FACTS:
This a complaint by Lupo Atienza for gross immorality and appearance of impropriety against Judge Brillantes.
Lupo Alleges that he has 2 children with Yolanda de Castro, who are living together in a home purchased by him in 1987 in Manila. On 1991, Lupo saw Brillantes sleeping on his bed. Upon inquiry, the houseboy told that Brillantes had been cohabiting with de Castro. Lupo left the home without confronting Brillantes. Thereafter, respondent prevented him from visiting his children and even alienated the affection of his children from him. Lupo claims that Brillantes is married to Ongkiko with whom he has 5 children. Brillantes on his part, alleged that Lupo was not married to de Castro and that he is not married to Ongkiko although he admits having 5 children with her. Brillantes claims that when he married de Castro in 1991 at California, he believed in all good faith and with all legal intents and purposes, that he was single because her first marriage was solemnized without a marriage license.
Brillantes argues that the provision of Art. 40 of the Family Code does not apply to him considering that his first marriage took place in 1965 and was governed by the Civil Code of the Philippines while the second marriage which took place in 1991 was governed by the Family Code.
ISSUE:
Whether or not Art. 40 of the Family Code does not apply to Brillantes.
HELD:
Art. 40 is applicable to remarriages entered into after the effectivity of the Family Code in 1988 regardless of date of the first marriage. Besides, Art. 256 of the Family Code said Art. 15 is given “retroactive effect” insofar as it does prejudice or impair vested or acquired rights in accordance with Civil Code or other laws. The retroactive application of procedural laws is not violative of any right of a person who may feel that he is adversely affected. Respondent is the last person allowed to invoke good faith. He made a mockery of the institution of marriage and employed deceit to be able to cohabit with a woman.
