Osmena v.

Osmena
Petition for review on certiorari
Facts: Before her death, Chiong Tan Sy executed a last will and testament in which she enumerated
her properties (2 parcels of land and one ancestral house in one of the lands). The titles to the lots
were in the name of Nicasio and Jose Osmenas father, Ignacio, Bernarda Osmenas older brother.
Upon Ignacios demise, Nicasio and Jose transferred the title to their own name.
Bernarda asserts that she is a co-owner of the properties. She argued that the lots were her mothers
and were part of the inheritance that she and her siblings received upon his mothers death. She said
that the lots were placed in his brothers name for he is the only Filipno citizen in the family at the
day the properties were purchased.
With regard to the ancestral house, she argued that ownership of her share was transferred to her
brother under the guise of a simulated contract to defeat any claims by her estranged husband. She
also said that she was never been charged rent by her brother for her continued residence in the same.
Nicasio and Jose predicate the claim to the disputed properties on the transfer certificates of title
covering the lots issued in their fathers name and a deed of sale signed by Bernarda, covering her
share in the ancestral house. Both the trial court and the CA recognized the validity of the said
documents. The trial court enjoined Bernarda from utilizing the the lot for her orchid business and
ordered her to leave the house immediately. CA ruled that Bernarda is a co-owner of the litigated
house to the extent of shares she inherited from 2 of her siblings.
Issue:
whether the CA erred in giving credence to the deed of sale and in holding that Nicasio and
Jose are owners of the lots.
Held:
The Court agrees that the deed of sale is a legal and binding document. No affirmative relief
is available. The Curt leaves the parties where they have placed themselves. Petition is denied. Costs
against Bernarda
A. Effect and Retroactivity
EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 29 as amended by E. O 227 Sec. 1. Article 26 of the Executive Order
No. 209 is hereby amended to read as follows their support; and in default thereof said minor
children shall be cared for in conformity with the provisions of this Code; but the Court shall abstain
from making any order in this respect in case the parents have by mutual agreement, made provision
for the care of said minor children and these are, in the judgment of the court, well cared for.
Art. 162. The value of what is donated or promised to the common children by the husband, only for
securing their future or the finishing of a career, or by both spouses through a common agreement,
shall also be charged to the conjugal partnership, when they have not stipulated that it is to be
satisfied from the property of one of them, in whole or in part. Art. 257. Should the wife commit
adultery at or about the time of the conception of the child, but there was no physical impossibility of
access between her and her husband as set forth in Article 255, the child is prima facie presumed to
be illegitimate if it appears highly improbable, for ethnic reasons, that the child is that of the
husband. For the purposes of this article, the wife's adultery need not be proved in a criminal case.

Lupo Atienza v. Judge Brillantes

Administrative Matter in the SC. Gross immorality and impropriety.
Facts:
Atienza alleges that he has 2 children with Yolanda De castro who all live in Makati. He stays
in said house whenever he is in Manila. One day, he saw Brillantes sleeping on his bed and found out
that the latter is already cohabiting with De Castro.
Thereafter, Brillantes prevented Atienza from visiting her children and even alienated the affection of
his children for him. Atienza claims that Brillantes is already married with Zenaida Ongkiko with
whom he has 5 children. Also, he alleges that Brillantes was responsible for his arrest after he had a
heated argument with De Castro inside her office. Respondent alleges that Atienza was not married to
De Castro and that the filing for administrative action was related to Atienzas claim for the Bel-Air
residence, which was disputed by De Castro. He also denied having been married with Ong kiko
though he admits having children with her. He alleges that his first marriage with her was not valid
for lack of marriage license. They had their second marriage in Manila but again neither party
applied for a marriage license. Ongkiko abandoned him 19 years ago, leaving his children and giving
him full custody. He claims that when he married De Castro he believed he is single because his first
marriage was solemnized without a license. Under FC, there must be judicial declaration of nullity of
marriage. rt. 40. The absolute nullity of a previous marriage may be invoked for purposes of
remarriage on the basis solely of a final judgment declaring such previous marriage void. Brillantes
argued that FC doesnt apply to him because his first marriage took place in1965 and thus governed
by NCC; his second marriage took place in 1991.
Issue:
Brillantes immorality and impropriety.
Held:
Art. 40 is applicable regardless of the date of the marriage under Art. 256. This Code shall
have retroactive effect insofar as it does not prejudice or impair vested or acquired rights in
accordance with the Civil Code or other laws.
Brillantes has not shown any vested right that was impaired by the application of Art. 40. The
retroactive effect of procedural laws is not violative of any right of a person who may feel that he is
adversely affected. No vested right may attach to procedural laws. Brillantes employed deceit to
cohabit with a woman. Any law student knows that a marriage license is necessary before one can get
married. Respondent failed to meet the standard of moral fitness for membership in the legal
profession. A public figure is also judged by his private life. WHEREFORE, he is dismissed from the
service with forfeiture of all leave and retirement benefits and with prejudice to reappointment in any
branch, instrumentality, or agency of the government.

Bernabe v. Alejo
Petition for review on certiorari
Facts:
The late Fiscal Bernabe allegedly fathered a son with his secretary of 23 yrs. (Carolina
Alejo). The son was born Sept. 18, 1981 and named Adrian Bernabe. Fiscal died Aug. 13, 1993 while
his wife Rosalina died on Dec. 3, 1991, leaving Ernestina as sole surviving heir. May 16,1994,
Carolina filed a complaint praying that Adrian be declared an acknowledged illegitimate son and be
given his share in Fiscals estate. July 16, 1995, RTC dismissed the complaint since the father had
not acknowledged or recognized Adrian in writing, the action for recognition should have been filed
during the lifetime of the father to give him the opportunity to either affirm or deny the childs
filiation.
On the other hand, CA ruled that Adrian should be allowed to prove that he was
the illegitimate son. Because he was born in 1985, his rights are governed by
Art. 285. The action for the recognition of natural children may be brought only
during the lifetime of the presumed parents, except in the following cases: (1) If
the father or mother died during the minority of the child, in which case the
latter may file the action before the expiration of four years from the attainment
of his majority; (2) If after the death of the father or of the mother a document
should appear of which nothing had been heard and in which either or both
parents recognize the child.
Issues:
whether or not Alejo has a cause of action to file a case against
Ernaestina; whether or not CA erred in the ruling that Adrian had 4 yrs from
attainment of majority to file an action for recognition; wheteher or not petition
for certiorari is fatally defective for failure to include CA as respondent.
Held:
FC cannot take Adrians right to file an action for recognition, because
that right had already vested prior to its enactment. The petition is denied and
the ruling of RTC and CA is affirmed. Ratio: Under FC, an action for recognition of
an illegit child must be brought with the lifetime of alleged pareny with no
distinction on whether the former was still a minor when the latter died. FC Art.
172. The filiation of legitimate children is established by any of the following:
(1) The record of birth appearing in the civil register or a final judgment; or
(2) An admission of legitimate filiation in a public document or a private
handwritten instrument and signed by the parent concerned. In the
absence of the foregoing evidence, the legitimate filiation shall be
proved by: (1) The open and continuous possession of the status of a

legitimate child; or (2) Any other means allowed by the Rules of Court
and special laws. (265a, 266a, 267a)
Art. 173. The action to claim legitimacy may be brought by the child
during his or her lifetime and shall be transmitted to the heirs should the
child die during minority or in a state of insanity. In these cases, the heirs
shall have a period of five years within which to institute the action.
Art. 175. Illegitimate children may establish their illegitimate filiation in
the same way and on the same evidence as legitimate children. The
action must be brought within the same period specified in Article 173,
except when the action is based on the second paragraph of Article 172,
in which case the action may be brought during the lifetime of the alleged
parent.

Estrada v. Escritor
Administrative matter in SC. Immorality.
Facts:
Estrada wrote a letter to Judge Caoibes Jr. requesting for an investigation of rumors that
Escritor, court interpreter, is living with a man not her husband. They alledgely have a son of 18-20
yrs of age. He filed the charge as he believes that she is committing an immoral act that tarnishes the
image of the court, thus she should not be allowed to remain employed therein as it might appear that
the court condones her act. Escritor said that when she entered the judiciary, she was already a
widow, her husband having died the year before. She admitted that she has been living with Quilapio
without the benefit of marriage for 20 yrs and that they have a son. But as a member of the Jehovahs
Witnesses and the Watch Tower and Bible Tract Society their conjugal arrangement is in conformity
with their religious beliefs.
Issues:
Will Escritor prevail with her plea of religious greedom?
Held:
The case is remanded to the Office of the Court Administrator. The
Solicitor General is ordered to intervene in the case where it will be given the
opportunity to examine the sincerity and centrality of respondents claimed
religious belief and practice; to present evidence on the states compelling
interestto override Escritors religious belief and practice and to show that the
means the state adopts in pursuing its interest is the least restrictive to
respondents religious freedom. The rehearing should be concluded 30 days
from the OCAs receipt of this decision. FC Article 1. Marriage is a special
contract of permanent union between a man and a woman entered into in
accordance with law for the establishment of conjugal and family life. It is the
foundation of the family and an inviolable social institution whose nature,
consequences, and incidents are governed by law and not subject to stipulation,
except that marriage settlements may fix the property relations during the
marriage within the limits provided by this Code. (52a)
RULE 131 Burden of Proof and Presumptions Sec. 3.Disputable
presumptions. The following presumptions are satisfactory if uncontradicted,
but may be contradicted and overcome by other evidence: (a)That a person is
innocent of crime or wrong; (b)That an unlawful act was done with an unlawful
intent; (c)That a person intends the ordinary consequences of his voluntary act;
(d)That a person takes ordinary care of his concerns; (e)That evidence willfully
suppressed would be adverse if produced; (f)That money paid by one to another

was due to the latter; (g)That a thing delivered by one to another belonged to
the latter;(h)That an obligation delivered up to the debtor has been paid; (i)That
prior rents or installments had been paid when a receipt for the later one is
produced; (j)That a person found in possession of a thing taken in the doing of a
recent wrongful act is the taker and the doer of the whole act; otherwise, that
things which a person possess, or exercises acts of ownership over, are owned
by him; (k)That a person in possession of an order on himself for the payment of
the money, or the delivery of anything, has paid the money or delivered the
thing accordingly; (l)That a person acting in a public office was regularly
appointed or elected to it; (m)That official duty has been regularly performed;
(n)That a court, or judge acting as such, whether in the Philippines or elsewhere,
was acting in the lawful exercise of jurisdiction; (o)That all the matters within an
issue raised in a case were laid before the court and passed upon by it; and in
like manner that all matters within an issue raised in a dispute submitted for
arbitration were laid before the arbitrators and passed upon by them; (p)That
private transactions have been fair and regular; (q)That the ordinary course of
business has been followed; (r)That there was a sufficient consideration for a
contract; (s)That a negotiable instrument was given or indorsed for a sufficient
consideration; (t)That an endorsement of negotiable instrument was made
before the instrument was overdue and at the place where the instrument is
dated; (u)That a writing is truly dated; (v)That a letter duly directed and mailed
was received in the regular course of the mail; (w)That after an absence of
seven years, it being unknown whether or not the absentee still lives, he is
considered dead for all purposes, except for those of succession. The absentee
shall not be considered dead for the purpose of opening his succession till after
an absence of ten years. If he disappeared after the age of seventy-five years,
an absence of five years shall be sufficient in order that his succession may be
opened. The following shall be considered dead for all purposes including the
division of the estate among the heirs: (1)A person on board a vessel lost during
a sea voyage, or an aircraft with is missing, who has not been heard of for four
years since the loss of the vessel or aircraft; (2)A member of the armed forces
who has taken part in armed hostilities, and has been missing for four years;
(3)A person who has been in danger of death under other circumstances and
whose existence has not been known for four years;
(4)If a married person has been absent for four consecutive years, the
spouse present may contract a subsequent marriage if he or she has wellfounded belief that the absent spouse is already death. In case of
disappearance, where there is a danger of death the circumstances hereinabove
provided, an absence of only two years shall be sufficient for the purpose of
contracting a subsequent marriage. However, in any case, before marrying
again, the spouse present must institute a summary proceedings as provided in

the Family Code and in the rules for declaration of presumptive death of the
absentee, without prejudice to the effect of reappearance of the absent spouse.
(x)That acquiescence resulted from a belief that the thing acquiesced in was
conformable to the law or fact; (y)That things have happened according to the
ordinary course of nature and ordinary nature habits of life;
5.If one be under fifteen or over sixty, and the other between those ages,
the latter is deemed to have survived. (kk)That if there is a doubt, as between
two or more persons who are called to succeed each other, as to which of them
died first, whoever alleges the death of one prior to the other, shall prove the
same; in the absence of proof, they shall be considered to have died at the
same time. (5a)
New Civil Code Art. 220. In case of doubt, all presumptions favor the solidarity of the
family. Thus, every intendment of law or facts leans toward the validity of marriage, the
indissolubility of the marriage bonds, the legitimacy of children, the community of property during
marriage, the authority of parents over their children, and the validity of defense for any member of
the family in case of unlawful aggression.
Muslim Code Article 14.
Nature. Marriage is not only a civil contract but a social institution. Its nature, consequences
and incidents are governed by this Code and the Shari'a and not subject to stipulation, except that the
marriage settlements may to a certain extent fix the property relations of the spouses.

Goitia vs. Campos-Rueda

Facts:
Eloisa Goitia Y De La Camara and Jose Campos-Rueda were legally
married on 7 Jan 1915 in Manila. Immediately thereafter, they established their
residence at 115 Calle San Marcelina. After a month of living together,
defendant demanded that his wife perform unchaste and lascivious acts on his
genitals. Petitioner continued to refuse to do any act other than legal and valid
cohabitation. Because of this, the defendant got exasperated and started
maltreating his wife. Eloisa took refuge in her parents home and claimed for
support from his husband. Defendants counsel argue that in a previous case
(Don Ramon Benso) in Spain, the Spanish court had held that neither spouse
can be compelled to support the other outside of the conjugal abode unless by a
final judgment granting a divorce. And that to grant support in an independent
suit is equivalent to granting divorce and if the court lacks the power to decree a
divorce, it also follows that it lacks the power to decree a divorce.
Issue:
WON the husband can be compelled to give support to the wife.
Held:
Yes. With regards to the first argument the court has held that the
governing the obligation and duties of husband and wife in the Philippines is not
the same with that in Spain. And that the mere act of marriage creates an
obligation on the part of the husband to support his wife. This obligation is
founded not so much on the express or implied terms of the contract of

marriage as on the natural and legal duty of the husband. The enforcement of
that obligation is a vital concern of the state that the law will not permit him to
terminate it by his own wrongful acts in driving his wife to seek protection in the
parental home. A judgment for separate maintenance is a calling for the
performance of a duty made specific by the mandate of society.

Go vs Court of Appeals
Facts:
During the marriage of Hermogenes and Jane Ong, video coverage
services were availed from the petitioners. The spouses tried to claim the videos
before they left for the US for their honeymoon, but since the petitioners were
still unable to process the videos the parties agreed to deliver the videos 2
months later, upon the couples return. However, it was found out that the tape
had been erased and could no longer be delivered. Spouses filed a complaint for
specific performance and damages before the RTC, which eventually granted the
Ongs petition for rescission of agreement and a payment for damages
amounting to PhP 552,000. The Gos then appealed the decision claiming that
they shouldnt be liable for various reasons but that at the end Alex Go
questions the decision of the RTC holding him jointly and severally liable for the
damages. Claiming that when his wife entered into the contract, she was acting
alone.
Issue:
WON Alex Go should be held liable for a contract his wife had entered into.
Held:

No. Alex Go is absolved from any liability in the case. Art 73 of the Family
Code provides that the wife may exercise any profession, occupation, or
engage in business without the consent of the husband, and in this case, only
Nancy Go entered into the contract.

Silverio vs Republic
Nature
Petition for review on certiorari of a decision of the Court of Appeals
Facts
Rommel Jacinto Dantes Silverio filed a petition for the change of his first name and sex in his
birth certificate
He alleged that he is a male transsexual, anatomically male but feels, thinks, and acts as a
female
And so he underwent psychological examination, hormone treatment, and breast augmentation.
On January 27, 2001, he underwent sex reassignment surgery in Bangkok
From then on, he lived as a female and was in fact engaged to be married
He sought to have his name in his birth certificate changed from Rommel Jacinto to Mely, and his
sex from male to female
The trial court rendered a decision in favor of Rommel on the grounds of upholding the principles
of justice and equity, not causing any harm to anybody if petition is granted, and no presenting of
evidence that shows cause to deny the petition
But the Republic of the Philippines filed a petition for certiorari in the CA

 CA then alleged that there is no law allowing the change of entries in the birth certificate by
reason of sex alteration, rendering its decision in favor of the Republic
Petitioner moved for reconsideration thus this petition
Issues
WON a persons first name can be changed on the ground of sex reassignment
WON a change of entry in the birth certificate as to sex on the ground of sex reassignment is
allowed
Held
No, a persons first name cant be changed on such aforementioned ground
No, a change of entry in the birth certificate as to sex on the ground of sex reassignment is not
allowed
Ratio
A persons first name cant be changed on the ground of sex reassignment
o RA 9048 provides grounds for which change of first name may be allowed
If the name is ridiculous, tainted with dishonor, or extremely difficult to write or pronounce
New first name or nickname has been habitually and continuously used by the petitioner and he
has been publicly known by that first name or nickname in the community
The change will avoid confusion
o The petition was filed in the wrong venue for the reason that proceedings of this nature are
primarily
administrative (should have filed in the local civil registrar), not judicial.
o Rommel failed to show any prejudice that he might suffer as a result of using his true and official
name
No law allows the change of entry in the birth certificate as to sex on the ground of sex
reassignment is not allowed
o Art, 412, amended by RA 9048, insofar as clerical/typographical errors are involved provides that
corrections can be made administratively, without any judicial order. This particular case however is
not one such error. To correct means that there was an error in the first place. In this instant case, the
petitioners birth certificate contains no error, and so no correction is necessary.
o Finally, to grant the changes sought by the petitioner will substantially reconfigure and greatly
alter many laws. For instance, on marriage and family relations, it will allow the union of a man and
another man who has undergone sex reassignment.

People vs Dela Cruz

Nature
Appeal seeking the reversal of the CA decision which affirmed with modification the decision of
the RTC convicting appellant Victoriano dela Cruz of the crime of parricide
Facts :
There are two versions of the story
Version of the prosecution
o Between 3:30 and 4:00 pm on August 18, 2002, Joel Song, while playing tong-its with 3 others,
saw Victoriano punching and kicking his wife, Anna Liza
Caparas dela Cruz, in front of their house. Victoriano then dragged Anna inside the house by pulling
the latters hair, then slammed the door. There were shoutings inside and, suddenly, Victoriano and
Anna came out of the house, together with their daughter. Victoriano asked for Joels help. He then
noticed that there was blood spurting out of Annas mouth. Joel accompanied the couple to the
hospital where Anna eventually died of hemorrhagic shock as a result of a stab wound in the trunk.
Victoriano was turned over to the police officers for investigation.
Version of the defense (as testified by Victoriano)
o Around 6:30 pm on August 18, 2002, he came home very drunk. Anna then, seeing him in that
condition, started nagging at him. Victorianoo slapped Anna and dragged her inside the house.
Victoriano then pushed her aside so he could go out; however, she fell on a jalousie window,

breaking it in the process. When he helped her stand up, he noticed that Annas back was punctured
by a piece of shattered glass. He then asked for Joels help to bring the wife to the hospital.
Furthermore, he said that he does not usually drink and that he consumed hard liquor at the time of
the incident. Lastly, he attested that he loved his wife and that he did not intentionally hurt her.
Issues :
WON Victoriano can be held guilty of parricide beyond reasonable doubt
Held :
Yes, Victoriano is guilty of parricide beyond reasonable doubt
Ratio
The key element in parricide other than the fact of killing is the relationship of the offender to
the victim
In the case of the parricide of a spouse, the best proof would be the marriage certificate
Circumstantial evidence is sufficient for conviction provided that
o There is more than one circumstance
o The facts from which the inferences are derived are proven
o The combination of all the circumstances is such as to produce a conviction beyond reasonable
doubt
In this case, there is the presence of the requisites for circumstancial evidence to sustain a
conviction
o Immediately preceding the killing, Victoriano physically maltreated Anna
o It was Victoriano who violently dragged Anna inside the house
o Anna sustained injuries in different parts of the body due to the physical abuse of Victoriano
o Location and extent of the wound indicated Victorianos intent to kill the victim
o Victoriano is certainly the lone assailant
o The act of carrying the body of a wounded victim and bringing her to the hospital does not
manifest innocence
Besides, it is clear that Victoriano was not performing a lawful act at the time of the incident
o To be exempted from criminal liability, the following elements must concur
A person is performing a lawful act
With due care
He causes an injury to another by mere accident
Without any fault or intention of causing it
And lastly, the defense failed to show that independent proof that Victorianos intoxication is not
habitual, not subsequent to a plan to commit a felony, and that the accuseds drunkenness affected his
mental faculties

Amores vs CSC
Nature
Petition for review on certiorari of the decision and resolution of the Court of Appeals
Facts Issues
WON Amores is entitled to the permanent seat as Deputy Director of LCP despite his lack of CES
eligibility
WON petitioners separation from service violated his right to security of tenure
Held
Amores is not entitled to the permanent seat as Deputy Director
No.
Ratio
A permanent appointment in the civil service is issued to a person who has met the requirements
of the position to which the appointment is made in accordance with law and the rules issuant
pursuant thereto

 The possession of the required CES eligibility is that which will make an appointment in the
career executive service a permanent one
And because petitioner lacked the proper CES eligibility and therefore had not held the subject
office in a permanent
capacity, there could not have been any violation of petitioners supposed right to security of tenure
inasmuch as he had never been in possession of the said right at least during his tenure

People vs. Poras

This is an appeal from the November 8, 2006 decision of the CA which found Poras guilty beyond
reasonable doubt of the crime rape and sentencing him to reclusion perpetua.
Facts:
Characters:
o AAA 13 years old victim
o BBB aunt of AAA
o CCC AAAs godmothers daughter
o DDD victims brother
o FFF victims deceased mother and common-law wife of Poras
o Jennifer AAAs school friend
Victims version of story:
o She lives in Barangay Pingkian, Pasong Tamo, QC with the appellant and CCC and her siblings
ever since her mothers death on January 31, 1994
o Poras first raped her when she was in Grade II

o November 26, 1994 evening, Poras asked her to drink coffee which she refused at first but Poras
became angry
She fell asleep after drinking the coffee and woke up to see Poras beside her
Poras was moving on top of her and touching her private parts
The strap of her bra had been removed, and her panty was lowered to her knees
There was blood on the rear end of her panty
She pushed Poras and Poras put on his briefs and shorts
Poras threatened to kill her if she tells anybody
CCC was no longer on the mattress where they slept when AAA woke up but was lying outside
of the mat where they slept
Poras sleeps alone in his room
She did not reveal the incident to DDD because he might side with Poras
o December 2, 1994 AAA told BBB about the incident
o December 4, 1994 BBB reported the incident to the police which told her to bring AAA to Camp
Crame for medical examination
o Medico-Legal Report:
According to Dr. Cosidon, there was laceration in the victims vagina at 3 and 9 oclock
positions
Laceration could have been caused by a hard object such as a finger or a fully erect penis
On cross examination, the doctor said that these lacerations could have happened even before
November 27, 1994
Poras version:
o He was FFFs common-law husband
o Before FFFs death, he, FFF, and her 5 children lived together
o After FFFs death, he stayed at a friends house at QC
o FFFs children asks him for money continually but he refused to give them anything since they
were already of age
o On the day of the crime, he was at the La Loma Cockpit Arena and slept at his friends place
Witnesses presented:
o AAA, Dr. Cosidon, BBB for prosecution
o Poras for his own defense
Regional Trial Court convicted Poras of rape and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua and to
pay AAA a total of P100,000 for damages
CA affirmed RTCs decision but with the modification that Poras be held liable for rape under
Article 335 as the rape was committed prior to the enactment of the Anti-Rape Law of 1997
o Relied on the evaluation made by the RTC regarding AAAs credibility as the trial court had the
unique opportunity to observe the witnesses attitude, conduct, and demeanor
o Victims testimony proved that Poras had sex with her while she was unconscious
o Totality of established circumstances constituted an unbroken chain of events leading to a fair and
reasonable conslusion that Poras raped AAA
o Minor inconsistencies in AAAs testimonies strengthened her credibility bec they eliminated the
chance of a rehearsed testimony
o Poras uncorroborated alibi and denial cannot prevail over the victims positive testimony
Issue:

Is the circumstancial evidence enough to convict Poras of rape/ Did the prosecution present
enough evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt Poras guilt?
Held:
No. Prosecution faileed to prove Poras guilt beyond reasonable doubt of the crime rape. SC
convicts him instead of the lesser acts of lasciviousness, included in rape, as the evidence on record
shows the presence of all the elements of this crime.
- Appelant was sentenced to imprisonment minimum of 6 months (arresto mayor) and maximum of 4
years and 2 months
(prision correccional) and to pay the victim a total of P52,000 for damages
Rape is a painful accusation to make but can be done by a person w/ malice in her mind
Bec of the private nature of rape that justifies the acceptance of lone testimony of a credible
victim to convict, it is not easy for the accused, althoug innocent, to disprove his guilt
Rape committed by having carnal knowledge of a woman with the use of force or
intimidation, or when she is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious, or when she is under 12
years old or is demented
Full penetration is not required to sustain conviction of rape, there must be at least proof beyond
reasonable doubt of the entrance of the male organ within the labia of the pudendum of the female
organ
In this case, no direct evidence exists showing the required penetration
o AAA could not have seen Poras insert his penis into her vagina bec she was unconscious
o Without direct evidence, Rule 133, Section 4, of the Rules on Evidence allows the court to rule on
the basis of circumstantial evidence:
Sec. 4. Circumstantial evidence, when sufficient. Circumstantial evidence is sufficient for
conviction if: There is more than one circumstance; The facts from which the inferences are derived
are proven; and The combination of all the circumstances is such as to produce a conviction beyond
reasonable doubt.
o A related rule is that the totality or the unbroken chain of the circumstances proved leads to no
other logical conclusion than the guilt of the appellant. [35]
o Circumstances from which RTC and CA based their decision:
Poras made AAA drink coffee which made her fall asleep
AAA saw Poras lying beside her, moving on top of her, and touching her private parts when she
woke up
AAAs panty has been lowered to her knees, and the strap of her bra had been removed
Poras put on his briefs and shorts after AAA pushed her
AAA felt pain in her private parts, saw blood stains on her panty
Poras threatened to kill AAA if she tells anyone
The examining physician found deep-healed lacerations in AAAs vagina
The circumstantial evidence failed to clearly establish an unbroken chain leading to the fair and
reasonable conclusion that Poras raped AAA
o First, the result of the medical examination did not in any way support AAAs claim that the
appellant had sex with her. Dr. Cosidon testified that the deep-healed lacerations on the victims
hymen could have also been caused by a finger, and that these lacerations could have been present
even before November 27, 1994.
Ruptured hymen is not equal to rape
It only proves that AAA has had prior sexual experience
Insertion of finger in the vagina did not constitute rape in 1994, only in 1997

Issue:
Whether or not the contract sanctioned an illicit and immoral purpose Whether or not the
notary public be
Held:
The Court held the contract to contain provisions contrary to law and public order, and as a
consequence, not judicially recognizable
- The consent or pardon given by the offended party constitutes a bar to prosecution for adultery or
concubinage, but they still remain as crimes that violates the sanctity of marriage
- The Court confined their discipline of the respondent to severe censure

Cabague vs. Auxilio

This is an appeal from an order of the Court of First Instance of Camarines Norte.
Facts:
Felipe Cabague and his son Geronimo sued Matias Auxilio and his daughter
Socorro to recover damages resulting from defendants refusal to carry out the
previously agreed marriage between Socorro and Geronimo
The following are the complaints:
a. That defendants promised marriage if plaintiffs would improve the house in Basud
and spend for the wedding feast and the needs of the bride
b. That plaintiffs made the improvement and spent P700
c. That without any reason, the defendants refused to honor their promise
Defendants moved for the dismissal of the case, arguing that the contract was
oral, and unenforceable
The court dismissed the case

 Under the former rules of procedure, when the complaint did not state whether
the contract sued was on writing or not, the statute of frauds could be no ground for
demurrer
Under the new rules, defendant may now present a motion to dismiss on the
ground that the contract was not in writing, even if such fact is not apparent on the
face of the complaint. The fact may be proved by him
Issue: WON that the transaction was not in writing can be proven in court
Held: For breach of contract to marry, Geronimo may sue Socorro for damages. But
Felipe cant continue with his suit because the suit is to enforce an agreement in
consideration of marriage. Felipe cant sue Matias on grounds of breach of mutual
promise to marry. Felipe cant sue Socorro for breach of mutual promise to marry
Basically, Geronimo is the only one who can sue Socorro for damages for her
failure to carry out their mutual matrimonial promises
The case was remanded to the lower court for further proceedings in accordance
with this decision.
Mallion vs. Alcantara
Facts:
Mallion filed a petition with San Pablo City RTC seeking declaration of nullity
of his marriage with Alcantara alleging the respondents psychological incapacity.
This petition was denied. The appeal in the CA was likewise dismissed. After the
decision attained finality, he filed the same petition with San Pablo RTC this time on
the grounds that the marriage is without a valid marriage license. The respondent
for her part moved to dismiss the petition invoking the principle of res judicata.
Issues:
WON res judicata applies. Assuming it does not, would the lack of marriage
license render the marriage null and void?
Held:
Res Judicata applies and lack of marriage license cannot render the
marriage null and void.
The petitioner is barred from instituting another suit where the cause of action is the
same (declaring nullity of his marriage with Alcantara). In the second case, he is
only invoking a different ground which is the lack of marriage license. The judiciary
would be squandering time, effort, and financial resources by litigating the same
controversy over again. And assuming, for arguments sake, that he is not barred
from instituting another case, he has already impliedly conceded the validity of his
marriage when he instituted the first case. This admission binds the petitioner and
cures the alleged defect of his marriage.