Art.

22 of CC
Buemer vs. AMores December 3, 2012 G.R. No. 195670
An action for recovery of what has been paid without just
cause has been designated as an accion in rem verso (A lawsuit
against an item of property, not against a person). This provision
does not apply if, as in this case, the action is proscribed by the
Constitution or by the application of the pari delicto doctrine
(Legal term used to indicate that two persons or entities are equally
at fault).
Art.4 FC
Abbas v. Abbas (G.R. No. 183896, Jan. 30, 2013)
All the evidence cited by the CA to show that a wedding ceremony
was conducted and a marriage contract was signed, does not
operate to cure the absence of a valid marriage license.
Art.122 FC
Pana v Heirs of Juanito, Sr. (G.R. No. 164201, Dec. 10, 2012)
"XXX should have no exclusive property or if it should be
insufficient XXX"
Article 121 above allows payment of the criminal indemnities
imposed on his wife, Melecia, out of the partnership assets even
before these are liquidated. Indeed, it states that such indemnities
may be enforced against the partnership assets after the
responsibilities enumerated in the preceding article have been
covered.
Art.129 FC
QUIAO v. QUIAO G.R. No 176556, July 04, 2012
When a couple enters into a regime of absolute community, the
husband and the wife become joint owners of all the properties of
the marriage.
Again, lest we be confused, like in the absolute community regime,
nothing will be returned to the guilty party in the conjugal
partnership regime, because there is no separate property which
may be accounted for in the guilty party's favor.
Art.194 FC
Lim Lua v. Lua (G.R. No. 175279-80, Jun. 5, 2013)
The amount of support which those related by marriage and
family relationship is generally obliged to give each other shall be
in proportion to the resources or means of the giver and to
the needs of the recipient. Such support comprises
everything indispensable for sustenance, dwelling, clothing,
medical attendance, education and transportation, in
keeping with the financial capacity of the family.

Any amount respondent seeks to be credited as monthly

support should only cover those incurred for sustenance and
household expenses [so value of two expensive cars bought by
respondent for his children plus their maintenance cost, travel
expenses of petitioner and Angelli, purchases through credit card of
items other than groceries and dry goods (clothing) should have
been disallowed].
Art.213 FC
Beckett v. Sarmiento A.M. No. RTJ-12-2326, Jan. 30, 2013
Under, the Family Code, case of separation of the parents, parental
authority shall be exercised by the parent designated by the
Court. The Court shall take into account all relevant considerations,
especially the choice of the child over seven years of age, unless the
parent chosen is unfit. Geoffrey Jr., at the time when he
persistently refused to be turned over to his father, was
already over 7 years of age. As such, he was very much
capable of deciding, based on his past experiences, with
whom he wanted to stay.