BORJA-MANZANO V.

SANCHEZ

Facts: Herminia Borja Manzano was married to David Manzano on May 21, 1996. However, David contracted another marriage with Luzviminda Payao before respondent Judge Sanchez. Clearly stated in the marriage contract that both contracting parties were separated in their previous marriages, thus, judge must have knowledge that subsequent marriage was void and bigamous. Nonetheless, the judge agreed to solemnize the marriage between David and Luzviminda as he knew they lived together as husband and wife for almost seven years. Hermenia filed a charge of gross ignorance of law against the respondent.

Issue: Whether the marriage between Davin and Luzvinda is valid. Held: One of the requisites under Article 34 of Family code is that parties must have no legal impediment to marry each other. Clearly, as indicated in the marriage contract that they are separated is a legal impediment that would make their subsequent marriage void. Mere separation, free and voluntary cohabitation with another for at least 5 years does not severe the bond of previous marriage. Sanchez demonstrated fross ignorance of law for the solemnization of a void and bigamous marriage of David and Luzviminda.

POP v. Magtibay G.R. No. 142985. August 6, 2002

Facts: Raymundo Magtibay was found guilty of rape and sentence to life imprisonment. The incident happened in Oriental Mindoro when the accused forcibly and successfully raped Rachelle Recto while on her way home. Because of accused-appellants threat on her life, Rachelle kept silent about the incident. It was not until she became pregnant that she was constrained to tell her mother what happened. She eventually gave birth to a baby boy. Issue: Whether the child born out of rape is entitled of support from the accused father. Held: Yes. Concerning the acknowledgment and support of the offspring of rape, Article 345 of the Revised Penal Code provides for three kinds of civil liability that may be imposed on the offender: a) indemnification, b) acknowledgment of the offspring, unless the law should prevent him from so doing, and c) in every case to support the offspring. Under Artilce Article 176 of Family Code, The illegitimate child shall be under the parental authority of the mother. The accused-appellant should only be ordered to indemnify and support the victims child. However, the amount and terms of support shall be determined by the trial court after due notice and hearing in accordance with Article 201 of the Family Code.