Supreme Court PH

This June, the Philippines marks Judiciary Month, celebrating the 125th anniversary of the Supreme Court.

Declared under Presidential Proclamation No. 1265, s. 2026, the observance calls on government agencies, local government units, the private sector, and civil society to support and partake in the commemoration.

Established on June 11, 1901 through Act No. 136 of the Philippine Commission, the Supreme Court has stood as a pillar of justice—first led by Chief Justice Cayetano Arellano.

In line with this milestone year, the Court unveils a series of activities under the theme: “SC: 125 Years of Tradition and Innovation.”

Stay tuned for updates through the official social media channels of the Supreme Court.

(SC) Associate Justices Ramon Paul L. Hernando, Amy C. Lazaro-Javier, and Samuel H. Gaerlan served as resource speakers during the first 𝘑𝘶𝘥𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘍𝘰𝘳𝘶𝘮 𝘰𝘯 𝘙𝘦𝘤𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘚𝘶𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘦 𝘊𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘵 𝘋𝘦𝘤𝘪𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘓𝘦𝘨𝘢𝘭 𝘐𝘯𝘯𝘰𝘷𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘈𝘧𝘧𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘖𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘦𝘢𝘴 𝘍𝘪𝘭𝘪𝘱𝘪𝘯𝘰 𝘞𝘰𝘳𝘬𝘦𝘳𝘴 on May 4, 2026, at the Consulate General of the Republic of the Philippines in Milan, Italy.

The 𝘑𝘶𝘥𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘍𝘰𝘳𝘶𝘮, which was hosted by the Philippine Consulate General in Milan and the Migrant Workers Office Milan and organized in close coordination with the SC, sought to provide important updates on key legal issues affecting overseas Filipino workers (OFWs) and their families, promote awareness of legal remedies and judicial processes, and encourage greater understanding of legal developments in relevant matters.

As resource speakers, the Justices imparted relevant legal and jurisprudential updates affecting OFWs and their families to the participants.

Justice Lazaro-Javier focused on recent developments in family law, gender protection, and legal safeguards affecting OFWs and their families. She highlighted the persistent challenges faced by OFWs. Emphasizing the unique realities of transnational Filipino families, she stressed that the rule of law must transcend borders to uphold the protection of marriages, safeguard the welfare of children, and preserve human dignity.

The program then turned to one of the most pressing concerns facing OFWs today—illegal recruitment—with Justice Gaerlan shedding light on a crime that continues to prey on the dreams of Filipino workers and their families. He discussed the legal framework governing illegal recruitment, its various forms and constituent acts, and its critical distinctions from estafa and trafficking in persons.

Upon the Philippine Consulate General in Milan’s request and to address the rampant scam operations in Italy that offer asylum to OFWs in exchange for substantial processing fees, Justice Hernando shared his knowledge on the right to seek asylum within the framework of the 𝘜𝘯𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘢𝘭 𝘋𝘦𝘤𝘭𝘢𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘏𝘶𝘮𝘢𝘯 𝘙𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵𝘴, the 1951 𝘙𝘦𝘧𝘶𝘨𝘦𝘦 𝘊𝘰𝘯𝘷𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯, and the 1967 𝘗𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘰𝘤𝘰𝘭 𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘚𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘶𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘙𝘦𝘧𝘶𝘨𝘦𝘦𝘴.

Read more at: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=166938

The public is advised of the schedule of livestreaming of the 𝐎𝐩𝐞𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐨𝐟 𝐁𝐢𝐝𝐬 of the following 𝐒𝐂 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐣𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐬 on 𝐉𝐮𝐧𝐞 𝟗, 𝟐𝟎𝟐𝟔:

𝐁𝐀𝐂 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐇𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐉𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐞
𝘗𝘳𝘰𝘤𝘶𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘢 𝘊𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘰𝘳 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘗𝘳𝘰𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘦𝘥 𝘊𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘉𝘦𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘰 𝘚𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘯, 𝘐𝘴𝘢𝘣𝘦𝘭𝘢 𝘏𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘰𝘧 𝘑𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘦
- Time: 9:30 A.M.

𝘗𝘳𝘰𝘤𝘶𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘢 𝘊𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘰𝘳 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘗𝘳𝘰𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘦𝘥 𝘙𝘦𝘱𝘢𝘪𝘳 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘙𝘦𝘩𝘢𝘣𝘪𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘏𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘰𝘧 𝘑𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘦 (𝘔𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘱𝘢𝘭 𝘛𝘳𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘊𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘵) 𝘪𝘯 𝘉𝘢𝘳𝘶𝘨𝘰, 𝘓𝘦𝘺𝘵𝘦
- Time: 9:30 A.M.

𝘗𝘳𝘰𝘤𝘶𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘢 𝘊𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘰𝘳 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘗𝘳𝘰𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘦𝘥 𝘊𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘏𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘰𝘧 𝘑𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘦 𝘉𝘶𝘪𝘭𝘥𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘯 𝘉𝘢𝘳𝘢𝘴, 𝘊𝘢𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘶𝘢𝘯𝘦𝘴
- Time: 9:30 A.M.

The Opening of Bids will be streamed live via Youtube at: https://www.youtube.com/-BACforHOJ

𝐆𝐨𝐨𝐝𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐒𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐢𝐜𝐞𝐬 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐒𝐂
𝘗𝘳𝘰𝘤𝘶𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘖𝘯𝘦 𝘚𝘦𝘳𝘷𝘪𝘤𝘦 𝘝𝘦𝘩𝘪𝘤𝘭𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘖𝘧𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘜𝘴𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘖𝘧𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘊𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘵 𝘈𝘥𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘰𝘳 (𝘙𝘦𝘣𝘪𝘥𝘥𝘪𝘯𝘨)
- Time: 2:00 P.M.

The Opening of Bids will be streamed live via Youtube at: https://www.youtube.com/-GSforSC2026

VISIT https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/bids-and-awards/ for more information.

See how the Justices voted in denying the plea of Senator Ronald Dela Rosa for a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) and/or Status Quo Ante Order (SQAO) seeking to stop authorities from enforcing any International Criminal Court (ICC) arrest warrant without a corresponding order from a Philippine court.

Nine Supreme Court Justices voted to deny Dela Rosa’s petition, five voted to grant, while one was on leave.

*𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘵𝘦𝘹𝘵 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 #𝘚𝘊𝘱𝘩𝘐𝘯𝘧𝘰𝘨𝘳𝘢𝘱𝘩𝘪𝘤𝘴 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘰𝘯𝘭𝘺 𝘴𝘶𝘮𝘮𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘦𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘙𝘦𝘴𝘰𝘭𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘚𝘦𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘖𝘱𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴. 𝘍𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘦𝘵𝘦 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘤𝘶𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯, 𝘱𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘥: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=166639

Judge Remiebel U. Mondia of Branch 110, Regional Trial Court, Pasay City, member of the Supreme Court Technical Working Group that drafted the 𝘙𝘶𝘭𝘦𝘴 𝘰𝘯 𝘍𝘪𝘭𝘪𝘱𝘪𝘯𝘰 𝘚𝘪𝘨𝘯 𝘓𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘶𝘢𝘨𝘦 𝘐𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘑𝘶𝘥𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘳𝘺, Filipino Sign Language interpreter, and Board Member and Legal Head of the Philippine Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf, discusses the FSL Rules and talks about her journey to becoming an FSL interpreter in #𝐒𝐂𝐩𝐡𝐏𝐨𝐝𝐜𝐚𝐬𝐭 𝐄𝐩𝐢𝐬𝐨𝐝𝐞 𝟏𝟏𝟗: 𝐉𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐇𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐝: 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐑𝐮𝐥𝐞𝐬 𝐨𝐧 𝐅𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐩𝐢𝐧𝐨 𝐒𝐢𝐠𝐧 𝐋𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐮𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝐈𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐉𝐮𝐝𝐢𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐫𝐲.

What prompted the Supreme Court to come up with the 𝘍𝘚𝘓 𝘙𝘶𝘭𝘦𝘴, and how exactly do the 𝘙𝘶𝘭𝘦𝘴 seek to improve access to justice for d/Deaf Filipinos? How do you ensure the accuracy, the impartiality, and professionalism of interpreters during court proceedings, especially in sensitive or high-profile cases? How do these 𝘙𝘶𝘭𝘦𝘴 reflect a broader shift towards inclusivity, dignity, and equal participation of persons with disabilities in our justice system?

This week's podcast is available on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, YouTube, Facebook, and the website.

Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/episode/6KMbRCK6JQb3hwFFJAGieG?si=dzeHPD2KQAG_L0pi5EwCWw

Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/ph/podcast/supreme-court-ph-podcast/id1852172756?i=1000770148597

YouTube: https://youtu.be/JNWhyNsoXwU

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1H3ddPnNGo/

SC website: http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/podcasts/

Nagpasya ang na ang mga kilos ng isang asawa na lumilikha ng mapanganib at nakakatakot na paligid para sa kanyang kabiyak, kanilang mga anak, at mga anak sa labas ng kasal ay maaaring ituring na “grossly abusive conduct” o labis na mapang-abusong pag-uugali sa ilalim ng Family Code at maaaring magsilbing batayan para sa legal separation.

Sa isang Desisyong isinulat ni Associate Justice Antonio T. Kho, Jr., pinagbigyan ng Ikalawang Dibisyon ng Korte Suprema ang petisyon para sa legal separation na inihain ng isang asawa laban sa kanyang kabiyak matapos ituring na grossly abusive conduct sa ilalim ng Article 55(1) ng Family Code ang mga kilos nito.

Ikinasal ang mag-asawa noong 2003 at nagkaroon ng dalawang anak. Pero nakaranas ang asawang lalaki ng iba’t ibang mapang-abusong pag-uugali mula sa kanyang kabiyak. Ayon sa kanya, kontrolado nito ang kanilang pananalapi at tumangging magbigay ng tulong pinansiyal kahit kailangan niyang magpagamot ng matinding sakit ng ngipin at sumailalim sa root canal procedure.

Sa isang salu-salo, sinabi umano ng kanyang kabiyak sa kanilang mga kaibigan na nais nitong putulin ang kanyang ari dahil hindi na sila nagtatalik. Inakusahan din niya ang asawa ng pagkukuwento tungkol sa kanya sa pamilya at mga kaibigan habang binabaluktot ang mga pangyayari para mapalabas siyang masama.

Tumanggi rin umano ang kanyang kabiyak na sumailalim sa marriage counseling, pinagbawalan siyang makipagkita sa kanyang mga kaibigan, minanipula ang kanilang mga anak para pilitin siyang magbigay ng mas malaking suportang pinansiyal, at nananatili ang “controlling” na ugali sa buong panahon ng kanilang pagsasama.

Pinagbigyan ng Regional Trial Court (RTC) ang petisyon para sa legal separation pero binaliktad ito ng Court of Appeals matapos nitong ituring na karaniwang alitan lamang ng mag-asawa ang kanilang mga hindi pagkakaunawaan.

Pinagtibay ng Korte Suprema ang pasya ng RTC at nilinaw na ang mga gawaing itinuturing “grossly abusive conduct,” na isang batayan para sa legal separation sa ilalim ng Article 55(1) ng Family Code, ay kinabibilangan ng mga kilos ng isang asawa na lumilikha ng mapanganib at nakakatakot na paligid para sa kanyang kabiyak o mga anak.

Binigyang-diin din ng Korte Suprema na kinakailangang suriin ng mga hukuman ang bawat kaso batay sa kani-kanilang mga pangyayari at ebidensiyang iniharap.

Bagaman hindi pinahihintulutan ng Family Code ang absolute divorce, maaaring legal na maghiwalay ang mag-asawa sa pamamagitan ng utos ng hukuman nang hindi napapawalang-bisa ang kanilang kasal. Hindi tulad ng deklarasyon na walang bisa ang kasal, ang legal separation ay hindi pumuputol sa bigkis ng pag-aasawa.

Kabilang sa mga batayan para sa legal separation sa ilalim ng Article 55(1) ng Family Code ang paulit-ulit na pisikal na pananakit o grossly abusive conduct laban sa asawa, kanilang anak, o anak ng asawa.

Dagdag pa ng Korte Suprema, ang interpretasyong ito ay naaayon sa tungkulin ng Estado sa ilalim ng Konstitusyon na pangalagaan ang kasal bilang pangunahing institusyong panlipunan.

Sa kasong ito, napag-alaman ng Korte Suprema na ang pinagsama-samang kilos ng asawa ay lumikha ng mapanganib at nakakatakot na paligid para sa kanyang kabiyak. Napilitan umano ang asawa na palaging sumunod sa kagustuhan ng kanyang kabiyak, at nabigo rin ang kanyang mga pagsisikap na ayusin ang kanilang pagsasama sa pamamagitan ng counseling at iba pang mga hakbang. Pinagtibay rin ng mga testigo ang “controlling” na ugali ng asawa, na sumuporta sa konklusyon na may umiiral na mapanganib na kalagayan sa kanilang tahanan. Dahil dito, nagpasya ang Korte Suprema na may sapat na dahilan ang asawa para humiling ng reassignment sa ibang lalawigan para makalayo sa sitwasyon sa kanilang bahay.

Pinagbigyan ng Korte Suprema ang legal separation at ibinalik ang kaso sa RTC para sa pagbuwag at paghahati ng ari-arian ng mag-asawa. Inatasan din nito ang RTC na magpasya ukol sa kustodiya at suporta para sa kanilang mga anak.

Basahin ang press release sa https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=166927

Basahin ang Desisyon sa https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=164913

Basahin ang Hiwalay na Sumasang-ayon na Opinyon ni Senior Associate Justice Marvic M.V.F. Leonen sa https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=164917

Sumunod sa Credit Attribution Policy ng SC PIO: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-attribution-policy/.

The (SC) has ruled that a spouse’s acts creating a hostile and intimidating environment for the other spouse, their children, and common children may constitute “grossly abusive conduct” under the 𝘍𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘭𝘺 𝘊𝘰𝘥𝘦 which serves as a ground for legal separation.

In a Decision written by Associate Justice Antonio T. Kho, Jr., the SC’s Second Division granted the petition for legal separation filed by a husband against his wife, after finding that her actions constituted grossly abusive conduct under Article 55(1) of the 𝘍𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘭𝘺 𝘊𝘰𝘥𝘦.

The couple married in 2003 and later had two children. To support their family, the wife started selling coffee, but they still faced financial hardships. The husband studied nursing with hopes of eventually relocating their family abroad. However, his plan to move abroad never materialized.

During the marriage, the husband claimed he faced various abusive behaviors from his wife. He reported that she controlled their finances and refused to provide financial help, even when he needed treatment for his toothache and was advised to get a root canal.

The husband also claimed that at a party, his wife told their friends she wanted to cut off his p***s because they were no longer having s*x. He also alleged that she shared stories about him with family and friends, often twisting the facts to make him look bad.

The husband also said that his wife refused marriage counseling, prohibited him from seeing his friends, manipulated their children to force him to provide more financial support, and maintained a controlling attitude throughout their marriage.

The Regional Trial Court (RTC) granted the petition for legal separation after finding that the wife’s behavior amounted to grossly abusive conduct. However, the Court of Appeals reversed the ruling, holding that their disagreements were ordinary marital disputes.

The SC affirmed the RTC defining acts constituting “grossly abusive conduct”, which is a ground for legal separation under Article 55(1) of the 𝘍𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘭𝘺 𝘊𝘰𝘥𝘦, to include those acts by a spouse that create a hostile and intimidating environment for the other spouse or the children.

The SC also stressed that courts must decide this issue on a case-by-case basis, based on the facts and evidence presented.

While the 𝘍𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘭𝘺 𝘊𝘰𝘥𝘦 does not allow absolute divorce, spouses may legally separate by order of a court without ending their marriage. Unlike a declaration that a marriage is void, a legal separation does not break the marital bond.

Among the grounds for legal separation under Article 55(1) of the 𝘍𝘢𝘮𝘪𝘭𝘺 𝘊𝘰𝘥𝘦 is repeated physical violence or grossly abusive conduct against the spouse, their common child, or the spouse’s child.

The SC added that this interpretation is consistent with the State’s constitutional duty to protect marriage as a basic social institution.

In this case, the SC found that the wife’s actions, taken together, created a hostile and intimidating environment for the husband. He was made to constantly follow her lead, and his efforts to fix the marriage through counseling and other interventions were unsuccessful. Witnesses also confirmed her controlling behavior, which supported the finding of a hostile home environment. Because of this, the SC ruled that the husband was justified in seeking reassignment to another province to distance himself from the situation at home.

The SC granted the legal separation and sent the case back to the RTC for the dissolution and division of the couple’s property. It also directed the RTC to decide on the custody and support of their children.

Read the full text of the press release at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=166927

Read the full text of the Decision at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=164913

Read the Separate Concurring Opinion of Senior Associate Justice Marvic M.V.F. Leonen at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=164917

Copying of this content is subject to the SC PIO’s Credit Attribution Policy.