Case Digest

In the Anti-VAWC Act, the use of the gender-neutral word “person” who has or had a sexual or dating relationship with the woman encompasses even lesbian relationships.

Hence, their marriage must be annulled on the ground of fraudulent concealment of homosexuality pursuant to Article 45(3) in relation to Article 46(4) of the Family Code.

Under Section 20(D) of the POEA-SEC, “[n]o compensation and benefits shall be payable in respect of any injury, incapacity, disability or death of the seafarer resulting from his willful or criminal act or intentional breach of his duties, provided however, that the employer can prove that such injury, incapacity, disability or death is directly attributable to the seafarer.”

Philippine courts have jurisdiction over a petition for declaration of nullity of a bigamous marriage between a foreigner and a Filipino, even if the marriage was celebrated abroad.

Having been able to perform some marital obligations does not mean that one cannot be subsequently incapable of fulfilling some of the other obligations. Article 36 of the Family Code holds that psychological incapacity can manifest after the marriage’s solemnization, making it a viable ground for its nullity.

A romantic relationship does not equate to consent. The Supreme Court held that love is never a license for coercion, reiterating that even a partner can commit rape if sexual relations occur without the victim’s free and voluntary consent.

While the Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act of 2004 (Anti-VAWC Act) provides that the offender be related or connected to the victim by marriage, former marriage, or a sexual or dating relationship, it does not preclude the application of the principle of conspiracy under the RPC.

Employers may be held solidarily liable for workplace sexual harassment if they fail to act on complaints with urgency and due diligence.

The Omnibus Rules Implementing the Labor Code is clear that “the time during which an employee is inactive by reason of interruptions in his work beyond his control shall be considered working time…if the interval is too brief to be utilized effectively and gainfully in the employee’s own interest.”

Under Article 295 of the Labor Code, a regular employee is one who has been engaged to perform tasks usually necessary or desirable in the employer’s usual business or trade – without falling within the category of either a fixed, project, or seasonal employee; or one who has rendered at least a year of service, with respect to the activity he or she is engaged, and the work of the employee remains while such activity exists.