Case Summary (G.R. No. 133778)
Relevant Dates and Procedural History
– September 2002: Edna filed a complaint before the AFP Provost Marshal seeking 75% of Otamias’s retirement benefits as support.
– February 26, 2003: Colonel Otamias executed a Deed of Assignment waiving 50% of his pension in favor of Edna and the five children.
– April 1, 2003: Otamias retired; payments under the deed continued until January 6, 2006.
– April 2006: AFP PGMC refused further disbursement absent a court order.
– June 2006: Edna filed an action for support in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Cagayan de Oro. The RTC declared Otamias in default, granted support, and ordered automatic deduction of 50% of his monthly pension.
– April 10, 2008: RTC issued writ of execution; garnishment notice served on AFP PGMC.
– July–August 2008: AFP Finance Center moved to quash; motions denied.
– 2008–2009: AFP PGMC secured certiorari relief from the Court of Appeals, which partially nullified the RTC’s order to deduct support from pension benefits.
– November 2009: Petition for review filed with the Supreme Court; decision rendered April 17, 2017.
Applicable Legal Provisions
– 1987 Constitution, Article XV on the family and duty of support.
– Family Code Articles 194–197 defining support obligations of spouses and legitimate descendants.
– Presidential Decree No. 1638 (1979) Section 31 exempting pension benefits of retired military personnel from execution or attachment, except to settle active‐service accountabilities.
– Rule 39, Sections 4 and 13(1) of the Rules of Court: judgments for support are immediately executory; government pensions are generally exempt from execution.
Issues
- Whether the AFP Finance Center can be directed to automatically deduct the amount of support from Colonel Otamias’s pension benefits.
- Whether Colonel Otamias’s pension benefits may be subjected to execution for the financial support of his legitimate family.
Court of Appeals Ruling
The Court of Appeals held that PD 1638, Section 31, and Rule 39, Section 13(1) render AFP pension benefits exempt from execution. It concluded that government pensions, while in the hands of the disbursing officer, belong to the State and cannot be garnished or attached even for spousal or child support. It also noted that the AFP PGMC was not impleaded and thus not bound by the RTC decision.
Supreme Court Analysis on Waiver
Under Civil Code Article 6 and jurisprudence, a statutory right can be waived unless contrary to law or public policy. Colonel Otamias voluntarily executed the Deed of Assignment, relinquishing 50% of his pension to secure his family’s support. Such waiver does not infringe public rights or harm third parties and is valid as between the parties.
Pension Exemption Versus Support Obligation
While PD 1638 protects military pensions from attachment, the Family Code imposes a constitutional duty to support one’s spouse and children. The conflict between pension exemption and immediately executory support judgments under Rule 39 must yield to substantive justice and the constitutional mandate to protect the family.
Precedent on Spousal and Child Support
In Republic v. Yahon, the Court upheld a trial court’s authority under the Anti-Violence Against Women Act to order withholding and direct remittance of pension benefits to a wife for support, despite gene
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 133778)
Facts of the Case
- Edna Mabugay-Otamias and Col. Francisco B. Otamias married in 1978 and had five children; they separated in September 2000.
- In August 2002, Edna filed a Complaint-Affidavit before the AFP Provost Marshall Division seeking 75% of her husband’s retirement benefits for support.
- Col. Otamias executed an affidavit offering 50% of his retirement benefits to be prorated among his wife and five children.
- On 26 February 2003, he formalized this compromise in a Deed of Assignment, waiving 50% of his pension in favor of Edna and the children.
- Col. Otamias retired on 1 April 2003; the AFP honored the agreement until January 2006, then suspended payments pending a court order.
Procedural History
- April 2006: AFP PGMC informed Edna that a court order was required to recognize the Deed of Assignment.
- June 2006: Edna, on behalf of herself and two minor children, filed an action for support before the RTC of Cagayan de Oro (F.C. Civ. Case No. 2006-039).
- Colonel Otamias was declared in default; the RTC ordered automatic deduction of 50% of his monthly pension for support and payment of arrears.
- April 2008: RTC issued a writ of execution; AFP Finance Center’s motion to quash was denied, and garnishment notice issued July 2008.
- AFP PGMC petitioned the Court of Appeals for certiorari and prohibition; CA partially nullified the RTC order, enjoining automatic pension deductions.
- November 2009: Petitioners filed a petition for review on certiorari with the Supreme Court.
Issues Presented
- Can the AFP Finance Center be directed to automatically deduct support from a retired officer’s pension?
- May Colonel Otamias’s retirement benefits be subjected to execution for the support of his legitimate family?
Deed of Assignment and Waiver
- Affidavit (Aug/Sep 2002): Col. Otamias commits to 50% of retirement benefits for support, proposes compromise agreement.
- Deed of Assignment (26 Feb 2003): Stipulates 50% of pension to be pro-rated among Edna and their five chi