Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 482 views

    People Vs Castañeda Digest

    Uploaded by

    PMV
    1) Victoria Manaloto filed a complaint against her husband Benjamin for falsifying documents by forging her signature on the sale of their conjugal property. 2) The defense sought to disqualify Victoria from testifying, citing a rule that prohibits spouses from testifying against each other. 3) The Supreme Court ruled that Victoria could testify, as falsification of documents committed by one spouse directly against the other falls under an exception to the marital disqualification rule. Forcing a spouse's signature without consent undermines the marital relationship and directly prejudices the victimized spouse.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    People Vs Castañeda Digest

    Uploaded by

    PMV
    482 views1 page
    1) Victoria Manaloto filed a complaint against her husband Benjamin for falsifying documents by forging her signature on the sale of their conjugal property. 2) The defense sought to disqualify Victoria from testifying, citing a rule that prohibits spouses from testifying against each other. 3) The Supreme Court ruled that Victoria could testify, as falsification of documents committed by one spouse directly against the other falls under an exception to the marital disqualification rule. Forcing a spouse's signature without consent undermines the marital relationship and directly prejudices the victimized spouse.

    Original Description:

    digest

    Original Title

    People vs Castañeda Digest

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) Victoria Manaloto filed a complaint against her husband Benjamin for falsifying documents by forging her signature on the sale of their conjugal property. 2) The defense sought to disqualify Victoria from testifying, citing a rule that prohibits spouses from testifying against each other. 3) The Supreme Court ruled that Victoria could testify, as falsification of documents committed by one spouse directly against the other falls under an exception to the marital disqualification rule. Forcing a spouse's signature without consent undermines the marital relationship and directly prejudices the victimized spouse.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    482 views1 page

    People Vs Castañeda Digest

    Uploaded by

    PMV
    1) Victoria Manaloto filed a complaint against her husband Benjamin for falsifying documents by forging her signature on the sale of their conjugal property. 2) The defense sought to disqualify Victoria from testifying, citing a rule that prohibits spouses from testifying against each other. 3) The Supreme Court ruled that Victoria could testify, as falsification of documents committed by one spouse directly against the other falls under an exception to the marital disqualification rule. Forcing a spouse's signature without consent undermines the marital relationship and directly prejudices the victimized spouse.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 1

    02 People vs Castañeda, Manaloto the criminal act complained of had the effect of directly and vitally

    G.R. No. L-46306. February 27, 1979 impairing the conjugal relation.
    TOPIC: Disqualification by reason of marriage  Public policy demands that the wife should not be disqualified from
    (Parian) testifying against her husband in a case of falsification of public document
    Petition for certiorari. constituted by the husband against his wife.
    1. Victoria Manaloto filed a complaint against her husband, Benjamin  To rule the contrary view would spawn the dangerous precedent of a
    Manaloto for Falsification of Public Documents husband committing many falsifications against his wife as he could
    2. Benjamin forged Victoria’s signature in a deed of absolute sale of a house conjure, seeking shelter in the anti-marital privilege as a license to injure
    and lot belonging to the spouses’ conjugal property. and prejudice in secret — all with unabashed and complete immunity.
    3. At the trial, prosecution called Victoria to the witness stand but the defense
    moved to disqualify her as a witness, invoking Sec. 20, Rule 130 of ROC:
    SEC. 20. Disquali􏰁cation by reason of interest or NOTES:
    relationship. — The following persons cannot testify as to SC cited a rape case wherein the wife was allowed to testify against her husband who
    matters in which they are interested, directly or indirectly, raped their daughter; stating that the crime committed against the daughter is a crime
    as herein enumerated: committed against the wife (well not literally; just SC being dramatic) --- “for the
    xxx xxx xxx reason that said criminal act "positively undermined the connubial (or matrimonial)
    (b) A husband can not be examined for or against his wife relationship."
    without her consent; nor a wife for or against her husband
    without his consent, except in a civil case by one against
    the other, or in a criminal case for a crime committed by
    one against the other.
    4. Prosecution opposed the said motion on the ground that the case
    falls under the exception to the rule, contending that it is a
    “criminal case for a crime committed by one against the other”.
    5. Notwithstanding the opposition, Judge Castañeda granted the
    motion. MR denied. Hence, this certiorari.

    ISSUE: WON Victoria is disqualified to testify against her husband by reason of


    marriage as per the Rules of Court. NO

    HELD:

     A criminal case for Falsification of Public Document filed against the


    husband—who allegedly forged the signature of his wife in a deed of sale,
    thereby making it appear that the latter gave her marital consent to the sale
    of a house and lot belonging to their conjugal partnership when in fact and
    in truth she did not — may be considered as a criminal case for a crime
    committed by a husband against his wife, and, therefore, an exception to the
    rule on marital disqualification.
     It is the husband's breach of his wife's confidence which give rise to the
    offense charged, for if the sale had been made with the consent of the wife,
    no crime could have been charged against the husband. This is the same
    breach of trust which prompted the wife to make the necessary complaint.
     Where the victim of the crime and the person who stands to be directly
    prejudices by the falsification is not a third person but the wife herself the
    exception to the marital disqualification rule applies for it is undeniable that

    You might also like