The Law Requisites Ph

Latest jurisprudence: released Dec 22, 2025

Judicial integrity is fundamentally threatened when those sworn to uphold the law themselves commit grave crimes.

This is an administrative case for judicial discipline entitled Judicial Integrity Board v. Presiding Judge Oscar D. Tomarong, involving the Judicial Integrity Board as complainant and Judge Oscar D. Tomarong as respondent, docketed as A.M. No. RTJ-25-085, promulgated on July 29, 2025. The Supreme Court found that Judge Tomarong masterminded the murder of a fellow judge, a crime involving moral turpitude, and ruled that substantial evidence suffices for administrative liability, warranting his dismissal from the judiciary and disbarment.

16 hours ago | [YT] | 3

The Law Requisites Ph

Sex Reassignment and Civil Registry in the Philippines: The Silverio v. Republic Doctrine Explained

www.facebook.com/100089499308282/subscribe/

Can a Filipino change their legal sex and name after sex reassignment surgery? This jurisprudence-based explainer of Silverio v. Republic (G.R. No. 174689, October 22, 2007) discusses why Philippine law does not yet recognize changes of sex in birth certificates, clarifying the limits of equity, civil registry rules, and legislative authority.

If science and identity evolve faster than the law, should courts adapt through equity—or must Congress always take the first step?

#SilverioVsRepublic #PhilippineJurisprudence #CivilRegistryLaw #GenderIdentityLaw #RA9048 #SupremeCourtPH #LawRequisitesPH #LegalEducationPH #PhilippineLawExplained

Disclaimer:
This content is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Jurisprudential interpretations may change. While carefully prepared, this material is not infallible and was generated with the assistance of premium artificial intelligence.

Skip the Carousel

1 2 3 4

1 day ago | [YT] | 5

The Law Requisites Ph

Imagine this… you are legally adopted, bearing your adoptive father’s surname, yet publicly known under your biological father’s famous name. You ask the court: can identity follow blood over law?
Background & Facts: Francis Luigi G. Santos sought to change his surname to “Revilla.” No money was involved. The RTC denied the petition; the CA affirmed, citing adoption laws.
Ruling: The Supreme Court of the Philippines ruled Rule 103 was proper but DENIED the change for lack of compelling reason.
Doctrine: Change of name is a privilege, not a right. Adoption severs legal ties; convenience or public image is insufficient.
Question: Should personal identity outweigh legal filiation? Comment, save, and follow to stay updated!

www.facebook.com/100089499308282/subscribe/

FAQs:
Q1: Can an adoptee change surname? Yes, but only for compelling reasons.
Q2: Does a screen name justify change? No.
Case: Santos v. Republic, G.R. No. 250520, May 5, 2021.
Disclaimer: For educational purposes only; not infallible. Generated with premium AI.

Skip the Carousel

1 2 3 4

2 days ago | [YT] | 1

The Law Requisites Ph

Family related jurisprudence

Can a Father Avoid Child Support Without a Written Demand? Supreme Court Ruling in Lacson v. Lacson

www.facebook.com/100089499308282/subscribe/

If a parent knows their child needs support but chooses silence over responsibility, should the law still protect that parent from liability?

Can a father escape liability for unpaid child support by claiming no formal written demand was made? In Lacson v. Lacson (G.R. No. 150644, August 28, 2006), the Philippine Supreme Court ruled that a father remains liable for support in arrears, even without a formal demand letter. This landmark case clarifies that child support is a legal obligation arising from need—not from paperwork—and that third parties who provide support may seek reimbursement under the Family Code of the Philippines.

#LacsonVsLacson
#ChildSupportPhilippines
#SupportInArrears
#FamilyCodePH
#PhilippineJurisprudence
#SupremeCourtPH
#ChildSupportLaw
#ParentalObligation
#LegalEducationPH
#KnowYourRightsPH

⚠️ Disclaimer

DISCLAIMER: This content is provided for educational and informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Laws and jurisprudence may be interpreted differently depending on the specific facts of each case. For legal concerns or advice, consult a qualified lawyer or legal professional.

Skip the Carousel

1 2 3 4

2 days ago | [YT] | 3

The Law Requisites Ph

Family related jurisprudence

Can a Foreigner Be Jailed for Not Giving Child Support in the Philippines? | Supreme Court Ruling Explained (G.R. No. 193707)

Does citizenship shield a foreign parent from criminal liability for abandoning a child in the Philippines—or does Philippine law step in to protect the child’s right to support?

Can a foreign national be imprisoned for failing to give child support in the Philippines? Learn how the Supreme Court ruled in Del Socorro v. Van Wilsem (G.R. No. 193707, December 10, 2014), applying the Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act (R.A. 9262) and the doctrine of processual presumption. A must-read for parents, lawyers, and Filipinos in cross-border family disputes.

#ChildSupportPhilippines
#RA9262
#PhilippineSupremeCourt
#FamilyLawPhilippines
#ForeignParentLiability
#ViolenceAgainstWomenAndChildren
#LegalRightsPH
#ChildSupportLaw
#PhilippineJurisprudence
#DelSocorroVsVanWilsem
#ProcessualPresumption
#CrossBorderFamilyLaw

⚠️ Disclaimer

Disclaimer: This material is for educational and informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Laws and jurisprudence may change, and the application of legal principles depends on specific facts. For legal concerns, consult a qualified lawyer or appropriate legal authority.

2 days ago | [YT] | 5

The Law Requisites Ph

Supreme Court Doctrine Explained: RA 9262 Applies to Lesbian Relationships | G.R. No. 242133

Learn the key Supreme Court doctrines in G.R. No. 242133 (April 16, 2024) where the Court ruled that Republic Act No. 9262 (Anti-VAWC Law) applies even when the offender is a woman. This landmark ruling clarifies that VAWC is about power and intimate-partner violence, not gender, and affirms protection for women in same-sex relationships. Ideal for law students, lawyers, and Philippine jurisprudence followers.

If violence in intimate relationships is truly a power issue rather than a gender issue, should Philippine law move toward a fully gender-neutral domestic violence framework?

#RA9262
#VAWC
#PhilippineSupremeCourt
#LegalDoctrine
#PhilippineJurisprudence
#LawSchoolPH
#BarReviewPH
#LGBTQRightsPH
#DomesticViolenceLaw
#lawrequisitesph

Disclaimer

This content is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Content is not infallible and was generated using premium artificial intelligence.

Skip the Carousel

1 2 3 4

3 days ago | [YT] | 1

The Law Requisites Ph

When Is Abuse Enough? Supreme Court Ruling on Legal Separation in Ong v. Ong (Philippines)

How much emotional, psychological, or physical abuse must a spouse endure before the law finally says: “Enough is enough”?

beacons.ai/thelawrequisitesph

This legal case digest examines the landmark Philippine Supreme Court decision in Ong v. Ong (G.R. No. 153206, October 23, 2006), which clarified the meaning of “grossly abusive conduct” as a ground for legal separation under the Family Code. The Court ruled that abuse is not limited to physical violence but includes psychological, emotional, and verbal cruelty when such conduct makes marital life intolerable. This case highlights how Philippine law protects spouses from sustained abuse and affirms that credible testimony and corroborating evidence are sufficient to justify legal separation.

Doctrine:
Grossly abusive conduct under Article 55(1) of the Family Code includes psychological, verbal, and emotional abuse. Repeated acts making marital life unbearable justify legal separation even without constant physical violence.
#OngVsOng
#LegalSeparationPhilippines
#FamilyCodePhilippines
#PhilippineSupremeCourt
#GrosslyAbusiveConduct
#DomesticAbuseLaw
#PhilippineJurisprudence
#MarriageAndLaw
#LegalEducationPH
#CaseDigestPH
#KnowYourRightsPH

⚠️ DISCLAIMER
This material is for educational and informational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice nor create an attorney-client relationship. For advice on specific legal issues, consult a licensed lawyer in the Philippines.

Skip the Carousel

1 2 3 4

3 days ago | [YT] | 1

The Law Requisites Ph

Imagine this… You’re involved in a vehicular accident resulting in damage. The other party files a criminal case for reckless imprudence, and you file a separate civil action for quasi-delict claiming damages. What happens next? Subscribe to be updated with the latest uploads.

You (Casupanan) and Capitulo were in a crash with Laroya. Laroya filed a criminal case for reckless imprudence. Meanwhile you and your co-party filed a civil case for damages (quasi-delict) while the criminal case was still at the preliminary investigation stage. The trial court dismissed the civil action for forum-shopping. You elevated the case to higher courts.

The Supreme Court reversed the dismissal, holding that under Section 1, Rule 111 of the Rules on Criminal Procedure and Civil Code Articles on quasi-delict, an accused in a criminal case can validly file a separate, independent civil action for quasi-delict against the private complainant. Forum-shopping was not present because the separate action was permitted by law, and the civil action proceeds independently of the criminal case, so long as double recovery for the same act is avoided.

Primary Doctrine:
Under Section 1, Rule 111 and Civil Code Articles 32, 33, 34 & 2176, a person involved in a criminal action — whether as offended party or as accused — may file a separate civil action for quasi-delict independently of the criminal case. There is no forum-shopping if the rules expressly allow such separate action; however, double recovery for the same act or omission is prohibited.

💭 Thought-Provoking Question: Can a party in a criminal case truly protect due process rights if forced to litigate civil and criminal aspects together? Comment below, SAVE to favorite!

CASE: Avelino Casupanan & Roberto Capitulo vs. Mario Llavore Laroya
G.R. No.: 145391
Promulgation: August 26, 2002


❓Frequently Asked Questions

Q1: Can an accused in a criminal case file a separate civil action?
A: Yes. Under Section 1, Rule 111 of the Rules on Criminal Procedure and Civil Code provisions, an accused may file a separate civil action for quasi-delict independently of the criminal case.

Q2: Does filing a separate civil action amount to forum-shopping?
A: No. The Supreme Court held that such a separate civil action does not constitute forum-shopping so long as it is authorized by law and the civil action is independent of the criminal case.

⚠️ Disclaimer: This content is for educational purposes only and is not infallible. It was created using premium artificial intelligence.

1 week ago | [YT] | 2

The Law Requisites Ph

1 week ago | [YT] | 5

The Law Requisites Ph

Irene Constantino Datu vs. Alfredo Fabian Datu, G.R. No. 209278

beacons.ai/thelawrequisitesph

Datu v. Datu Explained. Does Mental Illness Equal Psychological Incapacity Under Philippine Law?

If a spouse has a diagnosed mental illness, does the law automatically say the marriage never existed?


You need clarity on psychological incapacity under Article 36 of the Family Code. This post explains the Supreme Court ruling in Irene Constantino Datu vs. Alfredo Fabian Datu, G.R. No. 209278, September 15, 2021. Learn why mental illness alone does not void a marriage, how courts assess incapacity, and what evidence truly matters. Essential reading for law students, lawyers, and anyone dealing with marriage nullity cases in the Philippines.

#PsychologicalIncapacity
#Article36FamilyCode
#DatuVsDatu
#PhilippineJurisprudence
#MarriageNullity
#FamilyLawPhilippines
#SupremeCourtPH
#LegalEducationPH

Disclaimer
This content is for educational and informational purposes only. This is not legal advice. No lawyer client relationship is created. For advice on specific cases, consult a qualified Philippine lawyer.

1 week ago | [YT] | 3