Family Code
Family Code
Family Code
1. Suppose the spouses cannot agree on the custody of the children, to whom should the
custody of the children be given? Why?
ANSWER:
In such cases that spouses cannot agree with the custody of the children, the custody of
the child who is 6 years of age shall be merited to the mother while the child’s 10 years of age custody
depends on whom the child chooses.
As stated in Article 213 paragraph 2 of the Family Code “ NO CHILD UNDER SEVEN YEARS
OF AGE SHALL BE SEPARATED FROM THE MOTHER, unless the court finds compelling reasons to
order otherwise”. On the other hand, the custody of the child that is 10 years old will be based on whom
the child chooses according to Article 213 paragraph 1 of the Family Code “ In case of separation of
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.
For that matter, the child 6 years of age will be under the custody of Marikit provided that the
court does not see any reason for Marikit to be unfit to be the guardian of her 6-year-old child. While the
child is 10 years of age custody may be given to the parent of his/her choice provided that there are no
compelling reasons that the Court sees to order otherwise.
2. Can Marikit ask for support pendente lite from Marupok while the case is pending? If not,
why? If yes, how much support can she demand from her husband?
ANSWER:
During the proceedings for legal separation or for annulment of marriage, and for declaration of
nullity of marriage, the spouses and their children shall be supported from the properties of the absolute
community or the conjugal partnership. After the final judgment granting the petition, the obligation of
mutual support between the spouses ceases. (Art. 198 of the Family Code) The amount of support shall be
in proportion to the resources or means of the giver and to the necessities of the recipient. (Art. 201 of the
Family Code)
3. What property relation governs the spouses? How much is the community or conjugal
property of the spouses?
ANSWER:
Ans. An absolute Community of Property shall govern the spouses. When the regime agreed
upon is void or when the absence of marriage settlement, the system of absolute community of property
as established in the Family Code shall govern. Considering that the problem is silent as to its property
relations and the marriage is celebrated in 2000 which is during the Family Code. The total community
property of the spouses is P14M, including the family home in Tacloban City, 2 cars, a farm donated by
Marupok's parents on account of their marriage,or acquired. The jewelry shall form part of the community
property since it is of monetary value. (Art. 91 and 92 of the Family Code)
4. Suppose during the trial the spouses agree on the settlement of their property and this was
approved by the court but thereafter the petition is denied, what will be the property
relation of the spouses thereafter?
ANSWER:
Provided in Article 137 in the Family code it is stated that Once the separation of property
has been decreed, the absolute community or the conjugal partnership of gains shall be liquidated
in conformity with this code,].
During the pendency of the proceedings for separation of property, the absolute community
or the conjugal partnership shall pay for the support of the spouses and their children. (192a)
The absolute community of property regime shall subsist.
5. Suppose the petition is granted, what will be the status of the children, will they be
considered legitimate or illegitimate?
ANSWER:
The children are still legitimate despite the grant of the petition because, under Art.54 of the Family
Code, it says that children conceived or born before the judgment of annulment or absolute nullity of the
marriage under Article 36 has become final and the executor shall be considered legitimate
6. Can the uncle of Marikit revoke the donation if the petition will be granted?
ANSWER:
No. Under the article of the Family Code, stating that a donation by reason of marriage may be
revoked by the donor in the specified cases, includes: a.) If the marriage is not celebrated or judicially
declared void ab initio except donations made in the marriage settlements, 2.) When the marriage takes
place without the consent of the parents or guardian, as required by law; 3.)When the marriage is
annulled, and the donee acted in bad faith; 4.) Upon legal separation, the done being the guilty spouse; 5.)
If it is with a resolutory condition and the condition is complied with; 6.) When the done has committed
an act of ingratitude as specified by the provisions of the Civil Code on donations in general. In the case
of the revocation of the donation of Marikit's uncle, although the petition of the nullity of marriage will
prosper, the said revocation will not. Not unless the party will file for the revocation of the deed of
donation. Also, although the marriage is void, the effectiveness of the donation will continue until the
marriage will be annulled. Thus, the rovation of the donation of Marikit's uncle can not prosper.
7. Suppose there is an insurance policy wherein Marikit named Marupok as an irrevocable
beneficiary, can Marikit change the beneficiary in her insurance policy if her petition will be
granted? Explain.
ANSWER:
If Marikit's petition for a declaration of nullity of her marriage to Marupok will be granted, she
can change her beneficiary in her insurance policy even if such designation be stipulated as irrevocable.
Article 64 of the Family Code says that, after the finality of legal separation, the innocent spouse may
revoke the donations made by him or by her in favor of the offending spouse, as well as the designation,
be stipulated as irrevocable. The revocation of the donations shall be recorded in the registries of property
in the places where the properties are located, Alienations, liens, and encumbrances registered in good
faith before the recording of the complaint for revocation in the registries of property shall be respected.
The revocation of or change in the designation of the insurance beneficiary shall take effect upon written
notification thereof to the insured.
The action to revoke the donation under this Article must be brought within five years from the time the
decree of legal separation has become final.
An insurance policy is an independent contract, if the insured person assigned his/her beneficiary as an
irrevocable it means that said person will be considered as a partner in the policy contract which means
that the insured person cannot decide alone without the consent of his/her beneficiary. But in this case,
Marikit may revoke the designation of the beneficiary in her insurance policy if the petition will be
granted, as stated in Article 64 of the Family Code.
8. Suppose the 1st child of the spouses was born before their marriage, and that the
child during their marriage was not legitimated, can the child still be legitimated after the
approval of the petition for the declaration of nullity of marriage?
ANSWER:
Yes. The requisites for the legitimation of the child provided under Article 177 of the FC were
present: (a) Conceived and born outside of wedlock of parents who at the time of conception of the child,
were not disqualified by any impediment to marry each other; (b) A subsequent valid marriage between
the parents. The annulment of such marriage will not affect the legitimation of the child which by the
operative act of marriage, had already taken effect, as provided under the 2 nd sentence of Article 178 of
the Family Code. Thus, the child is still qualified for legitimation.
9. In relation to question number 8. Suppose after the issuance of the decree of nullity of
marriage Marupok died, can the 1st child still be legitimated? Explain.
ANSWER:
Yes, the 1st child can still be legitimated.
According to Article 177 of the Family Code; Children conceived and born outside of the wedlock of
parents who, at the time of conception of the former, were not disqualified by any impediment to marry
each other, or were so disqualified only because either or both of them were below eighteen (18) years of
age may be legitimated (as a by amended Republic Act No. 9858). Legitimation shall take place by a
subsequent valid marriage between parents (Article 178 of the Family Code). The annulment of a
voidable marriage shall not affect the legitimation. The effects of legitimation shall retroact to the time of
the child’s birth (Article 180 of the Family Code).
Since the marriage of the parents was celebrated in year 2000 the Family Code shall apply. So long the
child has been acknowledged by the parents before or after the celebration of their marriage. Provided
that the essential and mandatory requirements are present in the process of legitimation where the parents
do not suffer any legal impediment or are disqualified to marry because either one or both of them are 18
years of age at the conception born outside of a valid marriage, then the parents subsequently entered into
valid marriage. The law provides the benefit and protection of the innocent children and therefore, laws,
maybe applied retroactively, the annulment of a voidable marriage shall not affect the legitimation.
Thus, after the issuance of the decree of nullity of marriage the father (Marupok) died, the 1 st born child
can be legitimated by the operation of law.
10. Suppose the problem given, Marupok had no income and all he did was to squander the
money of Marikit, and that he was an irresponsible husband and father, how much is his share in
the community/conjugal property?
ANSWER:
The share is subject to precautionary conditions as the court may impose. The family code
provides that if one of the spouses without just cause abandons the other or fails to comply with his or her
obligations to the family, the aggrieved spouse may petition the court for receivership, for judicial
separation of property, or for authority to be the sole administrator of the absolute community, subject to
such precautionary conditions as the court may impose. The obligations to the family mentioned in the
foregoing refer to marital, parental, or property relations. In this case, the aggrieved spouse, Marikit, has
the right to seek the court to be granted the judicial separation of property, since Marupok was
irresponsible and unable to meet his commitment with regard to their marriage, their children, and their
property relation. Therefore, Marupok's share is determined through court decisions.
11. To whom should the Family home be awarded? Explain.
ANSWER:
The Family home should be awarded to Marikit.
According to Article 147 of the Family Code, when a man and a woman who are capacitated to
marry each other, living exclusively with each other as husband and wife, without the benefit of
marriage or under a void marriage, the property acquired by both of them through their work or
industry shall be governed by the rules on co-ownership. In the absence of proof to the contrary,
properties acquired while they lived together shall be presumed to have been obtained by their
joined efforts, work, or industry, and shall be owned by them in equal shares.
In the instant case, their marriage is void on the ground of psychological incapacity wherein they
were capacitated to marry each other but was considered void due to the inability of the husband
to comply with the essential marital obligations. Hence, the liquidation of property should be
governed by the rules on co-ownership provided by Article 147 of the FC. However, it was
provided that only those properties acquired while they lived together should be owned by them
in equal shares. And since the family home was acquired by Marikit before her marriage to
Marupok, it should be considered her exclusive property.