Persons and Family Relations Flashcards
At age 18, Marian found out that she was pregnant. She insured her own life and named her unborn child as her sole beneficiary. When she was already due to give birth, she and her boyfriend Pietro, the father of her unborn child, were kidnapped in a resort in Bataan where they were vacationing. The military gave chase and after one week, they were found in an abandoned hut in Cavite. Marian and Pietro were hacked with bolos. Marian and the baby delivered were both found dead, with the baby’s umbilical cord already cut. Pietro survived. Can Marian’s baby be the beneficiary of the insurance taken on the life of the mother?
Yes, the baby can be the beneficiary of the life insurance of Marian. Art. 40 NCC provides that “birth determines personality; but the conceived child shall be considered born for all purposes that are favorable to it, provided that it be born later with the conditions
specified in Art. 41. Article 41 states that “for civil purposes, the fetus shall be considered born if it is alive at the time it is completely delivered from the
mother’s womb. However, if the fetus had an intra-uterine life of less than seven months, it is not deemed born if it dies within twenty-four (24) hours after its complete delivery from the maternal womb. The act of naming the unborn child as sole beneficiary in the insurance is favorable to the conceived child and therefore the fetus acquires presumptive or provisional personality. However, said presumptive personality only becomes conclusive if the child is born alive. The
child need not survive for twenty-four (24) hours as required under Art. 41 of the Code because “Marian was already due to give birth,” indicating that the
child was more than seven months old.
Ricky donated P 1 Million to the unborn child of his pregnant girlfriend, which she accepted. After six (6) months of pregnancy, the fetus was born and baptized was Angela. However, Angela died 20 hours after birth. Ricky sought to recover the P 1 Million. Is Ricky entitled to recover? Explain.
Yes, Ricky is entitled to recover the P1,000,000.00. The NCC considers a fetus a person for purposes favorable to it provided it is born later in accordance with the provision of the NCC. While the donation is favorable to the fetus, the donation did not take effect because the fetus was not born in accordance with the NCC.
To be considered born, the fetus that had an intrauterine life of less than seven (7) months should live for 24 hours from its complete delivery from the mother’s womb. Since Angela had an intrauterine life of less than seven (7) months but did not live for 24 hours, she was not considered born and, therefore, did not become a person. Not being a person, she has no juridical capacity to be a donee, hence, the donation to her did not take effect. The donation not being effective, the amount donated may be recovered. To retain it will be unjust enrichment.
Roberta, a Filipino, 17 years of age, without the knowledge of his parents, can acquire a house in Australia because Australian Laws allow aliens to acquire property from the age of 16. Is this correct?
Yes. Since Australian Law allows alien to acquire property from the age of 16, Roberta may validly own a house in Australia, following the principle of lex
rei sitae enshrined in Art. 16, NCC, which states “Real property as well as personal property is subject to the law of the country where it is situated.” Moreover, even assuming that legal capacity of Roberta in entering the
contract in Australia is governed by Philippine Law, she will acquire ownership over the property bought until the contract is annulled.
OR
No. Laws relating to family rights and duties, or to the status, condition or legal capacity of persons are binding upon the citizens of the Philippines, even though living abroad (Art. 15, NCC). The age of majority under Philippine law is 18 years (R.A. No. 6809); hence, Roberta, being only 17 years old, has no legal capacity to acquire and own land.
Gianna was born to Andy and Aimee, who at the time Gianna’s birth were not married to each other. While Andy was single at the time, Aimee was still in the process of securing a judicial declaration of nullity on her marriage to her ex-husband. Gianna’s birth certificate, which was signed by both Andy and Aimee, registered the status of Gianna as “legitimate”, her surname carrying that of Andy’s and that her parents were married to each other. Can a judicial action for correction of entries in Gianna’s birth certificate be successfully maintained to:
a). Change her status from “legitimate” to “illegitimate”
and
b). Change her surname from that of Andy’s to Aimee’s maiden surname?
Yes, a judicial action for correction of entries in Gianna’s birth certificate can be successfully maintained to change (a) her status from “legitimate” to “illegitimate,” and (b) her surname from that of Andy’s to Aimee’s maiden surname in accordance with Rule 108 of the Rules of Court because said changes are substantive corrections.
Emmanuel and Margarita, American citizens and employees of the U.S. State Department, got married in the African state of Kenya where sterility is a ground for annulment of marriage. Thereafter, the spouses were assigned to the U.S. Embassy in Manila. On the first year of the spouses’ tour of duty in the Philippines, Margarita filed an annulment case against Emmanuel
before a Philippine court on the ground of her husband’s sterility at the time of the celebration of the marriage. Will the suit prosper? Explain your answer.
No, the suits will not prosper. As applied to foreign nationals with the respect to family relations and status of persons, the nationality principle set forth in Article 15 of the Civil Code will govern the relations of Emmanuel and Margarita. Since they are American citizens, the governing law as to the ground for annulment is not Kenyan Law which Magarita invokes in support of sterility as such ground; but should be U.S. Law, which is the national Law of both Emmanuel and Margarita as recognized under Philippine Law. Hence, the Philippine court will not give due course to the case based on Kenyan Law. The nationality principle as expressed in the application of national law of foreign nationals by Philippine courts is established by precedents (Pilapil v. Ibay-Somera, 174 SCRA 653[1989], Garcia v. Recio, 366 SCRA 437 [2001], Llorente v. Court of Appeals 345 SCRA 92 [2000],
and Bayot v. Court of Appeals 570 SCRA 472 [2008]).
If Ligaya, a Filipino citizen residing in the United States, files a petition for change of name before the District Court of New York, what law shall apply? Explain.
New York law shall apply. The petition of change of name file din New York does not concern the legal capacity or status of the petitioner. Moreover, it does not affect the registry of any other country including the country of birth of the petitioner. Whatever judgment is rendered in that petition will have effect only in New York. The New York court cannot, for instance, order the Civil Registrar in the Philippines to change its records. The judgment of the New York court allowing a change in the name of the petitioner will be limited to the records of the petitioner in New York and the use of her new name in all transactions in New York. Since the records and processes in New York are the only ones affected, the New York court will apply New York law in
resolving the petition.
OR
Philippine law shall apply (Art 15, NCC). Status, conditions, family rights and duties are governed by Philippine laws as to Filipinos even though sojourning abroad.
If Henry, an American citizen residing in the Philippines, files a petition for change of name before a Philippine court, what law shall apply? Explain.
Philippine law will apply. The petition for change of name in the Philippines will affect only the records of the petitioner and his transactions in the Philippines. The Philippine court can never acquire jurisdiction over the custodian in the US of the records of the petitioner. Moreover, change of name has nothing to do with the legal capacity or status of the alien. Since Philippine records and transactions are the only ones affected, the Philippine court may effect the change only in accordance with the laws governing those records and transactions that law cannot be but Philippine law.
OR
U.S. law shall apply as it is his national law. This is pursuant to the application of lex patriae or the nationality principle, by which his legal status is
governed by national law, the matter of change of name being included in the legal status. The Supreme Court has reiterate in several cases, that the lex patriae as provided in Article 15 of the Civil Code is applicable to foreign nationals in determining their legal status.
Rafael, a wealthy bachelor, filed a petition for the adoption of Dolly, a one-year old foundling who had a severe heart ailment. During the pendency of the adoption proceedings, Rafael died of natural causes. The Office of the Solicitor General files a motion to dismiss the petition on the ground that the case can no longer proceed because of the petitioner’s death.
Should the case be dismissed? Explain.
It depends on the stage of the proceedings when Rafael died. If he died after all the requirements under the law have been complied with and the case is
already submitted for resolution, the court may grant the petition and issue a decree of adoption despite the death of the adopter (Section 13, RA 8552).
Otherwise, the death of the petitioner shall have the effect terminating the proceedings.
Spouses Rex and Lea bore two children now aged 14 and 8. During the subsistence of their marriage, Rex begot a child by another woman. He is now 10 years of age. On Lea’s discovery of Rex’s fathering a child by another woman, she filed a petition for legal separation which was granted. Rex now wants to adopt his illegitimate child. Whose consent is needed for Rex’s adoption of his illegitimate child?
The consent of the 14-year-old legitimate child, of the 10- year -old illegitimate child and of the biological mother of the illegitimate child are needed for the adoption (Section 7 and 9, RA 8552). The consent of Lea is no longer required because there was already a final decree of legal separation.
Honorato filed a petition to adopt his minor illegitimate child Stephanie, alleging that Stephanie’s mother is Gemma Astorga Garcia; that Stephanie has been using her mother’s middle name and surname; and that he is now a widower and qualified to be her adopting parent. He prayed that Stephanie’s middle name be changed from “Astorga” to “Garcia,” which is her mother’s surname and that her surname “Garcia” be changed to “Catindig,” which is his surname. This the trial court denied. Was the trial court correct in denying Hororato’s request for Stephanie’s use of her mother’s surname as her middle name? Explain.
No, the trial court was not correct. There is no law prohibiting an illegitimate child adopted by his natural father to use as middle name his mother’s surname. The law is silent as to what middle name an adoptee may use. In case of In re: Adoption of Stephanie Nathy Astorga Garcia, G.R. No. 148311, March 31, 2005, the Supreme Court ruled that the adopted child may use the surname of the natural mother as his middle name because there is no prohibition in the law against it. Moreover, it will also be for the benefit of the adopted child who shall preserve his lineage on his mother’s side and reinforce his right to inherit from his mother and her family. Lastly, it will make the adopted child
conform with the time-honored Filipino tradition of carrying the mother’s surname as the person’s middle name.
Despite several relationships with different women, Andrew remained unmarried. His first relationship with Brenda produced a daughter, Amy, now 30 years old. His second, with Carla, produced two sons: Jon and Ryan. His third, with Donna, bore him no children although Elena has a daughter Jane, from a previous relationship. His last, with Fe, produced no biological children but they informally adopted without court proceedings, Sandy’s now 13 years old, whom they consider as their own. Sandy was orphaned as a baby and was entrusted to them by the midwife who attended to Sandy’s birth. All the children, including Amy, now live with Andrew in his house. Is there any legal obstacle to the legal adoption of Amy by Andrew? To the legal adoption of Sandy by Andrew and Elena?
Yes, there is a legal obstacle to the legal adoption of Amy by Andrew. Under Sec. 9(d) of RA 8552, the New Domestic Adoption Act of 1998, the written consent of the illegitimate sons/daughters, ten (10) years of age or over, of the adopter, if living with said adopter and the latter’s spouse, if any, is necessary to the adoption. All the children of Andrew are living with him. Andrew needs to get the written consent of Jon, Ryan, Vina and Wilma, who are all ten (10) years old or more. Sandy’s
consent to Amy’s adoption is not necessary because she was not legally adopted by Andrew. Jane’s consent is likewise not necessary because she is not a child of Andrew. Sandy, an orphan since birth, is eligible for adoption under Sec. 8(f) of RA 8552, provided that Andrew obtains the written consent of the other children mentioned above, including Amy and Elena obtains the written consent of Jane, if she is over ten years old (Sec. 9(d), RA 8552).
Eighteen-year old Filipina Patrice had a daughter out of wedlock whom she named Laurie. At 26, Patrice married American citizen John who brought her to live with him in the United States of America. John at once signified his willingness to adopt Laurie. Can John file the petition for adoption? If yes, what are the requirements? If no, why?
No, John cannot file the petition to adopt alone. Philippine law requires on certain situations enumerated in the law. The case of John does not fall in any of the exceptions (R.A. 8552).
Emmanuel and Margarita, American citizens and employees of the U.S. State Department, got married in the African state of Kenya where sterility is a ground for
annulment of marriage. Thereafter, the spouses were assigned to the U.S. Embassy in Manila. On the first year of the spouses’ tour of duty in the Philippines, Margarita filed an annulment case against Emmanuel before a Philippine court on the ground of her husband’s sterility at the time of the celebration of the marriage. Assume Emmanuel and Margarita are both Filipinos. After their wedding in Kenya, they come back and take up residence in the Philippines. Can their marriage be annulled on the ground of Emmanuel’s sterility? Explain.
No, the marriage cannot be annulled under the Philippine law. Sterility is not a ground for annulment of marriage under Article 45 of the Family Code.
OR
No, the marriage cannot be annulled in the Philippines.
The Philippine court shall have jurisdiction over the action to annul the marriage not only because the parties are residents of the Philippines but because they are Filipino citizens. The Philippine court, however, shall apply the law of the place where the marriage was celebrated in determining its formal validity (Article 26, FC; Article 17, NCC).
Since the marriage was celebrated in Kenya in accordance with Kenyan law, the formal validity of such marriage is governed by Kenyan law and any issue as
to the formal validity of that marriage shall be determined by applying Kenyan law and not Philippine law. However, while Kenyan law governs the formal validity of the marriage, the legal capacity of the Filipino parties to the marriage is governed not by Kenyan law but by Philippine law (Article 15, NCC).
Sterility of a party as a ground for the annulment of the marriage is not a matter of form but a matter of legal capacity. Hence, the Philippine court must apply Phillippine law in determining the status of the marriage on the ground of absence or defect in the legal capacity of the Filipino parties.
Since sterility does not constitute absence or defect in the legal capacity of the parties under Philippine law, there is no ground to avoid or annul the marriage. Hence, the Philippine court has to deny the petition.
The day after John and Marsha got married, John told her that he was impotent. Marsha continued to live with John for 2 years. Marsha is now estopped from filing an annulment case against John. Is she correct?
NO. Marsha is not estopped from filing an annulment case against John on the ground of his impotence, because she learned of his impotence after the celebration of the marriage and not before. Physical incapacity to consummate is a valid ground for the annulment of marriage if such incapacity was existing at the time of the marriage, continues and appears to be incurable. The marriage may be annulled on this
ground within five years from its celebration.
A petition for declaration of nullity of a void marriage can only be filed by either the husband or the wife? Do you agree? Explain your answer.
Yes, I agree. Under the rules promulgated by the Supreme Court, a direct action for declaration of nullity may only be filed by any of the spouses.
OR
No, I do not agree. There are others who may file a petition for declaration of nullity such as the other spouse in bigamous marriages.
