Pelayo v. Lauron, G.R. No. L-4089, 12 January 1909 (En Banc). Arroyo v. Vasquez-Arroyo, G.R. No. 17014, 11 August 1921. llusorio v. Bildner, llusorio, G.R. No. 139789. 12 May 2000. Goitia v. Campos Rueda. G.R. No, 11263, 2 November 1916, ©0000 4 Scanned with CamScanner© Imbong v. Ochoa, Jr. G.R. No. 204819, 8 April 2014. Valine v. Adriano, G.R. No. 182894, 22 April 2014. © Inthe Matter of Petition for Writ of Amparo of Vivian A. Sanchez, G.R. No. 242257, 1 October 2019 (En Banc). 7. Property Relations Between Spouses Ait. 1 and 74, FC; Att. 16 of the Civil Code Governing law, Art. 80, FC @. Marriage Settlement/Ante-Nuptial/ Pre-Nuplial Agreement, Art. 75-79, FC i Purpose ii Form and Requisites Tetms, conditions and stipulations iv. Effect if mariage does not take place. Art. 81, FC © Pana v. Heirs of Juanite, S.. G.R. No. 164201, 10 December 2012. b. Donations Propter Nuptias, Art, 82-87, FC; Art. 725 of the Civil Code i. Requisites © Cano. Cano, GR, No. 188666, 14 December 2017. ii Revocation, Art, 86, 50, 43/3). FC: Art. 134, 764, 769, 1144-1145 of the Civil Code ii Donation during the mamiage, Art. 84 and 87, FC: Art, 1490 and 1782 of the Civil Code Rationale © Arcaba v. Vda. De Batocael, G.R. No. 146683, 22 November 2001. © Matabuena v. Cervantes, G.R. No. L-28771, 31 Morch 1971 (En. Bane). © Perezv. Perez-Senerpida, G.R. No. 233365. 24 March 2021. c. Property Regimes under the Family Code: L Absolute Community Regime. Ar. 88-104. FC and Conjugal Partnership of Gains, Art. 105-133. FC 1) Concept 2) Lows tha! govem/ opplicable Commencement 3) Waiver of rights/ interests/ shares Components o Villanueva v, Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 143286, 14 ‘April 2004. 0 Navarro v. Escobido, G.R. No. 153788. 27 November 2009. © Imani v. Metropolitan Bank & Tust Co.. G.R. No. 187023, 17 November 2010. © Dela Pefia v. Avila, G.R. No, 187490, 8 February 2012. © Titan Construction Corporation v. David, G.R. No. 169548, 15 March 2010. 0 Tonv. Andrade, GR. No. 171904, 7 August 2013, 4) Excluded property © Tan v. Court of Appeals. G.R. No. 120594, 10 June 1997. 5) Uabilities/charges © Ayala Investment & Development Corp. v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 118305, 12 February 1998. co Rosv. Philippine National Bank, G.R. No. 170166, 6 April 2011. © Delos Santos v. Abejon, G.R. No, 215820, 20 Morch 2017. © Borlongon v. Banco De Oro. G.R. No. 217617, 5 Apri 2017. ce Dewara v. Lamela, G.R. No. 179010, 11 April 2011. 6) Administration Scanned with CamScanner9 Malthews v. Taylor, G.R, No. 164584, 22 June 2009. 7) Disposition ‘© Boston Equity Resources Inc. v. Del Rosario, G.R. No. 193228, 27 November 2017. 0 Hels of Go. Sr. ¥. Servacio, G.R. No. 157537.7 September 2011. Fuentes v. Roca, G.R. No. 178902, 21 April 2010. Ko v. Aramburo, G.R. No. 190995, 9 August 2017. Alejo v. Cortez. G.R. No. 206114, 19 June 2017. Carlos v. Tolentino, G.R. No, 234533, 27 June 2018. ‘Molabanan v. Malabanan. G. R. No. 187225, 6 March 2019. © Spouses Anastacio v. Hels of Coloma. GR. No. ‘224572, 27 August 2020. 8) Etlects of separation-in-fact, abandonment and non- compliance with obligations 9) Dissolution Liquidation ©. Inte Muller v. Muller, G.R. No. 149615, 26 August 2006. © Metropolitan Bank & Trust Co. v. Pascual. G.R. No. 163744, 29 February 2008, ‘© Domingo v. Molina, G.R. No. 200274, 20 April 2016. © Uy. Femandez, G.R. No. 200612, 5 April 2017. © Quigo v. Quiao, G.R. No. 176556, 4 July 2012. oooce i, Regime of Separation of Property and Separation of Properly During the Marriage Art. 134-146, FC 1) Regime of Separation of Property Concept Laws that govern? applicable, Art. 143, FC Commencement, art. 143 and Art. 134, FC Components, Art, 144, FC Liabilties/Charges. Art. 146. Fo © Yaov. Perel. G.R. No. 153828, October 24, 2003. 2) Administration/Disposttion, Art. 145 and Art, 142, FC 3}, Separation of Property During the Mariage, Art. 134-141. FC Separation of property for sufficient cause, Art. 135, FC Voluntary separation of property, Art. 136. FC fi, Property regime of unions without marrage 1) Void Marriages or Live-in relationships where parties ore capacitated fo mamy each other, Art. 147, FC © Ocampo v. Ocampo, G.R. No. 198908, 3 August 2015. © Barrio v. Nonato. G.R, No. 176492, 20 October 2014. © Moxey v. Court of Appecis, GR. No. L-45870 11 11 May 1984. Corifo v. Corifio, G.R, No. 132529, 2 February 2001. Gonzales v. Gonzales, G.R. No, 159521, 16 December 7005. © Mercado-ebr v. Fehr, G.R. No. 152716, 23 October 2003. Diaz-Salgado v. Salgado, G.R. No. 204494, 27 July 2016. © Patemno v. Lomongo-Patemo, G.R. No. 213687, 8 January 2020. 2) Bigamous. adulterous, etc. Relationships, Art. 148, FC © Carifio v. Carifio, G.R. No, 132529, 2 February 2001. © Tumlos v. Fernandez. G.R. No. 137650, 12 April 2000. © Francisco v. Master iron Works, GR. No. 151967, 16 February 2005. © Joaquino v. Reyes, G.R. No. 154645, 13 July 2004, 2° ° 16 Scanned with CamScanner2013. © Ventura. Jr. v. Abuda, G.R. No. 202932, 23 October 2013. THE FAMILY ART. 149 AND Ant. 1, FC; Art. XV AND ART. II, SEC. 12, 1987 CONSTITUTION 1. Coverage of Family Relations, Art. 150, FC 2. Suit among members of the same family/Necessity of earnest efforts toward compromise, Art. 151, FC; Art. 2035 of the Civil Code o Guerrero v. Regional Trial Court, G.R. No. 109068, 10 January 1994, © Hiyas v. Acuna, G.R. NO. 154132, 31 August 2006. 2 Vda. de Manalo v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 129242, 16 January 2001 © Santos v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 134787, 15 November 2005. © Moreno v. Kahn, G.R. No. 217744, 30 July 2018. 3. Prohibited Compromise, Art. 2034-2035, NCC © Mendoza v. Court of Appeals, G.R, No. $8010, 31 March 1993. ‘A. Famity Home, Ant. 152-162, FC 1. Concept 2. How conslituted/ Requisites 3. Beneficiaries of Family Home 4. Benefits/Exemptions © Solozar v. Felias, G.R. No. 213972, 5 February 2018. Eulogio v. Bell, G.R. No. 186322, 8 July 2015. Ariola v. Arriola, G.R. No. 177703, 28 January 2008. Modequill v. Breva, G.R. No. 86355, 31 May 1990. Josef v. Santos, G.R. No. 165060, 27 November 2008. Gomez v. Sta. Ines, G.R. No, 132537, 14 October 2005. Manacop v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 97898, 11 August 1997. Taneo v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 108532, 9 March 1999. Fortaleza v. Lopitan, G.R. No. 178288, 15 August 2012. o Oliva-De Mesa v. Acero, Jr., G.R. No. 185064, 16 January 2012. oeccco0.e 8. SurrorT 1. Concept, Art. 194, FC Contractual Support or support in o will, Art. 208, FC o Lim-Lua v. Lua. G.R. No. 175279, 5 June 2013. © De Asis v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 127578, 15 February 1999, 2. Actual Need vs. Capacity to Pay, Art. 201-202, FC © Lam v. Chua, G.R. No. 131286, 18 March 2004. 3. Whois eniilled to support. Art. 195-197. FC © Briones v. Miguel. G.R. No. 156343, 18 October 2004. © Quimiguing v. Icao, G.R. No. L-26795, 31 July 1970. © Francisco v. Zandueta, G.R. No. 43794, 9 August 1935. © Santero v. Court of Appeals. G.R. No. L-61700, 14 September 1987. © Golardo v. Buling. G.R. No. 165166, 15 August 2012. 4, Who must pay support, Arts. 195-197, 199-200 © De Guzman v. Perez, G.R. No. 156013, 25 July 2006. © Del Socorro v. Brinkman Van Wisem, G.R. No. 193707, 10 December 2014. Right of third persons who pay, Art. 206-207, FC 7 Scanned with CamScanner© Lacson v, Lacson, GR. No. 150644, 28 August 2006, 5, When demandable, Art, 203, FC © Mabugay-Otamias v. Republic, G.R. No. 189516, 8 June 2016, © Lacson v. Lacson, G.R. No. 150644, 28 August 2006. 6 Manner of payment/How given, Art, 203, par. 3 and Art, 204, FE © Limy. Lim, GR. No. 163209, 30 October 2009. © Mangonon v. Court of Appeals. G.R. No. 125041, 30 June 2006, 7. Exemption from levy and attachment, Art, 205 and 208, FC 8. Support pendent ite, Rule 61. 197 Rules of Civil Procedure PATERNITY AND FIUATION 1. Concept of Paternity, Maternity, Filation © Surposa Uy v. Ngo Chua, G.R. No. 183965, 18 September 2007. 2. Kinds of Filation and Kinds/Status of Children a. Legtlimate Children, Art. 164, 54 and 43(1). FC: Art. 163-174, FC b, Illegitimate Children, Art. 165 and $4, FC; Art. 175-176, FC . Legitimated Chitdren d. Adopted Children |. Legitimate and tlegitimate Children fi. Who are considered as Legitimate and illegitimate Children of Artif insemination, requirements fi, Presumption of legitimacy © Aguilar v. Siasat, G.R. No. 200169, 28 January 2015. © Concepcion v. Court of Appeais, G.R. No. 123450, 31 August 2005. © Angeles v. Maglaya, GR. No. 153798, 2 September 2005. iv, Action to impugn legitimacy Grounds, Arts. 166-169, FC © Angeles v. Maglaya, G.R. No, 153798, 2 September 2005, © Jao v. Court of Appeo's, G.R. No, L-49162, 28 July 1987. 1) Probotive valve of ONA fests: Rules on DNA Evidence. Supreme Court A.M. No. 06-11-05-5C © Tiing v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 125901, 8 March 2001. © Agustin v, Court of Appeals, G.R, No. 162571, 15 June 2005. Herrera v. Alba, G.R. No. 148220, 15 June 2005, © People v. Vallejo, G.R. No. 144656, 9 May 2002. © Estate of Ong v. Diaz, G.R, No. 171713, 17 December 2007. Lucas v. Lucas, G.R. No. 190710, 6 June 2011. 2) Who may fle and within what period, Art. 170-171, FC 0 Liyao. Jr. v. Tanhoti-liyao, G.R. No. 138961, 7 March 2002. © De Jesus v. Estate of Dizon, G.R. No. 142877, 2 ‘October 2001. ¥. Action to Claim legitimacy and Action for Recognition Proof of filiation, Att. 172 & 175, FC Geronimo v. Santos, G.R. No. 197099, 28 September 2015. Babiera v. Catotal, GR. No. 138493, 15 June 2000. Verceles v. Posada, GR. No. 159785, 27 April 2007. Femandez v. Fernandez. G. R. No. 143256, 28 August 2001 Alberto v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 86439, 2 June 1994. Nepomuceno v, Lopez, G.R. No. 181258, 18 March 2010. Perla v. Baring, G.R. No. 172471. 12 November 2012. Heirs of Fabillor v. Paller, G.R. No, 231459, 21 January 2019. Voluntary Recognition and Compultory Recognition © Verceles v. Posada, G.R. No. 159785, 27 April 2007. 18 Scanned with CamScanner© Hilario v. Miranda, G.R. No. 196499, 28 November 018. © Cobatonia v. Court of Appeols, G.R. No. 124814, 21 ‘October 2004, © Ecetav. Eceta, G.R, No. 157037. 20 May 2004. 2 Rivero v. Court of Appeals. G.R.No. 141273. 17 Moy 2005. 2) Who may file and when to file, Art, 173 & 175, FC © Guy v. Court of Appeals, GR. No. 163707, 15 September 2006. 2 Marquino v. Intermediate Appellate Court, G.R. No. 72078, 27 June 1994. 2 Tayag v. Tayag-Gallor, G.R. No. 174680. 24 March 2008. vi. Rights of Legitimate and legitimate children, Art. 174 and 176, Art. 194- 196, FC: Art. 364, 369, 888 and 979, NCC 1 y ‘© Grande v, Antonio, G.R. No. 206248, 18 February 2014. © Dela Cruz v. Gracia. G.R. No. 177728, 31 July 2009. 2 Briones v, Miguel. G.R. No. 156343, 18 October 2004. In the matter of the pelition for cancelation of cerliicate of live birth of Tinitigan v. Republic. GR. No, 222095, 7 August 2017. 2) legitimated children: Art. 178, FC as mended by Republic Act No. 9858 Requisites and Effects of legitimation Rights of legitimated children © De Sontos vs. Angeles. GR. No. 105619, 12 December 1995. © Abadilla v, Tobilron, AM. No. MIJ-92716, 25 ‘October 1995. vil, Adopted Children Republic Act No.8552 (Domestic Adoption Act of 1998). Republic Act ‘No. 8043 (inter-country Adoption Act of 1995), and Republic Act 11442 1) Concept of Adoption 2) Who may adopt and be adopted 3), Requirements for adoption 4) Nature and effects of adoption 5) Rescission of adoption © Benitez Badua v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 105625, 24 January 1994, © Republic v. Alarcon Vergara, G.R. No. 95551, 20 March 1997. ©. Ine: adoption of Michelle and Michael Lim. G.R. No, 168992, 21 May 2007, © Landingin v. Republic, G.R. No. 164948, 27 June 2006. © Cang v. Court of Appeals. G.R. No. 105308, 25 September 1998. © Castro v. Gregorio, G.R. No. 188801. 15 October 2014. © Department of Social Welfare and Development v. Belen, AM. No. RTJ-96- 1362, 18 July 1997. ©. Inte: adoption of Stephanie Nothy Astorga Garcia, GR. No. 148311, 31 March 2005. © Teotico v. Del Val, G.R. No. L-18753, 26 March 1965. 9 Scanned with CamScanner© Bartolome y. Social Security System. G.R. No, 192531, 12 November 2014. © Lohom v. Sibulo, G.R. No. 143989, July 14, 2003, © Suzuki v. OSG, G.R. No. 212302, 2 September 2020. PARENTAL AUTHORITY AND CUSTODY ‘Ant. XV, SEC. 3 (1) AND (2) OF 1987 CoNsMTUTION; Ant. 20, FC PATRIA POTESTAS, 1. Characteristics of Parental Authority, Art. 210, FC © Silva v. Court of Appeals. G.R. No. 114742, 17 July 1997. © Imbong v. Ochoa, J., G.R. No. 204819, 8 April 2014, 2. Who exercises parental authority and custody, Arf. 211, FC 2 Tonog v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 122906, 7 February 2002. Bondagiy v. Fouri Ali Bondagiy, G.R. No. 140817, 7 December 2001. Sagala-Eslao v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 116773, 16 Jonuary 1997. Sombong v. Court of Appeals. G.R. No. 111876, 31 January 1996. Recto v. Tracino, AM. No. RTJ-17-2508, 7 November 2017 [En Banc). © Mosbate v. Relucio, GR. No, 235498, 30 July 2018. 3. Effect of disagreement, absence. death, separation or termination of mariage of parents, Art, 212-213, FC; Art. 49, 50, 62, and 63, FC. “Tender Age Presumption” Rule © Gomboa-Hisch v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 174485, 11 July 2007. Pablo-Gualberto v. Gualberto, G.R. No. 154994, 28 June 2005. Santos v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No, 113054, 16 March 1995, David v. Court of Appeals. G.R. No. 111180, 16 November 1995. Espiritu v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 115640, 15 March 1995. Perez v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 118870, 29 Morch 1996, 2 Dacasin v. Dacasin, G.R. No. 168785, 5 February 2010. 4. Duties of children, Art. 211, par. 2, FC Filial Privilege Rule, Art, 215. FC 5. Substitute Parental Authority ©. When Applicable, Art. 214, 216, 222, FC © Vane v. Belmes, G.R. No, 132223, 19 June 2001. b. Who may exercise, Art. 216 and 217, FC ¢. Extent of Authority, Art. 233, FC 2 Caravan Travel and Tours Intemational, Inc. v. Abejar, G.R, No. 170631, 10 February 2016 6. Rights and Duties of persons exercising parental authority, Art, 219-221. FC © libiv. Intermediate Appellate Court, G.R. No. 70890, 18 September 1992. © Tomargo v. Court of Appeals, G.R, No. 85044, 3 June 1992. © Patulol v. People, G.R. No. 235071, 7 January 2019. 7. Disciplinary Measures, Art. 223-224, FC 8. Effects of Parental Authority upon property of children, Att. 225-227, FC 9. Termination of Parental Authority, At. 228, 229, 232, FC: RA 7610 10. Suspension of Parental Authority, Art. 230-231, FC 11. Special porental authority Who exercises special parental authority, Art. 218, FC When Applicable Extent of special parentol authority, Art, 233, par. 2, FC Extent of responsibiltyfiabilty, Art. 219, FC Aquinas School v. Inton. G.R. No. 184202, 26 January 2011. St. Joseph's College v. Manda, G.R. No. 182353, 29 June 2010. St. Mary's Academy v. Carpitanos, G.R. No. 143363, 6 February 2002, ‘Amadora v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-47745, 15 April 1988. Philippine School of Business Administration v. Cour! of Appeals. G. No. 84698, 4 February 1992. © St. Luke's College of Medicine-Wiliom H, Quasha Memorial Foundation v. Perez, G.R. No. 222740, 28 September 2016, aogoe 20 Scanned with CamScanner