Previous 5 / 23 Next

any designated family or household member consents to such relief.[48] Republic Act No. 9262 allows for the issuance of three (3) kinds of protection orders: a Barangay Protection Order, a Temporary Protection Order, and a Permanent Protection Order. A Barangay Protection Order is issued by a Punong Barangay or by a Barangay Kagawad.[49] Temporary protection orders and permanent protection orders are judicial issuances obtained through trial courts.[50] As its name denotes, a temporary protection order is a provisional relief. It shall be effective for 30 days, following a court's "ex parte determination that such order should be issued." [51] Within these 30 days, a hearing to determine the propriety of issuing permanent protection order must be conducted. The temporary protection order itself "shall include notice of the date of the hearing on the merits of the issuance of a [permanent protection order]." Following the conduct of a hearing, a permanent protection order may be issued and "shall be effective until revoked by a court upon application of the person in whose favor the order was issued."[52] I.B Section 9 of the Anti-VAWC Law enumerates the persons who may apply for the issuance of a protection order: Section 9. Who May File Petition for Protection Orders. - A petition for protection order may be filed by any of the following: (a) the offended party; (b) parents or guardians of the offended party; (c) ascendants, descendants or collateral relatives within the fourth civil degree of consanguinity or affinity; (d) officers or social workers of the DSWD or social workers of local government units (LGUs); (e) police officers, preferably those in charge of women and children's desks; (f) Punong Barangay or Barangay Kagawad; (g) lawyer, counselor, therapist or healthcare provider of the petitioner; (h) at least two (2) concerned responsible citizens of the city or municipality where the violence against women and their children occurred and who has personal knowledge of the offense committed. (Emphasis supplied) As is clear from this enumeration, a petition for the issuance of protection order is not limited to the alleged victim herself. The victim's mother - as is the case with respondent Mendenilla - is explicitly given the capacity to apply for a

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Pavlow v. Mendenilla

Jurisprudence

Case number: G.R. No. 181489

Division: PH Supreme Court Second Division

Date of decision: Abr 19, 2017

Year of decision: 2017

GBV Case Type

Anti-Violence Against Women and their Children Act of 2004 (VAWC)

Nature of the case: A petition for the issuance of a protection order was filed by Mendenilla, the mother of the victim against the American citizen husband of the victim. Barely three (3) months into their marriage, the victim filed a complaint against her husband for slight physical injuries and thereafter filed an amended complaint to include maltreatment in relation to the Anti-VAWC Law as a ground. The husband further assailed the personality of the mother of the victim to file for a TPO. The Court ruled that the mother of a victim of acts of violence against women and their children is expressly given personality by Section 9(b) of Republic Act No. 9262, otherwise known as the Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act of 2004 (the Anti-VAWC Law), to file a civil action petitioning for the issuance of a protection order for her child. In filing such a petition, she avails of a remedy that is distinct from the criminal action under Section 5 of the same law. The mere filing of such a criminal complaint, without the subsequent filing of an information in court, does not occasion litis pendentia or res judicata that precludes the filing of a petition for the issuance of a protection order. Hence, the CA’s decision affirming the RTC’s decision in issuing a TPO in favor of the victim is affirmed by the Court and thereby denying the claims of the husband.

Summary of outcome: The Court ruled that the mother of a victim of acts of violence against women and their children is expressly given personality by Section 9(b) of Republic Act No. 9262, otherwise known as the Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act of 2004 (the Anti-VAWC Law), to file a civil action petitioning for the issuance of a protection order for her child. In filing such a petition, she avails of a remedy that is distinct from the criminal action under Section 5 of the same law. The mere filing of such a criminal complaint, without the subsequent filing of an information in court, does not occasion litis pendentia or res judicata that precludes the filing of a petition for the issuance of a protection order. Hence, the CA’s decision affirming the RTC’s decision in issuing a TPO in favor of the victim is affirmed by the Court and thereby denying the claims of the husband.

Observatory: Gender-Based Violence

Affected Sector

Women

Ponente: LEONEN, J,

Long title: STEVEN R. PAVLOW, PETITIONER, VS. CHERRY L. MENDENILLA, RESPONDENT.

Geolocation 1

Latitude: 14.570688

Longitude: 121.027166

: Geolocation 1

Primary Documents

STEVEN R. PAVLOW.pdf
English
Download View

Commission on Human Rights

Select target paragraph3

Pavlow v. Mendenilla

Primary Documents

Notifications