legal Free Legal Advice

[il_jr]

mquestion panu ko mababasa yung naka pdf format? pagdownload ko sa rapidshare.? pwede pa ilipat sa word yun?

 

you may use acrobat reader Acrobat Reader to open your pdf files its free. regarding sa paglipat to word, may mga utilities na available, keywords sa google "pdf to word".

[R@v3n]

Any way to get rid of the "This is not a genuine Windows XP software" message at startup and the 'Your system may be at risk" lower right side of the desktop message?

 

Yes. Try searching for WGA removers on the internet. Also, after you uninstall it, be careful about what you install through Microsoft's automatic update. :headsetsmiley:

[_Pabling]

yung pc ko lage naghahang bakit kayaganun kaya minsan pagmayginagawa ka lage nabibibitin...bakit kaya ganun...wala naman daw virus avg antivirus ko...may spyware and adware na ko wala naman nadedetect...help naman please...

 

can you expoung more on the issue? sa safe mode nag hahang din ba?

[_Pabling]

update ko lang po kau sa status ng kaso ko. i received the sub poena na. sa sept 1 sa qc hall still. will post what happens later. thanks again to the lawyers. :thumbsupsmiley:

[kelvin]

mquestion panu ko mababasa yung naka pdf format? pagdownload ko sa rapidshare.? pwede pa ilipat sa word yun?

 

1. install acrobat reader

(if you had a copy of professional edition, good for u. sometimes they had direct convertion to word format)

2. look for solid pdf converter or abc amber

(make sure u had a patch or crack or buy an original copy)

[kelvin]

Any way to get rid of the "This is not a genuine Windows XP software" message at startup and the 'Your system may be at risk" lower right side of the desktop message?

 

on my opinion, theres two reason why that message showed up

 

1. Pirated copy

2. Your 25 character serial key had some problems

 

Try to visit P2Plife.com and look for the answer, 90% chance na ma solve ang problems mo. heheheh. :thumbsupsmiley:

[boibastos]

on my opinion, theres two reason why that message showed up

 

1. Pirated copy

2. Your 25 character serial key had some problems

 

Try to visit P2Plife.com and look for the answer, 90% chance na ma solve ang problems mo. heheheh. :thumbsupsmiley:

 

The link to P2Plife.com doesn't work. Is there any other site?

[federicuger]

pag nag commit ba ng adultery yung babae pwede ba itong grounds to annull/

 

ma void yung marriage?

[mick8]

my external hard disk just died. hindi na siya ma detect ng pc. although kahapon ok pa ngayon hindi na na dedetect. is there still a way to retrieve my files? i have many important files on it.

[wjc-934]

my external hard disk just died. hindi na siya ma detect ng pc. although kahapon ok pa ngayon hindi na na dedetect. is there still a way to retrieve my files? i have many important files on it.

 

 

pre, anong brand ng external hard disk mo?

inilagay mo lang ba sa external case or ung mga branded na external drive talaga?

[silvercross0816]

pag nag commit ba ng adultery yung babae pwede ba itong grounds to annull/

 

ma void yung marriage?

 

 

If convicted of adultery, or at least may preponderance of evidence, the following can be a ground for legal separation:

 

(1) Repeated physical violence or grossly abusive conduct directed against the petitioner, a common child, or a child of the petitioner;

 

(2) Physical violence or moral pressure to compel the petitioner to change religious or political affiliation;

 

(3) Attempt of respondent to corrupt or induce the petitioner, a common child, or a child of the petitioner, to engage in prostitution, or connivance in such corruption or inducement;

 

(4) Final judgment sentencing the respondent to imprisonment of more than six years, even if pardoned;

 

(5) Drug addiction or habitual alcoholism of the respondent;

 

(6) Lesbianism or homosexuality of the respondent;

 

(7) Contracting by the respondent of a subsequent bigamous marriage, whether in the Philippines or abroad;

 

(8) Sexual infidelity :boo: or perversion of the respondent;

 

(9) Attempt by the respondent against the life of the petitioner by the respondent; or

 

(10) Abandonment of petitioner by respondent without justifiable cause for more than one year.

 

Nullity of Marriage =

The Family Code in Articles 35, 36, 37, 38, provides for the grounds, as follows:

Art. 35. The following marriages shall be void from the beginning:

 

(1) Those contracted by any party below eighteen years of age even with the consent of parents or guardians;

 

This is what is called legal capacity which is the essential requisites of marriage. Absence of this makes the marriage void from the very beginning.

The following falls under the category formal requisites of marriage. Absence of this formal requisites shall render the marriage void from the very beginning. However, irregularity in the formal requisites shall not affect the validity of the marriage.

(2) Those solemnized by any person not legally authorized to perform marriages unless such marriages were contracted with either or both parties believing in good faith that the solemnizing officer had the legal authority to do so;

(3) Those solemnized without license, except those covered the preceding Chapter;

(4) Those bigamous or polygamous marriages not failing under Article 41;

(5) Those contracted through mistake of one contracting party as to the identity of the other; and

(6) Those subsequent marriages that are void under Article 53.

Art. 36. A marriage contracted by any party who, at the time of the celebration, was psychologically incapacitated to comply with the essential marital obligations of marriage, shall likewise be void even if such incapacity becomes manifest only after its solemnization. (As amended by Executive Order 227)

Art. 37. Marriages between the following are incestuous and void from the beginning, whether relationship between the parties be legitimate or illegitimate:

(1) Between ascendants and descendants of any degree; and

(2) Between brothers and sisters, whether of the full or half blood. (81a)

Art. 38. The following marriages shall be void from the beginning for reasons of public policy:

(1) Between collateral blood relatives whether legitimate or illegitimate, up to the fourth civil degree;

(2) Between step-parents and step-children;

(3) Between parents-in-law and children-in-law;

(4) Between the adopting parent and the adopted child;

(5) Between the surviving spouse of the adopting parent and the adopted child;

(6) Between the surviving spouse of the adopted child and the adopter;

(7) Between an adopted child and a legitimate child of the adopter;

(8) Between adopted children of the same adopter; and

(9) Between parties where one, with the intention to marry the other, killed that other person's spouse, or his or her own spouse.

 

Based on the above, I think you should go for legal separation.

[pogingpogi]

can you expoung more on the issue? sa safe mode nag hahang din ba?

 

basta sir pagginagamit mo lang siya paginternet,kahi paggamit mo word or powerpoint naghahang siya....pati sobra bagal niya bakit kaya ganun

[mick8]

pre, anong brand ng external hard disk mo?

inilagay mo lang ba sa external case or ung mga branded na external drive talaga?

 

samsung pre. inilagay ko lang siya sa external na case. ang alam ko pwedeng ilipat yung platters sa similar na HD. hindi na kasi umiikot yung motor sa loob kapay plinug ko yung external HD sa pc ko.

[bonito99]

Go for the annulment.

 

The whole 9 yards na.

 

Kaya yan. Art. 36 FC

[Waterbearer]

I agree with Bonito, gagastos ka rin lang naman e ba't di mo pa lubusin.....pa annul mo na :boo:

[jake_roxas]

yes, i'm talking about insurance. i don't think that such mandate will ever materialize in the phils.

 

what are your views on regulating professionals, not just lawyers, but the likes of doctors, architects, engineers, etc? anybody can answer.

 

yes, some firms, like ours, have their lawyers covered with malpractice insurance in case something goes wrong. and of course, they also have medical insurance, just in case an irate client shoots them.

[jake_roxas]

I agree with Bonito, gagastos ka rin lang naman e ba't di mo pa lubusin.....pa annul mo na :boo:

 

i think it is more realistic to file for legal separation.

 

however, you can perhaps allege alternative causes of action for legal separation or annulment under Article 36.

[Waterbearer]

yes, some firms, like ours, have their lawyers covered with malpractice insurance in case something goes wrong. and of course, they also have medical insurance, just in case an irate client shoots them.

may idea ka ba kung magkano ang premium na binabayaran ng firm ninyo at kung kaninong insurance company RE: malpractice insurance ?

Edited August 28, 2006 by Waterbearer

[miggy1422]

Peeps, Can u help me out? I'd like to try the world of computing, can you guys tell me something about the Standard Programmer's APtitude Test or something? Coz I'll be taking my exam as a fresh entry programmer. :mtc: :cool: Thanks.....

[dictum]

pag nag commit ba ng adultery yung babae pwede ba itong grounds to annull/

 

ma void yung marriage?

 

 

File a case for annulment instead of legal separation. I will definitely fall under Article 36. I'm pretty sure the practitioners on annulment cases can easily "make out" a case for annulment based on Art. 36 of the Family Code.

[jake_roxas]

may idea ka ba kung magkano ang premium na binabayaran ng firm ninyo at kung kaninong insurance company RE: malpractice insurance ?

 

i dont know the name of the insurance company, but its a US based insurance company. most of our clients are multinational firms since our firm is an affiliate of an international firm. i just remember signing something related to a malpractice suit insurance. i dont have any idea how much premium the firm is paying for each lawyer.

[bonito99]

Why waste money on a bad marriage just to get legal separation? Whole 9 yards.

[jake_roxas]

File a case for annulment instead of legal separation. I will definitely fall under Article 36. I'm pretty sure the practitioners on annulment cases can easily "make out" a case for annulment based on Art. 36 of the Family Code.

 

Just to give us an idea on how Article 36 cases are resolved.

 

GUIDELINES ON DECLARATION OF NULLITY OF MARRIAGE BASED ON ARTICLE 36 OF THE FAMILY CODE (PSYCHOLOGICAL INCAPACITY)

 

(1) The burden of proof to show the nullity of the marriage belongs to the plaintiff. And

doubt should be resolved in favor of the existence and continuation of the marriage and

against its dissolution and nullity. This is rooted in the fact that both our Constitution and

our laws cherish the validity of marriage and unity of the family. Thus, our Constitution

devotes an entire Article on the Family, recognizing it "as the foundation of the nation." It

decrees marriage as legally "inviolable," thereby protecting if from dissolution at the whim

of the parties. Both the family and marriage are to be "protected" by the state.

 

The Family Code echoes this constitutional edict on marriage and the family and

emphasizes their permanence, inviolability and solidarity.

 

(2) The root cause of the psychological incapacity must be (a) medically or clinically

identified, ( alleged in the complaint, © sufficiently proven by experts and (d) clearly

explained in the decision. Article 36 of the Family Code requires that the incapacity must

be psychological - not physical, although its manifestations and/or symptoms mayphysical.

The evidence must convince the court that the parties, or one of them, was mentally or

psychically ill to such an extent that the person could not have known the obligations he

was assuming, or knowing them, could not have given valid assumption thereof. Although

no example of such incapacity need be given here so as not to limit the application of the

provision under the principle of ejusdem generis, nevertheless such root cause must be

identified as a psychological illness and its incapacitating nature fully explained. Expert

evidence may be given by qualified psychiatrists and clinical psychologists.

 

(3) The incapacity must be proven to be existing at "the time of the celebration" of the

marriage. The evidence must show that the illness was existing when the parties

exchanged their "I do's." The manifestation of the illness need not be perceivable at such

time, but the illness itself must have attached at such moment, or prior thereto.

 

(4) Such incapacity must also be shown to be medically or clinically permanent or

incurable.Such incurability may be absolute or even relative only in regard to the other

spouse, not necessarily absolutely against everyone of the same sex. Furthermore, such

incapacity must be relevant to the assumption of marriage obligations, not necessarily to

those not related to marriage, like the exercise of a profession or employment in a job.

Hence, a pediatrician may be effective in diagnosing illnesses of children and prescribing

medicine to ensure them but may not be psychologically capacitated to procreate, bear and

raise his/her own children as an essential obligation of marriage.

 

(5) Such illness must be grave enough to bring about the disability of the party to assume

the essential obligations of marriage. Thus, "mild characteriological peculiarities, mood

changes, occasional emotional outbursts" cannot be accepted as root causes. The illness

must be shown as downright incapacity or inability, not a refusal, neglect or difficulty,

much less ill will. In other words, there is a natal or supervening disabling factor in the

person an, adverse integral element in the personality structure that effectively

incapacitates theperson from really accepting and thereby complying with the obligations

essential to marriage.

 

(6) The essential marital obligations must be those embraced by Articles 68 up to 71 of the

Family Code as regards the husband and wife as well as Articles 220, 221 and 225 of the

same Code in regard to parents and their children. Such non-complied marital obligation(s)

must also be stated in the petition, proven by evidence and included in the text of the

decision.

 

(7) Interpretations given by the National Appellate Matrimonial Tribunal of the Catholic

Church in the Philippines, while not controlling or decisive, should be given great respect

by our courts. It is clear that Article 36 was taken by the Family Code Revision

Committeefrom Canon 1095 of the New Code of Canon Law, which became effective in

1983 and which provides:

 

"The following are incapable of contracting marriage: Those who are unable to assume the

essential obligations of marriage due to causes of psychological nature."

 

Since the purpose of including such provision in our Family Code is to harmonize our civil

laws with the religious faith of our people, it stands to reason that to achieve such

harmonization, great persuasive weight should be given to decisions of such appellate

tribunal. Ideally - subject to our law on evidence - what is decreed as canonically invalid

should also be decreed civilly void.

 

This is one instance where, in view of the evidence source and purpose of the Family

Code provision, contemporaneous religious interpretation is to be given persuasive effect.

Here,the State and the Church - while remaining independent, separate and apart from

eachother - shall walk together in synodal cadence towards the same goal of protecting

and cherishing marriage and the family as the inviolable base of the nation.

 

(8) The trial court must order the prosecuting attorney or fiscal and the Solicitor General

to appear as counsel for the state. No decision shall be handed down unless the Solicitor

General issues a certification, which will be quoted in the decision, briefly stating therein

hisreasons for his agreement or opposition, as the case may be, to the petition. The

SolicitorGeneral, along with the prosecuting attorney, shall submit to the court such

certification within fifteen (15) days from the date the case is deemed submitted for

resolution of thecourt. The Solicitor General shall discharge the equivalent function of the

defensor vinculi contemplated under Canon 1095.

 

And in DAVID B. DEDEL, petitioner, vs. COURT OF APPEALS and SHARON L. CORPUZ-DEDEL a.k.a. JANE IBRAHIM, respondents. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, oppositor-respondent. [G.R. No. 151867. January 29, 2004], the SC ruled:

 

"The main question for resolution is whether or not the totality of the evidence presented is enough to sustain a finding that respondent is psychologically incapacitated. More specifically, does the aberrant sexual behavior of respondent adverted to by petitioner fall within the term “psychological incapacity?”

 

In Santos v. Court of Appeals,[12] it was ruled:

 

x x x “psychological incapacity” should refer to no less than a mental (not physical) incapacity that causes a party to be truly incognitive of the basic marital covenants that concomitantly must be assumed and discharged by the parties to the marriage which, as so expressed in Article 68 of the Family Code, include their mutual obligations to live together, observe love, respect and fidelity and render help and support. There is hardly any doubt that the intendment of the law has been to confine the meaning of “psychological incapacity” to the most serious cases of personality disorders clearly demonstrative of an utter insensitivity of inability to give meaning and significance to the marriage. This psychological condition must exist at the time the marriage is celebrated. The law does not evidently envision, upon the other hand, an inability of the spouse to have sexual relations with the other. This conclusion is implicit under Article 54 of the Family Code which considers children conceived prior to the judicial declaration of nullity of the void marriage to be “legitimate.”

 

The other forms of psychoses, if existing at the inception of marriage, like the state of a party being of unsound mind or concealment of drug addiction, habitual alcoholism, homosexuality or lesbianism, merely renders the marriage contract voidable pursuant to Article 46, Family Code. If drug addiction, habitual alcoholism, lesbianism or homosexuality should occur only during the marriage, they become mere grounds for legal separation under Article 55 of the Family Code. These provisions, however, do not necessarily preclude the possibility of these various circumstances being themselves, depending on the degree and severity of the disorder, indicia of psychological incapacity.

 

Until further statutory and jurisprudential parameters are established, every circumstance that may have some bearing on the degree, extent and other conditions of that incapacity must, in every case, be carefully examined and evaluated so that no precipitate and indiscriminate nullity is peremptorily decreed. The well-considered opinion of psychiatrists, psychologists and persons with expertise in psychological disciplines might be helpful or even desirable.[13]

 

The difficulty in resolving the problem lies in the fact that a personality disorder is a very complex and elusive phenomenon which defies easy analysis and definition. In this case, respondent’s sexual infidelity can hardly qualify as being mentally or psychically ill to such an extent that she could not have known the obligations she was assuming, or knowing them, could not have given a valid assumption thereof.[14] It appears that respondent’s promiscuity did not exist prior to or at the inception of the marriage. What is, in fact, disclosed by the records is a blissful marital union at its celebration, later affirmed in church rites, and which produced four children.

 

Respondent’s sexual infidelity or perversion and abandonment do not by themselves constitute psychological incapacity within the contemplation of the Family Code. Neither could her emotional immaturity and irresponsibility be equated with psychological incapacity.[15] It must be shown that these acts are manifestations of a disordered personality which make respondent completely unable to discharge the essential obligations of the marital state, not merely due to her youth, immaturity[16] or sexual promiscuity.

 

At best, the circumstances relied upon by petitioner are grounds for legal separation under Article 55[17] of the Family Code. However, we pointed out in Marcos v. Marcos[18] that Article 36 is not to be equated with legal separation in which the grounds need not be rooted in psychological incapacity but on physical violence, moral pressure, civil interdiction, drug addiction, habitual alcoholism, sexual infidelity, abandonment and the like. In short, the evidence presented by petitioner refers only to grounds for legal separation, not for declaring a marriage void.

 

We likewise agree with the Court of Appeals that the trial court has no jurisdiction to dissolve the church marriage of petitioner and respondent. The authority to do so is exclusively lodged with the Ecclesiastical Court of the Roman Catholic Church.

 

All told, we find no cogent reason to disturb the ruling of the appellate court. We cannot deny the grief, frustration and even desperation of petitioner in his present situation. Regrettably, there are circumstances, like in this case, where neither law nor society can provide the specific answers to every individual problem.[19] While we sympathize with petitioner’s marital predicament, our first and foremost duty is to apply the law no matter how harsh it may be.[20]"

[jake_roxas]

Why waste money on a bad marriage just to get legal separation? Whole 9 yards.

 

because the petitioner, like in the Dedel case, might be spending an even awful lot of money and resources and ending up with a dismissal of an Article 36 petition. perhaps, the safest route is to allege alternative causes of action.

Edited August 28, 2006 by jake_roxas

[bonito99]

That's up to the lawyer. Not the client.

 

The best result may not be the safest.