194 OCAMPO
vs.

FLORENCIANO ISSUE: Whether the confession made by Florenciano
G.R. No. L-13553 February 23, 1960
TOPIC: LEGAL SEPARATION
FACTS:
 Jose Ocampo and Serafina Florenciano were
married.
 In March 1951, latter discovered on several
occasions that his wife was betraying his trust
by maintaining illicit relations with Jose Arcalas.
Having found out, he sent the wife to Manila in
June 1951 to study beauty culture where she
stayed for one year. Again plaintiff discovered
that the wife was going out with several other
man other than Arcalas.
 In 1952, when the wife finished her studies, she
left plaintiff and since then they had lived
separately.
 In June 1955, plaintiff surprised his wife in the
act of having illicit relations with Nelson
Orzame.
 He signified his intention of filing a petition for
legal separation to which defendant manifested
conformity provided she is not charged with
adultery in a criminal action.
 Accordingly, Ocampo filed a petition for legal
separation in 1955.
constitutes the confession of judgment disallowed by
the Family Code which ultimately leads to collusion
warranting dismissal of the petition for legal
separation?
HELD: NO. Florenciano’s admission to the investigating
fiscal that she committed adultery, in the existence of
evidence of adultery other than such confession, is not
the confession of judgment disallowed by Article 48 of
the Family Code. What is prohibited is a confession of
judgment, a confession done in court or through a
pleading. Where there is evidence of the adultery
independent of the defendant’s statement agreeing to
the legal separation, the decree of separation should be
granted since it would not be based on the confession
but upon the evidence presented by the plaintiff. What
the law prohibits is a judgment based exclusively on
defendant’s confession. The petition should be granted
based on the second adultery, which has not yet
prescribed.
SC granted petitioner’s certiorari to consider the
application of articles 100 and 101 of the New Civil
Code