Spec Pro
Spec Pro
Belinda Oribello v.CA & Remedios Oribello These rules apply only to cases where
Remedios Oribello alleging that she is an parents are separated in fact or undergoing
adopted daughter of Tomas Oribello & legal separation and husband and wife are
FIRST wife Emma, filed an action for in dispute as to custody of minor children .
partition of estate left by Toribio Oribello It also applies to habeas corpus in relation
including those he and second wife Berlinda to custody of minors, The Rules of Court
owned. The latter claimed that the decree applies suppletorily
of adoption was void. RTC dismissed WHO FILES - ANY PERSON claiming right to
partition stating that Remedios is not a co custody VENUE -FC where petitioner resides
owner entitled thereto. On appeal to CA, or where the minor may be found
decision was reversed, and case was By VERIFIED PETITION with Cert of non
remanded to RTC for second phase of Forum shopping , and allegations shall
partition , without prejudice to the filing of include
the appropriate action to annul or petition 1. Personal circumstances of petitioner
for relief from decree of adoption. CA ruled and respondent (person who has
that RTC had no authority to annul adoption actual custody)
decree and to dismiss partition on that 2. Name age present whereabouts of
ground . minor, his or her relationship with
ISSUE: Can decree of adoption be attacked both Petitioner and respondent
collaterally in a petition for partition? 3. Material or operative facts
constituting deprivation of custody
4. Other matters relevant to custody of Content of HDO
minor 1 Name middle name and date and place of
Summons shall be served personally , with 5 birth nationality and place of last residence
days period for respondent to file VERIFIED of person against whom HDO was issued,
ANSWER. or whose departure from the country has
Court may order a social worker to conduct been enjoined.
case study and submit report 3 days before 2. Complete docket number of case and
pre trial. During pre trial court may also title
order respondent to present the minor to 3. Specific nature of the case
the court . Notices relevant to pre trial must 4. The date of the HDO
be served separately on the parties and 5. Recent photograph of the party …
their counsels . Recall can be also motu proprio
Failure of petitioner to appear at pre trial PROTECTION ORDER
shall warrant dismissal. Failure of Know specific instances what PO may be
respondent to appear at pre trial shall used for or what PO may contain in Sec. 17
authorize court to try case ex parte of the Rule.
Which courts have jurisdiction ? If court finds that the writ ought to issue, it
shall so issue. Through an order setting the
RTC of the place where threat, act or summary hearing within 7 days from date of
omission was committed or any of its issuance. The writ shall be served upon
elements occurred - returnable to it respondent personally or by substituted
Sandiganbayan or any of its justices - service . The respondent in the writ order
returnable to it or any of its justices
shall file a verified return with affidavits, What is the defense of the respondent
containing the following: Razon Chief of Staff AFP in regard to those
1-Lawful defenses that the respondent did allegations ?
not violate or threaten to violate right to life What was the ruling of the court ?
liberty or security of the aggrieved party by
act or omission 2nd case -Sec of National Defense v. Manalo
2-Steps taken by respondent to determine (brothers)
the fate or whereabouts … and the person
or persons responsible for the threat act or This case was filed before the issuance of
omission the Rule but during its pendency the Rule
3-All relevant information in possession of took effect on October 24, 2007 after
respondent pertaining to threat, act or publication . It is the first petition filed
omission before the Supreme Court from the time
the Rule was laid down. The staunchest
advocate of the amparo rule Justice Puno
If the respondent is a public penned the decision and emphasized his
officer/employee these are what he should decision this way -
allege in the return as to what steps he has “While victims of enforced disappearance
taken or will be taken - are separated from the rest of the world,
1-verify identity of the aggrieved party they are not separated from the
2-recover and preserve evidence related to Constitutional protection of their basic
the death or disappearance of the person rights. The Constitution is an overarching
identified in the petition which may aid in sky that covers all in its protection”
the prosecution of persons responsible “The writ of amparo is a tool that gives
3- identify witnesses and obtain statements voice to preys of silent guns and prisoners
4-determine cause, manner , location, and behind secret walls
time of death or disappearance as well as
pattern of practice that may have brought The backdrop is that the Manalo brothers
about the death or disappearance are under no restraint, merely hiding.
5-identify and apprehend the person or What was the first case prior to Sec. v.
persons involved Manalo ?
6-bring the suspected offenders before What was the threat that confronted them
competent court and who were the officers involved ?
What was the defense posited by the
Failure to return writ - court shall Proceed Armed Forces through Sec. Razon?
with hearing ex parte , summary in nature What were the reliefs granted by the CA?
and shall be given same priority as in Was it equivalent to a search warrant as
habeas corpus cases. respondent argued it was ?
Let us examine first the case filed a year What was the Court s disposition to
after Rule was issued. It involved actual case argument that revealing the information
of enforced disappearance - stated in the reliefs asked for will
Razon v. Tagitis - what are the allegations in jeopardize official functions of the officers
the petition for the issuance of writ filed by and expose them to threat of personal
Mrs. Tagitis ? injury even death?
both parties . There is no threat that can be
Cases filed as an over reach of the writ of implied from presence of armed men bare
amparo to the waist, and alleged pointing of
weapons . At most , Tapuz canfile ordinary
Tapuz v del Rosario June 17, 2008 criminal prosecution.
Issue - sufficiency of form and substance of
allegations in petition for writ of amparo
Tapuz lost case of forcible entry filed by Hernando B. Canlas v. Napico Homeowners
Sanson. RTC Judge issued mandatory June 5, 2008
injunction ordering Tapuz to move and and Canlas were settlers in land whose houses
demolish structure. He lost again, ehe have been demolished and others wer
appealed to CA by petition for review . n the about to be demolished by court order.
SC they filed a petition for issuance of writ They claimed title of plaintiffs were
of amparo and of habeas data, spurious . They filed petition for writ of
simultaneously . amparo alleging -
Allegations in writ of amparo 1- armed men 1-they were deprived of shelter as a result
with shot guns entered property and fired of holding that plaintiff had the right to
shots, Removed barbed wire fence securing evict them.
the house. Tapuz heirs reported that these 2-praying that RD , and land officials in LRA
were acts of terrorism and police indeed be summoned to explain the issuance of
certified that thre was a report. The spurious titles .
incident report also contained altercation, HELD ; Judgment of trial court and CA is
gun poking ang firing into air, and eve of affirmed. SC dismissed amparo petition -
burning of one house accidentally. . These there is no facual and legal basis in the
were supported by another affidavit affidavits
alleging Tapuz ‘s prior possession, The threatened demolition or more
contradictory to finding of fact of RTC . dwellings by final judgment of borth trial
There is no affidavit that th threat was and appellate court Ii NOT AMONG THOSE
contnuing at time of filing of petition. rights enumerated in Section 1 of the Rule
HELD;WHAT WRIT OF AMPARO IS Not on amparo
Recognition of children are either voluntary In illegitimate filiation, the same principles
or compulsory and provisions of law in recognition of
legitimate children apply.
Art 278 of Civil Code provides that voluntary “Art.175 FC Illegitimate children may
recognition shall be made establish their illegitimate filiation in the
In record of birth same way and in the same evidence as
A will legitimate children…”
A statement before a court of record The same article provides that if the basis
In any authentic writing of recognition will be Art.172 (2) admission
Art. 172 FC states that legitimate filiation in a public document or a private
may be established (1)by record of birth or handwritten instrument and signed by the
a final judgment (2) by an admission of parent concerned, the action must be
legitimate filiation in a public document or a brought during the lifetime of the alleged
private handwritten instrument signed by parent.
the parent . Amendment to FC allowing parents of
illegitimate children to acknowledge them
In the absence of record of birth or in the record of birth has eased the burden
admission of filiation – of those born outside of lawful relation,
Effect of approval