legal separation grounds for legal .pptx

PFR Topic under Legal Separation

1. LEGAL SEPARATION Edmarie T. Palukpok

2. Topics Over View on Legal Separation Grounds on the Petition for Legal Separation Defense against Petition for Legal Separation Prescriptive Period Steps towards reconciliation & Safeguards against collusion Consequences of filing of petitions for legal separation

3. It does not affect the marital status, there being no severance of the vinculum. Not a dissolution, involves nothing more than bed‐and‐board separation (a mensa et thoro) of the spouse. It is one of the legal remedies available to a married couple whose relationship has become untenable due to specific grounds under the Family Code. A decree of legal separation allows spouses to live separately from each other while remaining married, meaning they are not free to remarry, unlike in annulment or declaration of nullity of marriage. In fact, it is terminable at the will of the parties by filing a manifestation in court, since the marriage still operates continuously despite it. Overview on Legal Separation

4. 1. Repeated physical violence or grossly abusive conduct directed against the petitioner, a common child, or a child of the petitioner The hand account is an indispensable necessities of life. It is used to record what is happening in your daily life. Frequency of physical violence inflicted upon petitioner, common child, or petitioner’s child warrants this decree. However, this ground does not include repeated physical violence towards respondent’s child. Such behavior may be cause to suspend or terminate the parental authority of the respondent upon his own minor child with another person, depending on the severity of the violence. The hand account is an indispensable necessities of life. It is used to record what is happening in your daily life. In grossly abusive conduct, however even if act isn’t repeated or does not involve physical violence, it may constitute grossly abusive conduct on the part of the respondent which may warrant decree of legal separation. No exact definition and so it is determined on a case‐to‐case basis. Grounds for Legal Separation Article 55 of the Family Code

5. 2. Physical violence or moral pressure to compel the petitioner to change religious or political affiliation Justice Puno commented on this ground: No matter how insignificant as long as repeated physical violence exists, there will be ground for legal separation. Hence, even if such phrase is removed, it would fall under par. 1. What we did is to equate it to religious conviction, so that with one(1) attempt , once incident of physical violence or moral pressure to compel the change in religious or political affiliation, it can be a ground . Grounds for Legal Separation Article 55 of the Family Code

6. Parents and those exercising parental authority have the duty, among others, to provide their un‐emancipated children with moral and spiritual guidance, to instruct them by right precept and good example, and to protect them from bad company. The children here may or may not be emancipated. The immoral and corrupt act referred to is prostitution only. Mere attempt is enough to be a ground 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; Grounds for Legal Separation Article 55 of the Family Code

7. The judgment must likewise be final. Hence, the injured spousecannot file a case for legal separation while the criminal conviction is still on appeal because, in such a case, the decision has not yetbecome final. Offense for which a spouse is sentenced by final judgment of more than 6 years imprisonment can be towards anybody; and need not be necessarily against the other spouse, their common children or the petitioner’s children Ground can be invoked even if guilty spouse is pardoned. 4. Final judgment sentencing the respondent to imprisonment of more than six years, even if pardoned Grounds for Legal Separation Article 55 of the Family Code

8. 5. Drug addiction or habitual alcoholism of the respondent; The hand account is an indispensable necessities of life. It is used to record what is happening in your daily life. In annulment cases, the drug addiction, habitual alcoholism, lesbianism and homosexuality are instances of fraud which must exist at the time of the celebration of the marriage. In legal separation, such grounds can exist even after the marriage ceremony. Grounds for Legal Separation Article 55 of the Family Code 6.Lesbianism or homosexuality of the respondent;

9. 7. Contracting by the respondent of a subsequent bigamous marriage, whether in the Philippines or abroad; Bigamy is the act of illegally contracting a second marriage despite full knowledge that the first marriage is still validly existing or without obtaining the needed judicial declaration of presumptive death of the first spouse who was absent for four or two consecutive years pursuant to Article 41 of the Family Code. Grounds for Legal Separation Article 55 of the Family Code Whether the illegal subsequent marriage has been solemnized in the Philippines or abroad is immaterial. So long as there has been a second bigamous marriage, wherever celebrated, a legal separation decree may issue.

10. The husband and the wife are obliged to observe mutual love, respect and fidelity. A husband’s single act of sexual intercourse with a woman other than his wife may warrant the issuance of a decree of legal separation even if the husband and the woman did notcommit concubinage. 8. Sexual infidelity or perversion; Grounds for Legal Separation Article 55 of the Family Code An act committed need not to be adultery or concubinage are enough so long as the said acts committed by one spouse would constitute a clear betrayal of the trust of his or her spouse by having intimate love affairs with other persons.

11. No previous criminal conviction is required for the legal separation case to prosper. The criminal attempt can be proven by a preponderance of evidence in the civil case for legal separation. If the guilty spouse has been criminally convicted by a competent court, the innocent spouse can disinherit the guilty spouse even if no legal separation case has been filed. Attempt to kill a spouse is clearly an act of moral depravity which warrants a decree of legal separation. Such attempt must proceed from evil design and not from any justifiable cause like self-defense or from the fact that the spouse caught the other in flagrante delicto having carnal knowledge with another man or woman. Grounds for Legal Separation Article 55 of the Family Code 9. Attempt by the respondent against the life of the petitioner;

12. The spouse who left the conjugal dwelling for a period of three months or has failed within the same period to give any information as to his or her whereabouts shall be prima facie presumed to have no intention of returning to the conjugal dwelling (Arts. 101 and 128 of the Family Code) Act is willful when there is design to forsake the other spouse intentionally, or without cause and, therefore, break up the marital union; deliberate intent to cease living with the other spouse; abnegation of all duties of the marriage relation, not to return. Mere severance of the relation is not sufficient. There must be a wrongful intent to desert, continued for the statutory period. It must be abandonment without justifiable cause. Grounds for Legal Separation Article 55 of the Family Code 10. Abandonment of petitioner by respondent without justifiable cause for more than one year.

13. Condonation is an act of forgiving the offense after its commission. However, it has been held that it implies a condition of future good behavior by the offending spouse. Subsequent offense on his part revokes or nullifies the condonation and revives the original offense. Where condonation of adultery has been obtained by a false pretense of repentance, the original offense may be revived, although there is only a presumption, and no strict proof, of a subsequent matrimonial offense. Defense for Legal Separation Article 56 of the Family Code 1. Where the aggrieved party has condoned the offense or act complained of;

14. Consent is an agreement between the parties that they agree to live separately from each other, and that they will not object to the other’s act of sexual infidelity, adultery, or concubinage has been declared by SC as void but, though void, is nevertheless an expression of their clear consent to the commission of the sexual infidelity. Consent may be deduced also from the acts of the spouses. People v. Sensano , 58 Phil. 73, 2. Where the aggrieved party has consented to the commission of the offense or act complained of; Defense for Legal Separation Article 56 of the Family Code

15. The People of the Philippine Islands vs. Ursula Sensano and Marcelo Ramos March 7, 1933. Facts: Ursula Sensano married to Mariano Ventura on April 29, 1919. After Ursula gave birth to their child, Mariano went to work in Cagayan and failed to communicate or provide support for his wife and child for three years. In distress, afraid that they could die of hunger, Ursula eventually became involved with Marcelo Ramos, leading to their cohabitation. When Mariano returned in 1924, he filed a charge of adultery against both Ursula and Marcelo, resulting in a sentence of four months and one day of arresto mayor for each of them. After serving her sentence, Ursula begged reconciliation  with Mariano but was refused. She then returned to Marcelo, and when Mariano abandoned both his wife and child again for several years to go to Hawaii, he did not contest their relationship. Upon his return, Mariano filed a second adultery charge intending to use it to obtain a divorce, claiming the need to act as the offended spouse despite having not taken any action during the years of their separation. Ursula and Marcelo were convicted by the Court of First Instance for the crime of adultery, resulting in a sentence of three years, six months, and twenty-one days of prision correccional. They then appealed to the SC. Issue: Did Mariano Ventura consent to the adultery committed by Ursula Sensano, thereby precluding him from filing criminal charges against her and Marcelo Ramos? Ruling: The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Ursula Sensano and Marcelo Ramos, effectively reversing the judgment of the lower court and holding that Mariano Ventura had consented to the adulterous relationship. The decision of the Court reinforced the principle that a spouse cannot bring forth criminal action for adultery if they have consented or pardoned the act. Specifically, Article 344 of the Revised Penal Code stipulates that, to initiate such prosecution, the offended party must not have granted consent to the adulterous conduct. The Court emphasized that consent could be inferred from a spouse's passive conduct over an extended period,  in this instance highlighting Mariano’s seven years of acquiescence in the adulterous relationship between Ursula and Marcelo. Thus, his claim as the "offended" spouse was deemed a facade without legal merit, leading to the dismissal of his complaint.

16. Connivance Greene v. Greene Held: Connivance, or procurement, denotes direction, influence, personal exertion, or other action with knowledge and belief that such action would produce certain results and which results are produced. The basis of the defense of connivance are the following: Maxim ‘violenti non fit injuria,’ or that one is not legally injured if he has consented to the act complained of or was willing that it should occur. The concept of connivance prevents a party from benefiting from an act they were involved in or condoned, aligning with equitable principles of "clean hands" in law. 3. Where there is connivance between the parties in the commission of the offense or act constituting the ground for legal separation; Defense for Legal Separation Article 56 of the Family Code

17. Hence, the plaintiff-spouse cannot invoke the guilt of the other if such plaintiff-spouse is guilty of giving grounds for legal separation RECRIMINATION OR EQUAL GUILT . The reason for this rule lies in the equitable maxim that he who comes into equity must come with clean hands (Ann. Cas. 1917A 178 note). Also, it is also a rule that, when two persons acted in bad faith, they should be considered as having acted in good faith. 4.Where both parties have given ground for legal separation; Defense for Legal Separation Article 56 of the Family Code

18. There would be collusion if the parties had arranged to make it appear that a matrimonial offense had been committed although it was not, or if the parties had connived to bring about a legal separation even in the absence of grounds therefor. Collusion and connivance are closely related. The difference is that collusion is a corrupt agreement, while connivance is a corrupt consenting. Seems well‐settled, despite courts not being careful with such distinction, that for there to be collusion, there must be an agreement between husband and wife looking to the procuring of the divorce. 5. Where there is collusion between the parties to obtain decree of legal separation; or Defense for Legal Separation Article 56 of the Family Code

19. Time of discovery of the ground for legal separation is not material in counting the prescriptive period. Hence, if a wife commits sexual infidelity and the husband discovered such ground only after 6 years from the time it was actually committed, the husband cannot anymore file the legal separation case as the filing of the same has already prescribed. An action for legal separation must be filed within five years from the occurrence of the cause. After the lapse of the five-year period, the case cannot be filed. 6. Where the action is barred by prescription- Article 57 of the Family Code Defense for Legal Separation Article 56 of the Family Code

20. Whether or not the defendant files an answer to the complaint, no hearing on the merits shall be set by the courts for six months. This six-month period is designed to give the parties enough timeto further contemplate their positions with the end in view of attaining reconciliation between them. This is called the cooling-off period. Steps towards reconciliation Article 58. An action for legal separation shall in no case be tried before six months shall haveelapsed since the filing of the petition. purpose of cooling-off period: To give the spouses time to reflect and potentially reconcile, as the serious nature of legal separation can have significant impacts on the family, especially the children. This mandatory period, typically six months, is designed to allow emotions to subside, providing an opportunity for a couple to reconsider their decision before the court proceeds with the legal case and the formal separation begins.

21. Exceptions on Article 58 Sec. 19 of RA No. 9262 (Anti-Violence Against Womenand their Children [VAWC] law) provides that “in cases of legal separation, where violence as specified in this Act is alleged, Article 58 of the Family Code shall not apply. The court shall proceed on the main case and other incidents of the case as soon as possible. The hearing on any application for a protection order filed by the petitioner must be conducted within the mandatory period specifi ed in this Act.”

22. Art. 60. 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. Safeguards against Collusion & CONNIVANCE Art. 59. No legal separation may be decreed unless the Court has taken steps toward the reconciliation of the spouses and is fully satisfied, despite such efforts, that reconciliation is highly improbable.

23. If the defendant fails to answer, he or she cannot be defaulted and the court shall order the prosecuting attorney to investigate whether or not a collusion between the parties exists, and if there is a collusion, to intervene for the State in order to see to it that the evidence submitted is not fabricated Even if the party answers, the fiscal is also mandated to be present during the trial to further make sure that there is no collusion and the evidence is not fabricated. Whether or not the defendant files an answer to the complaint, no hearing on the merits shall be set by the courts for six months. This six month period is designed to give the parties enough time to further contemplate their positions with the end in view of attaining reconciliation between them. SAFEGUARD AGAINST CONNIVANCE & COLLUSION Upon filing of the complaint for legal separation by the plaintiff, the defendant shall be required to answer within 15 days from receipt of the summons and a copy of the petition.

24. (3) Art. 62. During the pendency of the action for legal separation, the provisions of Article 49 shall likewise apply to the support of the spouses and the custody and support of the common children.Art. 49. During the pendency of the action and in the absence of adequate provisions in a written agreement between the spouses, the Court shall provide for the support of the spouses and the custody and support of their common children. The Court shall give paramount consideration to the moral and material welfare of said children and their choice of the parent with whom they wish to remain as provided to in Title IX. It shall also provide for appropriate visitation rights of the other parent. Consequence of filing of petitions for legal separation Art. 61. After the filing of the petition for legal separation, (1) the spouses shall be entitled to live separately from each other. (2)The court, in the absence of a written agreement between the spouses, shall designate either of them or a third person to administer the absolute community or conjugal partnership property. The administrator appointed by the court shall have the same powers and duties as those of a guardian under the Rules of Court.

25. Thank you! Sources: Family Code of the Philippines Personal and Family Relations Book - Sta Maria & Paras