27, 28, 31, 32, 33, and 34 situations where the

contracting parties need not obtain a marriage license

prior to getting validly married.
These situations are explicitly declared by Article 3 (2)
exceptions to the formal requirement of a valid
marriage license
Also mentioned in Article 9
The exceptions are anchored on necessity and
practicality

Chapter II of the act shall be punished by imprisonment for

not less than 1 month nor more than 2 years or a fine of
300-2000 pesos or both
Article 31: A marriage in articulo mortis between passengers
and crew members may also be solemnized by a ship
captain or by an airplane pilot not only while the ship is at
sea or the plane is in flight, but also during stopovers at ports
of call.
-

CHAPTER 2: MARRIAGES EXEMPT FROM LICENSE

REQUIREMENT
Article 27: In case either or both of the contracting parties are
at the point of death, the marriage may be solemnized
without necessity of a marriage license and shall remain
valid even if the ailing party subsequently survives.
Article 28: If the residence of either party is so located that
there is no means of transportation to enable such party
to appear personally before the local civil registrar, the
marriage may be solemnized without the necessity of a
marriage license.
-

A sacred institution like marriage shall always be

encouraged.
Without this provision, illicit (illegal) relationships may
proliferate only because the parties could not get a
marriage license with really no fault on their part

Article 29: In the cases provided for in the two preceding

articles, the solemnizing officer shall state in an affidavit
executed before the local civil registrar or any other person
legally authorized to administer oaths that the marriage was
performed in articulo mortis (art 27) or that the residence of
either party, specifying the barrio or barangay, is so located
that there is no means of transportation to enable such
party to appear personally before the local civil registrar
(art 28), and that the officer took the necessary steps to
ascertain the ages and relationships of the contracting parties
and the absence of a legal impediment to the marriage.
Article 30: The original affidavit required in the last preceding
article (art 29), together with a legible copy of the marriage
contract, shall be sent by the person solemnizing the
marriage to the local civil registrar of the municipality where it
was performed within the period of 30 days after the
performance of the marriage.
-

Relative duties of the solemnizing officer with respect to

the affidavit s/he has to execute directory in character
Non-observance of the requirements will not render the
marriage void or annullable.
(Pursuant to Marriage Law of 1929) failure on the part of
the solemnizing officer to comply with the provisions of

They can only solemnize marriages among their

passengers and crew members

Article 32: A military commander of a unit, who is a

commissioned officer, shall likewise have an authority to
solemnize marriages in articulo mortis between persons
within the zone of military operation, whether members of
the armed forces or civilians.
-

Must be a commissioned officer rank should start from

a 2nd lieutenant, ensign and above
Must be a commander of a unit must at least be a
battalion
Can only solemnize if (and only if the ff are complete):
a. In articulo mortis
b. Absence of a chaplain
c. Solemnized within the zone of military operation and
during such military operation

Article 33: Marriages among Muslims or among members of

the ethnic cultural communities may be performed validly
without the necessity of a marriage license, provided they
are solemnized in accordance with their customs, rites, or
practices.
-

For as long as the marriages of ethnic groups, pagans,

and Muslims were performed according with their
customs, rites, and practices it would be considered
valid
Formal requisites need not be considered valid (Art 78 of
Civil Code)
Code of Muslim Personal Laws of the Philippines (Feb
4, 1977) do not require a marriage license for a marriage
to be valid
o The Family Code was consistent with this in so
far as not requiring Muslims to obtain marriage
license.
Organic Act for the Cordillera Autonomous Region
(RA 6766) Art 10, Sec 2: Marriages solemnized between
or among members of the indigenous tribal group or
cultural community in accordance with the indigenous
customary laws of the place shall be valid, and the
dissolution thereof in accordance with these laws shall be
recognized.
For other ethnic groups, they are governed by the
Family Code. (No separate laws regarding them)

Article 34: No license shall be necessary for the marriage of

a man and a woman who have lived together as husband and
wife for at least 5 years and without legal impediment to marry
each other. The contracting parties shall state the foregoing
facts in an affidavit before any person authorized by law to
administer oaths. The solemnizing officer shall also state under
oath that he ascertained the qualifications of the contracting
parties and found no legal impediment to the marriage.
-

Two distinct conditions (both conditions must concur; but

do not qualify each other):
1. They must live as such for at least 5 years
characterized by exclusivity and continuity that is
unbroken (Republic v Dayot)
o During the 5-year period, they must not have
suffered from any legal impediment
2. They must be without any legal impediment to
marry each other
o Construed to refer only to the time of the
actual marriage celebration
The essential requirements under Art 2
and formal requirements under Art 3 for
a valid marriage must be present only at
the time of the celebration of the
marriage and not at any other point in
time
Legal Impediment refers to any possible ground or
basis under the family code

Article 76 of Civil Code

Article 34 of Family Code

During the whole 5-year period,

the contracting parties must be
unmarried

For as long as there is no legal

impediment at the time of the
marriage ceremony, the parties
can avail exception
A spouse living-in with a paramour
can avail of the exception and
marry the paramour without a
marriage license after the death of
the legal spouse.

A person who was married at

anytime during the 5-year, and
who was living with another person
cannot avail of the exception if
s/he intends to marry his/her live-in
partner after the legitimate spouse
dies

Nial v Bayadog

Manzano v Sanchez

They were married on 1974. The legal

spouse was shot to death on 1985. 1
year and 8 months later, the spouse
married another person without a
marriage license, instituting an affidavit
that they lived together for 5 at least 5
years (exception to the securing of
marriage
license
requirement).
Marriage was declared void for the
absence
of
marriage
license.
Cohabitation for 5 years was
impossible because the first marriage
was dissolved (due to the death of the
first spouse) only for 2 years.

They were married on 1966. On 1993,

one spouse contracted another
marriage with another married person.
They issued an affidavit that they were
both married but because of quarrels,
they left their families and no longer
communicated with them. They lived
together as husband and wife for 7
years. The marriage was not valid
because even though they lived
together for 7 years, it is required that
there be no legal impediment to marry
each other. FREE AND VOLUNTARY
COHABITATION WITH ANOTHER DO
NOT SEVER THE TIE OF A
SUBSISTING PREVIOUS MARRIAGE.

The contracting parties shall state the fact of their

cohabitation for at least 5 years
Solemnizing officer must state that he ascertained the
qualifications of the contracting parties and found no legal
impediments.
o Failure of solemnizing officer to investigate shall
not invalidate the marriage

Cosca v Palaypayon judge solemnized a

marriage involving a party who was 18 years of age

without a marriage license on the basis of an affidavit
where the parties indicated they lived as husband and
wife for 6 years
SC ascertained that judge acted improperly (he should
have conducted an investigation to the qualifications of
the parties)
Judge should have been alerted that the affidavit was
possibly forged (13 palang sila nung nag live-in kung 18
siya)
SC did not state the marriage was void because at the
time of the marriage, there was no legal impediment to
marry. (18 na yung isa)

De Casto v Assidao-De Castro SC ruled the nullity of a

marriage on the ground of absence of valid marriage
license
o Upon evidence of that there was no cohabitation
for 5-years contrary to the statements in the
falsified affidavit
o False Affidavit cannot be considered a mere
irregularity because the 5-year cohabitation
period is a substantial requirement of the law
exempted from obtaining a marriage license.