Atty. Kristel Alyssa G. Maranan

16/07/2025

Iginiit ng na ang pagtatago ng homosexuality ng isang tao mula sa kanyang asawa ay maaaring ituring na panloloko at maaaring gamitin bilang isang batayan para mapawalang-bisa ang isang kasal.

Sa isang Desisyon na isinulat ni Associate Justice Antonio T. Kho, Jr., pinawalang-bisa ng Ikalawang Dibisyon ng Korte Suprema ang kasal ng isang babae sa asawa nito na itinago ang kanyang homosexuality bago sila ikasal.

Ayon sa talaan, nagkakilala ang dalawa sa social media at naging magkasintahan makalipas ang isang taon. Sa kanilang unang date, napansin ng babae na tila walang gana ang lalake dahil hindi man siya hinalikan o hinawakan ang kamay. Iniwasan din ng lalake na tabihan siya sa tuwing sila ay kumakain o bumibiyahe. Paliwanag ng lalake, nahihiya lang siya at walang kumpiyansa sa sarili.

Nagpatuloy ang kanilang relasyon pero nagtrabaho ang lalaki sa ibang bansa. Ikinasal sila makalipas ang dalawang taon.

Pero patuloy pa rin na umiwas ang lalaki na makipagtalik. Sa halip, nakikipagtalo siya sa asawa. Dalawang buwan matapos ang kasal, nangibang bansa uli ang lalaki at hindi na nakipag-ugnayan pa sa kanyang asawa.

Kalaunan, may nakita ang babae na mga magasin na may hubad na larawan ng mga lalaki sa gamit ng kanyang asawa. Nang komprontahin, inamin ng lalaki ang kanyang sekswalidad. Naghain ng petisyon ang babae para ipawalang-bisa ang kanilang kasal.

Nagpasya ang Korte Suprema na ang pagpayag ng babae sa kasal ay nakuha sa pamamagitan ng panloloko at maaring ipawalang-bisa ang kasal batay sa mapanlokong paglilihim ng sekswalidad sa ilalim ng Article 45(3) kaugnay ng Article 46(4) ng Family Code.

Nakasaad sa Article 45 ng Family Code na maaaring mapawalang-bisa ang kasal kung ang pahintulot ng isang partido ay nakuha sa pamamagitan ng panloloko, basta’t hindi natuloy ang pagsasama ng mag-asawa matapos matuklasan ang panloloko. Ayon naman sa Article 46, ang pagtatago ng sekswalidad mula sa asawa ay maituturing na panloloko.

Naniwala ang Korte Suprema sa mga paratang ng babae at sinabing hindi pwedeng balewalain ang naging pag-amin ng lalaki at ang kanyang hindi maipaliwanag na katahimikan noong tinanong ang kanyang sekswalidad. Itinago ng lalake ang kanyang sekswalidad para kumbinsihin ang babae na pakasalan siya.

Basahin ang press release sa https://tinyurl.com/ywadbxwp.

Basahin ang Desisyon sa https://tinyurl.com/yjn9a89f.

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

26/06/2025

Nagpasya ang na ang kawalan ng kakayahan ng isang asawa na mahalin ang kabiyak o magkaroon ng emosyonal na koneksyon sa kanya dahil sa isang personality disorder ay maaaring ituring na ebidensya ng psychological incapacity at maging batayan para ideklarang walang bisa ang kasal.

Sa isang Desisyon na isinulat ni Senior Associate Justice Marvic M.V.F. Leonen, kinatigan ng Second Division ng Korte ang naunang pasya ng Regional Trial Court (RTC) na nagdeklarang walang bisa ang kasal ng mag-asawa dahil sa psychological incapacity ng lalaki na gampanan ang kanyang mga tungkulin bilang asawa.

Nagkakilala ang mag-asawa noong 1999 at palihim na nagpakasal noong 2002. Hindi sila agad nagsama dahil nagtrabaho ang lalaki sa Saudi Arabia. Kinasal sila sa simbahan noong 2004 nang umuwi ang lalaki pero umalis ulit ito sa Pilipinas. Bumalik sa bansa ang lalaki noong 2005 at silang mag-asawa ay nagsama paminsan-minsan at nagkaroon ng dalawang anak — isang lalaki noong 2007 at babae noong 2012. Nagsama lamang sila ng halos limang taon at ang pagsasama ay puno ng paulit-ulit na pagtatalo at hiwalayan.

Noong 2016, nagsampa ng petisyon ang lalaki para mapawalang-bisa ang kasal. Nagsumite sya ng diagnosis ng isang psychologist tungkol sa kanyang Passive-Aggressive Personality Disorder na naging dahilan para mahirapan siyang mapanatili ang kanyang malalapit na relasyon.

Pinagbigyan ng RTC ang petisyon pero binaliktad nito ang naging desisyon matapos umalma ang Office of the Solicitor General dahil sa due process. Kalanaunan ay isinantabi ng Court of Appeals ang apela ng asawa.

Pero nagpasya ang Korte Suprema pabor sa lalaki at sinabing napatunayan nito ang kanyang psychological incapacity.

Sa ilalim ng Article 36 ng Family Code, ang kasal ay walang bisa kung ang isa o parehong mag-asawa ay hindi kayang gampanan pyschologically ang kanilang mga tungkulin sa pag-aasawa kahit pa ang kundisyon na ito ay lumantad lang pagkatapos ng kasal.

Ang kawalan ng kakayahang magmahal ay dapat na malalim na nakaugat sa karakter ng tao at dapat na umiiral bago pa ang kasal.

Sa kasong ito, sinabi ng Korte na ang emotional detachment ng lalaki ay dahil sa strikto at emotionally distant na pagpapalaki. Bagamat kaya niyang tustusan ang kanyang pamilya, nahirapan siyang tugunan ang emosyonal na mga pangangailangan ng kanyang asawa.

Basahin ang buong press release sa https://tinyurl.com/2zjba472.

Basahin ang buong Desisyon sa https://tinyurl.com/8e67mcme.

Basahin ang Dissenting Opinion ni Associate Justice Jhosep Y. Lopez sa https://tinyurl.com/56e9rs43.

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

03/06/2025

The Supreme Court (SC) has ruled that in drug cases, prosecutors must raise all their objections when an accused offers to plead guilty to a lesser crime. Any objections not raised are considered waived.

In a Decision written by Associate Justice Japar B. Dimaampao, the SC 𝘌𝘯 𝘉𝘢𝘯𝘤 reinstated the Regional Trial Court’s (RTC) ruling that found Rodulfo Ferraren Aquino (Aquino) guilty of illegal possession of drug paraphernalia under Section 12 of R.A. No. 9165, or the 𝘊𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘩𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘋𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘦𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘴 𝘋𝘳𝘶𝘨𝘴 𝘈𝘤𝘵 𝘰𝘧 2002.

The SC also updated its 𝘊𝘭𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘺 𝘎𝘶𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘦𝘴 𝘰𝘯 𝘗𝘭𝘦𝘢-𝘉𝘢𝘳𝘨𝘢𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘯 𝘋𝘳𝘶𝘨𝘴 𝘊𝘢𝘴𝘦𝘴 as set forth in the 2022 case of 𝘗𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦 𝘷. 𝘔𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘦𝘳𝘳𝘰, by adding the following guidelines:

1. If the prosecution objects to a plea bargaining motion but cites only some possible grounds, any other ground not raised is considered waived.

2. If the prosecution raises several objections, but the trial court addresses only one, the appellate court or the SC shall direct the trial court to resolve the remaining issues based on the Montierro guidelines and this case.

3. If the records before the appellate court or the SC are incomplete and it is unclear whether either of the above scenarios applies, the trial court shall be directed to rule again on the matter, applying the principles in 𝘔𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘦𝘳𝘳𝘰 and this case.

Aquino was charged with selling and possessing shabu. He asked the RTC to allow him to plead guilty to a lesser crime, illegal possession of drug paraphernalia, for both charges. The prosecution agreed to the plea bargain for the possession charge but objected to the plea for the drug sale charge, saying it violated Department of Justice (DOJ) rules. The RTC, however, granted Aquino’s plea.

The SC, agreeing with the RTC, reiterated the 𝘔𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘦𝘳𝘳𝘰 ruling that courts may reject the prosecution’s objection to a plea bargain in drug cases if the only reason for the objection is that the plea violates rules, provided the plea follows the SC’s official plea bargaining framework.

However, the SC also clarified that courts do not have unlimited authority and cannot reject the prosecution’s objection if it is based on valid grounds, such as if the accused is not qualified for plea bargaining, or if the plea does not follow the SC’s approved guidelines.

Read the full text of the Press Release at https://tinyurl.com/y627x9fk.

Read the full text of the Decision at https://tinyurl.com/4pcu6ke3.

Read the Concurring Opinion of Associate Justice Henri Jean Paul B. Inting at https://tinyurl.com/5898sb24.

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

25/04/2025

Annulment and nullity of marriage cases must now be filed and served electronically through email, except for initiatory pleadings.

In A.M. No. 25-01-13-SC, the En Banc expanded Rule 13-A of the Rules of Civil Procedure, which mandates electronic filing and service of pleadings, motions, and other papers in civil cases in first- and second-level courts.

The Office of the Court Administrator recommended this inclusion, noting that these cases follow similar procedures to civil actions.

The amendment takes effect after publication of the Resolution on April 24, 2025.

Read the press release in full at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/sc-requires-electronic-filing-for-annulment-and-nullity-of-marriage-cases/

Read the full text of A.M. No. 25-01-13-SC, Re: Inclusion of the Declaration of Absolute Nullity of Marriage and Annulment of Marriage in the Coverage of Rule 13-A of the Rules of Court, at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/25-01-13-sc-re-inclusion-of-the-declaration-of-absolute-nullity-of-marriage-and-annulment-of-marriage-in-the-coverage-of-rule-13-a-of-the-rules-of-court/ .

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

04/04/2025

The (SC) has clarified that the time limit or prescriptive period for prosecuting crimes, including those under the 2022 Rules on Expedited Procedures in the First Level Courts (Rules of Expedited Procedures), stops running once a complaint is filed with the Department of Justice (DOJ), not when the case reaches the court.

In a Decision written by Associate Justice Henri Jean Paul B. Inting, the SC En Banc abandoned its rulings in the 2023 cases of Republic v. Desierto and Corpus, Jr. v. People, which previously held that the prescriptive period for crimes covered by the 1991 Revised Rules on Summary Procedure (Rules on Summary Procedure) stops only when the information is filed in court.

The Rules on Summary Procedure applied to cases handled by first-level courts and cover crimes including those punishable by up to six months of imprisonment and fines up to PHP 1,000. This was replaced in 2022 by the Rules on Expedited Procedures, which expanded the coverage of summary procedure to include those crimes punishable by up to one year of imprisonment and fines up to PHP 50,000.

In 2024, the DOJ issued its Rules on Summary Investigation and Expedited Preliminary Investigation, which provide that a summary investigation shall be done if the prescribed penalty is imprisonment of up to one year.

Given these developments, the SC clarified that the prescriptive period for crimes is tolled upon the filing of a complaint with the prosecution and the start of the summary investigation. This ruling will apply prospectively.

The SC recognized that while criminal cases should ideally be resolved promptly, delays are sometimes unavoidable. Therefore, the State, as the offended party, should not be disadvantaged by delays in the DOJ’s preliminary investigations, even in criminal cases under summary procedure.

The SC also clarified that under Section 281 of the 1997 National Internal Revenue Code, the prescriptive period for criminal tax offenses that are not immediately known starts from the time the violation is discovered. The prescriptive period is interrupted once a preliminary investigation begins.

Read the full text of the Press Release at https://tinyurl.com/26tfrr38.

The full text of the SC En Banc Decision in G.R. No. 258563 shall be uploaded to the SC website once available.

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

12/03/2025

05/03/2025

The (SC) has held that a victim's youth and immaturity serve as strong indicators of the truthfulness and sincerity of their testimony regarding unlawful acts committed against them.

In a Decision written by Associate Justice Henri Jean Paul B. Inting, the SC’s Third Division affirmed the conviction of Resty Laconsay (Laconsay) for Lascivious Conduct under Section 5(b) of Republic Act (RA) No. 7610 or the Special Protection of Children Against Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act after he molested a 14-year-old girl.

The victim, AAA, recounted that she was sleeping at home with her siblings when she woke up to find a person standing at her feet, holding a cellphone. The person pulled down her blanket, touched her foot, and caressed her leg up to her groin. AAA identified her assailant as Laconsay, their neighbor.

Laconsay denied the allegations, arguing that AAA’s testimony was inconsistent because she initially told her father that it was not Laconsay who molested her.

Holding that Laconsay committed Lascivious Conduct, the SC found AAA’s testimony credible in describing the lascivious acts committed against her and positively identifying Laconsay as her assailant. It emphasized that her youth and immaturity are badges of truth and sincerity, “because of her relative vulnerability and the shame and embarrassment that would arise if the matter about which she testified were not true.”

Read the full text of the Press Release at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/sc-youth-and-immaturity-strengthen-victims-credibility-in-molestation-case/.

Read the full text of the Decision at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/259861-resty-laconsay-vs-people-of-the-philippines/.

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

03/03/2025

The (SC) has reiterated that in forcible entry cases, the key issue is who had prior physical possession of the property – not ownership.

In a Decision written by Associate Justice Jose Midas P. Marquez, the SC’s First Division ordered respondents Ernie “Toto” Castillo et al. to vacate a parcel of land in Barangay Matina, Davao City (Lot 1957), after finding that they had forcibly entered the property.

The case stemmed from a complaint for forcible entry filed by Edgar M. Rico (Rico), who claimed he was in possession of the property by virtue of his free patent application for Lot 1957 with the Department of Environment and Natural Resources. He claimed that on October 11, 2005, the respondents illegally entered the property by destroying a steel gate and demolishing structures.

The SC ruled that forcible entry cases are about physical possession, not legal ownership. It held that the only issue in forcible entry cases is whether the claimant has proven prior physical possession of the contested property. Since Rico had established his prior possession, the SC ruled in his favor and ordered the respondents to vacate the property.

Read the full text of the Press Release at: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/sc-prior-possession-not-ownership-matters-in-forcible-entry-cases/.

Read the full text of the Decision at: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/215166-edgar-m-rico-vs-ernie-toto-castillo-pifiano-jumo-gerry-villegas-alfrance-alicante-felix-yagao-john-does-and-marilou-lopez-a-k-a-ma-loreto-v-abella-lopez/.

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

28/02/2025

The (SC) has ruled that security guards working under a broken period scheme must be paid overtime if their break is too short for personal use.

In a Decision written by Associate Justice Henri Jean Paul B. Inting, the SC’s Third Division ordered Seabren Security Agency (Seabren) to compensate security guards Lorenzo D. Cambila, Jr. and Albajar S. Samad (security guards) for the four-hour breaks or intervals they were required to spend at work beyond their regular duty hours.

Seabren hired the security guards and made them work 12-hour shifts. Their schedule required them to work four hours, take a four-hour break, and work another four hours.

When Seabren ignored their request for a salary increase and reassigned them to a different post, the security guards filed a complaint for constructive dismissal and unpaid overtime pay.

Ruling in favor of the security guards, the Supreme Court found that they were able to show they worked more than eight hours and are thus entitled to overtime pay under the Labor Code.

The SC held that the broken period scheme implemented by Seabren was designed to circumvent labor laws and avoid overtime pay. “It was impractical and costly for minimum wage security guards to leave work, go home, and then come back on the same day,” said the SC.

Read the full text of the Press Release at:
https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/sc-security-guards-in-broken-shift-scheme-entitled-to-overtime-pay/.

Read the full text of the Decision at:
https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/261716-lorenzo-d-cambila-jr-et-al-vs-seabren-security-agency-et-al/.

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