1/48
Looks like no tags are added yet.
Name | Mastery | Learn | Test | Matching | Spaced |
---|
No study sessions yet.
What are the essential requisites of marriage?
Art. 2 FC
No marriage shall be valid, unless these essential requisites are present:
(1) Legal capacity of the contracting parties who must be a male and female
(2) Consent freely given in the presence of the solemnizing officer
What are the formal requisites of marriage?
Art. 3 FC. 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.
What are the grounds for void marriages?
(1) party below 18 years
(2) solemnized by any person not legally authorized
(3) solemnized without license
(4) bigamous or polygamous marriages
(5) contracted through mistake of identity of the other
(6) marriages that are void under Art 53 (obtained judgement of nullity of subsisting marriage was not registered making subsequent marriage void)
Art. 35. The following marriages shall be void from the beginning:
(1) Those contracted by any party below eighteen years of age even with the consent of parents or
guardians;
(2) Those solemnized by any person not legally authorized to perform marriages unless such
marriages were contracted with either or both parties believing in good faith that the solemnizing
officer had the legal authority to do so;
(3) Those solemnized without license, except those covered the preceding Chapter;
(4) Those bigamous or polygamous marriages not failing under Article 41;
(5) Those contracted through mistake of one contracting party as to the identity of the other; and
(6) Those subsequent marriages that are void under Article 53.
What are the grounds for voidable marriages?
(1) Lack of Parental Consent (18 ABOVE below 21) — unless ratified
(2) Insanity — unless ratified
(3) Consent Obtained Through Fraud — unless ratified
(4) Consent Obtained Through Force, Intimidation or Undue Influence — unless ratified
(5) Impotence (Physical Incapacity to Consumate a Marriage) — CANT be ratified
(6) Having serious, incurable STDs — CANT be ratified
<<[FULL LEGAL BASIS]>>
Art. 45. A marriage may be annulled for any of the following causes, existing at the time of the marriage:
(1) That the party in whose behalf it is sought to have the marriage annulled was 18 years of age or over but below 21, and the marriage was solemnized without the consent of the parents, guardian or person having substitute parental authority over the party, in that order, unless after attaining the age of 21, such party freely cohabited with the other and both lived together as husband and wife;
(2) That either party was of unsound mind, unless such party after coming to reason, freely cohabited with the other as husband and wife;
(3) That the consent of either party was obtained by fraud, unless such party afterwards, with full knowledge of the facts constituting the fraud, freely cohabited with the other as husband and wife;
(4) That the consent of either party was obtained by force, intimidation or undue influence, unless the same having disappeared or ceased, such party thereafter freely cohabited with the other as husband and wife;
(5) That either party was physically incapable of consummating the marriage with the other, and such incapacity continues and appears to be incurable; or
(6) That either party was afflicted with a sexually-transmissible disease found to be serious and appears to be incurable
Examples of kinds of fraud that fall under Art. 45 (3)?
(1) concealment of previous conviction for Crime of Moral Turpitude
(2) concealment of Pregnancy By Another Man At The Time of the Marriage
(3) concealment of STDs, regardless of nature
(4) concealment of Drug Addiction, Habitual Alcoholism, Homosexuality or Lesbianism
*"Fraud" of health, rank, fortune not included
<<[FULL LEGAL BASIS]>>
Art. 46. 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
Grounds for legal separation?
Article 55
(1) Repeated physical violence or grossly abusive conduct against petitioner, common child, or child of petitioner
(2) Physical violence or moral pressure to compel petitioner to change religious or political affiliation
(3) Attempt to induce petitioner or child to engage in prostitution
(4) 6+ year prison sentence on respondent, even if pardoned
(5) drug addiction or habitual alcoholism (substance abuse)
(6) lesbianism or homosexuality
(7) subsequent bigamous marriage of respondent
(8) sexual infidelity or perversion
(9) Attempt against life of petitioner
(10) abandonment w/o justifiable cause for more than one year
<<[FULL LEGAL BASIS]>>
Art 55, FC. A petition for legal separation may be filed on any of the following grounds:
(1) Repeated physical violence or grossly abusive conduct directed against the petitioner, a common child, or a child of the petitioner;
(2) Physical violence or moral pressure to compel the petitioner to change religious or political affiliation;
(3) Attempt of respondent to corrupt or induce the petitioner, a common child, or a child of the petitioner, to engage in prostitution, or connivance in such corruption or inducement;
(4) Final judgment sentencing the respondent to imprisonment of more than six years, even if pardoned;
(5) Drug addiction or habitual alcoholism of the respondent;
(6) Lesbianism or homosexuality of the respondent;
(7) Contracting by the respondent of a subsequent bigamous marriage, whether in the Philippines or abroad;
(8) Sexual infidelity or perversion;
(9) Attempt by the respondent against the life of the petitioner; or
(10) Abandonment of petitioner by respondent without justifiable cause for more than one year. For purposes of this Article, the term "child" shall include a child by nature or by adoption
Elaborate on the inconsistency of the Court's decision in the Tsoi v. CA and Jimenez v. Republic cases
Tsoi v. CA — ANNULLED — Court characterized husband’s refusal to have sexual relations with his wife (small penis) as a manifestation of his psychological incapacity to fulfill his marital obligations
Jimenez v. Republic — NOT ANNULLED — Jimenez filed for annulment on ground of his wife's impotency, because her vagina was too small to allow penetration. Wife refused to submit to a physical exam despite repeated orders by court. SC ruled that husband’s testimony is not enough to prove impotence. Presumption in the law is always in favor of potency. Wife's refusal to take the physical exam exam was (not self-incriminating) normal given that by nature, Filipina women are coy, bashful and shy
***Marriage cannot be void or voidable depending on the sex of the spouse providing the ground for its dissolution
Differentiate void and voidable marriages
Main point: A void marriage is considered to have never existed from the beginning due to fundamental defects, while a voidable marriage is valid until it is annulled by a court.
*other differences on page 182:
Void (Judicial Decree of Absolute Nullity)
1— Cannot be ratified
2— Property: only co-ownership; no ACP or CPG
3— Status of Children: Illegitimate under Art. 165 (Art. 36 and Art. 53 are exceptions)
4— Does not prescribe
Voidable (Judicial Decree of Annulment)
1— Can be ratified
2— ACP or any other property regime in accordance w/ marriage settlement
3— Status of Children: legitimate if conceived or born prior to the decree
4— Prescribes
What happens if a solemnizing officer has no authority?
Marriage is VOID AB INITIO.
EXCEPTION: If either or both parties believed in good faith that the solemnizing officer had the legal authority to solemnize the marriage.
— Applies in MISTAKE OF FACT — such as when a lower-ranking religious member of a sect was mistaken to be the higher authority that had the legal authority to solemnize
— NOT in MISTAKE OF LAW — such as when an SK Chairman or governor was asked to solemnize a marriage
Juridical Capacity vs Capacity to Act?
Juridical Capacity — Capacity to Act
fitness to be the subject of legal relations — power to act with legal effects
ability to hold & enjoy rights — ability to exercise rights
passive — active
inherent to natural persons — conditional & relative; may be acquired/lost; requires intelligence & will
extinguished only through death — cannot exist w/o juridical capacity
cannot be limited/restricted — can be restricted/limited/modified
Enumerate the marriages of exceptional character
FOUR marriages of exceptional character:
(1) In Articulo Mortis;
— All regular solemnizing officers
— Ship Captain or Airplane Chief –while at sea, or in flight, or during stopovers at ports
— Military Commander – ONLY in absence of chaplain assigned to the unit
(2) Remote that there is no means of transportation to go to get the license
(3) Muslim marriages & Members of Ethnic Communities under their customs, rites & practices (provided they are registered afterwards.)
(4) Cohabitants for 5 years as husband and wife without legal impediment.
What is the state interest in requiring parental consent?
Valid state interest in needing parental consent — mature decision-making and in preventing unstable marriages
Moe v. Dinkins Doctrine:
(1) To prevent immature persons from entering marriage;
(2) Vulnerability of Children; and
(3) To protect the privacy of parents in their child rearing. Parental consent ensures that at least one mature person will participate in the decision. (Art. 45(1), FC)
What are the defenses against legal separation?
Art 56, FC. The petition for legal separation shall be denied on any of the following grounds:
(1) Where the aggrieved party has condoned the offense or act complained of;
(2) Where the aggrieved party has consented to the commission of the offense or act complained of;
(3) Where there is connivance between the parties in the commission of the offense or act constituting the ground for legal separation;
(4) Where both parties have given ground for legal separation;
(5) Where there is collusion between the parties to obtain the decree of legal separation; or
(6) Where the action is barred by prescription.
Define the "tender years presumption"
A child UNDER 7 years should not be separated from the mother
Art 213, FC. In case of separation of the parents, parental authority shall be exercised by the parent designated by the court. The court shall take into account all relevant considerations, especially the choice of the child over seven years of age, unless the parent chosen is unfit.
No child under seven years of age shall be separated from the mother, unless the court finds compelling reasons to order otherwise.
Who are the people that may serve as solemnizing officers?
Art 7, FC. Marriage may be solemnized by:
(1) [Member of the Judiciary] — Any incumbent member of the judiciary within the court's jurisdiction;
(2) [Religious Clergy] — Any priest, rabbi, imam, or minister of any church or religious sect
— duly authorized by his church or religious sect and
— registered with the civil registrar general,
— acting within the limits of the written authority granted by his church or religious sect and
— provided that at least one of the contracting parties belongs to the solemnizing officer's church or religious sect
(3) [Articulo Mortis] — Any ship captain or airplane chief only in the case mentioned in Article 31;
(4) [Articulo Mortis] — Any military commander of a unit to which a chaplain is assigned, in the absence of the latter, during a military operation, likewise only in the cases mentioned in Article 32
(5) Any consul-general, consul or vice-consul in the case provided in Article 10.
— For Filipinos Abroad w/in Philippine Embassy
(6) City & Municipal Mayors — Removed in the family code; Revived by LGC
Status of children in void and voidable marriages
Void — Illegitimate
EXCEPTIONS:
1 — Before judgement of absolute nullity under Art. 36 (Psychological Incapacity)
2 — Of subsequent marriage under Art. 53 (Failure to record decree of nullity or annulment)
3 — Prior termination of subsequent marriage under Art. 42 (affidavit of reappearance)
Voidable — legitimate if conceived or born prior to the decree
How many years before the presumption of death in the Family Code, compared to the Civil Code?
Normal Circumstance — FC: 4 years — CC: 7 years
Exceptional Circumstance — FC: 2 years — CC: 4 years
(danger of death)
— Missing War / Lost at Sea / Airplane crash / Other similar danger
Under the Civil Code, a person who disappears under danger of death is presumed dead after 4 years, while under the Family Code, for purposes of remarriage, the period is only 2 years. The Family Code shortened the period to favor the stability of remarriage once there is a well-founded belief of death.
Is a breach of promise to marry an actionable wrong? Cite a case to support your answer
NO, not an actionable wrong.
WASSMER v VELEZ [1964]
FACTS: Velez left Wassmer a few days before the wedding, after Wassmer had already spent on many things for the occasion.
DOCTRINE: Mere breach of promise to marry is not an actionable wrong, but leaving a few days before the wedding (after all the preparations are done and have been paid for) is contrary to good customs. (Art. 21, NCC)
RULING: This was not mere breach of promise to marry. Award for moral damages was proper.
DE JESUS v SYQUIA (1933)
FACTS: Syquia promised to marry de Jesus. Syquia refused to marry de Jesus when she got pregnant for the second time suspecting the child was not his albeit recognizing the same in letters from Macau. De Jesus filed a suit for breach of promise to marry.
DOCTRINE: Action for breach of promise to marry has no standing in civil law, apart from right to recover money/property advanced by one party upon the faith of such promise
RULING: De Jesus cannot claim for damages. But, paternity of the child is sufficiently proved by the letters.
In separation, what are possible legal remedies for a parent who wants to see his child?
(*Grammar Note: using "his," since custody is often awarded to the wife)
1) Writ of Habeas Corpus
— Con: not direct remedy; does not resolve custody
— Pro: can be filed in CA/SC = wider jurisdiction in cases where mother is hiding the child
2) Petition for Custody
— Con: has to be filed in Family Court where the child is (not always Family Court available)
— Pro: a DIRECT remedy + Family Court is more specialilzed
Effectivity dates of the Civil Code and Family Code?
Civil Code: August 30, 1950
Family Code: August 3, 1988
What is the right to consortium? What are the limits to this right?
The right to consortium is made up of: companionship, love, affection, comfort, mutual services, sexual intercourse - all belonging to the marriage state.
Limits:
1 — Sexual relations limited to normal intercourse (coitus) — "Normal" is not defined by the courts, so spouses decide what is "normal"
2 — Anti-Rape Law (RA 8353) — sex should be consensual
Describe the role of the prosecuting attorney in legal separation and annulment cases?
Art 60, FC. No decree of legal separation shall be based upon a stipulation of facts or a confession of judgment.
In any case, the Court shall order the prosecuting attorney or fiscal assigned to it to take steps to PREVENT COLLUSION between the parties and to take care that the EVIDENCE is NOT FABRICATED or suppressed
How is condonation different from consent?
CONDONATION — forgiveness of marital offense — AFTER offense was committed
CONSENT: "Where the aggrieved party has consented to the commission of the offense or act complained of"
— Express: telling other spouse in CLEAR terms that he/she is free to have other liaisons.
— done BEFORE offense was committed
How is connivance different from collusion?
Connivance (“I let it happen”)— when one spouse secretly allows/facilitates/encouraged commission of a marital offense by the other spouse that becomes ground for legal separation — inferred from conduct of one spouse that s/he desires other spouse to commit the offense
Collusion (“We’re pretending to fight so we can both get legal separation.”)— act of married persons in procuring a legal separation by MUTUAL CONSENT whether by:
— Agreeing ahead of time for one of the spouses to commit a marital offense;
— Faking the commission of a ground of legal separation;
— Failing to present evidence to defeat the suit for legal separation.
What is the effect of two Filipinos obtaining a divorce abroad?
If 2 Filipinos are Filipino citizens AT THE TIME of OBTAINING the divorce = not recognized in the PH.
If the Filipino Obtaining the Divorce Subsequently Changes their Citizenship and are now a FOREIGN CITIZEN AT THE TIME OF OBTAINING the divorce = Recognized provided..
1— Proof that spouse obtaining divorce changed citizenship already AT THE TIME OF OBTAINING DIVORCE
2— Proof of foreign divorce judgement & authenticity as fact
3— Proof of existence of such foreign law — should show that the divorce allows the alien to remarry
Differentiate psychological incapacity and insanity
Psychological Incapacity (Art. 36) — spouse truly unable to understand and fulfill the essential marital obligations of marriage — INCURABLE — renders marriage VOID
Insanity (Art. 45 (3)) — mentally unsound at the time of the marriage, lacking the capacity to give valid consent — can be RATIFIED by insane spouse during period of LUCIDITY — renders marriage VOIDABLE
What value is given to the Certification of the Civil Registrar in relation to marriage license?
Probative Value
— considered prima facie evidence of the non-issuance/issuance of a marriage license —court presumes it true unless rebutted by other evidence
— based on the presumption of regular performance of official function by the Local Civil Registrar in issuing certifications
What are juridical persons? What is the significance or importance of this concept?
Juridical Persons
— entities given personality by law (products of legal fiction)
—being or entity recognized by law as having rights and obligations, SEPARATE from the natural persons composing it
— State & political subdivisions
— Corporation, institutions, entities with public purpose created by law
— Corporations, partnerships, and associations for private interest, granted personality by law (Corp code)
When does civil personality begin, and when does it end?
GENERAL RULE: Birth determines personality; Death extinguishes civil personality
EXCEPTION: Conceived child shall be considered born for all purposes that are favorable to it, provided it be born later with the following circumstances:
a) It is alive at the time it is completely delivered from the mother's womb
b) BUT if it had an intra-uterine life of less than seven months, it should survive for AT LEAST 24 HOURS after its complete delivery
Article 38 of the Family Code?
Art 38, FC. The following marriages shall be void from the beginning for reasons of public policy:
(1) Between collateral blood relatives whether legitimate or illegitimate, up to the fourth civil degree;
(2) Between step-parents & step-children;
(3) Between parents-in-law & children-in-law;
(4) Between the adopting parent & the adopted child;
(5) Between the surviving spouse of the adopting parent and the adopted child;
(6) Between the surviving spouse of the adopted child and the adopter;
(7) Between an adopted child and a legitimate child of the adopter;
(8) Between adopted children of the same adopter; and
(9) Between parties where one, with the intention to marry the other, killed that other person's spouse, or his or her own spouse.
Elaborate and explain Article 37 of the Family Code
Art. 37. Marriages between the following are incestuous and void from the beginning, whether relationship between the parties be legitimate or illegitimate:
(1) Between ascendants and descendants of any degree; and
(2) Between brothers and sisters, whether of the full or half blood. (81a)
What are the original standards set by the MOLINA DOCTRINE to determine the grounds for a void marriage under Art. 36?
8 Molina Guidelines
1) BURDEN OF PROOF to show nullity of marriage belongs to plaintiff
2) ROOT CAUSE of the psychological incapacity must be
— a) medically or clinically identified
— b) alleged in the complaint
— c) sufficiently proven by experts
— d) clearly explained in the decision
must be psychological although manifestations and/or symptoms may be physical
3) JURIDICAL ANTECEDENCE: incapacity proven to exist at the TIME OF CELEBRATION of marriage, although manifestation could’ve been perceived later on
4) medically permanent or INCURABLE – must be RELEVANT to the marriage, not necessarily to one’s job
5) Illness must be GRAVE ENOUGH that party cant assume their obligations – mild/mood changes/occasional outbursts cant be accepted— should be incapacity, not refusal, not neglect, not difficulty
6) ESSENTIAL MARITAL OBLIGATIONS must be the ones in Art. 68 - 71, FC (wife & husband) and Art. 220, 221, 225 (children).
— Must be stated in petition,
— must be proven,
— must be included in decision
7) Interpretations by National Appellate Matrimonal Tribunal of the Catholic Church in the PH, while not controlling, should be given GREAT RESPECT (purpose was not harmonize civil laws with religious faith of our people)
8) Trial court must order prosecutor or fiscal and the SolGen to appear as COUNSEL FOR THE STATE. No decision shall be handed down unless SolGen issues cert. Which will be quotes in decision, stating reasons for agreement
– SolGen and prosecuting attorney shall submit cert. w/in 15 days from date case is deemed submitted for resolution of the court.
What is marriage?
Marriage as defined in the family code partakes a dual character:
1) PRIVATE — a private covenant between two indiviuals committed to making a life together
2) PUBLIC — a social institution that serves a vital societal purpose
Article 1. Marriage is a special contract of permanent union between a man and a woman entered into in accordance with law for the establishment of conjugal and family life. It is the foundation of the family and an inviolable social institution whose nature, consequences, and incidents are governed by law and not subject to stipulation, except that marriage settlements may fix the property relations during the marriage within the limits provided by this Code.
Discuss Sarao v. Guevarra
SARAO v GUEVARRA [1940]
FACTS: Couple has painful sex with discharge, gets operation to remove uterus and ovaries that had tumor, husband lost interest in sex with her, asks whether her inability now to procreate amounts to physical incapbility of entering into the married state.
DOCTRINE: The phrase "physically incapable of entering into the married state" cannot be construed to mean incapacity to procreate but rather permanent/lasting inability to copulate.
RULING: Wife capable of copulation, and husband's voluntary desistance is the reason they no longer have sex. Also, "In the US, impotency is not the ability to procreate, but the inability to copulate. The defect must be one of copulation, not of reproduction. Barrenness will not invalidate the marriage." Fraud also not applicable since not alleged.
Is intent to kill a ground for legal separation?
Intent to kill is the 9th ground for legal separation.
ONG ENG KIAM v ONG [2006]
FACTS: Lucita, who left the family, filed for legal separation due to the husband's constant violence and abuse.
DOCTRINE: Repeated physical violence, when established and proven, is a ground for legal separation, and so with abandonment without justifiable cause for more than one year. (Art. 55(1), FC)
RULING: Petition for Legal Separation granted. Husband pointed a gun at her in one of their quarrels. Linda's sister also gave accounts of him throwing chairs at Lucita and their children, using his belt.
Discuss the Buccat v. Mangonon-Buccat case
BUCCAT v MANGONON-BUCCAT [1941]
FACTS: Husband and wife got married, 3 months later, wife gave birth after a full-term pregnancy. Husband filed for annulment on the ground of vitiated consent.
DOCTRINE: There should be a clear proof of fraud for a marriage to be annulled. 6 months is already too evident not to be noticed. (Art. 45(3) & 46(2) FC)
RULING: No fraud since the husband should have already observed the wife's physical condition at the time of the marriage. Petition for annulment DISMISSED..
Compare the BUCCAT v. MANGONON-BUCCAT and AQUINO v. DELIZO. Why were they judged differently?
BUCCAT v. MANGONON-BUCCAT — annulment NOT granted — No Fraud. It was unlikely for husband not to notice physical state of wife given advanced stage of pregnancy (7 months) at the time of the marriage. Furthermore, he was a first year law student
AQUINO v. DELIZO — annulment GRANTED — There is fraud. Pregnancy of wife by another man during the time of marriage was NOT APPARENT as she was not in an advanced stage of pregnancy (only 4 months). Pregnancy was easier to conceal, especially as the wife was a plump woman.
_________
BUCCAT v MANGONON-BUCCAT [1941]
FACTS: Husband and wife got married, 3 months later, wife gave birth after a full-term pregnancy. Husband filed for annulment on the ground of vitiated consent.
DOCTRINE: There should be a clear proof of fraud for a marriage to be annulled. 6 months is already too evident not to be noticed. (Art. 45(3) & 46(2) FC)
RULING: No fraud since the husband should have already observed the wife's physical condition at the time of the marriage. Petition for annulment dismissed.
VS
AQUINO v DELIZO [1960]
FACTS: 4 months after the spouses got married, the wife gave birth to a child. Husband filed for annulment on the ground of fraud, with wife concealing prenancy by another man.
DOCTRINE: At 4 months, Conchita's pregnancy was not readily apparent. It's only on the 6th month that the physical signs of pregnancy becomes more apparent. (Art. 45(3) & 46(2) FC)
RULING: Fraud by concealment was present, especially since the wife was "naturally plump". Petition was remanded for consideration.
Differentiate Mercado v. Espiritu, Bambalan v. Maramba, and Braganza v. Villa Abrille.
Mercado v. Espiritu — Minors cannot give consent to contracts; however, those made by minors who pretend to be of legal age, when in fact they are not, ARE VALID due to the principle of estoppel.
Bambalan v. Maramba - No misrepresentation of minority in the contract. Contract of sale was ANNULLED. Mercado vs. Espiritu Doctrine is not applicable to this case, because the plaintiff did not pretend to be of age, and the defendant knew him as a minor (as defendant bought plaintiff’s first cedula).
Braganza v. Villa Abrille - Passive misrepresentation/ Failure of minor to disclose his minority when making a contract does NOT per se, constitute a fraud. Mercado v. Espiritu → not applicable. The contract to pay back the loan is not enforceable towards the minors, but they must pay to the extent to which they were enriched (necessities)
Justifications for the Heartbalm Statutes
(1) Excessive Damage Verdicts
(2) Abuse & Blackmail
(3) Changed Social Moores
Explain the Dual Character of Marriage
(1) PRIVATE covenant between 2 individuals committed in having a life together
(2) PUBLIC - social institution that serves a vital societal purpose
Define Marriage
Article 1, FC — Marriage is a special contract of permanent union between a man and a woman entered into in accordance with law for the establishment of conjugal and family life. It is the foundation of the family and an inviolable social institution whose nature, consequences, and incidents are governed by law and not subject to stipulation, except that marriage settlements may fix the property relations during the marriage within the limits provided by this Code.
Differentiate a Marriage from Ordinary Contracts
(1) Entered into only by 1 man and 1 woman — Entered into by any number of persons
(2) Rights and duties are defined by law — Rights and duties are subject to stipulation; Agreement between the parties
(3) CANNOT be terminated by their OWN mutual agreement — CAN be terminated by their mutual agreement
Give me Loving v. Virginia and Zablocki v. Redhail
Loving v. Virginia (1967) was a landmark US SC case that struck down state laws banning interracial marriage. Richard and Mildred Loving, a white man and a Black woman, were sentenced to a year in prison in Virginia for marrying. They challenged the law as unconstitutional, arguing it violated their rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. SC unanimously agreed, ruling that laws prohibiting interracial marriage violated both the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses. This decision invalidated all race-based marriage restrictions in the United States, affirming marriage as a fundamental right.
Zablocki v. Redhail was a US SC case about a Wisconsin law that required people with child support obligations to get court approval before marrying. Redhail, who couldn’t afford to pay his past child support, was denied permission to marry. He challenged the law as a violation of his constitutional rights. SC ruled in his favor, holding that the law violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment because it unreasonably interfered with the fundamental right to marry. The decision reaffirmed that marriage is a basic civil right that cannot be restricted without a compelling government interest.
1.Discuss the parental consent requirement. Is the analysis of the U.S. Court in Moe v Dinkins applicable to the PH Family Code requirement. Explain fully.
2.Discuss fraud as a ground for voidable marriages. Discuss ALL the cases as examples of or exceptions to fraud.
3. Which grounds for voidable marriages are not ratifiable? Why not? Does this mean that a suit for annulment may thus be filed any time?
Obergeffel v. Hodges
Updated Molina Doctrine Relaxed by Tan-Andal v. Andal Case
1) Burden of proof – RETAINED
2) ROOT Cause — MODIFIED
— Abandoned A (medically identified)
— Abandoned C (proof by expert) > testimonies from fact/ordinary witnesses who have been present in the lives of the spouses may be sufficient proof
Not only PI mental disorders but “personality structure” –
But what is the difference with incompatibility (which is a ground for divorce)
3) Juridical Antecedence — RETAINED
4) Incurability — REINTERPRETED
— court recognizes LEGAL not medical incapacity
— Incapacity is enduring and persistent w/ respect to a specific partner and contemplates a situation where their personality structures are so incompatible and antagonistic that the result will be inevitable and irreparable breakdown of marriage
5) Gravity – RETAINED – clarified that must be grave enough to bring about the disability of the party to assume the essential marital obligations
Not mlild categorical pculiarities, mood changes, occasional emotion outbursts; must be GENUINELY SERIOUS PSYCHIC CAUSE
6) Marital Obligations – RETAINED
— Mere failure to meet these obligations will NOT automatically nullify the marriage
— must be shown that failure is of grievous nature that it reflects on the capacity of one of the spouse for marriage
7) Church Interpretation — RETAINED – great persuasive weight, what is decreed as canonical invalid should also be decreed civilly void
8) SolGen — RETAINED
Compare the grounds for legal separation under the Civil Code and the Family Code
CC — only 2 grounds for legal separation
(1) adultery or concubinage
(2) attempt by one spouse against the life of the other.
FC — expanded to 10 grounds
1 — Repeated physical violence or abuse against petitioner, common child, petitioner’s child
2 — Physical Violence or Moral Pressure to Compel Change in Religion/Political Affiliation
3 — Attempt to Corrupt or Induce Petitioner, Common Child, or Petitioner’s Child, to Engage in Prostitution
4 — Final Judgement Sentencing Respondent to Imprisonment of More Than 6 Years
5 — Drug Addiction or Habitual Alcoholism or Respondent
6 — Lesbianism or Homosexuality of Respondent
7 — Respondent Contracting of a Subsequent Bigamous Marriage, whether PH or Abroad
8 — Sexual Infidelity of Perversion
9 — Attempt of Respondent against Life of Petitioner
10 — Abandonment of Petitioner by Respondent W/O Justifiable Cause for More Than 1 Year
drug addiction, sexual infidelity, homosexuality, abandonment, and others. This expansion reflects a policy shift from simply punishing grave marital offenses to protecting the dignity, safety, and welfare of the family.