Above: File photo of Belo's present lover Hayden Kho during a hearing at the DoJ. Jose Santos, another of Belo's former lover is suing her for his supposed share in properties they acquired while they were living together.
BEAUTY surgeon to the stars Vicky Belo has lost a case before the Court of Appeals seeking to stop a Pasig court from proceeding with a case over the co-ownership of her properties.
The case for co-ownership was filed by Jose Santos her former live-in partner before Hayden Kho.
In a nine-page decision by Associate Justice Mario Guariña III, the CA’s Special Eight Division held that Belo’s motion for bill of particulars that Belo filed before the lower court was unnecessary.
Belo’s motion for bill of particulars, a kind of motion of to dismiss, sought three detals from respondent and former live-in partner Jose Santos -- the exact period when they cohabited as “husband and wife,” a list of properties acquired by her in which he claims a one-half interest and an estimate of their values, and a list properties which the respondent acquired during the period of the cohabitation.
Santos,a cosmetic surgeon himself, in his petition for declaration of co-ownership, asked the Pasig RTC to be declared the co-owner of all the properties and moneys that he and Belo acquired during their cohabitation from 1996 to 2007.
The CA, held that it would be unnecessary for Santos to be more precise about the dates since he already indicated that the period of their cohabitation was from 1996 to January 2007.
Concurring with the ruling were Associate Justices Apolinario Bruselas, Jr., and Agnes Reyes-Carpio.
Concurring with the ruling were Associate Justices Apolinario Bruselas, Jr., and Agnes Reyes-Carpio.
“The petitioner cannot be caught by surprise by this basic allegation. She knows in her mind whether she cohabited with the respondent during a particular period, and if she did, all that she needs to know are already there. She should be able to prepare affirmative defense, whether it is in the nature of denying the allegation or qualifying it with more specific dates of her own,” the CA ruled.
The appellate court noted that Santos’ complaint file with the lower court also enumerated several properties that should belong to the co-ownership such as their shareholdings in the business corporations, the six residential houses, a condominium unit, house and lot at Greenhills, savings in certain banks and properties acquired by Belo including a condominium unit in the RCBC Tower and another at San Francisco, USA.
“Again, the office of the pleading as a concise summary of the essential ultimate facts make it impractical to ask for more, for more here already means evidentiary information which is not required from a pleading,” the CA declared.
Likewise, the CA ruled that Belo cannot compel Santos to state in his complaint the properties that the latter acquired during the period of their alleged cohabitation.
“When the petitioner does not state that he had also acquired properties, for the purpose of the complaint, that is it. The ball is in the petitioner’s court to contest the assumption, by alleging in the answer that there are also co-owned assets in the possession of the respondent,” the appellate court said.
In his complaint filed with the lower court, Santos recounted that he and Belo started having an affair in 1990 when they were already separated from their respective spouses.
Santos, who is also a cosmetic surgeon, claimed that he allowed Belo to use one-half of his office space at Tektike Towers at Ortigas, and all the income generated by this clinic went to her.
Santos, who is also a cosmetic surgeon, claimed that he allowed Belo to use one-half of his office space at Tektike Towers at Ortigas, and all the income generated by this clinic went to her.
He said he was very supportive to Belo and even gave her the needed media exposure to herpractice.
In 1997, Santos said they decided to live together at his house in Dasmarinas Village, Makati.
He said their future looks rosy together considering that the businesses they organized prospered and that they accumulated substantial asserts and large deposits in banks.
However, Santos said in early 2007, after a trip to South Africa, Belo asked him to sign a waiver of the properties they acquired during the years they were living-in together, and when he refused, she broke up with him.
However, Santos said in early 2007, after a trip to South Africa, Belo asked him to sign a waiver of the properties they acquired during the years they were living-in together, and when he refused, she broke up with him.
Santos said this prompted him to file a petition for declaration of co-ownership of the properties and businesses they acquired and for the inventory and accounting of all their assets.###
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment