0%(1)Il 0% ha trovato utile questo documento (1 voto)
755 visualizzazioni2 pagine
Concepcion Alanis filed a complaint on October 1979, for the Declaration of Nullity of Marriage between her erstwhile husband nrico!acete and one Clarita de la Concepcion. He defendants were each ser$ed with summons" Due to unwanted misunderstanding, the defendants failed to file an answer on the date set by the court" After trial, the court rendered a decision in favor of the plaintiff on March 17, 19&0.
Concepcion Alanis filed a complaint on October 1979, for the Declaration of Nullity of Marriage between her erstwhile husband nrico!acete and one Clarita de la Concepcion. He defendants were each ser$ed with summons" Due to unwanted misunderstanding, the defendants failed to file an answer on the date set by the court" After trial, the court rendered a decision in favor of the plaintiff on March 17, 19&0.
Concepcion Alanis filed a complaint on October 1979, for the Declaration of Nullity of Marriage between her erstwhile husband nrico!acete and one Clarita de la Concepcion. He defendants were each ser$ed with summons" Due to unwanted misunderstanding, the defendants failed to file an answer on the date set by the court" After trial, the court rendered a decision in favor of the plaintiff on March 17, 19&0.
FACTS: Concepcion Alanis filed a complaint on October 1979, for the Declaration of Nullity of Marriage between her erstwhile husband nrico !acete and one Clarita de la Concepcion, as well as for legal separation between her and !acete, accounting and separation of property" #he a$erred in her complaint that she was married to !acete on April 19%& and they had a child named Consuelo' that !acete subse(uently contracted a second marriage with Clarita de la Concepcion and that she learned of such marriage only on August 1979" )econciliation between her and !acete was impossible since he e$idently preferred to continue li$ing with Clarita" *he defendants were each ser$ed with summons" *hey filed an e+tension within which to file an answer, which the court partly granted" Due to unwanted misunderstanding, particularly in communication, the defendants failed to file an answer on the date set by the court" *hereafter, the plaintiff filed a motion to declare the defendants in default, which the court forthwith granted" *he court recei$ed plaintiffs, e$idence during the hearings held on -ebruary 1., /0, /1, and //, 19&0" After trial, the court rendered a decision in fa$or of the plaintiff on March 17,19&0" ISSUE: 1hether or not the )*C gra$ely abused its discretion in denying petitioner,s motion for e+tension of time to file their answer, in declaring petitioners in default and in rendering its decision on March 17, 19&0 which decreed the legal separation of !acete and Alanis and held to be null and $oid the marriage of !acete to Clarita" HELD: *he Ci$il Code pro$ides that 2no decree of legal separation shall be promulgated upon a stipulation of facts or by confession of 3udgment" 4n case of non5appearance of the defendant, the court shall order the prosecuting attorney to in(uire whether or not collusion between parties e+ists" 4f there is no collusion, the prosecuting attorney shall inter$ene for the #tate in order to ta6e care that the e$idence for the plaintiff is not fabricated"7 *he abo$e stated pro$ision calling for the inter$ention of the state attorneys in case of uncontested proceedings for legal separation 8and of annulment of marriages, under Article &&9 is to emphasi:e that marriage is more than a mere contract" Article 10% of the Ci$il Code, now Article .& of the -amily Code, further mandates that an action for legal separation must 2in no case be tried before si+ months shall ha$e elapsed since the filing of the petition,7 ob$iously in order to pro$ide the parties a 2cooling5off7 period" 4n this interim, the court should ta6e steps toward getting the parties to reconcile" *he significance of the abo$e substanti$e pro$isions of the law is further or underscored by the inclusion of a pro$ision in )ule 1& of the )ules of Court which pro$ides that no defaults in actions for annulments of marriage or for legal separation" *herefore, 2if the defendant in an action for annulment of marriage or for legal separation fails to answer, the court shall order the prosecuting attorney to in$estigate whether or not a collusion between the parties e+ists, and if there is no collusion, to inter$ene for the #tate in order to see to it that the e$idence submitted is not fabricated"7