Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 98 views

    Republic v. Cantor

    Uploaded by

    Aljenneth Micaller
    The Supreme Court reversed the lower courts' rulings declaring the absent husband presumptively dead. While certiorari can be used to challenge such rulings, the respondent failed to meet the stringent standard of conducting a thorough and diligent search to have a well-founded belief that her husband was dead. She did not actively search for him, report him missing to authorities, present corroborating witnesses, or provide supporting evidence beyond her bare claims of inquiries. Her efforts were insufficient to establish a well-founded belief in her husband's death. The petition for presumptive death was therefore denied.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Republic v. Cantor

    Uploaded by

    Aljenneth Micaller
    98 views2 pages
    The Supreme Court reversed the lower courts' rulings declaring the absent husband presumptively dead. While certiorari can be used to challenge such rulings, the respondent failed to meet the stringent standard of conducting a thorough and diligent search to have a well-founded belief that her husband was dead. She did not actively search for him, report him missing to authorities, present corroborating witnesses, or provide supporting evidence beyond her bare claims of inquiries. Her efforts were insufficient to establish a well-founded belief in her husband's death. The petition for presumptive death was therefore denied.

    Original Description:

    mm

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court reversed the lower courts' rulings declaring the absent husband presumptively dead. While certiorari can be used to challenge such rulings, the respondent failed to meet the stringent standard of conducting a thorough and diligent search to have a well-founded belief that her husband was dead. She did not actively search for him, report him missing to authorities, present corroborating witnesses, or provide supporting evidence beyond her bare claims of inquiries. Her efforts were insufficient to establish a well-founded belief in her husband's death. The petition for presumptive death was therefore denied.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    98 views2 pages

    Republic v. Cantor

    Uploaded by

    Aljenneth Micaller
    The Supreme Court reversed the lower courts' rulings declaring the absent husband presumptively dead. While certiorari can be used to challenge such rulings, the respondent failed to meet the stringent standard of conducting a thorough and diligent search to have a well-founded belief that her husband was dead. She did not actively search for him, report him missing to authorities, present corroborating witnesses, or provide supporting evidence beyond her bare claims of inquiries. Her efforts were insufficient to establish a well-founded belief in her husband's death. The petition for presumptive death was therefore denied.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, vs. MARIA FE ESPINOSA CANTOR, Respondent.

    G.R. No. 184621 10 December 2013 J. Brion


    Nature of the Case: Petition for Review on Certiorari assailing the Court of Appeals’ Decision which affirmed the Regional Trial
    Court’s Decision declaring the husband presumptively dead under Article 41 of the Family Code.
    Material Facts of the Case:
     Concurring Opinion: J. Velasco
     Dissenting Opinion: J. Leonen
     27 August 2008 – CA Decision (CA-G.R. SP No. 01558-MIN)
     15 December 2006 – Decision of RTC Br. 25, Koronadal City, South Cotabato (SP Proc. Case No. 313-25)
     Jerry F. Cantor – absent husband
     Agan Homes, Koronadal City, South Cotabato – residence of Respondent and Jerry
    Facts of the Case/Sequence of Events:
    1. On 20 September 1997, Respondent and Jerry get married.

    2. Sometime in January 1998, the couple had a violent quarrel re: 1) Respondent’s inability to reach "sexual climax" whenever
    she and Jerry would have intimate moments; and (2) Jerry’s expression of animosity toward the respondent’s father. After
    this violent quarrel, Jerry left their conjugal dwelling and the Respondent had not seen, communicated, nor heard from him
    again.

    3. On 21 May 2002 (4 years since the quarrel), Respondent filed the Petition for her husband’s presumptive death before the
    RTC. She claimed that she had a well-founded belief that Jerry was already dead. She alleged that she had inquired from
    her mother-in-law, her brothers-in-law, her sisters-in-law, as well as her neighbors and friends, but to no avail. She also
    allegedly made it a point to check the patients’ directory whenever she went to a hospital. RTC granted herein Respondent’s
    Petition and declared that Jerry is presumptively dead.

    4. A Petition for Certiorari was then filed by the Office of the Solicitor General (“OSG”) for RTC’s grave abuse of discretion but
    CA dismissed OSG’s Petition and affirmed RTC’s Decision.

    5. OSG then brought the matter to Supreme Court contending that:


    a) Petition for Certiorari lies to challenge the decisions, judgments or final orders of trial courts in petitions for declaration
    of presumptive death of an absent spouse. It maintains that although judgments of trial courts in summary judicial
    proceedings, including presumptive death cases, are deemed immediately final and executory (not appealable under Article
    247 of the Family Code), this rule does not mean that they are not subject to review on certiorari; and

    b) the Respondent did not have a well-founded belief to justify the declaration of her husband’s presumptive death. It
    claims that the respondent failed to conduct the requisite diligent search for her missing husband. Likewise, the petitioner
    invites this Court’s attention to the attendant circumstances surrounding the case, particularly, the degree of search conducted
    and the respondent’s resultant failure to meet the strict standard under Article 41 of the Family Code.
    Issue:
    1) W/N certioraries are acceptable to challenge the decisions, judgments or final orders of trial courts in petitions for declaration of
    presumptive death of an absent spouse under Article 41 of the Family Code
    2) W/N the Respondent conducted a thorough and diligent search in order to have a well-founded belief that Jerry, her husband, is
    already dead
    Held/Ruling:
    1) YES. Article 247 of the Family Code was explicit that the court’s judgment in summary proceedings, such as the declaration of
    presumptive death of an absent spouse under Article 41 of the Family Code, shall be immediately final and executory and no appellate
    court can acquire jurisdiction to review the lower court’s judgment. However, a losing party in this proceeding is not entirely left without
    a remedy. An aggrieved party may file a Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court to question any abuse of discretion
    amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction that transpired. Certiorari may be availed of where a court has acted without or in excess of
    jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion, and where the ordinary remedy of appeal is not available.

    2) NO. Under Article 41 of the Family Code, there are four (4) essential requisites for the declaration of presumptive death: a) That the
    absent spouse has been missing for four consecutive years, or two consecutive years if the disappearance occurred where there is
    danger of death under the circumstances laid down in Article 391, Civil Code; b) That the present spouse wishes to remarry; c) That
    the present spouse has a well-founded belief that the absentee is dead; and d) That the present spouse files a summary proceeding
    for the declaration of presumptive death of the absentee.

    The burden of proof lies with the Respondent since she was the one who filed the petition for declaration of presumptive death of her
    husband. It requires a "well-founded belief" that the absentee is already dead before a petition for declaration of presumptive death
    can be granted. The law did not define what is meant by "well-founded belief." It depends upon the circumstances of each particular
    case. Its determination, so to speak, remains on a case-to-case basis. To be able to comply with this requirement, the present spouse
    must prove that his/her belief was the result of diligent and reasonable efforts and inquiries to locate the absent spouse and that based
    on these efforts and inquiries, he/she believes that under the circumstances, the absent spouse is already dead. It requires exertion
    of active effort.

    Efforts claimed by the Respondent fell short of the "stringent standard" and degree of diligence required by jurisprudence for the
    following reasons: a) the respondent did not actively look for her missing husband. It can be inferred from the records that her hospital
    visits and her consequent checking of the patients’ directory therein were unintentional. She did not purposely undertake a diligent
    search for her husband as her hospital visits were not planned nor primarily directed to look for him. This Court thus considers these
    attempts insufficient to engender a belief that her husband is dead; b) she did not report Jerry’s absence to the police nor did she seek
    the aid of the authorities to look for him. While a finding of well-founded belief varies with the nature of the situation in which the present
    spouse is placed, under present conditions, we find it proper and prudent for a present spouse, whose spouse had been missing, to
    seek the aid of the authorities or, at the very least, report his/her absence to the police; c) she did not present as witnesses Jerry’s
    relatives or their neighbors and friends, who can corroborate her efforts to locate Jerry. Worse, these persons, from whom she allegedly
    made inquiries, were not even named. As held in Nolasco, the present spouse’s bare assertion that he inquired from his friends about
    his absent spouse’s whereabouts is insufficient as the names of the friends from whom he made inquiries were not identified in the
    testimony nor presented as witnesses; and d) there was no other corroborative evidence to support the respondent’s claim that she
    conducted a diligent search. Neither was there supporting evidence proving that she had a well-founded belief other than her bare
    claims that she inquired from her friends and in-laws about her husband’s whereabouts. In sum, the Court is of the view that the
    respondent merely engaged in a "passive search" where she relied on uncorroborated inquiries from her in-laws, neighbors and friends.
    She failed to conduct a diligent search because her alleged efforts are insufficient to form a well-founded belief that her husband was
    already dead.

    Disposition:
    WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, the assailed decision dated August 27, 2008 of the Court of Appeals, which affirmed the order
    dated December 15, 2006 of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 25, Koronadal City, South Cotabato, declaring Jerry F. Cantor
    presumptively dead is hereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE.

    You might also like