Republic of the Philippines

National Capital Judicial Region

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
Muntinlupa City, Branch 87

EDSEL CO LIM,
Petitioner,
Civil Case No. 708999
-versus-
For: PETITION FOR
LEGAL SEPARATION
TIMOTHY ANG LIM,
Respondent.
x-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------x

PRE-TRIAL BRIEF OF THE RESPONDENT

The Respondent, represented by the undersigned counsel as his attorney-in-

law, respectfully submits to this Honorable Court this Pre-Trial Brief, to wit:

I.

POSSIBILITY OF AMICABLE SETTLEMENT OR ALTERNATIVE

MODES OF DISPUTE RESOLUTION

The Respondent is not willing to consider any amicable settlement or

undergo alternative modes of dispute resolution with respect to the primary prayer

of this petition. However, the Petitioner is open to the possibility of amicable

settlement in relation to the partition and accounting of the conjugal properties and

assets of her union with the Respondent.

II.

PROPOSED STIPULATION OF FACTS

The Respondent proposes the following stipulation of facts:

1. Petitioner is of legal age, Filipino, with postal address at No.

2. (INSERT PARAGRAPH 3 of the complaint)

3. (INSERT PARAGRAPH 4 of the complaint)

 4. That Respondent resides in the same address as that of Petitioners, as
evidenced by Respondents Paid Receipts of the Utilities of House marked
as [1]Annex A, Tax Declaration and Tax Receipts paid for marked as
[2]Annex B and Proof of Address marked as [3] Annex C all
addressed to Respondent.

5. Respondent habitually resides at No. 8 Madrigal Avenue, Ayala

Alabang, Muntinlupa City with Petitioner and their child and would only
leave the conjugal dwelling whenever he is out of the country for 3 or 5 days
on business meetings. The flight details of Respondent while he is away
from the country is marked as [7]Annex G, [8]Annex H respectively
in addition to Annex D;

6. Respondent did not commit any sexual infidelity.

7. Respondent denies the allegation that he was seen by the Petitioners

father kissing another woman, the same being fabricated. The relationship
between Respondent and Petitioners father is known to be unharmonious, as
they did not get well along with each other showing the tendency of the
Petitioners father to fabricate stories against Respondent.

8. Respondent never contracted any subsequent marriage on January 15,

2016 with a certain ROSALIE SY TANG as evidenced by the flight details
of Respondent wherein the latter was in Beijing, China on January 14-16,
2016 for a business meeting marked as [4]Annex D. (NOTE:
AFFIDAVIT nun business associate(s)? Or pwede rin sila maging
witness)

9. Respondent never attempted to physically hurt petitioner and their

child and/nor destroy appliances. The sworn statement of house helper Maria
Socorro Cruz lacks (NOTE: Gil, dapat ata may counter tayo dito as
defense tapos present natin as witness)

10.That the couple did not enter into any marriage settlement is deemed
admitted.

11.

12. (INSERT PARAGRAPH 17 of the complaint)

III.

ISSUES TO BE TRIED AND RESOLVED

The Respondent proposes the following issues to be tried and resolved by this

Honorable Court:

1. Whether or not the Petitioner has committed an extramarital affair due

to her failure to comply with the essential marital obligations stated in

Article 68 of the Family Code;

2. Whether or not the failure of the Petitioner to comply with the

essential marital obligations stated under Article 68 of the Family Code, was

due to psychological incapacity which is grave, serious and incurable and

existing at the time of the marriage, though only manifesting itself during

the marriage.

IV.

DOCUMENTS TO BE PRESENTED

The Respondent intends to present the following documents as evidence:

1. Paid Receipts of the Utilities of House made on ____ as Annex A

2. Tax Declaration and Tax Receipts Paid for made on __ as Annex B
3. Proof of Address marked as Annex C
4. Flight Details of respondent (Manila-Beijing-Manila) marked as
Annex D
5. NSO Birth Certificate of Theresa Ang Lim marked as Annex E
6. NSO Birth Certificate of Timothy Ang Lim marked as Annex F
7. Flight Details of Respondent (Manila-Hongkong-Manila) marked as
Annex G
8. Flight Details of Respondent (Manila-Singapore-Manila) marked as
Annex H
9. Manila Polo Club Shares of respondent marked as Annex I
10. Credit Card Statement of Respondent marked as Annex J
11.Attached thereto is the Statement of Monthly Stipend of Petitioner
marked Annex K
12.Ephemeral Text messages in accordance with the Legal Rules on
Evidence marked as Annex L
13.Medical Exam Result of Petitioner showing proof of Chlamidya
marked as Annex M
14.Private Investigator Report marked as Annex N
15.Pictures showing intimacy between the Petitioner and Ricardo
Sinoppoli marked as Annex O
 V.

WITNESSES TO BE PRESENTED

The Respondent will present the following witnesses:

1. Theresa Ang-Lim will testify as to her relationship with the

respondent, the frequency of their telephone calls and the gift which she
received from the Respondent on the account of her 18th birthday.

2. Dr. ___ will testify as to the truthfulness of the Medical Exam Result
showing proof of Chlamidia made on ___. He will also testify as to how
chlamydia is contracted and how it is transmitted.

VI.

RESORT TO DISCOVERY

Considering the relatively simple issues to be presented, Respondent does

not intend to avail of discovery at this time.

Subject, however, to a concrete and reasonable request for discovery from

Petitioner, Respondent reserves the right to resort to discovery before trial.

VII.

AVAILABLE DATES FOR TRIAL

The Respondent respectfully requests that the trial dates be agreed upon in

open court at such dates and the time convenient to the parties and the calendar of

this Honorable Court.

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is respectfully prayed unto this

Honorable Court that the foregoing Pre-Trial Brief be duly noted.

Muntinlupa City, 7 March 2017.

 MANOLO LAW OFFICE
Counsel for the Plaintiff
UNIT 2212, W TOWER
45TH AVE, ZIRCON STREET
BONIFACIO GLOBAL CITY, TAGUIG
METRO MANILA, PHILIPPINES
778-8888; 778-8889; 778-8890

By:
(SGD.) JULIUS C. DIMACULANGAN
Counsel for the Respondent
Roll of Attorney No. 76682
IBP No. 12345/1-5-12/Manila
PTR No. 87654/12-22-12/Manila
 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

Respondent hereby re-pleads and incorporates the foregoing allegations and as

negative and affirmative defenses state THAT:

1. With respect to the allegation under paragraph 6 of the complaint, there is no

sufficient evidence to prove that Respondent was caught having extra-marital affair
with another woman. The woman referred to on the phone to whom Respondent
was talking to sometime in February 2015 was Theresa Ang Lim, the sister of
Respondent. Theresa Ang Lim just turned 18 and called Respondent to say thank
you for the birthday gift that she has received from Respondent. The blood
relationship between Theresa Ang Lim and Respondent is evidenced by their
corresponding NSO birth certificates marked as [5]Annex E and [6]Annex F;

2. With respect to the allegation contained under paragraph 13 of the complaint,

there is no sufficient evidence to prove that Respondent left the conjugal home and
never returned. Respondent habitually resides at No. 8 Madrigal Avenue, Ayala
Alabang, Muntinlupa City with Petitioner and their child and would only leave the
conjugal dwelling whenever he is out of the country for 3 or 5 days on business
meetings. The flight details of Respondent while he is away from the country is
marked as [7]Annex G, [8]Annex H respectively in addition to Annex D;

3. Respondent never abandoned petitioner and their child and would continually
support them from the proceeds of the shares that Respondent holds at the Manila
Polo Club as attached hereto and marked as [9]Annex I;

4. The allegation contained in paragraph 14 to the effect that Respondent refused

to provide financial support for the payment of dental services of their child
remains untrue. On January 29, 2016 Respondent paid said dental services
amounting to Php 15,000 as the remaining balance thereof evidenced by his credit
card statement marked as [10]Annex J;

5. In addition to Respondents Paid Receipts of the Utilities of House marked as

Annex A, Tax Declaration and Tax Receipts paid for marked as Annex B and
Proof of Address marked as Annex C all addressed to Respondent, showing
proofs that latter remain mindful of his obligations to petitioner and their common
child, the Petitioner also receives from respondent monthly allowance of Fifty
Thousand Pesos (Php50,000.00) on top of house expenses marked as [11]Annex
K;

6. Respondent also alleges by way of an affirmative defense that it is the

Petitioner who is having extra-marital affairs with their childs dentist, a certain
Ricardo Sinnopoli. This is evidenced by an ephemeral text messages received by
Respondent from Petitioner which was indented to be sent to Ricardo Sinnopoli,
the same marked as |[12]Annex L;
7. Respondent alleges by way of an affirmative defense of a foul odor coming out
of the private organ of the Petitioner. Sometime in Febryary 2016, a week after his
arrival to the Philippines following a week long business meeting abroad,
Petitioner was complaining of strong pains in the lower abdomen. Thereafter,
Respondent rushed Petitioer to the Asian Medical Hospital. A series of tests
conducted by Dr. Bernardita De La Pena on Petitioner showed that the latter was
suffering from a sexually-transmitted disease known as Chlamydia. This fact is
evidenced by a medical exam result attached hereto and marked as [13]Annex
M;

8. Sometime in January 2016, Respondent frequently noticed that Petitioner

secretly goes to the dental clinic of Ricardo Sinnopoli during unreasonable hours
of the day. Suspecting that Petitioner is having an extra-marital affair with the
dentist, Respondent hired a private investigator to monitor the day-to-day activities
of Petitioner, attached hereto and marked as [14]Annex N;

9. In addition to Annex N, the respondent also gathered pictures taken in

different places and time showing the intimacy between of Petitioner and Ricardo
Sinnopoli, attaced hereto and marked as [15]Annex O.

10. Based on all the foregoing, the Petitioner clearly has no cause of action
against respondent.