Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 6

PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS CASE DIGEST PART 4

ALAVADO VS TACLOBAN CITY overthrow the presumption that P and the deceased were
married.
FACTS:

Petitioner assailed the decision of the defunct


Workmen's Compensation Commission which dismissed
petitioner's death benefits claim for the death of her husband, RIVERA VS. IAC
Ricardo Alavado, a former employee of the City Engineer's FACTS:
Office in Tacloban City
Ricardo A. Alavado was employed as a carpenter- Corazon Legamia lived with Emilio N. Reyes for 19 years from
foreman by the City Engineer's Office, Tacloban City November 8, 1955 to September 26, 1974, when Emilio died.
His last day of service was on April 19, 1974 since he During their live-in arrangement they produced a boy who was
was on leave from April 23, 1974 to May 23, 1974 named Michael Raphael Gabriel L. Reyes. He was born on
On August 6, 1974 when he reported to work he October 18, 1971.
suffered severe headache when he was supervising laborers
From the time Corazon and Emilio lived together until the
on a construction project in Leyte.
latter's death, Corazon was known as Corazon L. Reyes; she
He died the following day of CVA-Cerebral styled herself as Mrs. Reyes; and Emilio introduced her to
Hemorrhage. friends as Mrs. Reyes.
Petitioner, the surviving spouse, filed a claim for death
benefits in her own behalf and in behalf of her minor children. Emilio was Branch Claim Manager Naga Branch, of the
Respondent city filed a notice of controversion of the Agricultural Credit Administration when he died. On October
claimant's right to compensation 29, 1974, or shortly after Emilio's death, Corazon filed a letter
On March 31, 1975, the hearing officer of Regional in behalf of Michael with the Agricultural Credit Administration
Office No. 9 in Tacloban City issued an award granted for death benefits. The letter was signed "Corazon L. Reyes."
petitioner of death benefits and reimbursement of burial The voucher evidencing payment of Michael's claim in the
expenses amount of P2,648.76 was also signed "Corazon L. Reyes."
Respondent city appealed For using the name Reyes although she was not married to
Petitioner showed certified true copy of marriage cert Emilio, Felicisima Reyes who was married to Emilio filed a
in the absence of marriage contract complaint which Corazon Legamia was accused of using an
According to P, they lived together as man and wife alias in violation of Commonwealth Act No. 142.
continuously for a period of 35 years in their conjugal abode up
to the time of Ricardo's death Commonwealth Act No. 142 provides in Section 1:
WCC dismissed the claim for the death benefit due to
Section 1. Except as a pseudonym solely for literary, cinema,
lack of filiation between claimant and the deceased television, radio or other entertainment purposes and in athletic events
To prove filiation, claiming spouse should present: where the use of pseudonym is a normally accepted practice, no
1. original marriage contract or marriage cert duly signed by person shall use any name different from the one with which he was
LCR -primary registered at birth in the office of the local civil registry, or with which
2. affidavit of the claimant and at least three witnesses to the he was baptized for the first time, or in case of an alien, with which he
marriage cohabitation secondary was registered in the Bureau of Immigration upon entry; or such
To prove filiation of children, birth cert should be presented, substitute name as may have been authorized by a competent court:
Provided, That persons, whose births have not been registered in any
baptismal cert is not sufficient local civil registry and who have not been baptized have one year from
the approval of this act within which to register their names in the civil
ISSUE: registry of their residence. The name shall comprise the patronymic
name and one or two surnames.
W/N a marriage certificate can satisfactory proof marital status
in the absence of any evidence to the contrary? W/N Petitioner ISSUE:
should be entitled for her claim of death benefits?
Did the petitioner violate the law in the light of the facts
HELD: abovestated?

HELD:
SC reinstated the awarding of the claim
Rationale It is not uncommon in Philippine society for a woman to
Section 5 of Rule 31 of the Rules of Court provides: represent herself as the wife and use the name of the man she
That a man and a woman deporting themselves as husband is living with despite the fact that the man is married to another
and wife have entered into a lawful contract of marriage. woman. The practice, to be sure, is not encouraged but neither
Persons dwelling together in apparent matrimony are is it unduly frowned upon. A number of women can be
presumed, in the absence of any counter-presumption or Identified who are living with men prominent in political,
evidence special to the case, to be in fact married. The reason business and social circles. The woman publicly holds herself
is that such is the common order of society, and if the parties out as the man's wife and uses his family name blithely
were not what they thus hold themselves out as being, they ignoring the fact that he is not her husband. And yet none of
would be living in the constant violation of decency and of law. the women has been charged of violating the C.A. No. 142
(Adong vs. Cheong Seng Gee) because ours is not a bigoted but a tolerant and understanding
Marriage certificate indubitably establishes claimant's society. It is in the light of our cultural environment that the law
marriage to the deceased. There was no evidence showed to must be construed.

JUI NOTES
PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS CASE DIGEST PART 4
In the case at bar, Corazon had been living with Emilio for Stated differently, the inquiry would be whether it is necessary
almost 20 years. He introduced her to the public as his wife in the commencement of a criminal action for adultery that the
and she assumed that role and his name without any sinister marital bonds between the complainant and the accused be
purpose or personal material gain in mind. She applied for unsevered and existing at the time of the institution of the
benefits upon his death not for herself but for Michael who as a action by the former against the latter.
boy of tender years was under her guardianship. Surely, the
lawmakers could not have meant to criminalize what Corazon In the present case, the fact that private respondent obtained a
had done especially because some of them probably had their valid divorce in his country, the Federal Republic of Germany,
own Corazons. is admitted. Said divorce and its legal effects may be
recognized in the Philippines insofar as private respondent is
PILAPIL VS IBAY SOMERA concerned in view of the nationality principle in our civil law on
the matter of status of persons Under the same considerations
FACTS: and rationale, private respondent, being no longer the husband
of petitioner, had no legal standing to commence the adultery
Petitioner Imelda Pilapil, a Filipino citizen, and private case under the imposture that he was the offended spouse at
respondent Erich Geiling, a German national, were married in the time he filed suit.
Germany. After about three and a half years of marriage, such
connubial disharmony eventuated in Geiling initiating a divorce VILLANUEVA VS SPS. FROILAN
proceeding against Pilapil in Germany. The Local Court,
Federal Republic of Germany, promulgated a decree of divorce FACTS:
on the ground of failure of marriage of the spouses.
Gonzalo Villanueva, represented by his heirs, sued Spouses
More than five months after the issuance of the divorce decree, Branoco to recover a parcel of land. The former claimed
Geiling filed two complaints for adultery before the City Fiscal ownership over the property thru purchase from Vere, who in
of Manila alleging in one that, while still married to said Geiling, turn, bought the property from Rodrigo. Gonzalo declared
Pilapil had an affair with a certain William Chia. The Assistant the property in his name for tax purposes soon after acquiring
Fiscal, after the corresponding investigation, recommended the it.
dismissal of the cases on the ground of insufficiency of
evidence. However, upon review, the respondent city fiscal In their answer, the Spouses Baranoco similarly claimed
Victor approved a resolution directing the filing of 2 complaint ownership over the property thru purchase from Rodriguez,
for adultery against the petitioner. The case entitled PP who in turn, acquired the property from Rodrigo by way of
Philippines vs. Pilapil and Chia was assigned to the court donation. The Spouses entered the property and paid taxes
presided by the respondent judge Ibay-Somera. afterwards.

A motion to quash was filed in the same case which was The trial court ruled in favor of Gonzalo and declared him
denied by the respondent. Pilapil filed this special civil action owner of the property, and ordered the Spouses Branoco
for certiorari and prohibition, with a prayer for a TRO, seeking to surrender possession to Gonzalo. The trial court rejected
the annulment of the order of the lower court denying her Spouses Branocos claim of ownership after treating the Deed
motion to quash. as a donation mortis causa which Rodrigo effectively cancelled
by selling the Property to Vere. Thus, by the time Rodriguez
As cogently argued by Pilapil, Article 344 of the RPC thus sold the property to the Spouses, she had no title to transfer.
presupposes that the marital relationship is still subsisting at
the time of the institution of the criminal action for adultery. On appeal, the CA granted the Spouses appeal and set aside
the trial court's ruling. It held that the deed of donation is one
ISSUE: Did Geiling have legal capacity at the time of the filing of inter vivos.
of the complaint for adultery, considering that it was done after
obtaining a divorce decree? In his petition, Gonzalo seeks the reinstatement of the
trial court'sruling. Alternatively, petitioner claims ownership ove
HELD: WHEREFORE, the questioned order denying r the Property through acquisitive prescription, having allegedly
petitioners MTQ is SET ASIDE and another one entered occupied it for more than 10 years.
DISMISSING the complaint for lack of jurisdiction. The TRO
issued in this case is hereby made permanent. ISSUE: Whether or not the contract between Rodrigo and
Rodriguez is a donation or a devise?
NO
HELD: It is immediately apparent that Rodrigo passed naked
Under Article 344 of the RPC, the crime of adultery cannot be title to Rodriguez under a perfected donation inter vivos.
prosecuted except upon a sworn written complaint filed by the
offended spouse. It has long since been established, with First. Rodrigo stipulated that "if the herein Donee predeceases
unwavering consistency, that compliance with this rule is a me, the [Property] will not be reverted to the Donor, but will be
jurisdictional, and not merely a formal, requirement. inherited by the heirs of x x x Rodriguez," signalling their
revocability of the passage of title to Rodriguez's estate,
Corollary to such exclusive grant of power to the offended waiving Rodrigo's right to reclaim title. This transfer of title was
spouse to institute the action, it necessarily follows that such perfected the moment Rodrigo learned of Rodriguez's
initiator must have the status, capacity or legal representation acceptance of the disposition which, being reflected in the
to do so at the time of the filing of the criminal action. This is a Deed, took place on the day of its execution on 3May 1965.
logical consequence since the raison detre of said provision of Rodrigo's acceptance of the transfer underscores its essence
law would be absent where the supposed offended party had as a gift in presenti, not in futuro, as only donations inter
ceased to be the spouse of the alleged offender at the time of vivos need acceptance by the recipient.
the filing of the criminal case.
JUI NOTES
PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS CASE DIGEST PART 4
Indeed, had Rodrigo wished to retain full title over the Property, insecurity and need for attention.
she could have easily stipulated, as the testator did in another
case, that "the donor, may transfer, sell, or encumber to any The trial court found such sufficient to declare the marriage of
person or entity the properties here donated x x x" or used petitioner void. The Court of Appeals, however, reversed said
words to that effect. Instead, Rodrigo expressly waived title decision. It ruled that petitioner failed to substantiate his
over the Property in case Rodriguez predeceases her. incapacity, to show that the problem is incurable, and that it is
rooted in a psychological problem present upon the marriage.
Second. What Rodrigo reserved for herself was only the
beneficial title to the Property, evident from Rodriguez's ISSUE: Whether or not petitioner is psychologically
undertaking to "give one [half] x x x of the produce of the land incapacitated to perform his marriage obligations.
to Apoy Alve during her lifetime." Thus, the Deed's stipulation
that "the ownership shall be vested on [Rodriguez] upon my HELD:
demise," taking into account the non-reversion clause, could
only refer to Rodrigo's beneficial title. Indeed, if Rodrigo still Petition is without merit.
retained full ownership over the Property, it was unnecessary Civil Law: It is the burden of the party asserting the incapacity
for her to reserve partial usufructuary right over it. to show that said disorder is rooted in a psychological problem
and existed during the celebration of the marriage. In the case
Third. The existence of consideration other than the donor's at bar, petitioner failed to establish such. All the specialist did is
death, such as the donor's love and affection to the donee and to make general assumptions that petitioner indeed has
the services the latter rendered, while also true of devises antisocial personality disorder. There are no factual bases to
,nevertheless "corroborates the express irrevocability of x x x support such a conclusion. In fact, the events leading to the
inter vivos] transfers." Thus, the CA committed no error in filing of the suit says otherwise. The marriage between the
giving weight to Rodrigo's statement of "love and affection" petitioner and respondent did have good moments. The
for Rodriguez, her niece, as consideration for the gift, to petitioner is also a doting father to his children, to the point of
underscore its finding. spoiling them even. This shows that petitioner is not the self-
centered attention seeker he is claiming to be. Even his history
Nor can petitioner capitalize on Rodrigo's post-donation
with his womanizing father does not completely substantiate
transfer of the Property to Vere as proof of her retention of
his claim. It can be seen that it was the general dissatisfaction
ownership. If such were the barometer in interpreting deeds
with his marriage that made him seek comfort elsewhere.
of donation, not only will great legal uncertainty be visited on
Hence, the petition to declare the marriage void for
gratuitous dispositions, this will give license to rogue property
psychological incapacity must be denied.
owners to set at naught perfected transfers of titles, which,
while founded on liberality, is a valid mode of passing WIEGEL VS SEMPIO-DY
ownership. The interest of settled property dispositions
counsels against licensing such practice. Accordingly, having FACTS:
irrevocably transferred naked title over the Property to
Rodriguez in1965, Rodrigo "cannot afterwards revoke the Karl Wiegel was married to Lilia Wiegel on July 1978. Lilia was
donation nor dispose of the said property in favor of another." married with a certain Eduardo Maxion in 1972. Karl then filed
a petition in the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court for the
Thus, Rodrigo's post-donation sale of the Property vested no declaration of nullity of his marriage with Lilia on the ground of
title to Vere. As Vere's successor-in-interest, petitioner acquired latters former marriage. Having been allegedly force to enter
no better right than him. On the other hand, respondents into a marital union, she contents that the first marriage is null
bought the Property from Rodriguez, thus acquiring the latter's and void. Lilia likewise alleged that Karl was married to
title which they may invoke against all adverse claimants, another woman before their marriage.
including petitioner.
ISSUE: Whether Karls marriage with Lilia is void.
ROSALINO MARABLE VS MYRNA MARABLE
HELD:
FACTS: Petitioner seeks the declaration of nullity of his
marriage with respondent based on his psychological Yes. It was not necessary for Lilia to prove that her first
incapacity. The marriage between petitioner and respondent marriage was vitiated with force because it will not be void but
was at first smooth, but turned sour shortly after they got merely voidable (Art. 85, Civil Code). Such marriage is valid
married. They fought frequently, which got worse when their until annulled. Since no annulment has yet been made, it is
business ventures were failing and had financial trouble. clear that when she married Karl, she is still validly married to
Another factor that lead to the escalation of their bickering was her first husband. Consequently, her marriage to Karl is
that their children were spoiled by petitioner, and that such void. Likewise, there is no need of introducing evidence on
made the children unsociable. Petitioner eventually had a Lilia's prior marriage for then such marriage though void still
short-lived affair with another woman, which lead to even more needs a judicial declaration before she can
fighting. Petitioner eventually left respondent, and filed for a remarry. Accordingly, Karl and Lilias marriage are regarded
declaration of nullity of marriage due to psychological void under the law.
incapacity. In court, petitioner presented the findings of a
specialist, who declared petitioner was psychologically REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. VS BERMUDEZ-LORINO
incapacitated to fulfill his marriage obligations. The specialist
Respondent Gloria Bermudez-Lorino and her husband were
said that petitioner exhibited "antisocial behavior disorder"
married on June 12, 1987.
which made petitioner seek too much attention to himself, and
thus making him incapable of complying with his marriage Before they got married, Gloria was unaware of her husbands
obligations. It was stated that petitioner had a father who was a irresponsible attitude and violent character. She decided it
womanizer, which lead petitioner to develop feelings of
JUI NOTES
PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS CASE DIGEST PART 4
would be safer to leave him behind. In order to support her Respondent was charged with abandonment of minor and
children, she was compelled to work abroad. bigamy by complainant. Dorothy Terre was then married to a
certain Merlito Bercenillo her first cousin, with this fact, Atty.
From the time of her physical separation from her husband in Jordan Terre succesfully convinced complainant that her
1991, Gloria has not heard of him at all. She had absolutely marriage was void ab initio and they are free to contract
no communications with him, or with any of his relatives. marriage. In their marriage license, despite her objection, he
wrote single as her status. After getting the complainant
On August 14, 2000, nine years after she left her husband,
pregnant, Atty. Terre abandoned them and subsequently
Gloria filed a verified petition with the Regional Trial Court
contracted another marriage to Helina Malicdem believing
under the rules on Summary Judicial Proceedings in the Family
again that her previous marriage was also void ab initio.
Law provided for in the Family Code. She alleged that after
nine years, there was absolutely no news about her husband,
ISSUE:
Francisco Lorino, and she believes that he is already dead and
(1) WON a judicial declaration of nullity is needed to enter into
is now seeking through a petition for the Court to declare that
a subsequent marriage
her husband is judicially presumed dead for the purpose
of remarriage. Petition was published in a newspaper of HELD:
general circulation. RTC rendered a decision rendering Yes. The Court considers this claim on the part of respondent
Francisco Lorino presumptively dead. Judgment immediately Jordan Terre as a spurious defense. In the first place,
final and executory. Despite judgment being final and respondent has not rebutted complainants evidence as to the
executory, OSG filed an appeal. RTC elevated the records to basic fact which underscores that bad faith of respondent
the CA. In its decision, the CA, treating the case as an ordinary Terre. In the second place, the pretended defense is the same
appealed case denied the Republics appeal. Without filing a argument by which he inveigled complainant into believing that
motion for reconsideration, the Republic filed a petition for her prior marriage or Merlito A. Bercenilla being incestuous and
review on certiorari under rule 45 of the Rules of Court. void ab initio (Dorothy and Merlito being allegedly first cousins
to each other), she was free to contract a second marriage with
HELD:
the respondent. Respondent Jordan Terre, being a lawyer,
In Summary Judicial Proceedings under the Family Code, knew or should have known that such an argument ran counter
there is no reglementary period within which to perfect an to the prevailing case law of the Supreme Court which holds
appeal, precisely because judgments rendered thereunder, by that for purposes of determining whether a person is legally
express provision of Section 247, Family Code, supra, are free to contract a second marriage, a judicial declaration that
immediately final and executory. the first marriage was null and void ab initio is essential.

It was erroneous, therefore, on the part of the RTC to give due REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. VS NOLASCO
course to the Republics appeal and order the transmittal of the
entire records of the case to the Court of Appeals. An appellate FACTS:
court acquires no jurisdiction to review a judgment which,
by express provision of law, is immediately final and Nolasco, a seaman, first met Janet Monica Parker in a bar in
executory. As in the case of Veloria vs. Comelec the right to England. After that, she lived with him on his ship for 6 months.
appeal is not a natural right nor is it a part of due process, for it After his seaman's contract has expired, he brought her to his
is merely a statutory privilege. hometown in San Jose, Antique. They got married in January
Since, by express mandate of Article 247 of the Family Code, 1982.
all judgments rendered in summary judicial proceedings in After the marriage celebration, he got another employment
Family Law are immediately final and executory, the right to contract and left the province. In January 1983, Nolasco
appeal was not granted to any of the parties therein. The received a letter from his mother that 15 days after Janet gave
Republic of the Philippines, as oppositor in the petition for birth to their son, she left. He cut short his contract to find
declaration of presumptive death, should not be treated Janet. He returned home in November 1983.
differently. It had no right to appeal the RTC decision of
November 7, 2001.It was therefore erroneous for the CA to He did so by securing another contract which England is one of
dismiss it for lack of merit and should have dismissed the its port calls. He wrote several letters to the bar where he and
appeal outright for lack of jurisdiction over the case because Janet first met, but all were returned to him. He claimed that he
decision sought to be appealed is immediately final and inquired from his friends but they too had no news about Janet.
executory. Petition of Republic is denied. In 1988, Nolasco filed before the RTC of Antique a petition for
the declaration of presumptive death of his wife Janet.
TERRE VS TERRE
RTC granted the petition. The Republic through the Solicitor-
FACTS: General, appealed to the CA, contending that the trial court
erred in declaring Janet presumptively dead because Nolasco
On December 24, 1981, complainant Dorothy B. Terre charged
had failed to show that there existed a well-founded belief for
respondent Jordan Terre, a member of the Philippine Bar with
such declaration. CA affirmed the trial court's decision.
grossly immoral conduct, consisting of contracting a second
marriage and living with another woman other than ISSUE:
complainant, while his prior marriage with complainant
remained subsisting No judicial action having been initiated or Whether or not Nolasco has a well-founded belief that his wife
any judicial declaration obtained as to the nullity of such prior is already dead.
marriage of respondent with complainant.
HELD:

JUI NOTES
PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS CASE DIGEST PART 4
No. Nolasco failed to prove that he had complied with the third declaration of nullity.
requirement under the Article 41 of the Family Code, the
existence of a "well-founded belief" that Janet is already dead. ISSUE:

Under Article 41, the time required for the presumption to arise Whether or not a subsequent void marriage still needs a
has been shortened to 4 years; however, there is a need for judicial declaration of nullity for the purpose of remarriage.
judicial declaration of presumptive death to enable the spouse
present to marry. However, Article 41 imposes a stricter HELD:
standard before declaring presumptive death of one spouse. It
requires a "well-founded belief" that the absentee is already Respondents arguments that he was of the firm factual and
dead before a petition for declaration of presumptive death can legal conviction when he declared before the HIC authorities
be granted. that he was a bachelor since his first marriage is void and does
not need judicial declaration of nullity cannot exonerate him. In
In the case at bar, the Court found Nolasco's alleged attempt to Terre vs Terre, the same defense was raised by respondent
ascertain about Janet's whereabouts too sketchy to form the lawyer whose disbarment was also sought. We held:
basis of a reasonable or well-founded belief that she was xxx respondent Jordan Terre, being a lawyer, knew or should
already dead. have known that such an argument ran counter to the
prevailing case law of this court which holds that purposes of
Nolasco, after returning from his employment, instead of determining whether a person is legally free to contract a
seeking help of local authorities or of the British Embassy, second marriage, a judicial declaration that the first marriage
secured another contract to London. Janet's alleged refusal to was null and void an initio is essential. Even if we were to
give any information about her was too convenient an excuse assume, arguendo merely, that Jordan Terre held that mistaken
to justify his failure to locate her. He did not explain why he belief in good faith, the same result will follow. For if we are to
took him 9 months to finally reached San Jose after he asked hold Jordan Terre to his own argument, his frist marriage to
leave from his captain. He refused to identify his friends whom complainant Dorothy Terre must be deemed valid, with the
he inquired from. When the Court asked Nolasco about the result that his second marriage must be regarded as bigamous
returned letters, he said he had lost them. Moreover, while he and criminal.
was in London, he did not even dare to solicit help of
authorities to find his wife. PABLO-GUALBERTO VS COURT OF APPEALS
The circumstances of Janet's departure and Nolasco's FACTS:
subsequent behavior make it very difficult to regard the claimed
belief that Janet was dead a well-founded one. On June 22, 1982, respondent Atty. Leo J. Palma, despite his
subsisting marriage, wed Maria Luisa Cojuangco, the daughter
COJUANGCO VS PALMA of complainant Eduardo M. Cojuangco, Jr. Thus, the latter filed
on November 1982, a complaint disbarment against
FACTS: respondent. Palma moved to dismiss the complaint.
On March 2, 1983, the court referred the case to OSG for
On June 22, 1982, respondent Atty. Leo J. Palma, despite his
investigation and recommendation. The Assistant Solicitor
subsisting marriage, wed Maria Luisa Cojuangco, the daughter
General heard the testimonies of the complainant and his
of complainant Eduardo M. Cojuangco, Jr. Thus, the latter filed
witness in the presence of respondents counsel.
on November 1982, a complaint disbarment against
On March 19, 1984 respondent filed with the OSG an urgent
respondent. Palma moved to dismiss the complaint.
motion to suspend proceedings on the ground that the final
actions of his civil case for the declaration of nullity of marriage
between him and his wife Lisa, poses a prejudicial question to
On March 2, 1983, the court referred the case to OSG for
the disbarment proceeding, but it was denied.
investigation and recommendation. The Assistant Solicitor
The OSG transferred the disbarment case to the IBP, the latter
General heard the testimonies of the complainant and his
found respondent guilty of gross immoral conduct and violation
witness in the presence of respondents counsel.
of his oath as a lawyer, hence, was suspended from the
practice of law for a period of three years.
In his motion for reconsideration, respondent alleged that he
On March 19, 1984 respondent filed with the OSG an urgent acted under a firm factual and legal conviction in declaring
motion to suspend proceedings on the ground that the final before the Hong Kong Marriage Registry that he is a bachelor
actions of his civil case for the declaration of nullity of marriage because his first marriage is void even if there is judicial
between him and his wife Lisa, poses a prejudicial question to declaration of nullity.
the disbarment proceeding, but it was denied.
ISSUE:
The OSG transferred the disbarment case to the IBP, the latter Whether or not a subsequent void marriage still needs a
found respondent guilty of gross immoral conduct and violation judicial declaration of nullity for the purpose of remarriage.
of his oath as a lawyer, hence, was suspended from the
practice of law for a period of three years. HELD:

Respondents arguments that he was of the firm factual and


In his motion for reconsideration, respondent alleged that he legal conviction when he declared before the HIC authorities
acted under a firm factual and legal conviction in declaring that he was a bachelor since his first marriage is void and does
before the Hong Kong Marriage Registry that he is a bachelor not need judicial declaration of nullity cannot exonerate him. In
because his first marriage is void even if there is judicial Terre vs. Terre, the same defense was raised by respondent
JUI NOTES
PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS CASE DIGEST PART 4
lawyer whose disbarment was also sought. We held: assume, arguendo merely, that Jordan Terre held that mistaken
xxx respondent Jordan Terre, being a lawyer, knew or should belief in good faith, the same result will follow. For if we are to
have known that such an argument ran counter to the hold Jordan Terre to his own argument, his first marriage to
prevailing case law of this court which holds that purposes of complainant Dorothy Terre must be deemed valid, with the
determining whether a person is legally free to contract a result that his second marriage must be regarded as bigamous
second marriage, a judicial declaration that the first marriage and criminal.
was null and void an initio is essential. Even if we were to

JUI NOTES