Article 55 Legal Separation

8/11/2019 Article 55 Legal Separation

1/9

G.R. No. 153206 October 23, 2006

ONG ENG KIAM a.k.a. WILLIAM ONG, petitioner,

!.

L"#I$A G. ONG, re!pon%ent.

& E # I ' I O N

A"'$RIA(MAR$INE), J.*

Before this Court is a Petition for Review seeking the reversal of the Decision1of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA G.R. CV o. !"#$$ which

affir%e& in totothe Decision of the Regional 'rial Court (R'C) Branch #1 Dagupan Cit granting the petition for legal separation file& * herein

respon&ent as well as the Resolution+of the CA &ate& April +, +$$+ which &enie& petitioner-s %otion for reconsi&eration.

ng /ng 0ia% also known as illia% ng (illia%) an& 2ucita G. ng (2ucita) were %arrie& on 3ul 14 1"5! at the 6an Agustin Church in7anila. 'he have three chil&ren8 0ingston Charleston an& Princeton who are now all of the age of %a9orit.4

n 7arch +1 1"", 2ucita file& a Co%plaint for 2egal 6eparation un&er Article !! par. (1) of the :a%il Co&e#*efore the Regional 'rial Court

(R'C) of Dagupan Cit Branch #1 alleging that her life with illia% was %arke& * phsical violence threats inti%i&ation an& grossl a*usivecon&uct.!

2ucita clai%e& that8 soon after three ears of %arriage she an& illia% ;uarrele& al%ost ever &a with phsical violence *eing inflicte& upon her her< on Dece%*er " 1""! after she proteste& with illia%-s &ecision toallow their el&est son 0ingston to go to Bacolo& illia% slappe& her an& sai& =it is none of our *usiness=< on Dece%*er 1# 1""! she aske&

illia% to *ring 0ingston *ack fro% Bacolo&< a violent ;uarrel ensue& an& illia% hit her on her hea& left cheek ee sto%ach an& ar%s< when

illia% hit her on the sto%ach an& she *ent &own *ecause of the pain he hit her on the hea& then pointe& a gun at her an& aske& her to leave thehouse< she then went to her sister-s house in Binon&o where she was fetche& * her other si*lings an& *rought to their parents house in Dagupan< the

following &a she went to her parent-s &octor Dr. Vicente /lin?ano for treat%ent of her in9uries.,

illia% for his part &enie& that he ever inflicte& phsical har% on his wife use& insulting language against her or whippe& the chil&ren with the*uckle of his *elt. hile he a&%its that he an& 2ucita ;uarrele& on Dece%*er " 1""! at their house in 3ose A*a& 6antos Avenue 'on&o 7anila he

clai%e& that he left the sa%e stae& in their Greenhills con&o%iniu% an& onl went *ack to their 'on&o house to work in their office *elow. @n the

afternoon of Dece%*er 1# 1""! their laun&rwo%an tol& hi% that 2ucita left the house. 5

n 3anuar ! 1"" the R'C ren&ere& its Decision &ecreeing legal separation thus8

/R/:R/ pre%ises consi&ere& 9u&g%ent is here* ren&ere& &ecreeing the legal separation of plaintiff an& &efen&ant with all the

legal effects atten&ant thereto particularl the &issolution an& li;ui&ation of the con9ugal partnership properties for which purpose the

parties are here* or&ere& to su*%it a co%plete inventor of sai& properties so that the Court can %ake a 9ust an& proper &ivision such&ivision to *e e%*o&ie& in a supple%ental &ecision.

6 RD/R/D.

'he R'C foun& that8

@t is in&u*ita*le that plaintiff (2ucita) an& &efen&ant (illia%) ha& their fre;uent ;uarrels an& %isun&erstan&ing which %a&e *oth of theirlives %isera*le an& hellish. 'his is even a&%itte& * the &efen&ant when he sai& that there was no &a that he &i& not ;uarrel with his wife.

Defen&ant ha& regar&e& the plaintiff negligent in the perfor%ance of her wifel &uties an& ha& *la%e& her for not reporting to hi% a*out

the wrong&oings of their chil&ren. (citations o%itte&)

'hese ;uarrels were alwas punctuate& * acts of phsical violence threats an& inti%i&ation * the &efen&ant against the plaintiff an& on

the chil&ren. @n the process insulting wor&s an& language were heape& upon her. 'he plaintiff suffere& an& en&ure& the %ental an& phsical

anguish of these %arital fights until Dece%*er 1# 1""! when she ha& reache& the li%its of her en&urance. 'he %ore than twent ears ofher %arriage coul& not have *een put to waste * the plaintiff if the sa%e ha& *een live& in an at%osphere of love har%on an& peace.

orst their chil&ren are also suffering. As ver well state& in plaintiff-s %e%oran&u% =it woul& *e unthinka*le for her to throw awa this

twent ears of relationship a*an&on the co%forts of her ho%e an& *e separate& fro% her chil&ren who% she loves if there e>ists nocause which is alrea& *eon& her en&urance."

illia% appeale& to the CA which affir%e& in toto the R'C &ecision. @n its Decision &ate& cto*er +$$1 the CA foun& that the testi%onies for

2ucita were straightforwar& an& cre&i*le an& the groun& for legal separation un&er Art. !! par. 1 of the :a%il Co&e i.e. phsical violence an&grossl a*usive con&uct &irecte& against 2ucita were a&e;uatel proven. 1$
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/oct2006/gr_153206_2006.html#fnt1http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/oct2006/gr_153206_2006.html#fnt1http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/oct2006/gr_153206_2006.html#fnt2http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/oct2006/gr_153206_2006.html#fnt3http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/oct2006/gr_153206_2006.html#fnt4http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/oct2006/gr_153206_2006.html#fnt5http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/oct2006/gr_153206_2006.html#fnt5http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/oct2006/gr_153206_2006.html#fnt6http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/oct2006/gr_153206_2006.html#fnt7http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/oct2006/gr_153206_2006.html#fnt8http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/oct2006/gr_153206_2006.html#fnt8http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/oct2006/gr_153206_2006.html#fnt9http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/oct2006/gr_153206_2006.html#fnt9http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/oct2006/gr_153206_2006.html#fnt10http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/oct2006/gr_153206_2006.html#fnt2http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/oct2006/gr_153206_2006.html#fnt3http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/oct2006/gr_153206_2006.html#fnt4http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/oct2006/gr_153206_2006.html#fnt5http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/oct2006/gr_153206_2006.html#fnt6http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/oct2006/gr_153206_2006.html#fnt7http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/oct2006/gr_153206_2006.html#fnt8http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/oct2006/gr_153206_2006.html#fnt9http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/oct2006/gr_153206_2006.html#fnt10http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/oct2006/gr_153206_2006.html#fnt1


2/9

As the CA e>plaine&8

'he straightforwar& an& can&i& testi%onies of the witnesses were uncontroverte& an& cre&i*le. Dr. /lin?ano-s testi%on was a*le to show

that the 2ucita suffere& several in9uries inflicte& * illia%. @t is clear that on Dece%*er 1# 1""! she sustaine& re&ness in her cheek*lack ee on her left ee fist *low on the sto%ach *loo& clot an& a *lackish &iscoloration on *oth shoul&ers an& a =*u%p= or =bukol"on

her hea&. 'he presence of these in9uries was esta*lishe& * the testi%onies of 2ucita herself an& her sister 2in&a 2i%. 'he

7e%oran&u%E7e&ical Certificate also confir%e& the evi&ence presente& an& &oes not &eviate fro% the &octor-s %ain testi%on FFF that2ucita suffere& phsical violence on sic the han&s of her hus*an& cause& * phsical trau%a slapping of the cheek *o>ing an& fist

*lows. 'he effect of the soFcalle& alterations in the 7e%oran&u%E7e&ical Certificate ;uestione& * illia% &oes not &epart fro% the

%ain thrust of the testi%on of the sai& &octor.

Also the testi%on of 2ucita herself consistentl an& constantl esta*lishe& that illia% inflicte& repeate& phsical violence upon her

&uring their %arriage an& that she ha& *een su*9ecte& to grossl a*usive con&uct when he constantl hurle& invectives at her even in front

of their custo%ers an& e%ploees shouting wor&s like =gaga", "putang ina mo," tanga," an& =ou &on-t know anthing.=

'hese were further corro*orate& * several inci&ents narrate& * 2in&a 2i% who live& in their con9ugal ho%e fro% 1"" to 1""1. 6he sawher sister after the Dece%*er 1# 1""! inci&ent when she (2ucita) was fetche& * the latter on the sa%e &ate. 6he was a witness to the kin&

of relationship her sister an& illia% ha& &uring the three ears she live& with the%. 6he o*serve& that illia% has an =e>plosivete%per easil gets angr an& *eco%es ver violent.= 6he cite& several instances which prove& that illia% ng in&ee& treate& her wife

sha**il an& &espica*l in wor&s an& &ee&s.

> > >

'hat the phsical violence an& grossl a*usive con&uct were *rought to *ear upon 2ucita * illia% have *een &ul esta*lishe& *2ucita an& her witnesses. 'hese inci&ents were not e>plaine& nor controverte& * illia% e>cept * %aking a general &enial thereof.

Conse;uentl as *etween an affir%ative assertion an& a general &enial weight %ust *e accor&e& to the affir%ative assertion.

'he grossl a*usive con&uct is also apparent in the instances testifie& to * 2ucita an& her sister. 'he in9urious invectives hurle& at2ucita an& his treat%ent of her in its entiret in front of their e%ploees an& frien&s are enough to constitute grossl a*usive con&uct.

'he aggregate *ehavior of illia% warrants legal separation un&er grossl a*usive con&uct. > > >11

illia% file& a %otion for reconsi&eration which was &enie& * the CA on April +, +$$+. 1+

ence the present petition where illia% clai%s that8

@

'/ CR' : APP/A26 C77@''/D A /RRR : 2A @ D@6R/GARD@G C2/AR /V@D/C/ 'A' '/ P/'@'@

:R 2/GA2 6/PARA'@ A6 @6'@''/D BH '/ PR@VA'/ R/6PD/' :R '/ 62/ PRP6/ : R/7V@G

:R7 P/'@'@/R '/ C'R2 AD /R6@P : '/@R C3GA2 PRP/R'@/6 AD ' 'RA6:/R '/ 6A7/' PR@VA'/ R/6PD/'-6 :A7@2H.

@@

'/ CR' : APP/A26 C77@''/D A /RRR : 2A @ D@6R/GARD@G C2/AR /V@D/C/ R/PD@A'@G PR@VA'/

R/6PD/'-6 C2A@7 : R/P/A'/D PH6@CA2 V@2/C/ AD GR662H AB6@V/ CDC' '/ PAR' :P/'@'@/R.14

illia% argues that8 the real %otive of 2ucita an& her fa%il in filing the case is to wrest control an& ownership of properties *elonging to the

con9ugal partnership< these properties which inclu&e real properties in ong 0ong 7etro 7anila Baguio an& Dagupan were ac;uire& &uring the

%arriage through his (illia%-s) sole efforts< the onl parties who will *enefit fro% a &ecree of legal separation are 2ucita-s parents an& si*lingswhile such &ecree woul& con&e%n hi% as a violent an& cruel person a wifeF*eater an& chil& a*user an& will taint his reputation especiall a%ong

the :ilipinoFChinese co%%unit< su*stantial facts an& circu%stances have *een overlooke& which warrant an e>ception to the general rule thatfactual fin&ings of the trial court will not *e &istur*e& on appeal< the fin&ings of the trial court that he co%%itte& acts of repeate& phsical violence

against 2ucita an& their chil&ren were not sufficientl esta*lishe&< what took place were &isagree%ents regar&ing the %anner of raising an&&isciplining the chil&ren particularl Charleston 2ucita-s favorite son< %arriage *eing a social contract cannot *e i%paire& * %ere ver*al

&isagree%ents an& the co%plaining part %ust a&&uce clear an& convincing evi&ence to 9ustif legal separation< the CA erre& in reling on the

testi%onies of 2ucita an& her witnesses her sister 2in&a 2i% an& their parent-s &octor Dr. Vicente /lin?an?o whose testi%onies are tainte& withrelationship an& frau&< in the +$ ears of their %arriage 2ucita has not co%plaine& of an cruel *ehavior on the part of illia% in relation to their

%arital an& fa%il life< illia% e>presse& his willingness to receive respon&ent uncon&itionall however it is 2ucita who a*an&one& the con9ugal

&welling on Dece%*er 1# 1""! an& institute& the co%plaint *elow in or&er to appropriate for herself an& her relatives the con9ugal properties< theConstitution provi&es that %arriage is an inviola*le social institution an& shall *e protecte& * the 6tate thus the rule is the preservation of the

%arital union an& not its infringe%ent< onl for groun&s enu%erate& in Art. !! of the :a%il Co&e which groun&s shoul& *e clearl an&

convincingl proven can the courts &ecree a legal separation a%ong the spouses. 1#
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/oct2006/gr_153206_2006.html#fnt11http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/oct2006/gr_153206_2006.html#fnt12http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/oct2006/gr_153206_2006.html#fnt13http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/oct2006/gr_153206_2006.html#fnt13http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/oct2006/gr_153206_2006.html#fnt14http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/oct2006/gr_153206_2006.html#fnt11http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/oct2006/gr_153206_2006.html#fnt12http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/oct2006/gr_153206_2006.html#fnt13http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/oct2006/gr_153206_2006.html#fnt14


3/9

Respon&ent 2ucita in her Co%%ent %eanwhile asserts that8 the issues raise& in the present petition are factual< the fin&ings of *oth lower courts rest

on strong an& clear evi&ence *orne * the recor&s< this Court is not a trier of facts an& factual fin&ings of the R'C when confir%e& * the CA are

final an& conclusive an& %a not *e reviewe& on appeal< the contention of illia% that 2ucita file& the case for legal separation in or&er to re%ovefro% illia% the control an& ownership of their con9ugal properties an& to transfer the sa%e to 2ucita-s fa%il is a*sur&< 2ucita will not 9ust throw

her %arriage of +$ ears an& forego the co%panionship of illia% an& her chil&ren 9ust to serve the interest of her fa%il< 2ucita left the con9ugal

ho%e *ecause of the repeate& phsical violence an& grossl a*usive con&uct of petitioner.1!

Petitioner file& a Repl reasserting his clai%s in his petition1,as well as a 7e%oran&u% where he averre& for the first ti%e that since respon&ent is

guilt of a*an&on%ent the petition for legal separation shoul& *e &enie& following Art. !, par. (#) of the :a%il Co&e.15Petitioner argues that since

respon&ent herself has given groun& for legal separation * a*an&oning the fa%il si%pl *ecause of a ;uarrel an& refusing to return thereto unless

the con9ugal properties were place& in the a&%inistration of petitioner-s inFlaws no &ecree of legal separation shoul& *e issue& in her favor.

1

Respon&ent likewise file& a 7e%oran&u% reiterating her earlier assertions.1"

e resolve to &en the petition.

@t is settle& that ;uestions of fact cannot *e the su*9ect of a petition for review un&er Rule #! of the Rules of Court. 'he rule fin&s %ore stringentapplication where the CA uphol&s the fin&ings of fact of the trial court. @n such instance this Court is generall *oun& to a&opt the facts as

&eter%ine& * the lower courts.+$

'he onl instances when this Court reviews fin&ings of fact are8

(1) when the fin&ings are groun&e& entirel on speculation sur%ises or con9ectures< (+) when the inference %a&e is %anifestl %istaken

a*sur& or i%possi*le< (4) when there is grave a*use of &iscretion< (#) when the 9u&g%ent is *ase& on a %isapprehension of facts< (!) whenthe fin&ings of facts are conflicting< (,) when in %aking its fin&ings the Court of Appeals went *eon& the issues of the case or its fin&ings

are contrar to the a&%issions of *oth the appellant an& the appellee< (5) when the fin&ings are contrar to that of the trial court< () whenthe fin&ings are conclusions without citation of specific evi&ence on which the are *ase&< (") when the facts set forth in the petition as

well as in the petitioner-s %ain an& repl *riefs are not &ispute& * the respon&ent< (1$) when the fin&ings of fact are pre%ise& on thesuppose& a*sence of evi&ence an& contra&icte& * the evi&ence on recor&< an& (11) when the Court of Appeals %anifestl overlooke&

certain relevant facts not &ispute& * the parties which if properl consi&ere& woul& 9ustif a &ifferent conclusion. +1

As petitioner faile& to show that the instant case falls un&er an of the e>ceptional circu%stances the general rule applies.

@n&ee& this Court cannot review factual fin&ings on appeal especiall when the are *orne out * the recor&s or are *ase& on su*stantial evi&ence.++@n this case the fin&ings of the R'C were affir%e& * the CA an& are a&e;uatel supporte& * the recor&s.

As correctl o*serve& * the trial court illia% hi%self a&%itte& that there was no &a that he &i& not ;uarrel with his wife which %a&e his life

%isera*le an& he *la%es her for *eing negligent of her wifel &uties an& for not reporting to hi% the wrong&oings of their chil&ren.+4

2ucita an& her sister 2in&a 2i% also gave nu%erous accounts of the instances when illia% &isplae& violent te%per against 2ucita an& theirchil&ren< such as8 when illia% threw a steel chair at 2ucita


4/9

@n this case the R'C note& that8

illia%-s &enial an& that of his witnesses of the i%putation of phsical violence co%%itte& * hi% coul& not *e given %uch cre&ence *

the Court. 6ince the office secretar felia Rosal an& the fa%il laun&rwo%an Rosalino 7orco are &epen&ent upon &efen&ant for theirlivelihoo& their testi%onies %a *e tainte& with *ias an& the coul& not *e consi&ere& as i%partial an& cre&i*le witnesses. 6o with

0ingston ng who lives with &efen&ant an& &epen&s upon hi% for support.4,

Parentheticall illia% clai%s that that the witnesses of 2ucita are not cre&i*le *ecause of their relationship with her. e &o not agree. Relationship

alone is not reason enough to &iscre&it an& la*el a witness-s testi%on as *iase& an& unworth of cre&ence45an& a witness- relationship to one of theparties &oes not auto%aticall affect the veracit of his or her testi%on.4Consi&ering the &etaile& an& straightforwar& testi%onies given * 2in&a

2i% an& Dr. Vicente /lin?ano *olstere& * the cre&ence accor&e& the% * the trial court the Court fin&s that their testi%onies are not tainte& with*ias.

illia% also posits that the real %otive of 2ucita in filing the case for legal separation is in or&er for her si&e of the fa%il to gain control of the

con9ugal properties< that 2ucita was willing to &estro his reputation * filing the legal separation case 9ust so her parents an& her si*lings coul&

control the properties he worke& har& for. 'he Court fin&s such reasoning har& to *elieve. hat *enefit woul& 2ucita personall gain * pushing forher parents- an& si*lings- financial interests at the e>pense of her %arriageI hat is %ore pro*a*le is that there trul e>ists a groun& for legal

separation a cause so strong that 2ucita ha& to seek re&ress fro% the courts. As aptl state& * the R'C

...it woul& *e unthinka*le for her to throw awa this twent ears of relationship a*an&on the co%forts of her ho%e an& *e separate& fro%her chil&ren who% she loves if there e>ists no cause which is alrea& *eon& her en&urance.4"

'he clai% of illia% that a &ecree of legal separation woul& taint his reputation an& la*el hi% as a wifeF*eater an& chil&Fa*user also &oes not elicit

s%path fro% this Court. @f there woul& *e such a s%ear on his reputation then it woul& not *e *ecause of 2ucita-s &ecision to seek relief fro% thecourts *ut *ecause he gave 2ucita reason to go to court in the first place.

Also without %erit is the argu%ent of illia% that since 2ucita has a*an&one& the fa%il a &ecree of legal separation shoul& not *e grante&

following Art. !, par. (#) of the :a%il Co&e which provi&es that legal separation shall *e &enie& when *oth parties have given groun& for legalseparation. 'he a*an&on%ent referre& to * the :a%il Co&e is a*an&on%ent without 9ustifia*le cause for %ore than one ear.#$As it was esta*lishe&

that 2ucita left illia% &ue to his a*usive con&uct such &oes not constitute a*an&on%ent conte%plate& * the sai& provision.

As a final note we reiterate that our Constitution is co%%itte& to the polic of strengthening the fa%il as a *asic social institution.#1'he

Constitution itself however &oes not esta*lish the para%eters of state protection to %arriage an& the fa%il as it re%ains the province of thelegislature to &efine all legal aspects of %arriage an& prescri*e the strateg an& the %o&alities to protect it an& put into operation the constitutional

provisions that protect the sa%e.#+ith the enact%ent of the :a%il Co&e this has *een acco%plishe& as it &efines %arriage an& the fa%il spellsout the correspon&ing legal effects i%poses the li%itations that affect %arrie& an& fa%il life as well as prescri*es the groun&s for &eclaration of

nullit an& those for legal separation.#4As 2ucita has a&e;uatel proven the presence of a groun& for legal separation the Court has no reason *ut to

affir% the fin&ings of the R'C an& the CA an& grant her the relief she is entitle& to un&er the law.

/R/:R/ the petition is &ENIE&for lack of %erit.

Costs against petitioner.

6 RD/R/D.

Panganiban, C.J. (Chairperson), Ynares-Santiago, Callejo, Sr., and Chio-!aario, JJ.,concur.

:ootnotes1#ollo pp. 4$F##< penne& * Associate 3ustice Delilah Vi&allonF7agtolis an& concurre& in * Associate 3ustices 'eo&oro P. Regino an& 3osefinaGuevaraF6alonga.+#ollo p. #,.46ee recor&s p. 1.#Art. !!. A petition for legal separation %a *e file& on an of the following groun&s8

(1) Repeate& phsical violence or grossl a*usive con&uct &irecte& against the petitioner a co%%on chil& or a chil& of petitioner


5/9

G.R. No. L(53++0 Marc 1-, 1/

ENRI#O L. A#E$E, #LARI$A &E LA #ON#E#ION, EMEL&A #. A#E$E, EELINA #. A#E$E an% E&"AR&O #. A#E$E,petitionersvs.ON. GLI#ERIO . #ARRIAGA, R. an% #ON#E#ION 4#ON#I$A ALANI' A#E$E, respon&ents.

Juan $. Sibug and #odol%o &. 'uiahon %or petitioners.

Julio . ndres, Jr. %or pri*ate respondent.

I$"G, J.:

'he issue in this petition for ertiorari is whether or not the Court of :irst @nstance (now Regional 'rial Court) of Cota*ato Branch @ in Cota*ato Cit gravel a*use& its&iscretion in den+ingpetitionersJ %otion for e>tension of ti%e to file their answer in Civil Case o. +!1 in delaringpetitioners in &efault an& in rendering its &ecision of 15

7arch 1"$ which a%ong other things &ecree& the legal separation of petitioner /nrico 2. Pacete an& private respon&ent Concepcion Alanis an& hel& to *e null an& voi& ab initiothe %arriage of /nrico 2. Pacete to Clarita &e la Concepcion.

n +" cto*er 1"5" Concepcion Alanis file& with the court *elow a co%plaint for the &eclaration of nullit of the %arriage *etween her erstwhile hus*an& /nrico 2. Pacete an&one Clarita &e la Concepcion as well as for legal separation (*etween Alanis an& Pacete) accounting an& separation of propert. @n her co%plaint she averre& that she was %arrie&to Pacete on 4$ April 1"4 *efore the 3ustice of the Peace of Cota*ato Cota*ato< that the ha& a chil& na%e& Consuelo who was *orn on 11 7arch 1"#4< that Pacete su*se;uentl

contracte& (in 1"#) a secon& %arriage with Clarita &e la Concepcion in 0i&apawan orth Cota*ato< that she learne& of such %arriage onl on $1 August 1"5"< that &uring her%arriage to Pacete the latter ac;uire& vast propert consisting of large tracts of lan& fishpon&s an& several %otor vehicles< that he frau&ulentl place& the several pieces of

propert either in his na%e an& Clarita or in the na%es of his chil&ren with Clarita an& other =&u%%iestension of twent (+$) &as fro% 4$ ove%*er 1"5" within which to file an

answer. 'he court grante& the %otion. n 1 Dece%*er 1"5" appearing through a new counsel the &efen&ants file& a secon& %otion for an e>tension of another thirt (4$) &asfro% +$ Dece%*er 1"5". n $5 3anuar 1"$ the lower court grante& the %otion *ut onl for twent (+$) &as to *e counte& fro% +$ Dece%*er 1"5" or until $" 3anuar 1"$.

'he r&er of the court was %aile& to &efen&antsJ counsel on 11 3anuar 1"$. 2ikel still unaware of the court or&er the &efen&ants on $! :e*ruar 1"$ again file& another%otion (&ate& 1 3anuar 1"$) for an e>tension of =fifteen (1!) &as counte& fro% the e>piration of the 4$F&a perio& previousl sought= within which to file an answer. 'he

following &a or on $, :e*ruar 1"$ the court &enie& this last %otion on the groun& that it was =file& after the original perio& given . . . as first e>tension ha& e>pire&.=1

'he plaintiff thereupon file& a %otion to &eclare the &efen&ants in &efault which the court forthwith grante&. 'he plaintiff was then &irecte& topresent her evi&ence.2'he court receive& plaintiffJs evi&ence &uring the hearings hel& on 1! +$ +1 an& ++ :e*ruar 1"$.

n 15 7arch 1"$ the court3pro%ulgate& the herein ;uestione& &ecision &isposing of the case thus K

/R/:R/ or&er is here* issue& or&ering8

1. 'he issuance of a Decree of 2egal 6eparation of the %arriage *etween the plaintiff Concepcion (Conchita) Alanis Pacete an&the herein &efen&ants /nrico 2. Pacete in accor&ance with the Philippine laws an& with conse;uences as provi&e& for * our

lawshi*its =B= an&=BF1= for the plaintiff.

+. A parcel of lan& covere& * 'ransfer Certificate of 'itle o. 'F+$##+ with an area of !4 s;uare %eters an& covere& * 'a>

Declaration o. +,!$ (5#) in the na%e of /nrico Pacete situate& in the Po*lacion of 0i&apawan orth Cota*ato together withall its i%prove%ents which parcel of lan& as shown * />hi*its =0F1= was ac;uire& * wa of a*solute &ee& of sale e>ecute& *

A%rosio 7on&og on 3anuar 1# 1",!.

4. A parcel of lan& covere& * 'ransfer Certificate of 'itle o. 'F+$#+# an& covere& * 'a> Declaration o. $4 (5#) with anarea of !.1,5$ hectares %ore or less as shown * />hi*it =R= the sa%e was registere& in the na%e of /nrico Pacete an& the

sa%e was ac;uire& * /nrico Pacete last :e*ruar 15 1",5 fro% A%*ag A%po as shown * />hi*it =RF1= situate& at 7usan

0i&apawan orth Cota*ato.

#. A parcel of lan& situate& at 2anao 0i&apawan orth Cota*ato with an area of !.$!,5 hectares covere& * 'a> Declaration

o. #44+ (5#) as shown * />hi*it =6= an& registere& in the na%e of /nrico Pacete.


6/9

!. A parcel of lan& covere& * 'ransfer Certificate of 'itle o. 'F"5!$ situate& at 2ika 7lang orth Cota*ato with an area of

#."#1 hectares an& the sa%e is covere& * 'a> Declaration o. $4 (5#) an& registere& in the na%e of /nrico Pacete an& which

lan& was ac;uire& * /nrico Pacete fro% 6alva&or Pacete on 6epte%*er +# 1",+ as shown * />hi*it =LF1=.

,. A parcel of lan& covere& * 'ransfer Certificate of 'itle o. 'F""## with an area of "."!,, an& also covere& * 'a>

Declaration o. ,$ (5#) an& registere& in the na%e of the &efen&ant /nrico 2. Pacete which /nrico 2. Pacete ac;uire& fro%

6ancho Balingcos last cto*er ++ 1",+ as shown * />hi*it =2F1= an& which parcel of lan& is situate& at (0iala*) 0ia*7atala% orth Cota*ato.

5. A parcel of lan& covere& * 'ransfer Certificate of 'itle o. 'F"++5 situate& at 0ia* 7atala% orth Cota*ato with an area

of 1+.$#44" hectares %ore or less an& also covere& * 'a> Declaration o. ,$5 (5#) *oth in the na%e of the &efen&ant /nrico2. Pacete which he ac;uire& last cto*er 1! 1",+ fro% 7in&a Bernar&ino as shown * />hi*it =7F1=.

. A parcel of lan& covere& * 'ransfer Certificate of 'itle o. 'F"++ situate& at 0ia* 7atala% orth Cota*ato with an area

of 1$."$ hectares registere& in the na%e of /nrico Pacete an& also covere& * 'a> Declaration o. !51 (5#) in the na%e of

/nrico Pacete an& which parcel of lan& he ac;uire& last 6epte%*er +! 1",+ fro% Conchita &ela 'orre as shown * />hi*it =PF1=.

". A parcel of lan& covere& * 'ransfer Certificate of 'itle o. 'F1$4$1 situate& at 2inao 7atala% orth Cota*ato with an area

of 5.+!#5 hectares registere& in the na%e of /nrico Pacete an& also covere& * 'a> Declaration o. 51, (5#) also in the na%eof /nrico Pacete which /nrico Pacete ac;uire& fro% Agustin Bi9o last 3ul 1, 1",4 as shown * />hi*it =F1=.

1$. A parcel of lan& covere& * 'ransfer Certificate of 'itle o. 1+5+ in the na%e of the &efen&ant /nrico 2. Pacete with an

area of 1$."$$, hectares situate& at 2inao 7atala% orth Cota*ato an& is also covere& * 'a> Declaration o. !5#! (5#) in thena%e of /nrico Pacete as shown on />hi*it == an& which /nrico Pacete ac;uire& last Dece%*er 41 1",4 fro% /liseo Pugni as

shown on />hi*it =$F1=.

4. r&ering the Cancellation of riginal Certificate of 'itle o. PF4#+#4 covering 2ot o. 1$,, issue& in the na%e of /velinaPacete situate& at 0ia* 7atala% orth Cota*ato an& or&ering the registration of the sa%e in the 9oint na%e of Concepcion

(Conchita) Alanis Pacete an& /nrico 2. Pacete as their con9ugal propert with a&&ress on the part of Concepcion (Conchita)

Alanis Pacete at Parang 7aguin&anao an& on the part of /nrico 2. Pacete at 0i&apawan orth Cota*ato.

#. r&ering likewise the cancellation of riginal Certificate of 'itle o. VF+$1$1 covering 2ot o. 55 in the na%e of /&uar&oC. Pacete situate& at ew 2awaan 7lang orth Cota*ato an& the issuance of a new 'ransfer Certificate of 'itle in the 9oint

na%e of (half an& half) Concepcion (Conchita) Alanis Pacete an& /nrico 2. Pacete.

!. r&ering likewise the cancellation of riginal Certificate of 'itle o. PF+""$ covering 2ot 1$, situate& at 0ia* 7atala%

orth Cota*ato with an area of 1+.1$41 hectares in the na%e of /%el&a C. Pacete an& the issuance of a new 'ransfer Certificateof 'itle in the 9oint na%e (half an& half) of Concepcion (Conchita) Alanis Pacete an& /nrico 2. Pacete< an& &eclaring that the

fishpon& situate& at Barrio 'u%anan Bislig 6urigao Del 6ur with an area of # hectares an& covere& * :ishpon& 2easeAgree%ent of /%el&a C. Pacete &ate& 3ul +" 1"55 *e cancelle& an& in lieu thereof the 9oint na%e of Concepcion (Conchita)

Alanis Pacete an& her hus*an& /nrico 2. Pacete *e registere& as their 9oint propert inclu&ing the !$ hectares fishpon& situate&in the sa%e place Barrio 'i%anan Bislig 6urigao &el 6ur.

,. r&ering the following %otor vehicles to *e the 9oint properties of the con9ugal partnership of Concepcion (Conchita) Alanis

Pacete an& /nrico 2. Pacete *i8

a. 7otor vehicle with Plate o. 'FRGF54< 7ake Do&ge< 7otor o. '145F+$!,1< Chassis o. 4"+$4"4 an& 'pe 7carrier. R"?ILLO &. 7"#ANA, re!pon%ent.

R E ' O L " $ I O N

A'@ 3.8

Acting upon the letter of 7rs. Angela Drilon Balta?ar Baranga Captain of Victories Du%angas @loilo &ate& :e*ruar +, 1"5,

respon&ent otar Pu*lic Rufillo D. Bucana was re;uire& * this Court in its Resolution of 7arch +4 1"5, to show cause within ten(1$) &as fro% notice wh he shoul& not *e &isciplinaril &ealt with for having notari?e& on ove%*er 1$ 1"5! at Du%angas @loilo

an Agree%ent e>ecute& * the spouses Gon?alo Balta?ar an& 2uisa 6orongon wherein the aforeF%entione& spouses agree& therein that

=in case anone of the% will re%arr *oth parties offer no o*9ection an& waive all civil an& cri%inal actions against the%= an& that the

aforeF%entione& Agree%ent was =entere& into for the purpose of agree%ent to allow each an& everone of the% to re%arr withouto*9ection or reservation ...= which affi&avit is contrar to law *ecause it sanctions an illicit an& i%%oral purpose.

n April +1 1"5, respon&ent . su*%itte& his e>planation a&%itting that he notari?e& the aforeF%entione& &ocu%ent an& that the

Agree%ent is =i%%oral an& against pu*lic polic= *ut in %itigation he asserte& that the &ocu%ent in ;uestion was Prepare& * hisclerk 2ucia D. Doctolero without his previous knowle&ge< that when sai& &ocu%ent was presente& to hi% for signature after it was

signe& * the parties he vehe%entl refuse& to sign it an& infor%e& the parties that the &ocu%ent was i%%oral< that he place& the sai&

&ocu%ent on his ta*le a%ong his files an& %ore than a week later he aske& his clerk where the &ocu%ent was for the purpose of

&estroing it *ut to his surprise he foun& that the sa%e was notari?e& * hi% as per his file copies in the office< that he &ispatche& his

clerk to get the cop fro% the parties *ut the aforeF%entione& parties coul& not *e foun& in their respective resi&ences< that he %usthave ina&vertentl notari?e& the sa%e in view of the nu%erous &ocu%ents on his ta*le an& at that ti%e he was e%otionall &istur*e&

as his father (now &ecease&) was then seriousl ill. 'he foregoing contentions of respon&ent were corro*orate& su*stantiall * the

separate sworn state%ents of his clerk 2ucia D. Doctolero an& Angela Drilon Balta?ar *oth &ate& April +$ 1"5,. 1

'here is no ;uestion that the aforeF%entione& Agree%ent is contrar to law %orals an& goo& custo%s. 7arriage is an inviola*le social

institution in the %aintenance of which in its purit the pu*lic is &eepl intereste& for it is the foun&ation of the fa%il an& of societ

without which there coul& *e neither civili?ation nor progress. +

'he contract in su*stance purports to for%ulate an agree%ent *etween the hus*an& an& the wife to take unto hi%self a concu*ine an&

the wife to live in a&ulterous relations with another %an without opposition fro% either one an& what is %ore it in&uces each part to

co%%it *iga%. 4 'his is not onl i%%oral *ut in effect a*ets the co%%ission of a cri%e. A notar pu*lic * virtue of the nature ofhis office is re;uire& to e>ercise his &uties with &ue care an& with &ue regar& to the provisions of e>isting law.

As stresse& * 3ustice 7alcol% in Pangani*an v. Borro%eo # =it is for the notar to infor% hi%self of the facts to which he inten&s to

certif an& to take part in no illegal enterprise. 'he notar pu*lic is usuall a person who has *een a&%itte& to the practice of law an&as such in the co%%ingling of his &uties notar an& lawer %ust *e hel& responsi*le for *oth. e are le& to hol& that a %e%*er of the

*ar who perfor%s an act as a notar pu*lic of a &isgraceful or i%%oral character %a *e hel& to account * the court even to the

e>tent of &is*ar%ent.=

@n the case at *ar respon&ent in effect plea&s for cle%enc clai%ing that the notari?ation of the ;uestione& &ocu%ent was &ue to his

negligence. e fin& however that the afore%entione& &ocu%ent coul& not have *een notari?e& if the respon&ent ha& onl e>ercise&

the re;uisite care re;uire& * law in the e>ercise of his &uties as notar pu*lic.

/R/:R/ e hol& that respon&ent Rufillo D. Bucana is guilt of %alpractice an& is here* suspen&e& fro% the office of not tr

pu*lic for a perio& of si> (,) %onths with the a&%onition that a repetition of the sa%e or a si%ilar act in the future will *e &ealt with

%ore severel.

:ernan&o (Chair%an) Barre&o A;uino an& 7artin 33. concur.

Concepcion 3r. 3. is on leave.

7artin 3. was &esignate& to sit in the 6econ& Division.

Documents

Article 55 Legal Separation