persons- legal separation part 1.pptx.pdf

For PFR

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