G.R. No. L-10033 December 28, 1956
Benjamin Bugayong, plaintiff-appellant, vs. Leonila Ginez, defendant-appellee.

FACTS

Benjamin Bugayong, a U.S. Navy serviceman, married Leonila Ginez on August 27, 1949, in Asingan, Pangasinan. After living with relatives, Leonila left their shared dwelling in July 1951 to reside with her mother and later study in Dagupan City. Starting July 1951, Benjamin received letters from his sister-in-law and anonymous writers alleging his wife’s infidelity, and Leonila herself reportedly wrote (in a letter he destroyed) about being kissed by a certain “Eliong.” In October 1951, he sought advice on legal separation from a Navy Chaplain. In August 1952, Benjamin went to Pangasinan, found Leonila, persuaded her to accompany him, and they lived together as husband and wife for two nights and one day at his cousin’s house and then at his own house. During this time, he attempted to verify the allegations of infidelity, but Leonila left without answering. He later tried to locate her unsuccessfully. On November 18, 1952, Benjamin filed a complaint for legal separation in the Court of First Instance of Pangasinan, alleging “acts of rank infidelity amounting to adultery.” After Benjamin testified, the defendant moved to dismiss the complaint. The trial court, focusing on the ground of condonation, dismissed the action. Benjamin appealed, arguing the dismissal was premature, that there was no condonation, and that condonation should not have been entertained as a ground for dismissal since it was not raised in the answer or a pre-answer motion. The Court of Appeals certified the case to the Supreme Court as it involved only questions of law.

ISSUE

Whether the plaintiff-husband’s act of cohabiting with his wife after allegedly learning of her infidelity constitutes condonation, thereby barring his action for legal separation under Article 100 of the Civil Code.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s order of dismissal. The Court held that, assuming the plaintiff believed his wife guilty of adultery, his conduct in persuading her to live with him and their subsequent cohabitation as husband and wife for two nights constituted condonation. Condonation is the forgiveness of a marital offense that is a ground for legal separation. Under Article 100 of the Civil Code, legal separation may be claimed only by the innocent spouse, provided there has been no condonation of the adultery. The Court adopted prevailing American jurisprudence, which holds that a single voluntary act of marital intercourse or cohabitation after knowledge of the offense is sufficient to imply condonation. The plaintiff’s actions—specifically sleeping together as husband and wife—implied forgiveness and reconciliation, thus barring the action for legal separation. The Court also found no merit in the appellant’s procedural objection, as the motion to dismiss based on condonation served to supplement the answer and adjust the issues to the plaintiff’s own testimony under the Rules of Court. The order of dismissal was affirmed, with costs against the appellant.