Melissa Renee Mendiola - sadsadtamesislaw.com

Does gross negligence have to be habitual to be considered as just cause for dismissal?

Leave a Comment / Case Digest, Jurisprudence

Facts Lingganay was hired by the respondents as a bus driver sometime in 2013. In October 2013, he figured in an accident while driving the company bus along Maharlika Hi-way in Brgy. Concepcion, Quezon Province. On 30 December 2016, Lingganay was involved in another accident—this time, with a motorcycle. On 01 May 2017, Lingganay again figured in an accident as he crashed into the rear portion of a Toyota Wigo while driving the company bus along the San Juanico Bridge, Samar. On 29 May 2017, respondents decided to terminate Lingganay from Employment for transgressing the company rules and regulations on health and safety, i.e. “Violation 8.1.4 – Any form of laxity, reckless driving, and gross negligence, resulting to damages to property, injuries, death, and other casualties.” This prompted Lingganay to file a complaint for illegal dismissal with money claims against respondents. The Labor Arbiter (LA) ruled in favor of the respondents and dismissed Lingganay’s complaint, which the NLRC affirmed. The Court of Appeals (CA) agreed with the labor tribunals that Lingganay was validly dismissed as he repeatedly violated the Health and Safety Rules of the Company, and also on the ground of gross and habitual neglect of duties in accordance with Art. 282 of the Labor Code. Lingganay insists that even if he was indeed negligent in the performance of his tasks, it was not shown that his negligence was both gross and habitual, since his past mishaps were merely minor. Hence, this present petition for review on certiorari. Issue Whether or not Lingganay was validly dismissed from employment. Ruling YES. The Supreme Court (SC) held that respondents validly terminated Lingganay from employment for transgressing the company rules and regulations on health and safety, and for his gross and habitual neglect of his duties under Art. 297(b) of the Labor Code. Furthermore, the SC declared that even assuming arguendo that the employee’s gross negligence was not habitual, the element of habituality may be dispensed with in instances when the recklessness caused substantial damage or loss to the employer. Here, the infraction of Lingganay when he crashed into the Toyota Wigo caused substantial damage to the car in the amount of Php99,000.00 and to the company bus amounting to Ph6,500. Respondents were compelled to pay the full amount of Php99,000 just to avoid any possible legal suit against the company. This damage was so substantial that respondents cannot be legally compelled to continue his employment.

Does gross negligence have to be habitual to be considered as just cause for dismissal? Read More »

Your Helpful Guide to Copyright Registration

Leave a Comment / Bits of Law

Do you have a creative side that you like to indulge? Many creative spirits like to express themselves through some form of art. Some treat their art as a simple hobby to relax and unwind with. Others take it seriously as a career or a serious commitment. Regardless of their path, however, many artists are protective of their work and want to protect it from crimes such as plagiarism or unauthorized distribution. This is where copyright comes in. Here’s what you need to know. What is Copyright? Copyright protects an owner’s literary, scientific, or artistic creations. Books, songs (with or without words), illustrations, photographs, cinematographic works, and computer programs are some of the many works that copyright protection covers. If you’d like to have your work protected under copyright law, you will need to register it with the Intellectual Property Office (IPOPHIL). In the Philippines, copyright protection lasts for the entirety of the author’s lifespan, plus an additional fifty (50) years after the author’s death. Once such copyright protection expires, it enters the public domain, granting the public free access and rights to use it in any way they want. Copyright also protects derivative works, which are based on works that already exist. Creators who want to create something based on an existing piece will not be violating the original piece’s copyright protection. Examples of derivative works include adaptations, translations, or other alterations of literary or artistic works. Collections of works, such as a short story collection, are also derivative works. While copyright protection covers a fast number of literary, scientific and artistic creations, there are some works that are unprotected. These include: In addition, no copyright shall subsist in any work of the Government of the Philippines. This is all according to the Intellectual Property Code. Does this mean works without copyright are unprotected? No. From the moment a piece of copyrightable work is created and fixed in a tangible medium, it is automatically protected by The Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines (IP Code). Said law does not require registration of the work to fully recover in an infringement suit. However, there are still benefits to official registration, such as: How do I register my work for copyright? You can check the requirements here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1jG8thdOJGN7FLjvJ83zZOuoLkPEms5xc/view

Your Helpful Guide to Copyright Registration Read More »

Basics of Ownership: What You Need to Know About Succession

Leave a Comment / Bits of Law

In this blog, we shall be focusing on one of the few derivative modes of acquiring ownership: succession, including donation mortis causa. What is ownership? Ownership is defined as the exclusive right of the possession, enjoyment, and disposing of a property. Under Article 712 of the New Civil Code: “Ownership is acquired by occupation and by intellectual creation. Ownership and other real rights over property are acquired and transmitted by law, by donation, by testate and intestate succession, and in consequence of certain contracts, by tradition. They may also be acquired by means of prescription (609a)” What is Succession? Under Article 774 of the New Civil Code, succession is a mode of acquisition by virtue of which the property, rights and obligations to the extent of the value of the inheritance of a person are transmitted through his death to another or others either by his will or by operation of law. What are the Types of Succession? This type of succession is a result from the designation of an heir and is made in a will executed in the form prescribed by law. However, please take note that testamentary succession is not absolute, as it is subject to the right of the compulsory heirs to their legitime. A legal or intestate succession is when a decedent dies without a will or with an invalid will. Distribution of the property shall be made in accordance with the Civil Code. A mixed type of succession is when the transmission is made partly by will and partly by the operation of law. What are the Elements of Succession? The person who died owns the property to be transmitted through succession. Properties, rights, obligations of the decedent not extinguished by death A person called to the succession. The acceptance of an inheritance may be either express or tacit. A tacit acceptance is one where actions imply the intention of the successor. An express acceptance is made in a public or a private document. What else is covered by the Rules on Succession? Donation mortis causa is also covered by the Rules on Succession. With the direct translation of “Awareness that death is approaching”, it simply means that a donation is made in contemplation of the donor’s death. The ownership of the donated properties, be it full or naked ownership, will only pass to the donee because of the donor’s death. A donation mortis causa must be in the form of a will, with all the formalities for the validity of wills, otherwise it is void and cannot transfer ownership. Donation mortis causa has the following distinguishing characteristics:

Basics of Ownership: What You Need to Know About Succession Read More »

In case of doubt, in whose favor should an insurance claim dispute be resolved?

Leave a Comment / Case Digest, Jurisprudence

Doctrine: Insurers must not be allowed to delay the payment of claims by filing frivolous cases in court, hoping that the inevitable may be put off for years—or even decades—by the pendency of these unnecessary court cases Facts Romeo obtained an accident insurance policy from several insurance companies including Philam Life Insurance. One day, as he was coming out of the bathroom, Romeo tripped causing his right eye to hit the arm rest of a chair. He called out to his spouse, Luisa, who promptly rushed to his side Romeo was immediately brought to the clinic Dr. Villanueva. After a series of check-ups, he underwent an enucleation, a surgical procedure involving the removal of his right eye. On account of the surgery, he incurred medical expenses in the sum of PHP 31,060.00. Consequently, Romeo filed written notices of injury with the insurance companies. To his dismay, his claims were disapproved based on the joint affidavit of their former household helpers who denied the occurrence of the accident. The disapproval of the claims prompted Romeo and Luisa (spouses Soriano) to lodge separate complaints before the RTC against the insurance companies for accident insurance proceeds, specific performance, damages, and attorney’s fees. During the trial, spouses Soriano presented themselves and Dr. Villanueva as witnesses. On the other hand, Philam Life proffered the testimony of the househelperand the medical opinion of Dr. Dr. Valenton, a credited physician of Philam Life. In due course, the RTC rendered its Judgment, dismissing the complaints based on the equipoise rule. Issue Whether or not the RTC erred in not granting Romeo the insurance proceeds? Ruling Yes. In civil cases, the quantum of evidence to be observed is preponderance of evidence. Preponderance of evidence means that the evidence adduced by one side is superior to or has greater weight than that of the other. It means that evidence which is more convincing to the Court as worthy of belief than that which is offered in opposition thereto. Jurisprudence teaches that when the evidence of the parties are evenly balanced or when there is doubt on which side the evidence preponderates, the decision should be against the party with the burden of proof, according to the equipoise doctrine. Here, the RTC erred in applying the equipoise rule considering that the spouses Soriano were able to prove through preponderance of evidence that Romeo’s injury was caused by an accident, thus entitling him to the proceeds of the subject accident insurance policies. Their testimonies were sufficiently corroborated by the testimony of Dr. Villanueva, who clearly explained the findings he gathered in his examination of Romeo on January 29, 2001 or the day of the accident Determined to prove that Romeo was not entitled to the insurance benefits, PhilamLife raised Dr. Valenton ‘s medical opinion to controvert Dr. Villanueva’s testimony. It claims that Dr. Villanueva found no abrasion or hematoma. However, a perusal of Dr. Villanueva’s testimony plainly reveals that he “observed sub-conjunctival harmorhage, hemorrhage occuring in between the consubjunctival sclera of the eye. In contrast, Dr. Valenton, by his own admission, did not personally examine Romeo, but merely offered a different interpretation based on the findings made by Dr. Villanueva Hence, the Court ordered Philam Life, along with the other insurance companies, to pay jointly and severally actual damages or medical reimbursement to spouses Soriano in the amount of PHP 31,060.00 and the insurance proceeds for the permanent and irrecoverable loss of sight and of Romeo’s right eye. In so ruling, the Court commiserated with the two-decade plight of spouses Soriano, surpassing the death of Romeo. Certainly, insurers must not be allowed to delay the payment of claims by filing frivolous cases in court, hoping that the inevitable may be put off for years—or even decades—by the pendency of these unnecessary court cases. They employ this period to benefit from collecting the interest and returns on both the premiums previously paid by the insured clients and the insurance proceeds which should otherwise go to their beneficiaries. Philam Life’s deliberate delay in the payment of insurance proceeds and protracted litigation warrant the imposition of exemplary damages. This imposition serves as a warning to insurers or insurance companies of the consequences of unreasonably denying or delaying the payment of legitimate claims. Hence, aside from the insurance claim, Philam Life was also ordered to pay exemplary damages in the amount of PHP 50,000.00 with interest.

In case of doubt, in whose favor should an insurance claim dispute be resolved? Read More »

Does hostile behavior towards an employee constitute as constructive dismissal?

Leave a Comment / Case Digest, Jurisprudence

Doctrine: Employer’s insulting words and hostile behavior toward an employee constitutes constructive dismissal Facts: In 2009, Bartolome was hired by Toyota Q. Ave as a marketing professional trainee of its Vehicle Sales Department. He became a regular employee in 2010, tasked in selling of Toyota’s cars, products, and services. On December 2015, Bartolome received a Notice of Decision for Habitual Absences for October 2015 and a Notice of Explanation for the same offense for November 2015. He also received a notice putting him on a 7-day suspension for another offense. A meeting was set by management for the purpose and Bartolome brought his sibling along, who was a lawyer. After the meeting, he thought that the matter was settled but then the president of the company, in another meeting, uttered remarks against him, especially for bringing his sibling along. This began a series of incidents which lead Bartolome to resign: These series of events and the hostile working environment become unbearable for him to continue working, and thereafter, he resigned. Even when he was processing his clearance, he was treated like a stranger. His last pay did not include his commissions and his 13th month pay. ISSUE: Was Bartolome constructively dismissed? YES. The foregoing chain of events created a hostile working environment that made it impossible and unbearable for petitioner to continue working for TQAI. On this score, we emphasize that these events were not even refuted by respondents themselves. In weighing the argument of the parties, it is important to examine the evidence presented. As substantial evidence, or “such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion,” the detailed series of events supported by documentary evidence of petitioner must be given credence over the general denial of the respondents. The uttered words of respondents against petitioner, contrary to the respondents’ allegation, are not self-serving statements. Here, petitioner’s account of the events which rendered his employment conditions unbearable, leaving him with no other choice but to resign, was “candid, straightforward[,] and categorical.” It came from matters of his own personal knowledge. It should not be brushed aside, more so since it was unrefuted by the other party and was even amply corroborated by documentary evidence. Verily, petitioner was constructively dismissed. Surely, the calculated and combined acts of his higher ups constitute acts of disdain and hostile behavior, supporting the conclusion that they were collectively easing out petitioner who consequently had no choice but leave his employment. This is constructive dismissal pure and simple. Though the labor arbiter found nothing extraordinary about the resignation letter as it did not exactly indicate a tone of anger nor some sense of ingratitude, the circumstance before the resignation would show that he did not contemplate nor had any intention of resigning from the company were it not for respondents’ hostile and disdainful actions. When he tried to process his clearance on April 21, 2016, he was treated like a “stranger-criminal” and subjected to undue harassment. Notably, the document titled “special release of claim and/or quitclaim” dated July 9, 2016, bore, beside his signature, the term “w/o prejudice.” It was an unequivocal reservation of his right to bring an action against respondents despite his execution thereof. Thus, merely 24 days after, on August 4, 2016, he filed a Complaint for illegal/constructive dismissal and money claims against respondents. Doubtless, his resignation was involuntary and bore a clear reservation to file an action against respondents.

Does hostile behavior towards an employee constitute as constructive dismissal? Read More »

Can an Employer Suspend Work Due to Weather Disturbances?

Leave a Comment / Bits of Law

How willing are you to go to work during a typhoon? Some are willing to brave the storms to get to work on time, especially if their area is less affected. But others are understandably more hesitant to leave the house due to weather disturbances. They could end up stranded somewhere during their commutes or in their offices. In the worst case scenario, leaving the house during a typhoon can lead to injury or death. But if your workplace is requiring you to come in, what can you do? Labor Advisory No. 17 Series of 2022 provides and emphasizes that employees who fail or refuse to work by reason of imminent danger resulting from weather disturbances and similar occurrences shall not be subject to any administrative sanction against them. The same Advisory also provides the following rules governing suspension of work in the private sectors during weather disturbances and similar occurrences: “Section 1. Suspension of Work. – Except as provided for by the law or an appropriate proclamation, employers in the private sector may, in the exercise of their own prerogative and in proper coordination with their respective safety and health committee or any other responsible company officer, suspend work to ensure the safety and health of their employees during weather disturbances and similar occurrences.” For employers, it is important to note of the following rules regarding the payment of wages during these times: If unworked: The employee is not entitled to regular pay if the employee does not report to work, except when there is a company policy or collective bargaining agreement providing otherwise, or when the employee is allowed to utilize their accrued leave credits. If worked: The employee is entitled to full regular pay provided that they have rendered work for not less than six (6) hours. Finally, If the employee has rendered less than six (6) hours or work, they shall only be entitled to the proportionate amount of the regular pay, without prejudice of any existing policy or practice providing otherwise.

Can an Employer Suspend Work Due to Weather Disturbances? Read More »

What You Need to Know About the Philippine Lemon Law

Leave a Comment / Bits of Law

Are you planning on getting a car soon? Getting a car is always a huge life accomplishment, but it’s also an equally huge investment. The possibility of getting a car with immediate issues is nerve wracking. Thankfully, the Philippine Lemon Law aims to protect us consumers from these situations. Consumers with brand-new motor vehicle issues may avail of the remedies under the Philippine Lemon Law, the Consumer Act, or other applicable laws. R.A. No 10642, more commonly known as the Philippine Lemon Law, aims to promote full protection to consumers against businesses and trade practices that are deceptive or unfair to its consumers. It recognizes that a motor vehicle is a major purchase and investment, hence redress for violations shall be clearly defined. What is the coverage of the Lemon Law? The Lemon Law covers brand new motor vehicles purchased in the Philippines reported by a consumer to be in nonconformity with the vehicle’s manufacturer or distributor’s standards or specifications within twelve (12) months from the date of original delivery to the consumer, or up to twenty thousand (20,000) kilometers of operation after such delivery, whichever comes first. A Brand new motor vehicle refers to a vehicle constructed entirely from new parts and covered by a manufacturer’s express warranty at the time of purchase that it has never been sold or registered with the Department of Transportation and Communications (DOTC) or an appropriate agency or authority, and has never been operated on any highway of the Philippines, or in any foreign state or country. (Sec 3 [a]) What is not covered under the Lemon Law? If you wish to utilize the Lemon Law, it should be noted that the followingshall be excluded: When can one invoke his/her Lemon Law rights? At any time within the Lemon Law rights period (or within twelve (12) months from the date of original delivery or up to twenty thousand (20,000) kilometers of operation after such delivery) and after at least four (4) separate repair attempts by the same manufacturer, distributor, authorized dealer or retailer for the same complaint, and the nonconformity issue remains unresolved, the consumer may invoke his or her Lemon Law rights. Process of Availment of Lemon Law Rights Section 6 and 7 of the Philippine Lemon Law provides that: Documentary Requirements to Avail Lemon Law Rights Under Sec. 3, Rule III of the Lemon Law’s IRR, in order for the consumer to invoke the Lemon Law rights, the following documents are necessary: What are the remedies that may be availed under the Lemon Law? While the vehicle is under repair and during the period of availment of the Lemon Law rights, the consumer shall be provided a reasonable daily transportation allowance to compensate for the temporary non-usage of the vehicle. The transportation allowance is an amount which covers the transportation of the consumer from his or her residence to his or her regular workplace or destination and vice versa, equivalent to air-conditioned taxi fare, as evidenced by official receipt, or in such amount to be agreed upon by the parties, or a service vehicle at the option of the manufacturer, distributor, authorized dealer or retailer. In case the dispute is ruled in favor by the Complainant, the DTI may grant either of the following remedies to the consumer: (i) Replace the motor vehicle with a similar or comparable motor vehicle in terms of specifications and values, subject to availability; or (ii) Accept the return of the motor vehicle and pay the consumer the purchase price plus the collateral charges. On the other hand, in case there is no nonconformity found by the DTI, the DTI shall direct the consumer to reimburse the manufacturer, distributor, authorized dealer or retailer the costs incurred by the latter in validating the consumer’s complaints.

What You Need to Know About the Philippine Lemon Law Read More »

What’s the Difference Between Reclassification and Conversion of Land?

Leave a Comment / Bits of Law

If you have a plot of land, what exactly do you plan to do with it? Depending on its classification and its current state, you might have some limitations on what you can do. For example, if it’s classified as agricultural land, you won’t be able to use it for commercial purposes. If you want to use it for non-agricultural purposes, you, as the owner, are required to file for a land use reclassification. But you would also have to undergo land conversion afterwards. But what are these terms? And what are the differences between the two? Here’s what you need to know. What is Reclassification of Land? Reclassification of land refers to the act of specifying how agricultural lands shall be utilized for non-agricultural purposes. These purposes can be residential, industrial, or commercial. According to RA No. 6657, or the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of 1988, convertible lands can be reclassified through the local government unit or through a Presidential Proclamation. However, land classification doesn’t automatically allow a landowner to use the land for non-agricultural purposes. The act of reclassifying agricultural lands to non-agricultural uses simply specifies how agricultural lands shall be utilized for non-agricultural uses and does not automatically convert agricultural lands to non-agricultural uses or for other purposes. Therefore, in order for reclassified lands to be used for the purpose to which they are intended there is still a need to change the current use thereof through the process of conversion. (CREBA vs. The Secretary of Agrarian Reform, G.R. No. 183409, June 18, 2010) What is Conversion of Land? Conversion of land is the process of changing the current physical use of a plot of agricultural land for non-agriculture purposes, or any other agricultural use that does not include cultivating soil, planting crops, growing trees, or harvesting any produce. The issuance of conversion orders are approved by the DAR. It is clear from the aforesaid distinction between reclassification and conversion that agricultural lands though reclassified to residential, commercial, industrial or other non-agricultural uses must still undergo the process of conversion before they can be used for the purpose to which they are intended. It should be noted, however, that not all agricultural land plots are eligible for land use conversion. A land is only eligible for conversion if: What is the Process of Conversion of Land? It’s a good idea to know the general procedure of land conversion before you begin converting your own parcel of agricultural land. Here is an overview of the process of land conversion, so that you know what to expect. DOCUMENTARY REQUIREMENTS: WHERE TO FILE THE APPLICATION? Other requirements and processes may be found here:

What’s the Difference Between Reclassification and Conversion of Land? Read More »

Is the absence of one spouse evidence of psychological incapacity?

Leave a Comment / Case Digest, Jurisprudence

Doctrine: Unjustified Absence from Marital Home Considered Psychological Incapacity Facts: Leonora and Alfredo married on June 9, 1984. Their married life started smoothly, but Alfredo’s behavior later on changed. He would come home late or early morning after a night out with friends. He neglected his duty and did not provide food for the family. He treated Leonora as an ordinary occupant of the house, not as his wife. Alfredo also engaged in illicit affairs. In 1994, they separated. The same year, Alfredo married another woman. Then in 2000, he married another one. Alfredo abandoned his family with Leonora and did not provide any financial support. Leonora then filed a Petition for Declaration of Nullity of Marriage. Dr. Ison, a clinical psychologist, found Alfredo to be suffering from narcissistic personality disorder with underlying borderline personality traits. Issue: Whether or not Alfredo can be considered as psychologically incapacitated? Ruling: Yes. After leaving his family in 1994 and contracting marriage with different women, Alfredo never gave financial support to his children and only visited them once for less than an hour. These indicate that he did not understand his obligations as a husband and father. Article 68 of the Civil Code provides: The husband and wife are obliged to live together, observe mutual love, respect and fidelity, and render mutual help and support. Through Dr. Isons’s testimony who was presented as an expert witness, Leonora was able to prove that her husband Alfred’s psychological disorder is grave, incurable and permanent. Dr. Ison explained how Alfredo’s personality disorder developed from his childhood and how it is collated to his inability to fulfill his obligations as a husband and father. The gravity of his personality disorder is shown by his lack of recognition that he has responsibilities to his wife and children. The incurability of his disorder was also explained when Dr. Ison stated in his Judicial Affidavit that those diagnosed with narcissistic personality disorder “strongly deny that they are mentally ill, reject the idea of seeking professional help and therefore refuse any form of psychiatric treatment.” Alfredo’s infidelity, failure to give support to his wife and children, and unjustified absence from his family are all indicative that he is not cognizant of his duties and responsibilities of a husband and father. Hence, the Petition was GRANTED.

Is the absence of one spouse evidence of psychological incapacity? Read More »

When can foreign divorce be recognized in the Philippines?

Leave a Comment / Case Digest, Jurisprudence

FACTS: On December 8, 2004, Ruby Cuevas Ng, a Filipino citizen, and Akihiro Sono, a Japanese national, contracted marriage in Quezon City. Their union bore them a child named Rieka Ng Sono. After their marriage, the spouses moved to Japan. Unfortunately, their relationship turned sour and they later decided to obtain a divorce. Thus, on August 31, 2007, they secured a “divorce decree by mutual agreement” in Japan as evidenced by the Divorce Certificate issued by the Embassy of Japan in the Philippines. The DFA in Manila then provided an Authentication Certificate and a Certificate of Acceptance of Notification of Divorce. Likewise, the City Civil Registry Office of Manila released a Certification guaranteeing that the Divorce Certificate provided by the Embassy of Japan in the Philippines was filed and recorded in its office. So, too, the fact of divorce was duly recorded in the Civil Registry of Japan as exhibited by the original copy of the Family Registry of Japan bearing the official stamp of the Mayor of Nakano-Ku, Tokyo, Japan, and supported by its corresponding English translation. On May 28, 2018, Ruby filed a Petition for judicial recognition of foreign divorce and declaration of capacity to remarry before the QC RTC. During the initial hearing, the RTC admitted all the documentary evidence submitted by Ruby for purposes of compliance with jurisdictional requirements. The RTC also allowed her to present her evidence ex parte after making a declaration of general default. On January 3, 2019, the RTC granted the Petition on the thrust of Article 26, paragraph 2 of the Family Code of the Philippines, ratiocinating that there was a valid divorce obtained by Ruby abroad. Displeased, petitioner Republic of the Philippines, as represented by the OSG, moved for the reconsideration of the Decision, which was eventually denied by RTC. After, the OSG challenged the RTC Decision before the Supreme Court, arguing that the RTC gravely erred in judicially recognizing a foreign divorce that was obtained by mere mutual agreement between the spouses. It centers around how Ruby and Akihiro Sono obtained their divorce, positing that a “divorce by agreement” is not worthy of recognition in the Court’s jurisdiction. Clearly, for a foreign divorce to be recognized in the Philippines, it must be decided by a court of competent jurisdiction. The OSG further argued that Ruby failed to prove the foreign divorce law as she did not proffer an authenticated copy of the Japanese Civil Code or one held by the official repository of custodian of Japanese public laws and records. ISSUES: 1.WON the provision under Article 26(2) of the Family Code does not apply instant case as the divorce decree was obtained by mutual agreement and not through an adversarial proceeding in court; and ● WON Ruby was able to prove the applicable law on divorce in Japan. RULING: 1.No, Article 26(2) of the Family Code applies in the instant case. At the onset, it bears stressing that Philippine laws do not provide for absolute divorce; hence, our courts cannot grant it. Nevertheless, jurisdiction is conferred on Philippine courts to extend the effect of a foreign divorce decree to a Filipino spouse without under going trial to determine the validity of the dissolution of marriage. Article 26 of the Family Code – which addresses foreign marriages or mixed marriages involving a Filipino and a foreigner – allows a Filipino spouse to contract a subsequent marriage in case the divorce is validly obtained abroad by an alien spouse capacitating him or her to remarry. The provision states: Article 26. All marriages solemnized outside the Philippines in accordance with the laws in force in the country where they were solemnized, and valid there as such, shall also be valid in this country, except those prohibited under Articles 35(1), (4), (5) and (6), 36, 37 and 38. Where a marriage between a Filipino citizen and a foreigner is validly celebrated and a divorce is thereafter validly obtained abroad by the alien spouse capacitating him or her to remarry, the Filipino spouse shall likewise have capacity to remarry under Philippine law. The case of Fujiki v Marinay elucidates the nature of Article 26, paragraph 2 of the Family Code, thus – The second paragraph of Article 26 is only a corrective measure to address the anomaly that results :from a marriage between a Filipino, whose laws do not allow divorce, and a foreign citizen, whose laws allow divorce. The anomaly consists in the Filipino spouse being tied to the marriage while the foreign spouse is free to marry under the laws of his or her country. The correction is made by extending in the Philippines the effect of the foreign divorce decree, which is already effective in the country where it was rendered. In the landmark case of Republic v.Manalo, the Court emphatically declared that Article 26(2) of the Family Code only requires that there be a divorce validly obtained abroad capacitating the foreigner spouse to remarry, without regard as to who initiated it. Manaloinstructs that there must be a confluence of two elements in order for the second paragraph of the law to be validly applied, to wit: (1) there is a valid marriage that has been celebrated between a Filipino citizen and a foreigner; and (2) valid divorce obtained capacitating the parties to remarry regardless of the spouse who initiated the divorce proceedings. Significantly, the Court clarified that pursuant to the majority ruling in Manalo, Article 26(2) applies to mixed marriages where the divorce decree is (1) obtained by the foreigner spouse; (2) obtained jointly by the Filipino and foreign spouse; and (3) obtained solely by the Filipino spouse. Accordingly, the Court concluded that “the divorce obtained by petitioner abroad against her foreign husband, whether at her behest or acquiescence, may be recognized as valid in this jurisdiction so long as it complies with the documentary requirements under the Rules of Court. The text of Article 26(2) of the Family Code does not support a construction to limit recognition of foreign divorce decrees to those issued in judicialproceedings only. A plain reading of Article 26(2) of the Family Code reveals that it only requires that the divorce be “validly obtained abroad.” To insist that the divorce be obtained through judicial proceedings in

When can foreign divorce be recognized in the Philippines? Read More »

(02) 8477 5798 / 0948-961-2397

Author name: Melissa Renee Mendiola

Does gross negligence have to be habitual to be considered as just cause for dismissal?

Your Helpful Guide to Copyright Registration

Basics of Ownership: What You Need to Know About Succession

In case of doubt, in whose favor should an insurance claim dispute be resolved?

Does hostile behavior towards an employee constitute as constructive dismissal?

Can an Employer Suspend Work Due to Weather Disturbances?

What You Need to Know About the Philippine Lemon Law

What’s the Difference Between Reclassification and Conversion of Land?

Is the absence of one spouse evidence of psychological incapacity?

When can foreign divorce be recognized in the Philippines?