FAMILY CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES

DINAH B. TONOG VS COURT OF APPEALS Facts: In 1989, Dinah B. Tonog gave birth to Gardin Faith Belarde Tonog, her illegitimate daughter with Edgar V. Daguimol. A year after the birth of Gardin, Dinah left for the USA where she found a work as a  nurse. Gardin was left in the care of her father and paternal grandparents.  Edgar filed a petition for guardianship over Gardin in the RTC of Quezon City. In March 1992, the court  granted the petition and APPOINTED  Edgar as legal guardian of Gardin.  In May 1992, Dinah filed a petition for relief from judgment. She averred that she learned of the judgment only on April 1, 1992. The trial court set aside its original judgment and allowed Dinah to  file  her opposition to Edgar's petition. Edgar, in turn, filed a motion for reconsideration.  In 1993, Dinah filed a motion to remand custody of Gardin to her. In 1994, the trial court ISSUED ...

ARTICLE 222         The courts may appoint a guardian of the child’s property, or a guardian litem when the best interests of the child so require. (317) Article 223         The parents or, in their absence or incapacity, the individual, entity or institution exercising parental authority, may petition the proper court of the place where the child resides, for an providing for disciplinary measures over the child. The child shall be entitled to the assistance of counsel, either of his choice or appointed by the court, and a summary hearing shall be conducted wherein the petitioner and the child shall be heard.         However, if in the same proceeding the court finds the petitioner at fault, irrespective of the merits of the petition, or when the circumtances so warrant, the court may also order the deprivation or suspension of parental authority or adopt such other meas...

           REPUBLIC THE PHILIPPINES,  petitioner, vs.  HON. CONCEPCION S. ALARCON VERGARA, in her capacity as Presiding Judge of the Regional Trial Court, Third Judicial Region, Branch 62, Angeles City and SPOUSES SAMUEL ROBERT DYE, JR. and ROSALINA D. DYE, respondents. [ G.R. No. 95551.   March 20, 1997] FACTS: On June 25, 1990, the spouses Samuel R. Dye, Jr. and Rosalina Due Dye filed a petition before the Regional Trial Court of Angeles City   to adopt Maricel R. Due and Alvin R. Due, ages 13 and 12 years old, respectively, younger siblings of Rosalina. Samuel R. Dye, Jr, a member of the United States Air Force, is an American citizen who resided at the Clark Air Base in Pampanga. His wife Rosalina is a former Filipino who became a naturalized American. They have two children. Both Maricel and Alvin Due, as well as their natural parents, gave their consent to the adoption. After trial, the lower court rendered its dec...

The following persons may not adopt: 1.     The guardian with respect to the ward prior to the approval of the final accounts rendered upon the termination of their guardian ship relation 2.     Any person who has been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude 3.     An alien, except: a.     A former Filipino citizen who seeks to adopt a relative by consanguinity; b.     One who seeks to adopt the legitimatechild of his or her Filipino spouse;or c.     One who is married to a Filipino citizen and seeks to adopt jointly with his or her spouse a relative by consanguinity of the latter. Aliens not included in the foregoing exceptions may adopt Filipino children in accordance with the rules on Inter-country Adoption as may be  be provided by law (28a. E. O No 91 and P. D. No. 603). GUARDIAN CANNOT ADOPT WARD PURPOSE OF THE LAW ·       ...

Manacop Vs. CA Facts: On March 17, 1986, Private Respondent E & L Mercantile, Inc. filed a complaint against petitioner and F.F. Manacop Construction Co., Inc. before the Regional Trial Court of Pasig, Metro Manila to collect an indebtedness of P3,359,218.45. Instead of filing an answer, petitioner and his company entered into a compromise agreement with private respondent, the salient portion of which provides:  That defendants will undertake to pay the amount of P2,000,000.00 as and when their means permit, but expeditiously as possible as their collectibles will be collected.  However, execution of the Judgment was delayed. Eventually, the sheriff levied on several vehicles and other personal properties of petitioner. In partial satisfaction of the judgment debt, these chattels were sold at public auction for which certificates of sale were correspondingly issued by the sheriff. On August 1, 1989, petitioner and his company filed a motion to quas...

ARTICLE 154   The beneficiaries of a family home are; 1.     The husband and wife, or an unmarried person who is an head of a family; and 2.     Their parents, ascendants, descendants, brothers and sisters, whether the relationship be legitimate or illegitimate,who are living in the family home and who depend upon the head of the family for legal support.(226a)   The law merely enumerates the beneficiaries of the family home. ARTICLE 155 The family home shall be exempt execution, forced sale or attachment except; 1. For non-payment of taxes; 2. For debts incurred prior to the constitution of the family home; 3. For debts secure by mortgages on the premises before or after such constitution; and 4.For debts due to laborers, mechanics, architects, builders, materialment and others who have rendered service or furnished material for the construction of the building (243a) EXPLANATION: “Under the Family Code, a family...