Citizenship versus Independence

Sometimes lawyering is not only to help clients who are in need of legal assistance. There are instances that you have to render advise more fitting under a given situation outside of the legalistic approach.

Here is a case of an unhappy, helpless and battered wife whose marriage life she tried to keep come hell or high water despite the psychological incapacity of her husband.

Due to sweet talks and charm, Cristy was convinced by Mark to engaged in pre-marital relationship. Immediately upon reaching the age of majority, they got married. Even in the beginning, Mark already unveiled his other side of personality. He showed his being self-centered and a total womanizer. Aside from not being a good provider, he even subjected his wife to physical harm. During this worst marriage, they begot 4 children. Cristy survived all her ordeals if only to keep and maintain their family as she believed on the sanctity of marriage life.

Due to the help of Cristy's family, Mark was able to work abroad. In the beginning, he was able to send and support the financial needs of his family. However, Mark suddenly stop from sending his family their monies for unknown reason leaving Cristy to solely shouldered their family needs. Through Cristy's effort, they were able to acquire several properties.

Eventually Mark re-appeared and brought Cristy and their children to Canada where he was granted resident status. Hoping that living in Canada with her husband would save their marriage, Cristy acceded only to find out that Mark already has another wife thereat. Because of this discovery Cristy left Mark and brought with her their children and moved to another house compelling her and the chidlren to merely depend on the support and graces of the Canadian Government and their relatives in the Philippines.

In order to prevent Mark from insisting upon a continuous sexual relationship, Cristy decided to file a no-fault divorce, which Mark opposed and threatened Cristy that the granting of divorce will lead to a denial of her own application for Canadian citizenship. Mark even compelled Cristy for the liquidation of their properties in the Philippines in which he demanded half of the proceeds thereof.

Cristy now ask what would be her options to save her application and that of her children for Canadian citizenship and the interest of their children over the conjugal properties which Mark wanted to dispose.

It may be true that Canadian law may deny her application should she divorced her husband in whose grant of citizenship do principally depends her application as such.But certainly, it will not affect the application for the same of their children.

However, her misfotune requires weighing whether or not she prefers to become Canadian citizen or to have her independence from her husband who is not only psychologically incapacitated to perfrom the essential marital obligation but moreso a psychologically imbalance person.

Considering that Cristy remained a filipino citizen, her divorce in Canada even if granted will not, under Philippine law, sever her marital tie and would not perfect her true independence. Cristy must file the appropriate petition for the nullification of her marriage on the ground of psychological incapacity of Mark in the Philippines.

The granting of such decree will likewise result to the dissolution of their absolute community property relationship with one another after the delivery of the would-be legitime (inheritance) of their common children. In doing so, Cristy would eventually frustrate the ill-motive of Mark to gain half of their properties and will protect the welfare of their common children.

Kotseng Binenta Napurnada

Here is the case were the previous owner of a registered vehicle was made liable even after he sold it.


Facts:

Angel is the registered owner of a nissan terrano. She sold it to Robin and turned over to him the Certificate of Registration (CR) as well its Official Receipt (OR) with the understanding that Robin would be the one to cause the transfer of the registration.

Thereafter, the vehicle was figured in an accident whereby a passersby was bumped and run over by this nissan terrano, which at the time of the accident was driven by Robin's friend Bamby. Bamby had since absconded and disappeared. Records showed that the nissan terrano remained registered in Angel's name. The family of the victim sued Robin and Angel for damages.

In his defense, Angel argued that when the accident happpened, he was no longer the owner of the vehicle for he had sold it to Robin.

Question:

Can the victim of motor vehicle accident run after its registered owner even after it was sold to another?

Answer:

Yes, victims of reckless imprudence can run after the registered owner of a motor vehicle even though it was sold already to another person so long that he remained to be its registered owner.

In Cadiente v. Macas, The Supreme Coourt had the occasion to reiterate its ruling in PCI Leasing and Finance, Inc. vs. UCPB holding that the registered owner of any vehicle, even if he had already sold it to someone else, is primarily responsible to the public for whatever damage or injury. It explained that:

" were a registered owner allowed to evade responsibility by proving who the supposed transferee or owner is, it would be easy for him, by collusion with others or otherwise, to escape said responsibility and transfer the same to an indefinite person or to one who possess no property with which to respond financially for the damage or injury done. A victim of recklessness on the public highways is usually wihtout means to discover or identify the person actually causing the injury or damage. He has no means other than recourse to the registration in the Motor Vehicle Office to determine who is the owner. The protection that the law aims to extend to him would become illusory were the registered owner given the opportunity to escape liability by disproving his ownership." (Cadiente vs. Macas, G.R. No. 161946, Nov. 14, 2008; citing PCI case, G.R. No. 162267,July 4, 2008)