SOBIACO,CLEOFE MAY B.
JMC-COLLEGE OF LAW
PERSONS
RELATIONS
AND
FAMILY
Ruling:
FINAL EXAM CASES
Abadilla v. Tabiliran
Facts:
An administrative case was filed by
Abadilla (a clerk of court) alleging that
Judge Tabiliran had scandalously and
publicly
cohabited
with
Priscilla
Baybayan (with whom he begot 3
children) during the existence of his
legitimate marriage with
Teresita
Banzuela-Tabiliran. The respondent and
Baybayan were married on May 23,
1986. It was further alleged that Judge
Tabiliran falsely represented himself as
“single” in the marriage contract and
that Mrs. Tabiliran also filed a
complaint against the respondent for
abandoning the family home and living
with Leonora Pillarion, with whom he
begot a son. the judge was also alleged to
have committed corruption and bribery.
In his defense, Judge Tabiliran claimed
that he was not liable for bigamy
because he cohabited and married
Baybayan after Mrs. Tabiliran left and
abandoned him and their family in 1966.
Since then, he had not heard any news
about his wife. He also alleged that
Abadilla was filing this case in
retribution and resentment. The RTC
said that the marriage between Tabiliran
and Baybayan is valid until the
reappearance of his first wife.
Issue:
Whether or not the trial court erred in
recognizing the second marriage valid.
The Court found that Judge Tabiliran
started cohabiting with Baybayan as
early as 1970, prove by the birth of their
children in 1970, 1971 and 1975
respectively.
Hence,
the cohabitation occurred while the
first marriage was valid and subsisting
and contrary to Sec 3 of the Rules of
Court and Art 390 of the Civil Code
which states that a spouse is presumed
to be dead after 7 years of absence. In
this case, Mrs. Tabiliran was absent only
for 4 years when respondent and
Baybayan cohabited. Therefore, Judge
Tabiliran was found guilty of gross
immorality, deceitful conduct and
corruption.
Tijing v Court of Appeals
Facts:
Petitioners are husband and wife. They
have six children. The youngest is
Edgardo Tijing Jr. In August 1989,
Bienvienida left Egardo to Angelita, who
went to her house to fetch the urgent
laundry. Bienvenida usually let Angelita
take care of the child while she was
doing te laundry.
When Bienvienida returned from the
market Angelita and Edgardo Jr. were
gone. She proceeded to the house of
Angelita however she was not there. The
petitioner returned to the house of
Angelita, unfortunately Angelita move to
another place.
SOBIACO,CLEOFE MAY B.
JMC-COLLEGE OF LAW
Issue: Whether or not Edgado Tiijing Jr.
and John Thomas Lope are one of the
same person and is son of petitioners
Ruling:
Yes. Evidence presented by Bienvenida
is sufficeinet to establish that Joh
Thomas lOpezz is actually her missing
son, Edgardo Tijing, Jr. The subject
minor is indeed the son of petitioners.
The writ of habeas corpus is proper to
regain custody of the said child.
Parentage is still be resolved using
conventional method unless we adopt
the modern and scientific ways
available. Fortunately we have now the
facility and expertise in using DNA test
for identification and parentage testing.
Firs, there is evidence that Angelita
could no longer bear children. There is
no clininal records, logbook or
dischnarge order from the clinic were
ever submitted.
Angelitas claimed that she is the mother
of John Thomas lopez will not prosper.
It was foud out that the birth certificate
was filed by Tomas Lopez instead of the
midwife. Under the law, the attending
physician or medwife in attendance at
birth should cause the registration of
such birth.
Cabatania vs. Court of Appeals
Facts: