Albano vs Gapusan

Albano vs. Gapusan

AM No. 1022-MJ, May 7, 1976

FACTS:

Redentor Albano filed a complaint against Judge Gapusan seeking disciplinary action involving latter’s malpractice in his notarization of a separation agreement between Valentina Andres and Guillermo Maligta and the extrajudicial liquidation of their conjugal partnership.  Likewise, a complaint was filed alleging that said Judge influenced Judge Crispin of CFI-Ilocos in deciding two criminal cases.  In the abovementioned separation agreement, it was stipulated that the spouse guilty of adultery or concubinage shall be barred to file an action against the other. Respondent judge denied that he drafted the said agreement and explained that the spouses had been separated for a long time when they signed it and the wife had begotten children with her paramour.  He further added that there was a stipulation in the said agreement that the spouse would live together in case of reconciliation.

ISSUE: WON Judge Gapusan should be reprimanded because of notarizing the void agreement between the spouses.

HELD:

A notary should not facilitate the disintegration of a marriage and the family by encouraging the separation of the spouses and extrajudically dissolving the conjugal partnership.

There is no question that the stipulation contained in the said separation agreement is contrary to law, morals and good customs.  The family is a basic social institution which public policy cherishes and protects.  To preserve the institution of marriage, the law considers void any contract for personal separation between husband and wife and every extra-judicial agreement for the dissolution of the partnership.  SC held the action of respondent judge Gapusan as contrary to law.