What are the opening hours?

Monday 8am - 6pm Tuesday 8am - 6pm Wednesday 8am - 6pm Thursday 8am - 6pm Friday 8am - 6pm

https://www.facebook.com/516364031570636/

PRV Law Office

Home
Philippines
Bulacan
PRV Law Office

Contact information, map and directions, contact form, opening hours, services, ratings, photos, videos and announcements from PRV Law Office, Lawyer & Law Firm, Unit 1, 3J Commercial Bldg. , Gov. Padilla, Banga 1st, Plaridel, Bulacan.

03/07/2026

🎉 Happy Birthday, Atty. Pia Roelen C. Pahati! ⚖️🎂

Today, we celebrate not only an exceptional lawyer but also an inspiring colleague, leader, and friend.

Your unwavering dedication to the legal profession, commitment to justice, and genuine compassion for those you serve reflect the very values that define PRV LAW OFFICE. Your professionalism, integrity, and excellence continue to inspire everyone around you and contribute immensely to the growth and success of our firm.

We are truly grateful to have you as one of our valued partner lawyers. Your wisdom, perseverance, and passion for the law have made a lasting impact on our clients, our team, and the community we proudly serve.

As you celebrate another year of life, may God continue to bless you with good health, happiness, strength, and countless opportunities to achieve even greater success. May this new chapter bring you fulfillment in your profession, joy in your personal life, and abundant blessings in everything you do.

Thank you for your invaluable contributions and for being an integral part of the PRV LAW OFFICE family.

Here's to another year of excellence, purpose, and making a difference.

🥂 Happy Birthday, Atty. Pia! May your special day be as wonderful and inspiring as you are. Wishing you God's abundant grace and blessings today and always! ⚖️💙

— Your PRV LAW OFFICE Family

03/06/2026

PRV Law Office proudly congratulates our esteemed Partner Lawyer, ATTY. JANINE CRYSTAL C. SAYO-VILLAVICENCIO, for successfully earning her Master of Laws (LL.M.) degree from the University of Santo Tomas with the distinction of Cum Laude.

Your hard work, perseverance, and unwavering dedication to the legal profession truly embody excellence and integrity. This remarkable achievement is a testament to your passion for the law and your commitment to continuous growth and service.

Your PRV Law Office family celebrates this milestone with great pride and admiration. May this accomplishment inspire more success in your legal journey and continue to empower the lives of those you serve.

Congratulations, Attorney Janine Crystal! ⚖️🎓

20/04/2026

PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT

This is to inform the public that ELISA SANCHEZ is no longer affiliated with PRV Law Office effective immediately.

Any and all transactions, representations, or dealings made by the said individual are no longer authorized and are not in any way connected with PRV Law Office.

PRV Law Office shall not be held liable for any actions, agreements, or commitments entered into by the aforementioned individual from the date of separation onward.

For official transactions and inquiries, please coordinate directly with PRV Law Office through its authorized representatives.

Thank you for your cooperation.

PRV Law Office

10/02/2026

The (SC) has ruled that same-sex couples who live together may be recognized as co-owners of property under Article 148 of the 𝘍𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘭𝘺 𝘊𝘰𝘥𝘦, provided there is proof of actual contribution.

In a Decision written by Associate Justice Jhosep Y. Lopez, the SC’s Second Division granted a woman’s complaint for partition of property and recognized her as a co-owner of the house and lot she shared with her same-sex partner.

Article 148 of the 𝘍𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘭𝘺 𝘊𝘰𝘥𝘦 governs the property relations of couples who are living together but cannot legally marry, acknowledging co-ownership based on their actual contributions.

The two women lived together as a couple. A year into their relationship, they purchased a house and lot, and agreed to register the property in one partner’s name to facilitate banking transactions.

Upon separation, they agreed to sell the property and divide the proceeds equally. One partner signed an 𝘈𝘤𝘬𝘯𝘰𝘸𝘭𝘦𝘥𝘨𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 stating that the other had paid about 50% of the purchase and renovation costs.

However, she later refused to sell the property and denied that her former partner was a co-owner.

To protect her interest, the former partner annotated an adverse claim on the title and demanded partition of the property. When this failed, she filed a case for partition of real estate and damages, relying on the 𝘈𝘤𝘬𝘯𝘰𝘸𝘭𝘦𝘥𝘨𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 as proof of co-ownership.

The SC granted the complaint for partition of real estate, as it clarified the provisions in the 𝘍𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘭𝘺 𝘊𝘰𝘥𝘦 governing the property relations of unmarried couples living together.

Article 147 applies to unmarried couples who may legally marry. Property acquired during their cohabitation is presumed jointly owned.

Article 148, on the other hand, applies to couples who are not permitted to marry. Only properties obtained through actual contribution are considered common property.

Since the 𝘍𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘭𝘺 𝘊𝘰𝘥𝘦 only allows marriage between a man and a woman, the SC held that same-sex couples necessarily fall under Article 148.

Here, the SC found that the signed 𝘈𝘤𝘬𝘯𝘰𝘸𝘭𝘦𝘥𝘨𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵, where one partner admitted that the other paid about half of the property costs, was a binding admission and sufficient proof of actual contribution. This established co-ownership.

Read the full text of the press release at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=160462.

Read the full text of the Decision at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=160431.

Read the Concurring Opinion of Senior Associate Justice Marvic M.V.F. Leonen at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=160444.

Read the Concurrence of Associate Justice Amy C. Lazaro-Javier at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=160439.

Copying of this content is subject to the SC PIO’s Credit Attribution Policy: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-attribution-policy/.

09/02/2026

Isinantabi ng ang kasong adultery na inihain ng kinatawan ng isang lalaki laban sa kanyang asawa. Muling iginiit ng Korte na tanging ang mismong asawang nasaktan o naagrabyado ang may karapatang magsampa ng ganitong kaso.

Sa isang desisyong isinulat ni Associate Justice Antonio T. Kho, Jr., binaliktad ng Ikalawang Dibisyon ng Korte Suprema ang pasya ng Regional Trial Court (RTC) na nag-utos na muling buksan ang kasong adultery laban kina Aurel Ann Chua-Chiba at kapwa-akusado na si Michael Llona.

Nagsampa, sa pamamagitan ng isang kinatawan, ng kasong adultery at grave threats si Jin Chiba laban sa asawa niyang si Aurel at kay Michael.

Hindi pinagbigyan ng Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC) ang kasong adultery sa dahilang tanging ang mismong asawang naagrabyado lamang ang maaaring magsampa nito.

Binaliktad ng RTC ang desisyon ng MeTC at pinagtibay na tumugon sa mga pamantayang legal ang pagsasampa ng kaso, dahil nakalakip naman sa reklamong inihain ng kinatawan ni Jin ang mismong complaint-affidavit ni Jin.

Hindi ito sinang-ayunan ng Korte Suprema at muling iginiit na ang adultery ay isang pribadong krimen na maaari lamang usigin kung may reklamong inihain mismo ng asawang inagrabyado. Binanggit ng Korte ang Rule 110, Section 5, ng Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure at ang Article 344 ng Revised Penal Code (RPC).

Ipinaliwanag ng Korte Suprema na umiiral ang kahingiang ito “bilang paggalang sa panig na inagrabyado, na maaaring mas piliing tiisin na lamang nang tahimik ang dinanas na paglabag kaysa humarap sa eskandalo ng isang pampublikong paglilitis.” Pinahihintulutan ng batas ang asawang inagrabyado na magpasya kung dadalhin ba ang usapin sa hukuman o aayusin ito nang pribado.

Sa kasong ito, ang reklamong adultery ay hindi sinimulan ng mismong asawang inagrabyado kundi ng kanyang kinatawan. Bagaman nagsumite si Jin ng sarili niyang complaint-affidavit, ito ay isinama lamang bilang kalakip o annex sa reklamong inihain ng kanyang kinatawan.

Dahil hindi natugunan ang mga kahingian sa ilalim ng Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure at ng Revised Penal Code, itinuring ng Korte Suprema na walang wastong reklamo naisampa at tuluyan nitong ibinasura ang kaso.

Basahin ang kabuuan ng press release sa https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=159759

Basahin ang kabuuang teksto ng Desisyon sa https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=159743

Basahin ang Concurring Opinion ni Senior Associate Justice Marvic M.V.F. Leonen sa https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=159748

Sumunod sa Credit Attribution Policy ng SC PIO: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-attribution-policy/.

29/01/2026

FREE LEGAL CONSULTATION

Our office will be offering a Free Legal Consultation to assist individuals who need legal guidance and advice.

📅 Date: January 31, 2026
⏰ Time: 9:00 AM – 12:00 NN
📍 Venue: Ground Floor, Unit 1, 3J Commercial Building, Governor Padilla Road, Banga 1st, Plaridel, Bulacan

📞 For inquiries: 0993-303-6825 | 0975-362-4945

Slots may be limited. We encourage interested parties to contact us in advance.

20/01/2026

Our office achieved a significant legal milestone!

The Human Settlements Adjudication Commission, in its Decision dated 16 December 2025, rendered judgment in favor of our client—declaring the disputed election null and void and granting the reliefs prayed for.

30/12/2025

The has clarified that the proper term for the crime under Article 266-A(1)(a) of the 𝘙𝘦𝘷𝘪𝘴𝘦𝘥 𝘗𝘦𝘯𝘢𝘭 𝘊𝘰𝘥𝘦 (𝘙𝘗𝘊) is 𝘳𝘢𝘱𝘦 and not 𝘴𝘪𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘳𝘢𝘱𝘦.

In a Decision written by Associate Justice Henri Jean Paul B. Inting, the SC’s Third Division affirmed a man’s conviction for ra**ng a 13-year-old girl, sentencing him to a maximum of 40 years in prison.

The accused was found guilty by the Regional Trial Court and the Court of Appeals of 𝘴𝘪𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘳𝘢𝘱𝘦.

Under Article 266-A(1)(a) of the RPC, 𝘳𝘢𝘱𝘦 is committed when a man has sexual in*******se with a woman through force, threat, or intimidation.

The SC affirmed his conviction and also took the opportunity to clarify that the crime should be referred to as 𝘳𝘢𝘱𝘦 instead of 𝘴𝘪𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘳𝘢𝘱𝘦:

“After all, there is nothing ‘simple’ about R**e and referring to it in such a manner downplays its severity and desensitizes the public to the harm it inflicts,” said the SC.

While 𝘳𝘢𝘱𝘦 was initially classified as a crime against chastity under Article 335 of the RPC, Republic Act No. 8353, or the 𝘈𝘯𝘵𝘪-𝘙𝘢𝘱𝘦 𝘓𝘢𝘸 𝘰𝘧 1997, reclassified it as a crime against persons.

Crimes against chastity, such as adultery and seduction, are generally private crimes which focus on protecting the victim’s honor.

On the other hand, crimes against persons, such as homicide, murder, and physical injuries, aim to protect individuals’ bodily integrity and well-being.

Read the full text of the Press Release at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=157708.

Read the full text of the Decision at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=157708.

Copying of this content is subject to the SC PIO’s Credit Attribution Policy: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-attribution-policy/.

Address

Unit 1, 3J Commercial Bldg. , Gov. Padilla, Banga 1st, Plaridel
Bulacan
3004

Opening Hours

Monday	8am - 6pm
Tuesday	8am - 6pm
Wednesday	8am - 6pm
Thursday	8am - 6pm
Friday	8am - 6pm

Website

facebook.com

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when PRV Law Office posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Want your business to be the top-listed Law Practice in Bulacan?