Scribd
Upload
313 views2 pages

DIGEST - Dela Cueva Vs Omaga

This case involves an administrative complaint filed by Julie Ann C. dela Cueva against her husband Nestor dela Cueva and respondent Selima B. Omaga. Julie Ann alleged that Nestor and Selima were living together as husband and wife despite Nestor still being married to Julie Ann. However, Julie Ann later withdrew her complaint. The court ruled that the case could not be dismissed at Julie Ann's request, as administrative cases consider whether conduct breached standards of service, not just the complainant's interests. The court also found Selima not guilty of immoral conduct, accepting her claim that she was unaware of Nestor's marriage and ended their relationship when she found out.

Uploaded by

ChristianneDominiqueGravoso
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
313 views2 pages

DIGEST - Dela Cueva Vs Omaga

This case involves an administrative complaint filed by Julie Ann C. dela Cueva against her husband Nestor dela Cueva and respondent Selima B. Omaga. Julie Ann alleged that Nestor and Selima were living together as husband and wife despite Nestor still being married to Julie Ann. However, Julie Ann later withdrew her complaint. The court ruled that the case could not be dismissed at Julie Ann's request, as administrative cases consider whether conduct breached standards of service, not just the complainant's interests. The court also found Selima not guilty of immoral conduct, accepting her claim that she was unaware of Nestor's marriage and ended their relationship when she found out.

Uploaded by

ChristianneDominiqueGravoso
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Julie Ann C.

Dela Cueva, complainant

Vs.

Selima B. Omaga,

Court Stenographer 1, MTC Calauan, Laguna, respondent

FACTS:

The complainant Julie Ann C. dela Cueva is the legal wife of P/Supt. Nestor dela Cueva. They were
married on July 29, 1984 and bore three children. Due to the philandering ways of her husband, the
couple separated on November 30, 1994. Thereafter, the complainant cohabited with two different men
in succession.

On May 31, 2007, P/Supt. Nestor dela Cueva filed a Petition for Declaration of Nullity of Marriage
alleging as ground his own psychological incapacity. This angered and prompted his wife, the
complainant, to file a criminal complaint against him for bigamy and concubinage. Her complaint alleged
that he and respondent, Selima B. Omega, got married and were living together as husband and wife
despite the subsistence of his marriage with her (the complainant). The criminal charges were dismissed
by the provincial prosecutor dated August 24, 2007.

Complainant dela Cueva also filed an administrative complaint against both her husband and the
respondent. In her defense, respondent averred that she first met P/Supt. Dela Cueva in 1995 when he
was assigned by the Philippine National Police as Chief of Police in Calauan, Laguna. Their relationship
started on March 8, 1995 and continued until she received notice of the bigamy and concubinage case
filed against him. It was only then that she discovered that he was married. She bore P/Supt. Dela Cueva
three children. Respondent also assessed that despite having three children with P/supt. Dela Cueva,
they did not live together in one house but rather, he would just visit her in her house from time to
time.

On October 23, 2008, the Office of the Court Administrator recommended that the complaint be
redocketed as a regular administrative matter and that respondent in the meantime be suspended for a
period of six months and one day without pay.

As recommended, the Court re-docketed the complaint as a regular administrative matter in a


Resolution dated December 15, 2008.

During the hearing of the case before the investigating judge on October 8, 2009, the complainant
manifested that she was withdrawing her complaint after learning that respondent and her husband
never lived together as husband and wife. Complainant confessed that she was prompted to file the
complaint simply because her husband had filed a petition of nullity of their marriage.

ISSUE:

Whether or not the case be discharged at the complainants change of heart.


Whether or not respondent is guilty of immoral conduct.

HELD:

No, the case charged may not be dismissed at the complainants change of heart. It should be stressed
that the complainants decision not to pursue the case against the respondent is of no moment as it has
no controlling significance in this administrative case. The policy is Administrative actions cannot
depend on the will or pleasure of the complainant who may, for reasons of his own, condone what may
be detestable. This is so because the issue in administrative cases is not whether the complainant has a
cause of action against the respondent but, rather, whether the employee against whom the complaint
is filed has breached the norms and standards of service in the judiciary.

No, the respondent is not guilty of immoral conduct.

Immorality has been defined to include not only sexual matters but also conduct inconsistent with
rectitude, or indicative of corruption, indecency, depravity, and dissoluteness; or is willful, flagrant, or
shameless conduct showing moral indifference to opinions of respectable members of the community ,
and an inconsiderate attitude toward good order and public welfare.

The respondent claims, however, that she had no knowledge that P/Supt. Dela Cueva was married and
that she ended their relationship as soon as she was made aware of his true civil status. If her
contention were true, the Court found that she did not deserve administrative punishment.

You might also like