A wife’s domineering, nonchalant, controlling attitude, gossip mongering, and other “grossly abusive conduct” that create a hostile and intimidating environment for her husband can serve as grounds for legal separation.

Vice-versa, such “grossly abusive conduct” of a husband can also serve as grounds for legal separation that can be filed by a wife.

In a decision written by Associate Justice Antonio T. Kho Jr., the SC said that while the Family Code does not allow absolute divorce, spouses may legally separate by order of a court without ending their marriage.

The SC said: “A grant of a decree of legal separation under the Family Code does not sever the marriage of the parties, nor affect their marital status. The same only involves a ‘bed-and-board separation’ of the spouses considering how our jurisdiction does not allow absolute divorce.”

Under Article 55 of the Family Code, legal separation may be granted under the following grounds:

1. Repeated physical violence or grossly abusive conduct directed against the petitioner (husband or wife), a common child, or a child of the petitioner.

2. Physical violence or moral pressure to compel the petitioner to change religious or political affiliation.

3. Attempt of respondent (husband or wife) to corrupt or induce the petitioner, a common child, or a child of the petitioner, to engage in prostitution, or connivance in such corruption or inducement.

4. Final judgment sentencing the respondent to imprisonment of more than six years, even if pardoned.

5. Drug addiction or habitual alcoholism of the respondent.

6. Lesbianism or homosexuality of the respondent.

7. Contracting by the respondent of a subsequent bigamous marriage, whether in the Philippines or abroad.

8. Sexual infidelity or perversion.

9. Attempt by the respondent against the life of the petitioner.

10.Abandonment of petitioner by respondent without justifiable cause for more than one year.

The summary of the decision issued by the SC’s Office of the Spokesperson stated that the couple in the case, docketed as G.R. No. 243647, married in2003 and later had two children.

The Manila Bulletin redacted the names of the parties in the case to protect their privacy.

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, the husband’s 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 penis because they no longer had sex.

He also alleged that she shared stories about him with family and friends, often twisting the facts to make him look bad.

He 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 husband filed a petition for legal separation.

The wife claimed that her husband would always complain and grumble, aside from being irritable.

She also claimed that he would spend most of his time in his study room doing computer work and watching movies.

Then, she added, her husband started to come home late as he would hang out with his friends at resto-bars and other entertainment places.

In a decision on March 1, 2017, the regional trial court (RTC) granted the petition filed by the husband. The trial court ruled that the husband was able to prove “the existence of grossly abusive conduct with prima facie evidence based on the aggregate behavior” of the wife.

When her motion for reconsideration was denied, the wife elevated the case to the Court of Appeals (CA).

In a decision on July 19, 2018, the CA granted the wife’s petition with a ruling that the matters raised by the husband and the wife “were frivolous and commonly exist with married couples” and “the conduct raised by both parties are neither grave nor abusive, and the same was not beyond repair or incurable.”

The husband appealed the CA’s ruling before the SC.

Granting the husband’s petition, the SC said:

“To the Court's mind, the husband’s allegations against his wife satisfy the existence of a hostile and intimidating environment for the husband. As can be gleaned from the facts, the wife’s treatment of the husband subjected him from always taking the wife’s lead. Moreover, there were numerous attempts made by the husband to save their marriage through counseling and interventions, which were nonetheless made futile.

“Furthermore, the testimonies of his witnesses further support the existence of a hostile environment as reflected by the wife’s controlling attitude. Thus, the Court cannot find fault in the husband’s decision to be reassigned back to Davao for work to be away from the environment in Cebu.

“Taken together, the Court finds that the husband was able to prove that the wife’s acts constituted ‘grossly abusive conduct’ under the Family Code.

“Thus, the Court deems it proper to reverse the findings of the CA and reinstate the RTC Decision granting a decree of legal separation between the husband and the wife.

“As a consequence of the husband and the wife’s legal separation, there is a need to remand the present case to the court of origin (RTC) for the dissolution and liquidation of their property regime pursuant to Article 63 of the Family Code.

“The RTC is further ordered to determine the grant of custody and support of the husband and the wife’s common children pursuant to A.M. No. 02-l l-l l-SC53 or the Rule on Legal Separation.”