Nikko Hotel Manila v. Reyes, G.R. No.

154259, 28 February 2005

Doctrine of Volenti Non Fit Injuria refers to the self- inflicted injury or to the consent to injury which precludes
the recovery of damages by one who has knowingly and voluntarily exposed himself to danger, even if he is
noy negligent in dong so. As formulated by petitioners, however, this doctrine does not find petitioners, under
Article 19 and 21 of the New Civil Code, were still under obligation to treat him fairly inoder not to expose him
to unnecessary redicule and shame.

Cosca v. Palaypayon A.M. No. MTJ-92- 721, 30 September 1994

Article 4 of the Family Code pertinently provides that “in the absence of any of the essential or formal
requisites shall render the marriage void ab initio whereas an irregularity in the formal requisite shall not affect
the validity of the marriage but the party or parties responsible for the irregularity shall be civilly, criminally,
and administratively liable.He was found guilty of solemnizing marriage without marriage license.

He solemnized marriage between Abellano & Edralin and claimed it was under Article 34 of the Civil Code so
the marriage license was dispensed with considering that the contracting parties executed a joint affidavit that
they have been living together as husband and wife for almost 6 years already. However, it was shown that
Abellano must have been less than 13 years old when they started living together He is fond negigent in
ascertaining the qualification of the contracting parties who might have executed a false joint affidavit in order
to avoid the marriage license requirement.

BARCELONA VS CA G.R. NO. 130087. SEPTEMBER 24, 2003

The complete facts should allege the physical manifestations, if any, as are indicative of psychological
incapacity at the time of the celebration of the marriage but expert opinion need not be alleged. Since the new
Rules do not require the petition to allege expert opinion on the psychological incapacity, it follows that there is
also no need to allege in the petition the root cause of the psychological incapacity. Hence, what the new Rules
require the petition to allege are the physical manifestations indicative of psychological incapacity. Respondent
Tadeos second petition complies with this requirement.

ALCANTARA VS ALCANTARA GR NO 167746, 28 AUGUST 2007

Art. 53. No marriage shall be solemnized unless all these requisites are complied with:(1) Legal capacity of the
contracting parties;(2) Their consent, freely given(3) Authority of the person performing the marriage; and (4)
A marriage license, except in a marriage of exceptional character.

A valid marriage license is a requisite of marriage, the absence of which renders the marriage void ab initio. To
be considered void on the ground of absence of a marriage license, the law requires that the absence of such
marriage license must be apparent on the marriage contract, or at the very least, supported by a certification
from the local civil registrar that no such marriage license was issued to the parties an irregularity in any of the
formal requisites of marriage does not affect its validity but the party or parties responsible for the irregularity
are civilly, criminally and administratively liable.

SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM, Petitioner, vs. TERESITA JARQUE VDA. DE BAILON, Respondent.
If the absentee reappears, but no step is taken to terminate the subsequent marriage, either by affidavit or by
court action, such absentee’s mere reappearance, even if made known to the spouses in the subsequent
marriage, will not terminate such marriage. Since the second marriage has been contracted because of a
presumption that the former spouse is dead, such presumption continues inspite of the spouse’s physical
reappearance, and by fiction of law, he or she must still be regarded as legally an absentee until the subsequent
marriage is terminated as provided by law.

Such marriages can be assailed only during the lifetime of the parties and not after the death of either, in which
case the parties and their offspring will be left as If the marriage had been perfectly valid. Upon the death of
either marriage cannot be impeached and is made good ab initio. As no step was taken to nullify, in accordance
with law, Bailon’s and respondent’s marriage prior to the former’s death in 1998, respondent is rightfully the
dependent spouse-beneficiary of Bailon.

ESTRELLA DE LA CRUZ, vs.SEVERINO DE LA CRUZ, G.R. No. L-19565 January 30, 1968
Article 101.
To be legally declared as to have abandoned the conjugal home, one must have willfully and with intention of
not coming back and perpetual separation. The law provides that there must be real abandonment and not mere
separation. The abandonment must not only be physical estrangement but also amount to financial and moral
desertion. Therefore, physical separation alone is not the full meaning of the term "abandonment", if the
husband, despite his voluntary departure from the society of his spouse, neither neglects the management of the
conjugal partnership nor ceases to give support to his wife. Additionally, the concept of abandonment may be
established in relation to the alternative remedies granted to the wife when she has been abandoned by the
husband, namely, receivership, administration by her, or separation of property, all of which are designed to
protect the conjugal assets from waste and dissipation rendered imminent by the husband's continued absence
from the conjugal abode, and to assure the wife of a ready and steady source of support.

De Asis v. De Asis, G.R. No. 127578, 15 February 1999

The new Civil Code provides that the allowance for support is provisional because the amount may be
increased or decreased depending upon the means of the giver and the needs of the recipient (Art. 297); and
that the right to receive support cannot be renounced nor can it be transmitted to a third person; neither can it be
compensated with what the recipient owes the obligator (Art. 301). Furthermore, the right to support cannot be
waived or transferred to third parties and future support cannot be the subject of compromise (Art. 2035).

In the case at bar, respondent minors mother, who was the plaintiff in the first case, manifested that she was
withdrawing the case as it seemed futile to claim support from petitioner who denied his paternity over the
child. Since the right to claim for support is predicated on the existence of filiation between the minor child and
the putative parent, petitioner would like us to believe that such manifestation admitting the futility of claiming
support from him puts the issue to rest and bars any and all future complaint for support.

Macadangdang v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-49542, 12 September 1980, 108 SCRA 314

The child Rolando is presumed to be the legitimate son of respondent and her spouse. This presumption
becomes conclusive in the absence of proof that there was physical impossibility of access between the spouses
in the first 120 days of the 300 which preceded the birth of the child. This presumption is actually quasi-
conclusive and may be rebutted or refuted by only one evidence � the physical impossibility of access between
husband and wife within the first 120 days of the 300 which preceded the birth of the child.

Republic v. Cagandahan GR No. 166676, 12 September 2008

Where the person is biologically or naturally intersex the determining factor in his gender classification would
be what the individual, like respondent, having reached the age of majority, with good reason thinks of his/her
sex. Sexual development in cases of intersex persons makes the gender classification at birth inconclusive. It
is at maturity that the gender of such persons, like respondent, is fixed.