Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 681 views

    PACETE Vs Carriaga

    Uploaded by

    Jireh Rarama
    1) Concepcion Alanis filed for legal separation from her husband Enrico Pacete, as well as nullification of Pacete's subsequent marriage to Clarita de la Concepcion. She claimed Pacete fraudulently transferred their properties to Clarita and others. 2) After being summoned, Pacete and Clarita repeatedly requested extensions to file their answer, which resulted in them being declared in default. 3) The Supreme Court nullified the lower court's decision, ruling that defaults are not allowed in annulment or legal separation cases. The lower court also failed to follow the mandated six month "cooling-off" period before trying the case.

    Copyright:

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

    PACETE Vs Carriaga

    Uploaded by

    Jireh Rarama
    681 views2 pages
    1) Concepcion Alanis filed for legal separation from her husband Enrico Pacete, as well as nullification of Pacete's subsequent marriage to Clarita de la Concepcion. She claimed Pacete fraudulently transferred their properties to Clarita and others. 2) After being summoned, Pacete and Clarita repeatedly requested extensions to file their answer, which resulted in them being declared in default. 3) The Supreme Court nullified the lower court's decision, ruling that defaults are not allowed in annulment or legal separation cases. The lower court also failed to follow the mandated six month "cooling-off" period before trying the case.

    Original Description:

    adasdad

    Original Title

    PACETE vs Carriaga

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) Concepcion Alanis filed for legal separation from her husband Enrico Pacete, as well as nullification of Pacete's subsequent marriage to Clarita de la Concepcion. She claimed Pacete fraudulently transferred their properties to Clarita and others. 2) After being summoned, Pacete and Clarita repeatedly requested extensions to file their answer, which resulted in them being declared in default. 3) The Supreme Court nullified the lower court's decision, ruling that defaults are not allowed in annulment or legal separation cases. The lower court also failed to follow the mandated six month "cooling-off" period before trying the case.

    Copyright:

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

    PACETE Vs Carriaga

    Uploaded by

    Jireh Rarama
    1) Concepcion Alanis filed for legal separation from her husband Enrico Pacete, as well as nullification of Pacete's subsequent marriage to Clarita de la Concepcion. She claimed Pacete fraudulently transferred their properties to Clarita and others. 2) After being summoned, Pacete and Clarita repeatedly requested extensions to file their answer, which resulted in them being declared in default. 3) The Supreme Court nullified the lower court's decision, ruling that defaults are not allowed in annulment or legal separation cases. The lower court also failed to follow the mandated six month "cooling-off" period before trying the case.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 2

    PACETE vs.

    CARIAGA

    231 SCRA 321

    FACTS:

    The issue in this petition for certiorari is whether or not the CFI of Cotabato, Branch I, gravely
    abused its discretion in denying petitioners’ motion for extension of time to file their answer
    and in declaring petitioners in default and in rendering its decision of which, among other
    things, decreed the legal separation of petitioner Enrico L. Pacete and private respondent
    Concepcion Alanis and held to be null and void ab initio the marriage of Enrico L. Pacete to
    Clarita de la Concepcion.

    Concepcion Alanis filed for the declaration of nullity of the marriage between her erstwhile
    husband Enrico L. Pacete and one Clarita de la Concepcion, as well as for legal separation and
    accounting and separation of property. She averred that she was married to Pacete on 30 April
    1938 and they had a child named Consuelo. She learned that Pacete subsequently contracted a
    second marriage with Clarita de la Concepcion. She and Pacete acquired vast property that he
    fraudulently placed the several pieces of property either in his name and Clarita or in the names
    of his children with Clarita and other “dummies;”

    After having been summoned, the defendants repeatedly asked the court for extension of filing
    for an answer which eventually resulted to being declared in default. Five months after the
    petition was filed the court granted the issuance of a Decree of Legal Separation and declared the
    properties in question as conjugal properties of Alanis and Pacete which were ordered forfeited
    in favor of Alanis. The court also nullified his marriage to Clarita.

    ISSUE:

    Whether or not the court gravely abused its discretion in deciding the case.

    HELD:

    No defaults in actions for annulments of marriage or for legal separation. If the defendant in an
    action for annulment of marriage or for legal separation fails to answer, the court shall order the
    prosecuting attorney to investigate whether or not collusion between the parties exists, and if
    there is no collusion, to intervene for the State in order to see to it that the evidence submitted is
    not fabricated.

    Article 103 of the Civil Code, now Article 58 of the Family Code, further mandates that an
    action for legal separation must “in no case be tried before six months shall have elapsed since
    the filing of the petition,” obviously in order to provide the parties a “cooling-off” period. In this
    interim, the court should take steps toward getting the parties to reconcile.

    The decision of the lower court was nullified.

    You might also like