Atty. Muchas Absalon

Atty. Muchas Absalon Public Page of Atty. Muchas Absalon (Atty. Si Abogado Charles Kevin Caparas Absalon na kilala rin sa pangalang Atty. Si Atty. Madalas ding naiimbitahan si Atty.

Charles Kevin Caparas Absalon)

Aktibong Maloleñong Aksyon
Kasangga niyo sa Batas
Ang Bagong Boses ng mga Malolenyo
Abogado at Guro
Lider Kabataan Muchas Absalon ay nagmula sa Barangay Mojon, Lungsod ng Malolos, Bulacan. Isang lider kabataan na nagtapos ng kolehiyo sa Bulacan State University sa kursong BS Psychology at nagtapos din bilang isang Juris Doctor sa College of Law ng nasabing unibersid

ad. Muchas ay isa sa 100% first taker Bar Passer mula sa Bulacan State University noong 2021/22 Philippine Bar Examination. Sa kasalukuyan, siya ay isang Private/Litigation Lawyer, Legal Consultant ng iba't-ibang samahan, at isa ring Guest Lecture at Guro sa College of Criminal Justice Education ng Bulacan State University. Noong siya ay nasa kolehiyo pa lamang, aktibo na si Atty. Muchas sa mga gawain at programa para sa mga kabataan katulad ng debate competitions, student organizations, journalism, sports, volunteering, charity at outreach programs. Hanggang sa kasalukuyan ay aktibong siyang gumaganap sa mga Legal Aid Programs at Pro Bono assistance hindi lamang sa Lungsod ng Malolos kundi pati na rin sa Lalawigan ng Bulacan. Muchas na magsalita sa mga programa o pagtitipon na may kinalaman sa batas, kabataan at mga inspirational talks. Muchas ay aktibo din sa mga samahan na tumutulong hindi lamang sa loob ng paaralan kung hindi pati na rin sa komunidad kung saan siya ay miyembro at minsan ding naging leader (Grand Chancellor) ng Beta Sigma Upsilon Confraternity ng Bulacan State University College of Law, at miyembro rin ng Integrated Bar of the Philippines Marcelo H. Del Pilar Bulacan Chapter.

07/11/2025
18/09/2025

| The Supreme Court (SC) ruled that being irresponsible in doing household chores and taking care of children may be considered evidence of psychological incapacity to comply with marital obligations, a ground for nullification of marriage.

In a 13-page decision authored by Associate Justice Samuel Gaerlan, the SC's Third Division has declared void from the beginning the marriage between Arnold Alfonso and Michelle Pamintuan-Alfonso on the ground of the latter's psychological incapacity as provided under Article 36 of the Family Code.

Arnold and Michelle were high school classmates. In 1997, or eight years after their graduation, they unexpectedly met. Since then, they have become close and regularly exchanged phone calls.

Despite being in a relationship with another man, Michelle often visited Arnold's apartment. Later on Michelle and Arnold spent the night at the latter's apartment, where the two engaged in unprotected sexual in*******se that resulted in Michelle's unexpected and unwanted pregnancy.

At first, Michelle was contemplating aborting the child, but Arnold convinced her otherwise and offered marriage. After the wedding, Michelle and Arnold resided at the parental house. They were blessed with three children.

A year later their relationship turned sour. Arnold noticed the changes in Michelle's behavior. Michelle would be verbally aggressive towards him, crying loudly to gain sympathy from their neighbors. She also refused to do household chores or care for their children, instead relying on her mother to fulfill her domestic responsibilities.

Arnold also observed that Michelle has a luxurious lifestyle, which caused her to obtain looming debts from various people. It reached the extent that Arnold's father paid Michelle's debt to save her from being sued.

Over time, Arnold felt Michelle's growing coldness towards him. Michelle disavowed fulfilling his sexual needs by making excuses that she is tired and not in the mood.

Sometime in 2010, Michelle informed Arnold that she had secured a job that required deployment to Bicol for one month. However, to his surprise, Arnold later learned that Michelle was having an affair with another man. Since then, Michelle has refused to communicate with him and their children.

This paved the way for Arnold to file a petition for nullification of their marriage on the ground of Michelle's psychological incapacity to fulfill her marital obligations.

Initially, the Regional Trial Court (RTC) granted the petition and nullified their marriage, but it was later reversed by the Court of Appeals. This prompted Arnold to elevate the case before the Supreme Court.

In granting Arnold's petition, the high court held that he was able to illustrate that the incapacity of Michelle was so grave or serious that it already impaired her from carrying out the required ordinary marital duties. It gave credence to the psychological report, which diagnosed Michelle with histrionic personality disorder and antisocial personality disorder.

The SC also emphasized that the incapacity of Michelle was incurable, as the pattern of persistent failure to assume her essential marital obligations was proven. It also took into account the instance where Michelle entered into an illicit affair with another man.

“In every marriage lies the vinculum juris—the juridical bond that unites the spouses in a legally and morally binding union governed by law. This vinculum juris imposes upon each spouse the essential marital obligations of mutual love, respect, fidelity, and support,” the Supreme Court said.

“Thus, in the present case, we hold that Michelle's psychological incapacity existed prior to and during the celebration of the marriage; the vinculum juris is deemed never to have validly arisen,” it added.

05/09/2025

| The Supreme Court (SC) clarified that the local government unit cannot automatically claim ownership of open spaces and road lots in subdivisions without written donation, as the property remains private.

In a 20-page ruling authored by Associate Justice Jhosep Lopez, the SC’s Second Division ruled that the Quezon City (QC) LGU failed to establish that the open spaces and road lots in Capital Park Homes Subdivision (CPHS) had been donated to the city for public use, citing its failure to show a copy of any deed of donation as well as any proof of acceptance of such donation.

The case stemmed from a petition filed by Rainier Madrid, a QC local resident and taxpayer, who questioned the use of public funds to improve what he argued was private property.

Madrid contended that VV Soliven, CPHS’ developer, failed to present proof that the properties had been donated to the QC LGU. He stressed that without proof of donation, the properties remain private and cannot be treated as public property.

The Quezon City LGU countered the petition by citing its 1964 ordinance, which provides that developers are required to dedicate 6% of open spaces to the city for public use before a subdivision plan can be approved. The city argued that CPHS’s plan approval in 1969 was proof of compliance, which made it a donation.

Meanwhile, the homeowners association admitted the absence of a deed of donation but cited a board resolution stating that the properties were donated to the QC LGU.

Initially, the Regional Trial Court (RTC) dismissed the petition due to lack of cause of action, emphasizing that Madrid is not even a real party-in-interest.

On appeal, the Court of Appeals (CA) reversed the lower court ruling and recognized Madrid’s right to file the case since he could be affected by the alleged misuse of public funds.

The Appellate Court stressed that the areas in question remain private property, as there was no proof that the subdivision developer had donated them to the QC LGU. This prompted the city government to elevate the case before the Supreme Court.

In affirming the CA’s ruling, the high court emphasized that the QC LGU must prove a valid transfer of property in its favor.It held that since the LGU did not provide a deed of donation or any proof of acceptance, as required under the Civil Code, it failed to prove that the subject properties were donated.

The SC agreed with the CA ruling, saying the LGUs cannot rely solely on ordinances or laws to claim ownership. It cited the Civil Code, which requires a written deed of donation and an official act of acceptance for a valid property transfer.

Without the necessary documents, subdivision properties, even those designated as open spaces, remain private and cannot be subject to improvement, most especially using public funds.

31/08/2025

The late president Ramon Magsaysay was fondly called the 'Champion of the Masses' and 'Defender of Democracy.'

Laban na ng Malolos Juniors mamaya! Libre po ang panonood sa MSCC! Let’s go Maloloa, Let’s go 1D Lakas ng Kabataan!
10/08/2025

Laban na ng Malolos Juniors mamaya! Libre po ang panonood sa MSCC!

Let’s go Maloloa, Let’s go 1D Lakas ng Kabataan!


01/08/2025
31/07/2025

📢 𝗖𝗦𝗖 𝗿𝗲𝗹𝗲𝗮𝘀𝗲𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝟮𝟬𝟮𝟱 𝗥𝘂𝗹𝗲𝘀 𝗼𝗻 𝗔𝗱𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗖𝗮𝘀𝗲𝘀 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗖𝗶𝘃𝗶𝗹 𝗦𝗲𝗿𝘃𝗶𝗰𝗲 (𝗥𝗔𝗖𝗖𝗦)!

The updated RACCS reflects key laws, Supreme Court rulings, and evolving governance practices streamlines how disciplinary and non-disciplinary cases are handled in government.

Chairperson Atty. Marilyn B. Yap, DPA led the Commission to act swiftly in completing the RACCS and ensuring its swift release to strengthen capabilities at resolving disciplinary cases. This revised framework promotes accountability, transparency, and efficiency in the civil service.

Key features include:
⚖️ Integration of RA No. 11032 and RA No. 9285
👩‍⚖️ Virtual and clarificatory hearings
📄 Electronic filing
💼 Revised rules on dishonesty and sexual harassment cases

📖 Read the full news release here: https://csc.gov.ph/csc-revises-rules-on-administrative-cases-in-the-civil-service

Address

Malolos
3000

Website

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Atty. Muchas Absalon posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Share