NARCISO SALAS, vs. ANNABELLE MATUSALEM, G.R. No. 180284 September 11, 2013 - CASE DIGEST – Remedial Law 2 – Provisional Remedies – Support Pendente Lite

 

NARCISO SALAS, vs. ANNABELLE MATUSALEM, G.R. No. 180284 September 11, 2013

- CASE DIGEST – Remedial Law 2 – Provisional Remedies – Support Pendente Lite

VILLARAMA, JR., J.

Facts: Matusalem filed a complaint for Support against Salas. She claimed that Salas is the father of her son. Salas, already 56 years old at the time, enticed her as she was then only 24 years old, making her believe that he is a widower. Salas rented an apartment where Matusalem stayed and shouldered all expenses in the delivery of their child.

However, when Matusalem refused the offer of Salas’ family to take the child from her, Salas abandoned her and their child.

Salas prayed for support pendente lite and monthly support in the amount of ₱20k. Salas denied paternity of the child.

RTC: To give as monthly support of 2k for the child through the mother

CA: Salas satisfactorily established the illegitimate filiation of her son and no error was committed by the RTC in granting the prayer for support.

ISSUE: Whether or not the RTC and CA erred in ruling that Matusalem’s evidence sufficiently proved that her son is the illegitimate child of Salas.

Conflicting positions:

Matusalem: Salas is the father of her son and therefore prayed for support pendente lite of ₱20k monthly.

Salas: Salas denied paternity of the child. RTC decided the case without affording him the right to introduce evidence on his defense; and RTC erred in finding that he is the putative father and ordering him to give monthly support.

Held: Yes. If the father did not sign in the birth certificate, the placing of his name by the mother, doctor, registrar, or other person is incompetent evidence of paternity. Neither can such birth certificate be taken as a recognition in a public instrument and it has no probative value to establish filiation to the alleged father.

The testimonies of Matusalem and the owner of the apartment unit Salas rented as to the circumstances of the birth, Salas’ financial support and his regular visits to her, though replete with details, do not approximate the "overwhelming evidence, documentary and testimonial" proof of paternity.

A high standard of proof is required to establish paternity and filiation. An order for recognition and support may create an unwholesome situation or may be an irritant to the family or the lives of the parties so that it must be issued only if paternity or filiation is established by clear and convincing evidence.

CA’s decision is reversed and set aside. RTC case is dismissed.

SUSAN LIM-LUA vs. DANILO Y. LUA, G.R. Nos. 175279-80, June 5, 2013 – Support pendente lite CASE DIGEST - Remedial Law Review 2 - Provisional Remedies

 

SUSAN LIM-LUA vs. DANILO Y. LUA, G.R. Nos. 175279-80, June 5, 2013 – Support pendente lite CASE DIGEST - Remedial Law Review 2 - Provisional Remedies

Lim-Lua filed an action for the declaration of nullity of her marriage with Lua, in her prayer for support pendente lite for herself and her two children, she sought the amount of ₱500k as monthly support, citing Lua’s huge earnings from salaries and dividends in several companies and businesses here and abroad.

RTC: ₱250k would be sufficient to take care of the needs Lim-Lua and their 2 children, being a commendable act of defendant, should be continued by him considering the vast financial resources at his disposal.

CA: CA reduced the monthly support pendente lite of ₱115k. Lua paid ₱162k and advances given by him to his children and Lim-Lua in the sum of ₱2.4M. The expenses incurred by Lua consisting of the purchase and maintenance of the two cars, payment of tuition fees, travel expenses, and the credit card purchases involving groceries, dry goods and books, certainly inured to the benefit not only of the two children, but their mother as well.

ISSUE: Whether or not certain expenses already incurred by Lim may be deducted from the total support in arrears

Conflicting positions:

Lim-Lua: it was erroneous to have allowed the deduction of the value of the two cars and their maintenance costs from the support in arrears, as these items are not indispensable to the sustenance of the family or in keeping them alive.

Lua: disallowing the subject deductions would result in unjust enrichment, thus making him pay for the same obligation twice. Since Lim-Lua and the children resided in one residence, the groceries and dry goods purchased by the children using his credit were not consumed by the children alone but shared with their mother. As to the cars, these, too, are to be considered advances for support, in keeping with the financial capacity of the family as the children had never in their entire life commuted from one place to another, nor do they eat their meals at "carinderias".

Held: No. The deductions should be limited to basic needs and expenses (food, household expenses such as salaries of drivers and house helpers, and also Lim-Lua’s scoliosis therapy sessions) 

Sec. 1, Rule on Provisional Orders; Revised Rules of Court, Rule 61, Secs. 1 & 4:

Upon receipt of a verified petition for declaration of absolute nullity of void marriage or for annulment of voidable marriage, or for legal separation, and at any time during the proceeding, the court, motu proprio or upon verified application of any of the parties, guardian or designated custodian, may temporarily grant support pendente lite prior to the rendition of judgment or final order.

Because of its provisional nature, a court does not need to delve fully into the merits of the case before it can settle an application for this relief. All that a court is tasked to do is determine the kind and amount of evidence which may suffice to enable it to justly resolve the application. It is enough that the facts be established by affidavits or other documentary evidence appearing in the record.

In this case, the amount of monthly support pendente lite was determined after due hearing and submission of documentary evidence by the parties. Although the amount fixed by the trial court was reduced on appeal, it is clear that the monthly support pendente lite of ₱115k was intended primarily for the sustenance of Lim-Lua and her children, e.g., food, clothing, salaries of drivers and house helpers, other household expenses and the cost of regular therapy for her scoliosis and vitamins/medicines.

Judgment for support does not become final. The right to support is of such nature that its allowance is essentially provisional; for during the entire period that a needy party is entitled to support, his or her alimony may be modified or altered, in accordance with his increased or decreased needs, and with the means of the giver. It cannot be regarded as subject to final determination.