Opus Chan Consultancy

13/10/2026

Seven theories of life
1. Apple theory
2. Lotus theory
3. Position theory
4. Crab mentality
5. Bamboo theory
6. Flea
7. Cicada

12/10/2026

False affidavit of cohabitation makes marriage void

The Family Code states, “No marriage shall be valid, unless these essential requisites are present: (1) Legal capacity of the contracting parties who must be a male and a female; and (2) Consent

09/10/2026

https://www.facebook.com/share/1C1Phg9fk1/?mibextid=wwXIfr

The (SC) has ruled that probate courts, which settle a deceased person’s estate, may require banks to explain withdrawals from the deceased person’s accounts to determine whether the funds are part of the estate.

In a Decision penned by Associate Justice Henri Jean Paul B. Inting, the SC’s Third Division upheld the Regional Trial Court’s (RTC) order requiring Union Bank of the Philippines (UnionBank) to explain withdrawals from the accounts of the late Ignacio T. Arroyo and submit related email exchanges.

During the settlement of Arroyo’s estate, the estate administrators discovered that money had been withdrawn from his UnionBank accounts after his death without the heirs’ knowledge.

The RTC, upon motion of the heirs, required UnionBank to explain the withdrawals and submit additional records, including emails exchanged between bank officers and a certain Atty. Fe. This was upheld by the Court of Appeals.

UnionBank challenged the ruling before the SC, arguing that the RTC had exceeded its authority as a probate court. The bank claimed that the withdrawals were made under a survivorship agreement and were used, among others, to settle Arroyo’s existing obligations. It also argued that any attempt to recover the funds should be brought in a separate civil case.

In upholding the RTC, the SC explained that while probate courts have limited powers, they may provisionally determine whether property belongs to a deceased person’s estate. Under Rule 87 of the 𝘙𝘶𝘭𝘦𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘊𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘵, they may also require persons suspected of concealing or taking estate property to answer questions and account for it.

In this case, the bank accounts were admittedly in Arroyo’s name. The RTC merely sought to determine how much money was in the accounts when he died and whether the funds should be included in the estate.

Read the full text of the press release at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=174678

Read the full text of the Decision at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/e-02776-union-bank-of-the-philippines-vs-bernardina-arroyo-tantoco-and-alicia-rita-m-arroyo/

Copying of this content is subject to the SC PIO’s Credit Attribution Policy: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-attribution

01/10/2026

https://www.facebook.com/share/19gho2uXEV/?mibextid=wwXIfr

05/09/2026

18/08/2026

SUPREME COURT: BREACH OF PROMISE TO MARRY MAY CONSTITUTE PSYCHOLOGICAL VIOLENCE UNDER VAWC

FIRST ON BATAS PH: The Supreme Court (SC) has sentenced a man to suffer up to 9 years imprisonment for committing psychological violence under R.A. 9262 or the Anti-Violence against Women and their Children Act against his pregnant girlfriend after he breached his promise to marry her, which caused serious emotional and psychological suffering.

In a 10-page ruling penned by Associate Justice Ramon Paul Hernando, the SC's First Division affirmed the rulings of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) and Court of Appeals (CA) penalizing the man after finding that his "willful" withdrawal of the marriage license, knowing that his girlfriend was pregnant and had already announced the union-constitutes a form of emotional manipulation and public humiliation that fits the definition of psychological violence.

18/08/2026

Sharing the 2026-27 JGSoM Faculty Roster

03/08/2026

While watching the impeachment, I googled Logical Fallacies. Hahaha