Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
NOT GRANTED
But if entered to escape punishment for seduction,
NOT ANNULLED eg filing charges against admission
to bar for immorality
Pressure brought upon man to marry girl to repair the
wrong etc
Pressure of man if not revealing indiscretions of girl
Where SUFFICIENT TIME, opportunity for
DELIBERATION & REFLECTION after the time duress
was exerted
Physical Incapacity:
- must have ff circumstances
1) PI exists at time of celeb of marriage
2) PI continues to time case is tried
3) Incurable
4) Known to other contracting party
NOT GRANTED
impotence in OLD AGE
if incapacity removed by proper treatment/operation
PHYSICAL INCAPACITY = IMPOTENCE
coitus w/ normal person of opposite sex IMPOSSIBLE
Italian decision: test is ABILITY TO COPULATE on
waife who is virgin not to others who are not
Lack of power to copulate NOT STERILITY
(pathological condition w/c is negative reproduction;
not ground for annulment bec hard to diasgnose)
EG SARAO VS GUEVARA: large vagina, oozing
purulent matter offensive to the smell; operation to
remove organs; lost all desire; annulment not
granted bec NOT CAPACITY TO REPRODUCE but to
COPULATE
Also when sex impossible bec PAIN INFLICTED, may
constitute PI
Triennial Cohabitation: doctrine of Triennial Cohabitation
(in England & some American courts); if wife VIRGIN, after 3
yrs of cohabitation, husband presumed to be IMPOTENT &
burden upon him to overcome presumption
Action Barred: due to CLEAN HANDS PRINCIPLE if
1) other party has knowledge of incurable impotence
BEFORE marriage meaning he renounces
COPULATION (a personal right)
2) both spouses impotent, exited before marr, incurable
bec COULD NOT HAVE EXPECTED COPULATION
action is barred
Sexually-Transmissible Disease: NEW CAUSE; requisites
are
1) STD exist at time of marr
2) Found to be serious
3) Incurable
4) Unknown to other party when marr solemnized
danger to health of other spouse & offsprings
failure to attain purpose of marriage procreation of
children & raising family
Prejudicial Question: case for annulment under duress,
violence or intimidation is prejudicial to BIGAMY case
Ratification of VOIDABLE marriage: generally through
CONTINUED VOLUNTARY COHABITATION after the cause cease
to exist; law does not fix period of cohabitation
once ratified, cannot be revived for nullity
RATIFICATION> right of action
PRESCRIPTION> refers only to remedy
No more remedy if there is no more RIGHT!
Marriages NOT subject to ratification: three marr
1) incurably impotent
2) incurable STD
since 1 & 2 are incurable physical defects, caused of
nullity will never cease to exist
Ratification cures defect in CONSENT not on physical
defect
As long as prescription has not expired
3) sane spouse marries insane spouse w/ knowledge of
insanity; INSANE CAN RATIFY after recovering but
SANE SPOUSE cannot be barred from asking
annulment even if he continued to cohabit after
learning of insanity (bec might HOPE for CURE
someday)
SEMPIO-DIY
Comparing A85 CC & A45 FC
A85 CC
A45 FC
lack of parental consent
- same existing prior marriage bec
- eliminated bec of A42 FC
of absence, remarries
wc automatically terminates
2nd marriage upon recording
of affidavit of reappearance
insanity
- samefraud vitiating consent
- same violence or intimidation
- undue influence added
that vitiated consent
impotency
- FC makes both absolute &
relative impotency grounds
for annulment
-none- STD serious & incurable
Grounds for Annulment EXPLAINED:
1) Lack of parental consent
18<=x<21 w/o parental consent
Ratified upon free cohabitation upon reaching 21;
mere transient sex inter NOT SUFFICIENT
Parents absent consent may ratify?
o
TOLENTINO: yes, before 21; this right can be
waived
Art 14 comments
o
Emancipated, below 21, no need for PC
o
PC in sworn statement w/ 2 witnesses before
any official adm of oath OR appear before
LCR to accomplish written consent
o
To marry SPECIFIC person, not just anyone
2) Insanity
distinction bet PI of A36 FC
[comments under A36 FC]
PI vs insanity: mental incapacity or insanity or
physical incapacity is a vice of consent; insanity (1) of varying
degrees, (2) curable being an illness, capable of ratification or
convalidation, (3) has lucid intervals, (4) ground only for
annulment in many countries
can be ratified by sane partys cohabitation after
insane is cured
mere mental weakness not ground but if seen grave
enough as in A36 FC, may even be null & void
intoxication, somnambulism (lack of mental capacity)
= insanity
insanity must EXIST AT TIME of marr not prior or
subsequent
law presumes SANITY, burden of proof on party
alleging insanity
CASE
KATIPUNAN V TENORIO [Sept 29, 1937; Imperial]
Facts: Marcos Katipunan & Rita Tenorio married 1919 having
4 offsprings in its 7-year cohabitation. In 1934, CFI Manila for
annulment because of UNSOUND MIND & asked Ursula Paz
(mother of Rita) to be guardian ad litem & DISMISSED this
Issue: WON insanity ground for annulment (existed at time of
marriage)
Held: No annulment, valid marriage. Accdg to GO No 68 Sec
10 unsound mind existing at time of marriage. Accdg to Act
3613 (1929), unsound mind at time of marriage annulled.
Although odd that only 4 days of courtship they married,
Ursula Paz said they cohabited for 2 yrs. Also Faustina dela
Cruz knew RT 1905-1913 (childhood), RT muttering
inconsistent words. RT only insane in 1926 confined in San
Lazaro hospital, etc in 3-4 occasions after giving birth to child.
Every presumption lean towards marriage.
SUNTAY V COJUANGCO-SUNTAY [Dec 29, 1998;
Martinez]
Facts: Isabel Cojuanco married Emilio Aguinaldo-Suntay in
Macao on July 1958 borne them 3 children Isabel, Emilio
Aguinaldo & Maragrita Guadalupe all surnamed Cojuangco-
Fraud
only those enumerated in A46 FC
maybe ratified upon cohabitation after knowledge of
fraud
Force, intimidation, undue influence
definitions are
o
A1335 CC: VIOLENCE when order to wrest
consent, serious or irresistible force is
employed
INTIMIDATION when compelled by
reasonable or well-grounded fear imminent
evil upon the person, property, of the
spouse, descendants, etc, to give his
consent
DEGREE OF INTIMIDATION: age, sex,
condition of person borne in mind
A threat to enforce claim thru competent
authority, lawful or not, does not vitiate
consent
o
A1336 CC: VIOLENCE or INTIMIDATION
annul obligation even if by third person
o
A1337 CC: UNDUE INFLUENCE when
improper advantage of his power over the
will of another, depriving freedom of choice.
EXAMPLE: confidential, family relations,
suffering from mental weakness, in financial
distress
Threat to FILE A CASE OF immorality on bar
candidate where he does not marry a girl who he has
impregnated does not vitiate consent (Ruiz v Atienza)
Threat or intimidation as no to act as FREE AGENT;
threatened of armed demonstrations by brother is
ANNULLABLE (Tiongco v Matig-a)
Man rapes a girl, marries her & has no intention to
live with the girl; marriage is annullable (People v
Santiago)
Committee added undue influence, maybe
compelled to enter out of REVERENTIAL FEAR eg fear
of causing distress to parents, grandparents, etc
CASE
RUIZ V ATIENZA [Mar 18, 1941; Bengzon]
Facts: Jose Ruiz married Pelagia Atienza in Nov 14,1938. Also
this is the date of birth of child of Pelagia impregnated by JR.
On same day, father, cousin & 3 other companions from PAs
camp went to JRs dorm in Manila threatening to marry PA in
Aglipayan church by balisong, charging immorality in
admission to bar, saying he will be safe is he went with them
Issue: WON force as ground for annulment present
Held: No no evidence of bodily harm by balisong (only
found 1 inch knife), had many occasions to escape as they
are in dorm (friends could see even policeman), & threat to
charge immorality in preventing admission to bar NOT force.
In Marriage Law Act 3613, force/violence does not include
INTIMIDATION
5)
-
Impotency
refers to lack of power to COPULATE not mere
sterility
must exist at time of marr, must be continuous, must
be incurable; thus if removable by operation, NOT
ANNULLABLE (Sara v Guevarra, CA)
only potent spouse can file for action for annulment
& clean hands
both spouses impotent, cannot be annulled bec
neither spouse is aggrieved
impotency due to old age cannot be annulled
POTENCY PRESUMED; party who alleges impotency
has burden of proof (Jimenez v Canizares)
Although potency is presumed, there is a doctrine in
England called TRIENNIAL COHABITATION that if wife
remains virgin after 3 yrs, husband presumed
impotent & H has burden to prove otherwise
(Tompkins v Tompkins)
REFUSAL of wife to be examined DOES NOT
PRESUME impotency bec Filipino girls are inherently
shy & bashful; TC must order physical examination
bec w/o proof of impotency, she is presumed potent;
to order her for phys exam does not infringe consti
rights against self-incriminating (Jimenez v Canizares)
NOTE: if continued refusal, can be held for
CONTEMPT & ordered to be confined in jail until she
does so
RELATIVE IMPOTENCY: may now be invoked bec there
are cases where impotent wrt to spouse but not with
other men or women
EXAMPLE: penile erection to other women possible
Unusually large penis can fit with other abnormally
large vagina
CASE
JIMENEZ V CANIZARES [Aug 31, 1960; Padilla]
Facts: Joel Jimenez & Remedios Canizares married August
1950. In CFI Zamboanga (1955) filed for annulment due to
physical incapacity (orifice of vagina too small to allow
penetration of a male organ for copulation) existing at time of
marriage & still continues. JJ left 2 nights & 1 day after
marriage. RC did not file answer. City atty present to prevent
collusion. Court orderd medical examination but she didnt
appear (3 times) & court said if she did not appear, marriage
will be annulled. So on April 11, 1957, marriage annulled. In
April 26, 1957, city atty filed Motion for Reconsideration bec 1)
RTs impotency not established 2) RC should be punished in
CONTEMPT OF COURT not ANNULLING MARRIAGE 3) this would
open doors to couples wanting to annul & collude. Motion
denied (May 13, 1957)
Issue: WON marriage annulled on grounds of impotency
Held: No (remanded to trial court). No evidence is presented
and this is due to women being naturally shy & bashful. JJ is
sole witness to impotency. Marriage is social institution.
Presumption is potency.
SARAO V GUEVARA [May 31, 1940; Reyes]
Facts: B Sarao married Pilar Guevara on March 1936. On
wedding night, PG reluctant & begged to wait for the night.
During coitus, it was seen that orifice of her vagina sufficiently
large for his organ, she complains of pains in private parts &
there is oozing purulent liquid offensive to smell. Coitus that
night NOT SUCCESSFUL. Then, PG always complained of pains
during sex. In August 1936, they consulted a physician in
removing tumors in uterus & ovaries rendering PG incapable
of procreation. Sarao filed for annulment on grounds of
impotency in CFI Laguna and was dismissed.
Issue: WON marriage annulled on grounds of impotency
Held: No, it is still possible to copulate (even if sterile bec of
removal of organs). It is choice of Sarao not to have sex
because of turn off 1st experience. Accdg to Marriage Law
(Sec 30 Act 3613), it should be in existence at time of
marriage. Existence of tumors does not render her incapable
of procreation (at time of marriage). Impotency not ability to
procreate but to COPULATE.
- must be concealed
- can be ratified after
knowledge of STD continues
to cohabit
Effect of Cure
Recovery or rehabilitation (in STD, drug addiction, habitual
alcoholism) will NOT BAR ACTION for annulment; defect not
disease but on CONSENT w/c was vitiated thru fraud
SEMPIO-DIY
Comparing A86 CC & A46 FC
A86 CC
A46 FC
- misrepresentation as to
> under A35FC as ground to
identity
declare marriage void for lack
of valid consent; party guilty
of fraud, criminally liable
- non-disclosure of previous
- removed imprisonment for
conviction (moral turpitude,
two years or more
penalty 2yrs or more
- impt non-disclosure is
imprisonment)
lacking in good moral
character & other party did
not know about it
- concealment by wife of
-samepregnancy by other man
-none- concealment of STD
regardless of nature existing
at time of marriage
-none- concealment of drug
addiction, habitual
alcoholism, homosexuality,
lesbianism existing at time of
marriage
- no other
- added health eg
misprepresentations
concealment of cancer, heart
disease etc NOT ANNULED
TOLENTINO
Principle of Estoppel: sane spouse knew insanity,
knowledge of incurable impotency & knowledge of incurable
STD existing at time of marriage >, estopped to seek
annulment (CLEAN HANDS)
Ratification & Prescription: Ratification cures defect
existing at time of marriage & validates marr; Prescription
bars the remedy bec of lapse of period; after ratification, can
no longer be nullified
SEMPIO-DIY
Ground for
Annulment
Lack of
Parental
Consent
Who can
File Action
Period of
Prescription
(1) party
under age
(2) parent or
guardian
w/in 5 yrs
after 21 yo
before child
reaches 21
yo
before death
(1) sane
Convalidati
on or
Ratification
free
cohabitation
after
reaching 21
yo
free
Insanity of
One Party
spouse
of other
party
(2) guardian
of insane
spouse
(3) insane
spouse
-doduring lucid
interval or
after
regaining
sanity,
before death
of other
party
w/in 5 yrs of
discovery
Fraud
injured party
Force,
Intimidatio
n, or Undue
Influence
Impotence
of one
party
injured party
w/in 5 yrs of
cessation of
cause
potent party
w/in 5 yrs of
marriage
serious STD
of one
party
healthy party
w/in 5 yrs
after
marriage
cohabitation
after insane
regains
sanity
REYES (1981)
marriage must be entered in GOOD FAITH and w/ the
intent in fulfilling marital duties & obligations (People
v Santiago)
CASE
free
cohabitation
after
knowledge of
fraud
free
cohabitation
after cause
disappeared
cannot be
ratified but
action
prescribes
cannot be
ratified but
action
prescribes
A47 FC
- w/in 5 yrs after reaching
21yo
- w/in 5 years after discovery
- w/in 5 years after cessation
of cause
- w/in 5 yrs from marriage
A48 FC
In all cases of annulment & declaration of absolute
nullity, court shall order pros atty & fiscal to appear on
behalf of the state to take steps to prevent COLLUSION
taking care that evidence not fabricated or
suppressed; no judgment will be based upon
stipulation of facts or confession of judgment
TOLENTINO
Purpose of this Article: prevent collusion; judgment held
for annulment even if only stips of facts as long as collusion is
REMOTE
Policy of the Law: intervention of state emphasizes
imptnce of marr as social institution, etc
Effect of Collusion: A221 CC every collusion to obtain
decree of legal separation or annulment of marriage is VOID
AND NO EFFECT and is OMMITTED BY FC
SEMPIO-DIY
A88 CC to A101(2) CC > when defendant does not
appear, court is required to order fiscal to appear in
behalf of state; under A48, pros atty & fiscal shall
appear even if defendant present or not
Intervention of state bec marr social institution
preserved by State
No judgment based on stipulation of facts to
PREVENT COLLUSION
Even if parties succeed even with safeguards &
annulled through COLLUSION, deemed absolutely
VOID
A344 RPC
A87 (2) CC
PERIOD of commencement of ACTION for annulment by
parties
2) in A85(2) by spouse ABSENT during his/her
LIFETIME; OR by EITHER spouse of the SUBS MARR
during the LIFETIME of the other
A41 FC
TOLENTINO
Prior Voidable Marr: UNLESS final judgment or dissolved by
death, subsequent marr NULL & VOID
Status of Subs Marr: during subsisting marr, remarriage is
BIGAMOUS & VOID. EXCEPT:
absentee four years or for two under special
circumstances
absence gives rise to presumption of death w/c is
required to be declared in SUMMARY PROCEEDING to
enable to remarry
Period of Absence:
GENERALLY, under CC, 7 years req for decl of
presump death For REMARRIAGE, reduced to 4 years
by FC
EXCEPT in cases, CC 4 years & FC 2 years IF
o
ON BOARD VESSEL lost at sea voyage,
airplane
o
ARMED FORCES in war
o
DANGER OF DEATH under other
circumstances, existence not known
Good Faith: PERIOD of absence for PRESUMPTIVE DEATH is
MANDATORY thus cannot be shortened by good faith and if be
done so will be VOID
Meaning of Absent spouse: American origin.
California CC: presumption of death cannot be predicted if
absence resulted from LEAVING OR DESERTING. Spouse who
has been left or deserted is spouse PRESENT and thus can
validly remarry. In this Article, the REMARRIAGE OF THE
ABANDONED SPOUSE contemplated not DESERTING SPOUSE.
Burden of Proof: two successive marriages, presumption on
validity of 2nd marriage and burden on party ATTACKING
VALIDITY OF 2ND MARR. PRESUMPTION in favor of INNOCENCE
prevails over PRESUMPTION of CONTINUANCE OF LIFE OF 1ST
SPOUSE & MARITAL RELATIONS.
SEMPIO-DIY
Kinds of Bigamous Marr (under this Art)
1) VOID BIGAMOUS MARRIAGE contracted during
SUBSISTENCE of prev marr; good faith immaterial; 2nd
marr stil VOID; person marries in BAD FAITH
criminally liable for BIGAMY
2) VOIDABLE BIGAMOUS MARRIAGE contracted during
ABSENCE of spouse 4 consec years (ordinary) or 2
years (extraordinary absence under A391 CC) having
WELL-FOUNDED BELIEF of death after having
JUDICALLY DECLARED PRESUMPTIVELY DEAD in
summary proceeding
Compared with A83 CC
ORDINARY
ABSENCE
EXTRAORDINA
A83 CC (OLD)
7 consec years
A41 FC (NEW)
4 consec years
2 years
RY ABSENCE
* because of better communication & transportation in
country & world
JUDICIAL
no need; enough
must file
DECLARATION
that period had
summary
OF DEATH
passed
proceeding for
eg Jones v
DECLARATION
Horiguela
OF
absence of 7 years
PRESUMPTIVE
enough and judicial
DEATH
declaration only
- protection
needed for proper
against charge of
administration of
bigamy to
estate/property
PRESENT SPOUSE
- also found In Re
bec good faith
Sztraw, Lukban v
established
Rep.
- conflicting with
A349 RPC wc
requires declaration
of presumptive death
to be NOT GUILTY OF
BIGAMY
Meaning of Absent spouse
- Absent for 4 years having well-founded belief of death
- period of 4 years reduced to 2 years in danger of death in
A391 CC where:
- on board vessel lost at sea or airplane
(includes all kinds of watercraft & aircraft)
- armed forces in war
(all military operations involving armed fighting; doe
not apply to nurses, doctors, reporters or cameramen)
- danger of death
(includes earthquakes, fires, explosions, dangerous
expeditions, landslides, volcanic eruptions)
- 2-year period counted from event of death presumed
Recent Jurisprudence:
A) presumption of death must comply with rules
(ordinary or extraordinary) and belief must be WELLFOUNDED
B) REP V NOLASCO: seaman husband FAILED to conduct
search of missing wife with such diligence to have it
well-founded. Search too sketchy
C) A247 FC on judgments on summary judicial
proceedings are IMMEDIATELY FINAL AND EXECUTORY
tf unappealable
D) REP V BERMUDEZ-LORINO: word of caution,
convincing proof must be shown of well-founded
belief. Otherwise, summary proceeding might be
abused by colluding spouses
A42 FC
Subsequent marriage automatically terminated by
RECORDING OF AFFIDAVIT OF REAPPEARANCE OF
ABSENT SPOUSE unless there is a judgment annulling
prev marr or declaring it void ab initio
SWORN STATEMENT of the fact & circumstances of
reappearance shall be recorded in CIVIL REGISTRY of
the residences of parties to the subsequent marriage
TOLENTINO
Status of Subsequent Marriage:
- generally bigamous and null and void but if period of A41 FC,
in good faith & well-founded belief still VALID. In CC,
annullable. Not voidable bec not in A45. So not void or
voidable tf it is VALID IN FC
- But if BOTH parties in BAD FAITH, VOID AB INITIO accdg to
A44 FC
- ONE party acted in BAD FAITH (present spouse),
subsequent marr VOID as bigamous under A35(4)
- ONE party acted in BAD FAITH (other spouse of 2nd marr),
and present spouse acted in good faith & with decl of
presump death, MARR STILL VALID but A43 FC will operate
(revocation of donation, insurance, inheritance)
A43 FC
EFFECTS OF TERMINATION OS SUBSEQUENT MARR
1) CHILDREN conceived prior to its termination
are LEGITIMATE. Custody & support to be
determined by COURT
2) ACP/CPP dissolved & liquidated. But if in BAD
FAITH, share in net profits forfeited in favor of
a. Common children
b. Children of guilty spouse
c. Innocent spouse
3) DONATION by marriage VALID except in BAD
FAITH, revoked by ops of law
4) REVOCATION of designation as beneficiary in
INSURANCE of SPOUSE in BAD FAITH
5) DISQUALIFICATION to INHERIT if in BAD FAITH
SEMPIO-DIY
unlike CC wc does not provide effects after
termination of SUBS MARR, FC provided effects of
automatic termination in A43
A44 FC
BOTH spouses in BAD FAITH, marriage VOID AB INITIO.
All DONATIONS by marriage & TESTAMENTARY
DISPOSITIONS made in favor of the other REVOKED by
ops of law
TOLENTINO
Dissolution by Death: terminated not by recording of
affidavit of reappearance but by DEATH, effects of dissolution
of VALID MARR will arise bec annullable/voidable can only be
assailed DIRECTLY. But if BOTH in BAD FAITH VOID AB
INITIO can be attacked collaterally at any time even if
dissolution is by death of one of parties.
SEMPIO-DIY
both acting in bad faith MEANS both spouses KNEW
absent spouse still alive
both bad faith, VOID AB INITIO; may even be
prosecuted for BIGAMY
effects of both in bad faith as if NULL & VOID not
voidable
donations, testamentary dispositions, revoked by ops
of law
A349 RPC
BIGAMY penalty of prison mayor persons contracting
subsequent marr before former legally dissolved or
before absent spouse DECLARED PRESUMPTIVELY DEAD
by means of judgment
REYES (1981 consult newer version)
Elements
offender legally married
SEMPIO-DIY
court decides custody & support unless there is a
written agreement
support of spouses & children comes from ACP/CPP
after annulment, spouses support CEASE (no longer
H&W) but continues support to CHILDREN
custody of children accdg to best interests and, if
over 7, considers CHOICE unless seen unfit (A213 FC)
under 7 yo w/ mother unless unfit (A213 FC); this
provision amends A17 of PD 603 (Child & Youth
Welfare Code) w/c states below 5 yo
appropriate visitation rights
A50 FC
1) effects accdg to A43
(2) absolute community of property or the conjugal
partnership dissolved and liquidated but if spouse in
bad faith, his share to common children or children of
guilty spouse from prev marriage or innocent spouse
(3) donations valid except in when bad faith wc is
revoked by operation of law
(4) innocent spouse may revoke, if in bad faith,
beneficiary to insurance even if irrevocable
(5) in bad faith, disqualified to inherit from innocent
spouse
Effects accdg to A44
Both spouses in bad faith, all donations and
testamentary dispositions revoked by operation of
law
If nullity accdg to A40 (declaration of previous marriage
void) and A45 (1]18-21 w/o consent 2] unsound mind 3]
consent of either party thru fraud 4] consent by force or
intimidation 5] physically incapable of consummating
marriage 6] sexually-transmitted disease)
2) final judgment must contain
- liquidation, partition and distribution of properties
- custody & support of children
- delivery of presumptive legitimes
3) creditors informed of liquidation
4) conjugal dwelling in accdce to A102, 129)
Art51 FC
Value of presumptive legitime delivered in cash, properties or
sound securities unless judicially approved arrangement;
children, guardian or trustee may enforce judgment; dec of
pres legitimes no prejudice to succ rights upon death of
parents but value already received as part of legitime shall be
considered advances
Art52 FC
-judgment of annulment or absolute nullity of marriage
- partition and distribution of property
- Delivery of childrens presumptive legitimes
RECORDED in civil registry and registries of property;
otherwise, this will not affect third persons
Art53 FC
After compliance with reqts in prev article, may marry again,
otherwise subsequent marriage null and void
Art54 FC
Children born or conceived before judgment is legitimate;
children in subsequent marriage also legitimate
Tolentino:
Uniformity of Judgment
1) Liquidation inventory of properties and payment of
obligations; after payment to creditors, remaining is assets of
spouses
Partition remaining properties divided to capital of spouses
and net profits of marriage depends if absolute community
[AC] (A102) or conjugal partnership [CP] (A129)
AC inc in value from celeb of marr to termination
CP all fruits of separate properties and products of
labor and industry
A369 CC
Children conceived before decree annulling a
VOIDABLE MARRIAGE principally use SURNAME OF
FATHER
TOLENTINO
Use of Mothers Surname: children conceived before
decree are LEGITIMATE & may use MOTHERS SURNAME
JURISDICTION
CASE
TAMANO V ORTIZ [JUNE 29, 1998; J Bellosillo]
Facts: May 1958, Senator Mamintal Tamano married Zorayda
Tamano in civil rites remaining valid and subsisting until
Tamanos death May 1994. In June 1993, Tamano (as
divorced) married Estrellita Tamano (as single while waiting
for decision of annulment to Llave to be final & executory) in
civil rites in Lanao del Sur. On Nov 1994, Zorayda & son filed
Complaint for Declaration of Nullity of Marriage against
Estrellita bec bigamous.
Estrellita filed MOTION TO DISMISS that RTC no jurisdiction
since both Muslims vested on sharia courts accdg to A155 of
Code of Muslim Personal Laws & Zorayda canno file an action
for annulment since only a party to the marriage can file.
Since ET and SMT married accdg to Civil Code, not in accdnce
to PD 1083 or Code of Muslim Personal Laws, RTC has
jurisdiction.
CA ruled that it fell under exclusive jurisdiction of Sharia
courts if there are sharia courts. But in QC, where no sharia
court is found, RTC can be proper forum.
Issue: WON this case falls under jurisdiction of RTC
Held: Yes, Accdg to The Judiciary Reorganization Act of
1980, RTC has jurisdiction over all actions involving marriage
& marital relations. Also, never was it mentioned that ET &
SMT married under Muslim laws (this fact only seen in Motion
for Reconsideration not the Motion to Dismiss). PD 1083 silent
when married both in civil & Muslim rites. Sharia courts not
vested ORIGINAL & EXCLUSIVE jurisdiction when it comes to
marriages celebrated in both. RTC not divested of their
general original jurisdiction (Sec 19 par 6 BP Blg 129)