Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

CONTINUE TO LAWYERLY APP

JOHN CLEMENT CONSULTANTS v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION

This case has been cited 5 times or more.

	GR No. 191425 2011-09-07	ATILANO O. NOLLORA v. PEOPLE CARPIO, J.
The circumstances in the present case satisfy all the elements of bigamy. (1) Nollora is legally married to Pinat;[14] (2) Nollora and Pinat's marriage has not been legally dissolved prior to the date of the second marriage; (3) Nollora admitted the existence of his second marriage to Geraldino;[15] and (4) Nollora and Geraldino's marriage has all the essential requisites for validity except for the lack of capacity of Nollora due to his prior marriage.[16]
	GR No. 169766 2011-03-30	ESTRELLITA JULIAJVO-LLAVE v. REPUBLIC DEL CASTILLO, J.
Her marriage covered by the Family Code of the Philippines,"[55] Estrellita relies on A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC which took effect on March 15, 2003 claiming that under Section 2(a) [56] thereof, only the husband or the wife, to the exclusion of others, may file a petition for declaration of absolute nullity, therefore only she and Sen. Tamano may directly attack the validity of their own marriage.
	GR No. 162421 2007-08-31	NELSON CABALES v. CA PUNO, C.J.
As to petitioner Rito, the contract of sale was unenforceable as correctly held by the Court of Appeals. Articles 320 and 326 of the New Civil Code[6] state that:Art. 320. The father, or in his absence the mother, is the legal administrator of the property pertaining to the child under parental authority. If the property is worth more than two thousand pesos, the father or mother shall give a bond subject to the approval of the Court of First Instance.
	GR NO. 157043 2007-02-02	REPUBLIC v. TRINIDAD R.A. CAPOTE CORONA, J.
When Giovanni was born in 1982 (prior to the enactment and effectivity of the Family Code of the Philippines),[19] the pertinent provision of the Civil Code then as regards his use of a surname, read:Art. 366. A natural child acknowledged by both parents shall principally use the surname of the father. If recognized by only one of the parents, a natural child shall employ the surname of the recognizing parent. (emphasis ours) Based on this provision, Giovanni should have carried his mother's surname from birth. The records do not reveal any act or intention on the part of Giovanni's putative father to actually recognize him. Meanwhile, according to the Family Code which repealed, among others, Article 366 of the Civil Code:
	GR No. 127406 2000-11-27	OFELIA P. TY v. VS.CA QUISUMBING, J.
At the outset, we must note that private respondent's first and second marriages contracted in 1977 and 1979, respectively, are governed by the provisions of the Civil Code. The present case differs significantly from the recent cases of Bobis v. Bobis[7] and Mercado v. Tan,[8] both involving a criminal case for bigamy where the bigamous marriage was contracted during the effectivity of the Family Code,[9] under which a judicial declaration of nullity of marriage is clearly required.