Bugayong Vs Ginez FACTS: in 1949, While On Furlough (Temporary

Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 2

Bugayong vs Ginez sufficient for this court to render a valid

judgement. : The Court of First Instance ordered


FACTS: In 1949, while on furlough(temporary
the dismissal of the action on the ground of
unpaid) leave, Benjamin Bugayong, a
Condonation.
serviceman in the US Navy married Leonila
Ginez in Pangasinan.

After the marriage, they lived with his sisters in ISSUE: Whether there was condonation
Manila. 2 years after, the wife left the dwelling between Benjamin and Leonila that may serve
of her sister-in-law and informed her husband as a ground for dismissal of the legal separation.
by letter that she had gone to Pangasinan to
reside with her mother and later moved to
Dagupan to study in a local college. On that RULING: There was clearly a condonation on
same year, the husband received letters from the part of the husband for the supposed acts
his sister-in-law and from some anonymous of rank of infidelity amounting to adultery
writers about the infidelity of his wife. His wife committed by his wife. This is evident when
also messaged him that a certain “Eliong” kissed they slept together for two nights as husband
her. and wife in the same house. The SC opined that
there was a reconciliation between them and
He seeked the advice of the Navy Chaplain who
there was a condonation of the wife by the
directed him to consult instead the Navy Legal
husband.
Department.
Also, Article 100 of the Civil Code provides that
One year after, he went to Pangasinan and
legal separation may only be claimed by an
looked for his wife. They met in the house of
innocent spouse provided there has been no
the wife’s godmother and afterwards
condonation of or consent to the adultery or
proceeded to the house of his cousin where
concubinage. The acts of the husband, despite
they stayed for 1 night and 1 day as husband
his belief of the unfaithfulness of his wife
and wife. The next day, they slept together in
deprives him of any action for legal separation
their own house. When he tried to verify with
because his conduct comes with the restriction
the wife the truth on the information he
of Article 100 of the Civil Code.
received but instead of answering, she merely
packed up and left which he took as a *In the American jurisprudence, if the parties,
confirmation of the acts of infidelity. After that, after the commission of the offense and with
he went to Ilocos Norte to find her but to no the knowledge of the other party of the its
avail . commission, has lived on the same house, it is
presumed that they live on terms of
He then filed a complaint for legal separation in
matrimonial cohabitation and is sufficient
the Court of First Instance in Pangasinan against
enough to constitute condonation.
his wife who denied his accusations. The wife,
moved to dismiss the proceedings on the
grounds that if there was truth on the
allegations, (1) the action is barred by the
statute of limitations, (2) that under the same
assumption, the acts charged have been
condoned by the husband, (3) and that the
complaint failed to state a cause of action
RULING: Yes. The fact that he told his
wife that he had nothing to do with her
and that she can do whatever she
People vs Sensano and Ramos wants is considered as consent for the
adultery. He also did not interfere with
FACTS: Ursula Sensano and Mariano his wife’s relations for seven years
Ventura were married and had 1 child. despite knowing that the she was
After the birth of the child, the staying again with Marcelo.
husband went to Cagayan for 3 years
without writing to his wife or giving The Attorney-General’s contention has
support to them. no merit-the husband could still have
taken actions despite his absence
The wife met Marcelo Ramos who took from the country had he wanted to.
her and the child to live with him. The SC reversed the decision of the
Upon the return of her husband, he Court of First Instance of Ilocos Norte
filed a charge against his wife and for the crime of adultery to three
Marcelo for adultery and both were years, six months and 21 days of
prison correccional.
sentenced to 4 months and 1 day of
arresto mayor.
After completing the sentence, she left
her paramour and appealed to the
municipal president and justice of
peace to send for her husband so she
can ask for his pardon and beg him to
take her back. He refused to pardon
her, to live with her and said she could
go wherever she wished and do as she
pleased and that he would have
nothing more to do with her.
Abandoned for the second time, she
went back to Marcelo and lived with
him ever since. The husband knew of
this but didn’t do anything to interfere
or to assert his rights as the husband.
He left for Hawaii and remained there
for 7 years completely abandoning his
wife and child. On his return to the PH,
he presented the second charge of
adultery for the sole purpose of being
able to obtain a divorce under the
provisions of Act No. 2710 (An Act to
Establish Divorce).
ISSUE: WON the husband has
consented to his wife’s adulterous
acts.

You might also like