The Johan Journal

Article 124. The administration and enjoyment of the conjugal partnership shall belong to both spouses jointly. In case of disagreement, the husband's decision shall prevail, subject to recourse to the court by the wife for proper remedy, which must be availed of within five years from the date of the contract implementing such decision. In the event that one spouse is incapacitated or otherwise unable to participate in the administration of the conjugal properties, the other spouse may assume sole powers of administration. These powers do not include disposition or encumbrance without authority of the court or the written consent of the other spouse. In the absence of such authority or consent, the disposition or encumbrance shall be void. However, the transaction shall be construed as a continuing offer on the part of the consenting spouse and the third person, and may be perfected as a binding contract upon the acceptance by the other spouse or authorization by the court b...

Article 63.  The decree of legal separation shall have the following effects: The spouses shall be entitled to live separately from each other, but the marriage bonds shall not be severed; The absolute community or the conjugal partnership shall be dissolved and liquidated but the offending spouse shall have no right to any share of the net profits earned by the absolute community or the conjugal partnership, which shall be forfeited in accordance with the provisions of Article 43(2); The custody of the minor children shall be awarded to the innocent spouse, subject to the provisions of Article 213 of this Code; and The offending spouse shall be disqualified from inheriting from the spouse by intestate succession. Moreover, provisions in favor of the offending spouse made in the will of the innocent spouse shall be revoked by operation of law. (106a) In this article, the law enumerates the effect of legal separation. Living separately The right to live separa...

G.R. No. 166357               January 14, 2015 VALERIO E. KALAW,  Petitioner, vs. MA. ELENA FERNANDEZ,  Respondent. PONENTE:  Bersamin, J. FACTS : Petitioner Kalaw presented the testimonies of two supposed expert witnesses who concluded that respondent is psychologically incapacitated.  The experts presented by Kalaw heavily relied on petitioner’s allegations of respondent’s constant mahjong sessions, visits to the  beauty parlor , going out with friends, adultery, and neglect of their children. Petitioner’s experts reasoned that respondent’s alleged habits, when performed constantly to the detriment of quality and quantity of time devoted to her duties as mother and wife, constitute a psychological incapacity in the form of Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD). However, the Supreme Court in its decision dated September 19, 2011, dismissed the complaint for declaration of nullity of th...