Petitioner: Susan Lim-Lua

Respondent: Danilo Lua

Ponente: Villarama
Promulgated: Jun 05 2013
FACTS:
1.Sept 3 2003- Susan filed declaration of nullity with her marriage with Danila
- She wanted 500k monthly support for her 2 children
2. March 2004- RTC said that monthly support of 250k/month plus 135k support for operation on her
both eyes. RTC also said that applying Art 203 of the FC. It should be retroactive from the time of judicial
demand. Ergo Resp must pay 250k x 7.
3.Respondent then said that the wife does not need that much money since she lives in the same house
as their children.
4. April 2005- Court of appeals said that GADLEJ in RTC since there is no evidence to prove his income.
And he should only pay support of 115k per month. Plus back pay of 2.185Million pesos.
5.Respondent refused to pay the support pendente lite. Then the trial court granted a writ of execution,
but the CA reversed this decision. They ordered a deduction of 3.428 million from the arrears in the
support.
6.The CA reasoned out that the RTC should not have ignored the maintenance of 2 cars, payment of
tuition, travel expenses, credit card purchases, and books made by Danilo to support the children and
Susan.
7.The CA intended the 115k to be for the sustenance of t he children
- according to the records
- Susan had scoliosis
- they spend 50k a month for food
- 100k in other expenses
- Susan needs clothing, vitamins and medicine for her illness.
- They need 2 drivers
- schooling shouldered by husband
- Therapy of 5k a week.

8.The supposed income of millions of the respondent is based only on allegations and records show that
the corporations are owned by his parents and sibling and not by him. The CA reduced support o 115k

ISSUES
1. THE HONORABLE COURT ERRED IN NOT FINDING RESPONDENT GUILTY OF INDIRECT CONTEMPT. (NO)
2. THE HONORABLE COURT ERRED IN ORDERING THE DEDUCTION OF THE AMOUNT OF PHP2,482,348.16
PLUS 946,465.64, OR A TOTAL OF PHP3,428,813.80 FROM THE CURRENT TOTAL SUPPORT IN ARREARS
OF THE RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER AND THEIR CHILDREN. (PARTLY GRANTED)

HELD (ONLY FOR ISSUE NUMBER 2)
1.the amount of support which those related by marriage and family relationship is generally obliged to
give each other shall be in proportion to the resources or means of the giver and to the needs of the
recipient.

2.Such support comprises everything indispensable for sustenance, dwelling, clothing, medical
attendance, education and transportation, in keeping with the financial capacity of the family

3.Upon receipt of a verified petition for declaration of absolute nullity of void marriage or for annulment
of voidable marriage, or for legal separation, the court may temporarily grant support pendente lite
prior to the rendition of judgment or final order.

4.court does not need to delve fully into the merits of the case before it can settle an application for this
relief.
5.Since the amount of monthly support pendente lite as fixed by the CA was not appealed by either
party, there is no controversy as to its sufficiency and reasonableness. The dispute concerns the
deductions made by respondent in settling the support in arrears.


6. HOWEVER the CA should not have allowed all the expenses incurred by respondent to be credited
against the accrued support pendente lite.

7. the value of two expensive cars bought by respondent for his children plus their maintenance cost,
travel expenses of petitioner and Angelli, purchases through credit card of items other than groceries
and dry goods (clothing) should have been disallowed (i.e not to be deducted from arrears)
8. Of the 3.428M allowed by the CA only 648.102k are allowable deductions
PETITION PARTLY GRANTED.