Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Absence of an essential requisite – void (ie. Art Rule for marriage solemnized inside PH:
35- below 18, bigamous and polygamous
Between two Filipinos – Apply PH Law
marriage, mistake in identity where there is
absent of consent, Art 43 – absence of legal Between two foreigners – Apply PH Law
capacity particularly, legal presence of legal “lex loci celebrationis” rule that PH Law
impediment) determines the validity of marriage but
their legal capacity to marry is governed
Absence of formal requisites – void (ie. Art 35 –
by their national law as provided in Art
marriage solemnized by someone who is not
21 Fam Code and Art 15 civil code.
authorized to solemnize such and mistake of law
or if done in bad faith where the parties assume
Between a foreigner and a Filipino – the requirements of marriage is ceremony and it
“lex loci celebrationis” hence, apply PH requires the presence of the parties.
Law, but the foreigner’s legal capacity is
Between two foreigners abroad – on the
governed by his national law.
premise that the exceptions do not apply to
Rule for marriage solemnized outside PH: foreigners, if valid there, it’s valid here. If the
marriage abroad is polygamous and valid there,
If valid abroad, it’s valid here but there are 7
Art 26 does not apply since they are not Filipinos.
exceptions to that under Art 35;
All the premises in Art 26 do not apply to
p1 – below 18 years old foreigners.
Art 38 – void by reason of public policy Some say, if there is the presence of the
exceptions, it is void.
Contrasting Opinions with regard to the
application of Art 26 exceptions: But to Paras, Agpalo & Sta Maria: The
exceptions govern the Fil spouse only. If its
1. The exceptions of Art 26 apply to all hybrid marriage, the most acceptable
parties whether Filipino or foreigners. interpretation is that the marriage is valid in
2. (Paras, Agpalo, Sta Maria) the consistence with the PH policy in our jurisdiction
exceptions in art 26 are applied only in pursuant to the presumption of validity of
so far as the Filipino spouse is concern. marriage.
Art 26 regards to status and legal
capacity of the Filipino spouse as we Sta Maria: Art 35 p1 – below 18 – should not be
adhere to nationality theory. applied to foreigners instead, their national law
shall. If 15 is of legal age according to the
How do we reconcile this? national law of the foreigner and he contracted
marriage inside PH, it is valid since we apply his
Between two Filipinos abroad – “lex loci
national law/nationality theory. But when he
celebrationis”, if valid there its valid here too
contracts marriage in his own country or abroad,
except if it falls in to any of the exceptions.
we invalidate the marriage by applying Art 35 p1
Marriage by proxy in abroad and is valid there to him, creating an absurd situation where he
shall be considered valid here too because it is can’t be recognized of his legal capacity in his
not specifically included in the exceptions. But if own territory but can when he contracts it inside
done inside PH, then it shall be void since one of our jurisdiction. It’s inconsistent.
*But there is no right or wrong answer in here, a. Existence of divorce decree –
no case like this has been presented before the present a copy of divorce decree.
court neither were there qualifications provided b. Authenticity of divorce decree –
in Art 26.* rule 132 sec 24 and 25 of the rules
of court. Under sec 24 - present an
Art 35, p. 2
official publication of divorce decree
The provision is to address the concern raised (official gazette or publication). The
from the result of Vando vs Romilo and Pilapil vs other option is to present a certified
Ibay Zomera; true copy of divorce decree,
accompanied by an attestation.
The alien spouse obtained divorce
decree abroad and returned to PH and *Attestation is an undertaking of the legal
claimed to be the husband of the Fil custodian that the copy is certified and faithful
spouse as they argued that PH law copy of the original, executed in his custody.*
doesn’t recognize divorce but SC ruled
Since the document is kept outside the
that their national law determines their
PH, it should also be accompanied by a
legal capacity meaning the divorce
certification executed by the PH
decree was recognized. However, there
consular official. This states that the
is an absurd situation that arises from
officer who executed the attestation is
this, the Fil spouse is still regarded as the
the legal custodian and as the legal
alien spouse’s wife even if the alien
custodian, he has the authority to issue
spouse is already considered to be off
the required attestation.
the marriage. Hence, the legal capacity
of the alien to remarry shall also be *Failure to submit these would result to the
availed of by the Fil spouse as to correct dismissal of the petition.*
the injustice or the absurd situation.
Noveras vs Noveras
Art 35, P2 only applies;
Marriage between two Filipinos who
a. If the divorce decree was obtained by subsequently acquired us citizenship.
the alien spouse abroad.
Wife obtained divorce decree in abroad and all
b. Between a Fil and a foreigner. Mixed
the properties located in US were adjudicated to
marriage shall be determined at the
her.
time of the acquisition of divorce
decree so it is possible that the parties Wife went to PH and filed an action in court for
were both Filipinos at the time of the judicial separation of the property located in PH.
marriage. (Republic vs Obrecido)
Is it proper for trial court to issue judicial
Procedure for the Fil spouse to be capacitated to declaration on the basis of the divorce decree
remarry: obtained abroad?
1. Fil spouse should file a petition pursuant SC: Since our courts do not take judicial notice of
to Rule 63 – declaratory relief – to judgment of foreign courts, wife shall prove the
establish one’s right or status. existence and authenticity of divorce decree.
But SC is so categorical and that
petitioner shall establish the ff;
She failed to submit the attestation and Relative Divorce which is similar to legal
certification therefore the court cannot issue separation.
judicial declaration.
What is the rule if the alien spouse, the one who
2. Validity of divorce decree or Establish obtained the divorce decree, wishes to remarry?
divorce decree in conformity to the
Corpus vs Sto Tomas
foreign laws allowing such.
Procedure: Rule 132 sec 24 and 25 They were both Fil at the time of their marriage.
(attestation and certification)
Husband went to Canada and got naturalized
But which law does the petitioner need to there.
prove?
He was surprised that wife was cheating on him
In Republic vs Obrecido – it was the US so he decided to obtain divorce decree.
law because it is where the divorce decree was
obtained and the spouse who obtained it is a US He found another Fil to love so he submitted the
citizen. copy of divorce to civil registry. But he was
advised by the LCR that it was not enough and
What if the divorce decree is obtained in a that he should get recognition of his divorce
country not from the country of the petitioner? decree from the PH court.
(ie. German who obtained divorce decree in US)
But p2 of Art 26 cannot be availed by foreigner.
Prove both laws. If under both laws it is The procedure under Art 26 p 2 is reserved for Fil
valid, then it is valid. only. But he may still have gained recognition of
his divorce decree in accordance to rule 39 sec
But what if the other country does not allow
48 and 50 rules of court governing effects of
divorce?
foreign judgment since divorce decree is a
Bayot vs Bayot foreign judgment.
Husband is guilty of senseless and contracted Couple eloped to Cebu and returned to Manila
refusal to have sex with the wife. Sex is where and crashed in the place of the uncle of the girl.
the husband and wife can participate in the He felt like a prisoner and he was threatened to
mystery of creation. *claps* marry her. It was found out that; husband has
dependent personality disorder. He lacked self-
esteem and belittle himself and can’t make up
his own decision. On the other hand, the wife is outburst or irreconcilable differences are not
suffering from anti social personality disorder. grounds since they are not that grave.
She defies norms in the society. She is
3. Incurability
domineering, manipulative and she doesn’t care
of other people’s rights and feelings. – It must be something beyond the
means of the individual to avail of the cure. It has
Reyes vs Reyes
dual concept; absolute incurability – unable to
Husband was too invested in business and he perform marital obligation regardless of who the
doesn’t even bother to call his wife as he was spouse is. Relative incurability is incapacity
remorseless. Wife had an operation once and he present in one or particular spouse only but not
did not even care about her. All his businesses necessarily when he is partnered to another so
were a jenga of failure. SC found this as he still can remarry.
indicative of immaturity and irresponsible on
the part of the husband, demonstrative of utter
insensitivity and failure to understand the Is it the defect in the inner self of the individual
meaning of marriage. or the individual’s ability to deal with his
partner?
I know you’re tallying so what’s your score out of 5? XD It is possible that the individual is perfect but
when paired with another perfect individual but
together they are imperfect (screw driver and
Grounds of nullity, annulment or legal screw analogy). So if it’s relationship-centered
separation such as homosexuality, lesbianism, or oriented then we have relative incurability
alcoholism and etc can be grounds for because one’s capacity to perform depends on
psychological incapacity too, so long as they his partner. But if it’s in the inner self, regardless
comply with the 3 characteristics; of who the spouse is, he is always incapacitated.
1. Juridical antecedence In PH, we adhere to both. It’s enough that in so
far as that spouse is concern, he is unable to
– Psychological incapacity is present at perform marital obligation.
the time or prior to the marriage celebration
although it’s manifested after the celebration.
The connection between behavioral SC Guidelines for purposes of dissolving
manifestation and the history of the individual petitions for nullity invoking Psychological
should be established and that these personality Incapacity (Molina Case).
disorders are brought about by his own
dysfunctional system. In most cases, this is due a. It is the burden of the petitioner to prove
to the upbringing of the person in a the existence of psychological incapacity
dysfunctional family. This is why it is advisable to b. The ground for psychological incapacity
bring experts such as psychologists or must be clinically and medically
psychiatrists to offer testimony. identified, proven by experts’ testimony
and clearly explained in the decision of
2. Gravity the court.
– It must be so grave or serious that it c. It must exist at the time or prior to the
brings about incapacity or inability to perform celebration of marriage.
marital obligation. Occasional violent behavior, d. It must be so serious.
e. It must be incurable that there is no
known cure for this type of disorder and
even if there is, it is beyond the means of
the spouse to avail of the cure.
f. The incapacity to perform marital
obligation of the spouses to each other
and the parents to their children (Art 68-
72, 221, 222 and 225 of Fam Code. (ie if
the husband is so irresponsible with
respect to his job but not to his children,
it’s not psychological incapacity))
g. Decisions of the church matrimonial
tribunal although not conclusive upon
the courts but they carry weight.