Araneta vs.

Concepcion
GR. L-9667 | July 31, 1956 | Ponente: Labrador J.;
FACTS:
Luis Araneta (petitioner) filed for legal separation from his wife Emma
Benitez Araneta on the ground of adultery. Emma filed an omnibus petition to secure
custody of their children and a monthly support of. The respondent judge
Concepcion granted the omnibus petition. He refused to reconsider so Luis Araneta
filed with the court a petition for certiorari and mandamus to compel the respondent
judge to both parties to submit evidence before deciding for the omnibus
petition. The court granted a writ of preliminary injunction against the order
of the judge. Respondent Judges reason for refusal for the request for the
presentation of evidence to be allowed before deciding was because it is the
prohibition contained in Art. 103 of the Civil Code. This reads: An action for
legal separation shall in no case be tried before six months shall have elapsed since
the filing of the petition. The respondent Judge interpreted the provision by
saying that every single step it should take within the period of six months
above the stated should be taken toward reconciling the parties. Admitting
evidence now will make the reconciliation difficult if not impossible. The
children must be given custody for him or her who by family custom or
tradition is the custodian of the children. The court should ignore the
defendant had committed any act of adultery or the plaintiff, any act of
cruelty to his wife. The status quo of the family must be restored as much as
possible. In atypical Filipino family, its the wife/mother who keeps the
children in her company or custody.

ISSUE:
W/N the presentation of evidence as petitioned by the husband is needed in
determining the custody of the children.

RULING:
YES, The six month period fixed in Art. 103 of the Civil Code is evidently
intended as a cooling off period to make possible reconciliation between the spouses.
However, it does not have the effect of overriding other provisions such as the
determination of the custody of the children and alimony, and support according to the
circumstances. The law expressly enjoins that these should be determined by the court
according to the circumstances. If these are ignored, rank in justice may be caused. The
determination of the custody of the children should be given and effect and force
provided it does not go to the extent of violating the policy of the cooling off period
which means that the evidence will not be the cause of the separation.