ACE LEGAL NETWORK

EJ BLANCO Drive Daro, Dumagute City

Dear Mrs. Gaskon

I received your letter for request regarding our legal opinion in a matter of
your petition for seeking the nullity of your marriage. You asked how to end your
marriage due to your husband’s acts and habitual vices.

My opinion of an appropriate action that you may avail regarding such case
is only legal separation. Based on your stated facts on your submitted letter, you
stated that your husband Steve Gaskon Hits you during marital quarrel. There is
an act of physical violence as sufficient ground for legal separation from your
husband. Such factual basis is not a ground for voidable marriage under Article 45
of the Family Code.

Legal Separation does not terminate your marriage. However, you can live
separately from board and in bed from your husband as an effect of the provided
under Article 63 paragraph 1 of the Family Code. The Custody of your children
shall be awarded to you as innocent spouse provided under paragraph 3 of the
same provision.

However, if you wish to pursue for annulment, I can recommend to site for
Psychological Incapacity on the part of Mr. Steve Gaskon under Article 36 of the
Family Code provided that there is a proof of incapacity to comply with essential
marital obligation.

To prove Psychological Incapacity, the court already ruled the concurrence

of the following characteristics.

1. Gravity;
 (b) Juridical antecedence

(c) Incurability,

The incapacity must be grave or serious such that the party would be
incapable of carrying out the ordinary duties required in marriage; it must be
rooted in the history of the party antedating the marriage, although the overt
manifestations may emerge only after the marriage; and it must be incurable or,
even if it were otherwise, the cure would be beyond the means of the party
involved.

Therefore, we recommend to file for Legal separation in the first place

before citing for we take action for Psychological Incapacity.

Sincerely yours

ATTY. JAPET R. RENTUMA, Lpt.

OFFICE MEMORANDUM

For the Managing partner of the Law Firm

Facts in the Compromise:

The Father, Engr. Edilberto C. Daguok, and Ms. Danielle P. Enrile agreed in
writing that the former will give a monthly support of 10,000.00 to the child. He
however, failed to fulfil his obligation because he disappeared just one week after
he signed a notarized agreement. It was latter found out that he is in Manila with
another woman. A demand letter was sent to him for seeking the performance of
his obligation but he filed a suit seeking the annulment of the compromise base
on the following reasons:

1. Engr. Edilberto C. Daguok is now head of the family of three (3)

members
2. He asserted that his filiation to the child was not yet declared
judicialy.
3. He cannot exercise visiting rights because of the distance of his
residence.

MEMORANDUM

To: Atty. MIKE BOLONGAITA JR.

From: Atty. KENT P. AMORIO

Date: December 09, 2019

Re: Ms. Danielle D. Enrile. Pertinent matters for the enforcement of a

compromise that is now being assailed.

Question Presented.

Whether or not, the compromise agreement approved by the Regional Trial Court
be successfully annulled by Edilberto C. Daguok?
Brief answer

No

A compromise contract whereby the parties, by making reciprocal concessions,

avoid litigation or put an end to one already commenced (Article 2028 of the Civil
Code). “Clearly, the very purpose of a compromise agreement is to avoid litigation
in court whereby the adverse parties settle their differences amicably without
court intervention, or to stop one that has already started.