CABUG Law Office

CABUG Law Office Contact information, map and directions, contact form, opening hours, services, ratings, photos, videos and announcements from CABUG Law Office, Lawyer & Law Firm, Marilao.

20/07/2025

The (SC) has reiterated that hiding one’s homosexuality from a spouse can be considered fraud and may be used as a ground to annul a marriage.

In a Decision written by Associate Justice Antonio T. Kho, Jr., the SC’s Second Division annulled the marriage of a woman whose husband concealed his homosexuality before they got married.

The couple met on social media. On their first date, the woman noticed that the man seemed distant. The man also avoided sitting beside her. When asked about this, the man said he was just shy and lacked confidence.

The two kept a long-distance relationship as the man worked overseas. Notwithstanding this, they got married two years later.

But the man continued to avoid intimacy and often started arguments to avoid his wife. Just two months after the wedding, he returned overseas and stopped communicating with her.

Later, the woman found magazines with half-naked and naked male models among her husband’s things. When she confronted him, he admitted that he was homosexual. The woman then filed for annulment of their marriage.

The SC ruled that the woman’s consent to the marriage was obtained through fraud, and that the marriage must be annulled on the ground of fraudulent concealment of sexuality, following Article 45(3) in relation to Article 46(4) of the 𝘍𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘭𝘺 𝘊𝘰𝘥𝘦.

Article 45 of the 𝘍𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘭𝘺 𝘊𝘰𝘥𝘦 states that a marriage can be annulled if one party’s consent was obtained through fraud, as long as the couple did not continue living together after discovering the fraud. Article 46 further specifies that hiding one’s homosexuality or lesbianism from a spouse is considered fraud.

The SC gave credence to the woman’s allegations, noting that the man’s admission and his unexplained silence when his sexuality was being questioned could not be ignored. It found that the husband intentionally hid his homosexuality to persuade the woman to stay and marry him.

Read the full text of the Press Release at https://tinyurl.com/ywadbxwp.

Read the full text of the Decision at https://tinyurl.com/yjn9a89f.

Copying of this content is subject to the SC PIO’s Credit Attribution Policy: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-attribution-policy/.

20/07/2025

Sandiganbayan Associate Justice Ma. Theresa Dolores C. Gomez-Estoesta, who also serves as Professorial Lecturer at the Philippine Judicial Academy, discusses public bidding and how it differs from negotiated procurement in Episode 78: Public Bidding vs. Negotiated Procurement.

Who can participate in public bidding? What types of projects or purchases require public bidding? In criminal cases involving a violation of Section 3(e) of RA 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, is it enough to show there was a violation of the procurement laws?

This week's podcast is available on Spotify, the website, and YouTube.

Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/episode/1iksYP5sEw1N5IvmcJUoiK?si=29c6296e0d0b4406

SC website: http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/podcasts/

YouTube: https://youtu.be/2KXCYPB_DeY

08/06/2025

You can now consult your legal concern thru online.
Just follow the steps below.

05/03/2025

The (SC) has held that a victim's youth and immaturity serve as strong indicators of the truthfulness and sincerity of their testimony regarding unlawful acts committed against them.

In a Decision written by Associate Justice Henri Jean Paul B. Inting, the SC’s Third Division affirmed the conviction of Resty Laconsay (Laconsay) for Lascivious Conduct under Section 5(b) of Republic Act (RA) No. 7610 or the Special Protection of Children Against Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act after he molested a 14-year-old girl.

The victim, AAA, recounted that she was sleeping at home with her siblings when she woke up to find a person standing at her feet, holding a cellphone. The person pulled down her blanket, touched her foot, and caressed her leg up to her groin. AAA identified her assailant as Laconsay, their neighbor.

Laconsay denied the allegations, arguing that AAA’s testimony was inconsistent because she initially told her father that it was not Laconsay who molested her.

Holding that Laconsay committed Lascivious Conduct, the SC found AAA’s testimony credible in describing the lascivious acts committed against her and positively identifying Laconsay as her assailant. It emphasized that her youth and immaturity are badges of truth and sincerity, “because of her relative vulnerability and the shame and embarrassment that would arise if the matter about which she testified were not true.”

Read the full text of the Press Release at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/sc-youth-and-immaturity-strengthen-victims-credibility-in-molestation-case/.

Read the full text of the Decision at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/259861-resty-laconsay-vs-people-of-the-philippines/.

Copying of this content is subject to the SC PIO’s Credit Attribution Policy: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-attribution-policy/.

04/03/2025

The (SC) has reiterated that in forcible entry cases, the key issue is who had prior physical possession of the property – not ownership.

In a Decision written by Associate Justice Jose Midas P. Marquez, the SC’s First Division ordered respondents Ernie “Toto” Castillo et al. to vacate a parcel of land in Barangay Matina, Davao City (Lot 1957), after finding that they had forcibly entered the property.

The case stemmed from a complaint for forcible entry filed by Edgar M. Rico (Rico), who claimed he was in possession of the property by virtue of his free patent application for Lot 1957 with the Department of Environment and Natural Resources. He claimed that on October 11, 2005, the respondents illegally entered the property by destroying a steel gate and demolishing structures.

The SC ruled that forcible entry cases are about physical possession, not legal ownership. It held that the only issue in forcible entry cases is whether the claimant has proven prior physical possession of the contested property. Since Rico had established his prior possession, the SC ruled in his favor and ordered the respondents to vacate the property.

Read the full text of the Press Release at: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/sc-prior-possession-not-ownership-matters-in-forcible-entry-cases/.

Read the full text of the Decision at: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/215166-edgar-m-rico-vs-ernie-toto-castillo-pifiano-jumo-gerry-villegas-alfrance-alicante-felix-yagao-john-does-and-marilou-lopez-a-k-a-ma-loreto-v-abella-lopez/.

Copying of this content is subject to the SC PIO’s Credit Attribution Policy: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-attribution-policy/.

Address

Marilao
3019

Opening Hours

Monday 9am - 5pm
Tuesday 9am - 5pm
Wednesday 9am - 5pm
Thursday 9am - 5pm
Friday 9am - 5pm
Saturday 9am - 5pm

Website

Alerts

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

Share