Case Digest (G.R. No. 175279-80) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
In Susan Lim-Lua v. Danilo Y. Lua, petitioner Susan Lim-Lua filed on September 3, 2003 before the Regional Trial Court of Cebu City, Branch 14, Civil Case No. CEB-29346, an action for declaration of nullity of marriage and prayed for P500,000 monthly support pendente lite for herself and her two children. On March 31, 2004, the trial court granted support pendente lite in the amount of P250,000 per month, plus a retroactive award of P1,750,000 covering September 2003 to March 2004. Respondent Danilo Y. Lua moved for reconsideration but was denied for lack of proper notice. He then petitioned the Court of Appeals (CA) under Rule 65, which on April 12, 2005, found grave abuse of discretion in the trial court’s award and reduced monthly support to P115,000, with retroactive support likewise adjusted. Neither party appealed the CA decision. In compliance, respondent issued a check net of P2,482,348.16, reflecting deductions for expenses he advanced to petitioner and the children. Pe Case Digest (G.R. No. 175279-80) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Background of the marriage nullity and support pendente lite
- On September 3, 2003, petitioner Susan Lim-Lua filed for nullity of marriage against Danilo Y. Lua in RTC Cebu City, Branch 14 (Civil Case No. CEB-29346), praying for P500,000 monthly support pendente lite for her and their two children.
- On March 31, 2004, the trial court granted P250,000 monthly support pendente lite (retroactive to September 2003, totaling P1,750,000) plus P135,000 for petitioner’s eye operations.
- Respondent’s motions and CA reversal
- Respondent’s motion for reconsideration was denied for lack of proper notice; he was ordered to show cause for contempt for non-compliance.
- He petitioned the Court of Appeals (CA), which on April 12, 2005 nullified the RTC orders and instead awarded P115,000 monthly support pendente lite (from April 2005) and ordered recalculation of arrears based on that amount.
- Compliance, writs and contempt proceedings
- In June 2005 respondent filed compliance, issuing a check for P162,651.90 after deducting P2,482,348.16 (value of cars, maintenance and advances) from arrears.
- Petitioner moved for a writ of execution; RTC issued it on September 27, 2005 and denied respondent’s motions for reconsideration and inhibition on November 25, 2005.
- Respondent still did not pay the full arrears; petitioner filed CA-G.R. SP 01154 for contempt, and respondent filed CA-G.R. SP 01315 for certiorari.
- CA consolidation and decision of April 20, 2006
- The CA consolidated both petitions, dismissed petitioner’s contempt case, granted respondent’s certiorari, nullified the RTC execution orders, allowed deductions totaling P3,428,813.80 from arrears, and directed respondent to resume P115,000 monthly support plus preliminarily enjoined execution.
- Petition before the Supreme Court
- Petitioner sought certiorari to set aside the CA decision and resolution, raising:
- Failure to hold respondent in indirect contempt.
- Error in ordering massive deductions from support arrears.
Issues:
- Whether respondent is guilty of indirect contempt for suspending payment of support pendente lite.
- Whether the expenses advanced by respondent may be deducted from the support pendente lite arrears.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)