Lim-Lua v.

Lua
G.R. No. 175279-80 | June 5, 2013

FACTS:
Susan Lim-Lua filed an action for the declaration of nullity of her marriage with Danilo Lua with Cebu City RTC.
In her prayer for support pendente lite for herself and her 2 children, she sought P500,000 as monthly support,
citing Danilos huge earnings from salaries and dividends in several companies and businesses here and
abroad.
RTC granted support pendente lite: P250,000 per month X 7 months (from filing of complaint to date of judicial
grant). Thereafter, starting the month of April 2004, P250,000 monthly support. This amount excludes P135,000
for medical attendance expenses needed by Susan for the operation of both her eyes which is demandable upon
the conduct of such operation.
On appeal, the CA reduced the amount of support pendente lite to P115,000.00. This ruling was no longer
questioned by both parties.
However,controversy between the parties resurfaced when Danilos compliance with the final CA decision
indicated that he deducted from the total amount in arrears the sum representing (1) the value of the 2 cars for
the children (Volkswagen Beetle and BMW 316i), (2) their cost of maintenance and (3) groceries and dry goods
purchased by the children using Danilos credit card which were not consumed by the children alone but shared
with their mother.
Susan argues that it was patently erroneous for the CA to have allowed the deduction of the value of the 2 cars
and their maintenance costs from the support in arrears, as these items are not indispensable to the sustenance
of the family or in keeping them alive.

ISSUE: WON certain expenses already incurred by Danilo may be deducted from the total support in arrears owing to
Susan and her children pursuant to the CA Decision. YES but the court clarified which particular expenses may be
deducted.

RATIO:
General rule is that when a father is required by a divorce decree to pay to the mother money for the support of
their dependent children and the unpaid and accrued installments become judgments in her favor, he cannot, as
a matter of law, claim credit on account of payments voluntarily made directly to the children. (Koon v. Koon,
Briggs v. Briggs)
Here, the CA should not have allowed ALL the expenses incurred by Danilo to be credited against the accrued
support pendente lite. The monthly support pendente lite granted by RTC was intended primarily for food,
household expenses such as salaries of drivers and house helpers, and also Susans scoliosis therapy sessions.
Hence, the value of 2 expensive cars bought by Danilo for his children plus their maintenance cost, travel
expenses of Susan and Angelli (daughter), purchases through credit card of items other than groceries and dry
goods (clothing) should have been disallowed, as these bear no relation to the judgment awarding support
pendente lite. The deductions should be limited to basic needs and expenses considered by the trial and
appellate courts.
Also, the ruling of the CA disregarded spousal support. While there is evidence that Danilo is giving some forms
of financial assistance to his 2 children via their credit cards and paying for their school expenses, the same is,
however, devoid of any form of spousal support to Susan. Remember that while the action for nullity of marriage
is still to be heard, it is incumbent upon the defendant, considering the physical and financial condition of the
plaintiff and the overwhelming capacity of defendant, to extend support unto the latter.
Considering that Susan needs the P113,000 for the maintenance of the household and other miscellaneous
expenses and considering further that Danilo can afford to buy cars for his 2 children (bcoz he has vast financial
resources at his disposal), and to pay the expenses incurred by them which are chargeable to him through the
credit cards he provided them in the amount of P100,000.00 each, it is but fair and just that the monthly support
pendente lite for his wife be fixed in the amount of P115,000.00 which would be sufficient enough to take care of
the household and other needs.
This excludes the P135,000 for medical attendance expenses needed by Susan for the operation of both her
eyes which is demandable upon the conduct of such operation. Likewise, this monthly support of P115,000 is
without prejudice to any increase or decrease thereof that the trial court may grant Danilo as the circumstances
may warrant i.e. depending on the proof submitted by the parties during the proceedings for the main action for
support.