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

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 914 views

    SSS V Teresita Jarque Vda de Bailon

    Uploaded by

    AweGooseTree
    1) Teresita Jarque received funeral benefits after the death of her husband Clemente Bailon, who was a member of the SSS. 2) It was later discovered that Bailon had contracted three marriages and had several children from different relationships. Some children claimed death benefits from the SSS. 3) The SSS ordered Jarque to return the benefits received and cancel her monthly pension, considering her marriage to Bailon as void. However, the Court of Appeals reversed and ordered the SSS to pay benefits to Jarque. 4) The Supreme Court ruled that Jarque was entitled to the benefits, as her marriage to Bailon was not declared void by a court, in

    Copyright:

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

    SSS V Teresita Jarque Vda de Bailon

    Uploaded by

    AweGooseTree
    914 views1 page
    1) Teresita Jarque received funeral benefits after the death of her husband Clemente Bailon, who was a member of the SSS. 2) It was later discovered that Bailon had contracted three marriages and had several children from different relationships. Some children claimed death benefits from the SSS. 3) The SSS ordered Jarque to return the benefits received and cancel her monthly pension, considering her marriage to Bailon as void. However, the Court of Appeals reversed and ordered the SSS to pay benefits to Jarque. 4) The Supreme Court ruled that Jarque was entitled to the benefits, as her marriage to Bailon was not declared void by a court, in

    Original Description:

    08. SSS v Teresita Jarque Vda de Bailon

    Original Title

    08. SSS v Teresita Jarque Vda de Bailon

    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) Teresita Jarque received funeral benefits after the death of her husband Clemente Bailon, who was a member of the SSS. 2) It was later discovered that Bailon had contracted three marriages and had several children from different relationships. Some children claimed death benefits from the SSS. 3) The SSS ordered Jarque to return the benefits received and cancel her monthly pension, considering her marriage to Bailon as void. However, the Court of Appeals reversed and ordered the SSS to pay benefits to Jarque. 4) The Supreme Court ruled that Jarque was entitled to the benefits, as her marriage to Bailon was not declared void by a court, in

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    914 views1 page

    SSS V Teresita Jarque Vda de Bailon

    Uploaded by

    AweGooseTree
    1) Teresita Jarque received funeral benefits after the death of her husband Clemente Bailon, who was a member of the SSS. 2) It was later discovered that Bailon had contracted three marriages and had several children from different relationships. Some children claimed death benefits from the SSS. 3) The SSS ordered Jarque to return the benefits received and cancel her monthly pension, considering her marriage to Bailon as void. However, the Court of Appeals reversed and ordered the SSS to pay benefits to Jarque. 4) The Supreme Court ruled that Jarque was entitled to the benefits, as her marriage to Bailon was not declared void by a court, in

    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 1

    Sebastian, Ethan Joshua S.

    Social Security Act of 2018


    Agrarian Laws and Social Legislation Social Security Act of 2018
    Case Digest SSS v Teresita Jarque vda. De Bailon

    SSS vs. Teresita Jarque vda. De Bailon,


    G.R. No. 165545, 24 March 2006

    Facts:

    After 15 years since the marriage of Clemente G. Bailon and Alice P. Diaz, the later was
    declared presumptively dead by the court. The former then contracted a subsequent marriage
    with Teresita Jarque. Upon the death of Bailon who was a member of the SSS, the respondent
    claimed and received funeral benefits. It was then discovered that the deceased Bailon
    contracted three marriages and had several children. Some of the said children claimed for
    death benefits. SSS then ordered Jarque to return the received benefits and the cancelation of
    her monthly pension in view of the apparent void marriage between her and Bailon. Respondets
    then filed with SSC for the reinstallation of her monthly pension, it was however denied by the
    same. CA however reversed said decision and ordered SSS to pay the benefits once more.

    Hence this petition,

    Issue:

    WON Jarque is entitled of the benefits

    Ruling:

    Yes, since her marriage with Bailon is not void.


    Art. 83. Of the family code provides that:
    “Art. 83. Any marriage subsequently contracted by any person during the lifetime of the
    first spouse of such person with any person other than such first spouse shall be illegal
    and void from its performance, unless:
    (1) The first marriage was annulled or dissolved; or
    (2) The first spouse had been absent for seven consecutive years at the time of the
    second marriage without the spouse present having news of the absentee being alive, or
    if the absentee, though he has been absent for less than seven years, is generally
    considered as dead and believed to be so by the spouse present at the time of
    contracting such subsequent marriage, or if the absentee is presumed dead according to
    Articles 390 and 391. The marriage so contracted shall be valid in any of the three cases
    until declared null and void by a competent court.”
    The article explains that as long as the subsequent marriage is not declared null and void by a
    court, the marriage is still valid.

    In the case at bar, 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.

    You might also like