Persons Reviewer For Aug 30 (To Print) PDF

THE
U.P. SIGMA RHO FRATERNITY 1

Notes for Persons & Family Relations (LAW100) based on the Syllabus of Dean Soledad Mawis
Prepared by: Jam Zaldivar ’17, Migs Raymundo ’17, and JD Censon ’17

V. MARRIAGE & PERSONAL RELATIONS BETWEEN Protection Clause and Due Process Clause of the
SPOUSES Fourteenth Amendment, and one group of plaintiffs also
brought claims under the Civil Rights Act. In all the cases,
the trial court found in favor of the plaintiffs. The U.S.
A. The concept of “marriage”
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit reversed and held
that the states' bans on same-sex marriage and refusal to
FC 1. Marriage is a special contract of permanent recognize marriages performed in other states did not
union between a man and a woman entered into in violate the couples' Fourteenth Amendment rights to equal
accordance with law for the establishment of conjugal and protection and due process.
family life. It is the foundation of the family and an Ruling: The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth
inviolable social institution whose nature, consequences, Amendment guarantees the right to marry as one of the
fundamental liberties it protects, and that analysis applies
and incidents are governed by law and not subject to
to same-sex couples in the same manner as it does to
stipulation, except that marriage settlements may fix the opposite-sex couples. Judicial precedent has held that the
property relations during the marriage within the limits right to marry is a fundamental liberty because it is
provided by this Code. inherent to the concept of individual autonomy, it protects
the most intimate association between two people, it
NCC 52. Marriage is not a mere contract but an safeguards children and families by according legal
recognition to building a home and raising children, and it
inviolable social institution. Its nature, consequences and
has historically been recognized as the keystone of social
incidents are governed by law and not subject to
order. Because there are no differences between a same-
stipulation, except that the marriage settlements may to a sex union and an opposite-sex union with respect to these
certain extent fix the property relations during the principles, the exclusion of same-sex couples from the
marriage right to marry violates the Due Process Clause of the
Fourteenth Amendment. The Equal Protection Clause of
FC 149. The family, being the foundation of the the Fourteenth Amendment also guarantees the right of
same-sex couples to marry as the denial of that right
nation, is a basic social institution which public policy
would deny same-sex couples equal protection under the
cherishes and protects. Consequently, family relations are law. Marriage rights have traditionally been addressed
governed by law and no custom, practice or agreement through both parts of the Fourteenth Amendment, and the
destructive of the family shall be recognized or given same interrelated principles of liberty and equality apply
effect. with equal force to these cases; therefore, the Constitution
protects the fundamental right of same-sex couples to
Const. Art. II Sec. 12. The State recognizes the marry. The Court also held that the First Amendment
protects the rights of religious organizations to adhere to
sanctity of family life and shall protect and strengthen the
their principles, but it does not allow states to deny same-
family as a basic autonomous social institution. It shall sex couples the right to marry on the same terms as those
equally protect the life of the mother and the life of the for opposite-sex couples.
unborn from conception. The natural and primary right
and duty of parents in the rearing of the youth for civic B. Nature of marriage in Philippine law
efficiency and the development of moral character shall
receive the support of the Government. FC 1. Marriage is a special contract of permanent
union between a man and a woman entered into in
Const. Art. XV Sec. 2 Marriage, as an inviolable accordance with law for the establishment of conjugal and
social institution, is the foundation of the family and shall family life. It is the foundation of the family and an
be protected by the State. inviolable social institution whose nature, consequences,
Obergefell vs. Hodges stipulation, except that marriage settlements may fix the
Facts: Groups of same-sex couples sued their property relations during the marriage within the limits
relevant state agencies in Ohio, Michigan, Kentucky, and provided by this Code.
Tennessee to challenge the constitutionality of those
states' bans on same-sex marriage or refusal to recognize Rule 131 Sec. 3 (aa). That a man and woman
legal same-sex marriages that occurred in jurisdictions deporting themselves as husband and wife have entered
that provided for such marriages. The plaintiffs in each
into a lawful contract of marriage
case argued that the states' statutes violated the Equal

THE U.P. SIGMA RHO FRATERNITY 2

NCC 220. In case of doubt, all presumptions favor A case was filed against Sermonia before RTC Pasig for
the solidarity of the family. Thus, every intendment of law bigamy. Sermonia contends that (1) criminal liability
or facts leans toward the validity of marriage, the already extinguished due to prescription, (2) prescriptive
indissolubility of the marriage bonds, the legitimacy of period should run from date of registration of marriage,
children, the community of property during marriage, the (3) offended party assumed to have had constructive
authority of parents over their children, and the validity of notice of the subsequent, marriage from date of
defense for any member of the family in case of unlawful registration of marriage. The respondent argues that
aggression. prescriptive period only begins after discovery of crime
which is 1991. • RTC denied petition; CA (respondent)
Muslim Code, (P.D. 1083) Sec. 14. Nature. affirmed RTC decision.
Marriage is not only a civil contract but a social institution. Ruling: The prosecution of the petitioner for the
Its nature, consequences and incidents are governed by crime of bigamy has not yet prescribed. The principle of
this Code and the Shari'a and not subject to stipulation, constructive notice is not applicable to the crime of bigamy
except that the marriage settlements may to a certain since bigamous marriage is usually entered into by the
extent fix the property relations of the spouses. offender with secrecy. Considering that a bigamous
• Nature of marriage: inviolable social institution marriage is often concealed by the offender, to compute
• Marriage Contract: the best evidence of existence the prescriptive period for the offense of bigamy from
of marriage, but not the only evidence registration would almost absolve offenders of their
liability. Such interpretations would encourage violations
Goitia vs. Campos-Rueda of a social institution (marriage) cherished and protected
Facts: Goita and Campos Rueda were legally by law. Marriage is an inviolable social institution, the
married in Manila, and established their residence in San
preservation of which is a primary concern of the society.
Marcelino. After one month of marriage, Campos-Ruedat
continually demanded that the Goitia perform “unchaste It is therefore reasonable to compute prescriptive period
and lascivious acts on his genital organs”. However, Goitia on the date of discovery of the crime by the offended party,
refused to perform any act other than legal and valid the authorities and agencies.
cohabitation. Due to her refusals, Campos-Rueda
maltreated her by word and deed and inflicted injuries Perido vs. Perido
upon her lips, face, and other body parts. Goitia was unable
Facts: Lucio Perido married twice during his
to induce her husband to desist from his repugnant desires
and cease form maltreating her. Because of this, she was lifetime. His 1st wife was Benita and they had 3 children
obliged to leave their conjugal abode and take refuge in (Felix, Ismael, and Margarita). After Benita died, Lucio
her parents’ home. Plaintiff filed a complaint against married Marcelina (2nd wife) and they had 5 children
Campos-Rueda, seeking support outside the conjugal (Eusebio, Juan, Maria, Sofronia, and Gonzalo). Lucio died in
domicile. CFI Manila ruled that Campos-Rueda cannot be 1942, and Marcelina (2nd wife) died in 1943. Margarita is
compelled to support the Goitia, except in his own house, the only living child of the 1st marriage (Benita’s child).
unless divorce or separation is granted.
The children and grandchildren of both 1st marriage and
Ruling: Goitia can compel her husband to support
her outside the conjugal home. Marriage is a relation of 2nd marriage executed a document denominated as
rights, duties and obligations prescribed by the law for the “Declaration of Heirship and Extra-Judicial Partition”,
benefit of society. NCC 44, 45 and 48 state that it is the whereby they partitioned themselves the estates of Lucio.
duty and obligation of spouses to be faithful to, to assist, The children of the 1st marriage filed a complaint in CFI
and to support each other. Additionally, NCC 149 states against the children of the 2nd marriage, alleging, among
that support may be satisfied by paying the pension or other things, that the children of the 2nd marriage were all
receiving and maintaining in his own home the person
illegitimate and therefore had no successional rights to the
having the right to the same, is not absolute. Obligation to
support is a legal duty that must be performed by the estates of Lucio. The “Declaration of Heirship and Extra-
defendant, and the law cannot permit him to terminate Judicial Partition” was annulled by the lower court.
this by his own wrongful act of driving away his wife from However, it did not order the partition of the view of its
the conjugal home. findings that the 5 children of Lucio with his 2nd wife
(Marcelina) were legitimate; and that all the lots, except
Sermonia vs. Republic for one, belonged to the conjugal partnership of Lucio and
Facts: In 1975, Sermonia, married Unson. While Marcelina. Petitioners argued that the children of the 2nd
having a prior valid and subsisting marriage with Nieverra.

marriage were illegitimate on the grounds that they were Anna (and their child). Victoriano and Joel rushed her to
born out of wedlock. Bulacan Provincial Hospital, where she died. Based on the
Ruling: The children of Lucio and Marcelina (2nd defense, Victoriano came home drunk and beat his wife
wife) were legitimate. In the absence of proof that outside the door because she kept nagging him. They went
marriage did not take place, a man and a woman living inside where Victoriano pushed her and Anna fell on a
together as husband and wife are presumed married. jalousie window (looks like a shutter). The medico-legal
Leonora, when asked why she knew that Marcelina was officer Dr. Viray, found that Anna died of hemorrhagic
married to Lucio only in 1925, merely replied that “during shock as a result of a stab wound, trunk (blood loss), and
the celebration of the marriage by the Aglipayan priest documented her wounds. RTC found Victoriano guilty of
(they) got flowers from (their) garden and placed in the parricide. CA affirmed. Victoriano prays for the mitigating
altar.” Evidently, she was not even an eyewitness to the factor that he did not intend to commit a wrong against his
ceremony. The statement was not conclusive enough to wife, evident from that he rushed her to the hospital
show that he was not actually married to Marcelina (2nd Ruling: RTC and CA correctly ruled in finding
wife) when the children were born. Victoriano guilty of parricide. The elements of parricide
are (1) a person is killed, (2) the deceased is killed by the
Silverio vs. Republic accused, and (3) the deceased is the father, mother, child…,
Facts: Rommel Jacinto Dantes Silverio is a male or the legitimate spouse of the accused. The key element in
transsexual. He’s a biological male who feels trapped in a Parricide is the relationship of the offender to the victim.
male body so he sought gender re-assignment in Bangkok, The best proof of relationship between the accused and the
Thailand. In 2002, he filed a petition for the change of his deceased would be their marriage certificate. Even without
first name (from Rommel to Mely) and his sex (male to this, Victoriano admitted that Anna was his wife.
female) in his birth certificate. He filed the petition before
RTC Manila. He wanted to make these changes as he was De Santis vs. Intestate Estate Jalandoni
engaged to be married. RTC granted Silverio’s petition, Facts: Jalandoni died intestate (without a will) on
ruling that it should be granted based on equity; that there 1966. Petitioners introduced themselves as the children of
was no opposition to his petition (even the OSG did not Slyvia Desantis—who, in turn, is the daughter of Isabel
make any basis for opposition at this point); that no harm, Blee, whom the petitioners contend to have been the legal
injury or prejudice will be caused to anybody or the spouse of Jalandoni at the time of his death. They argue
community in granting the petition. OSG filed a petition for that Isabel is entitled to a share in the estate of Jalandoni
certiorari. CA reversed RTC They presented 2 marriage certificates between Isabel and
Ruling: The entries pertaining to sex and first Jalandoni, and the birth certificate of their mother, Slyvia,
name in the birth certificate may not be changed on the as evidence. However, the birth certificate of Sylvia shows
ground of gender re-assignment. There is no law that her father is not Jalandoni, but a John Desantis. The
authorizing the change of entry as of sex and first name birth certificate also shows that Isabel and Desantis were
through the intervention of sex reassignment surgery. NCC married, and Sylvia is their legitimate child. Thus,
376 as amended by RA 9048 (Clerical Error Law), together respondents argue that there is no evidence linking Isabel
with NCC 412 of the same Code, only allows change of as an heir to Jalandoni, and that the evidence shows that
name or sex in the birth certificate by the courts so long as Isabel had a previous and subsisting marriage with John
clerical or typographical errors are involved. The changes Desantis at the time she was purportedly married to
sought by Silverio will have serious legal and public policy Rodolfo, thus rendering it void. Petitioners contend that
consequences. To grant the will greatly alter the laws on this may have been made only in order to save Isabel and
marriage and family relations. Second, there will be major her family from the social condemnation of having a child
changes in statutes that underscore the public policy in out of wedlock. Lower court allowed petitioners to
relation to women. participate in settlement of estate, because the marriage
certificate is sufficient evidence. CA reversed, ruling,that
People vs. De La Cruz the birth certificate proves otherwise
Facts: Joel was playing cards when Victoriano Ruling: Isabel was not the legal spouse of
punched and kicked his wife Anna outside the door, and Jalandoni at the time of his death, and is thus not an heir of
dragged her inside the house. He was heard shouting at Jalandoni. Tere is no evidence linking Isabel as an heir to
her, and shortly thereafter, he came out with a bloodied Jalandoni. The birth certificate of Sylvia is sufficient

enough evidence to prove that Sylvia’s father is not Calimag argues that the respondents have no legal capacity
Jalandoni, but Desantis. The existence of a previous because they are illegitimate children of Anastacio Sr.
marriage between Isabel and John Desantis was also andas such they have no right over Silvestra’s estate. RTC
ruled in favor of the respondents with the reason that the
adequately established through the birth certificate. The
Deed of Sale was a forgery since it was executed three
fact of marriage may be proven by relevant evidence other years after the death of Silvestra and also the fact that the
than the marriage certificate, such as in this case, a birth respondents presented the Certificate of Marriage of their
certificate. In the absence of any proof that the marriage parents and also the birth certificates of the respondents.
had been dissolved by the time Isabel was married to CA affirmed the validity of the marriage between Anastacio
Jalandoni, the conclusion is that the latter marriage is Sr. and Fidela and the respondents were conceived and
bigamous and, therefore, void ab initio. born during the said marriage hence they are presumed to
be legitimate children of Anastacio Sr in the absence of any

contradicting evidence. Calimag argues that the marriage
Tambuyat vs. Tambuyat contract is not admissible under the Best Evidence Rule for
Facts: Adriano Tambuyat and Wenifreda Balcom- it being a mere fax copy or photocopy of an alleged
Tambuyat were married on 1965. During their marriage, marriage contract and also that the Certificate of Canonical
Adriano acquired a parcel of land. The deed of sale was Marriage only proves that a marriage ceremony actually
signed by Adriano alone as vendee; signing witness to the transpired and it is not the same as the marriage license.
Ruling: The respondents are legal heirs of
deed of sale Rosario Banguis. The Transfer Certificate
Silvestra. A photocopy of the marriage contract cannot be
covering the subject property was made under the name of
used as primary evidence to establish the fact of marriage
Adriano M. Tambuyat “married to” Rosario E. Banguis. but it can be admitted as secondary evidence. It can be
Banguis was married to Nolasco (alive) since 1975 and admitted as secondary evidence if the offeror can prove
was never annulled. On June 1988, Adriano died intestate. (1) the execution or existence of the original, (2) loss and
On September 1988, Rosario alleged she and Adriano were destruction of the original or non-production in court and
married. Wenifreda filed a Petition for Cancellation of (3) unavailability of the original is not due to bad faith. The
canonical certificate of marriage is not a public document
Transfer Certificate, alleging therein that she was the
but a private writing and its authenticity must be proven
surviving spouse of Adriano and Banguis was still married in order to be admitted; the respondents were unable to
to Nolasco. Banguis could not have been married to prove it. The respondents presented their birth certificates
Adriano. and it shows that they were born to the same parents and
Ruling: The Court did not err in allowing the it was stated that the respondents’ parents were married
cancellation of Certificate of Title wherein Rosario Banguis on 1955 in Alang-alang, Leyte. The birth certificates being
was recorded married to Adriano and co-owner of subject public documents are presumed to be valid and are prima
land. The evidence adduced proved that Wenifreda, and facie evidence of the truth of the facts stated in them.
not Banguis, is the lawful wife of Adriano; that Rosario Under R.A. 3753, the declaration of either parent of the
Banguis’ claim that she and Adriano were married is newborn legitimate child shall be sufficient for the
subverted by the fact that she has a subsisting marriage registration of his birth in the civil register, which is
with one Nolasco, prior to her alleged marriage with contrary to the argument of the Calimag. It is only in the
Adriano. Both marriages (Adriano-Wenifreda & Rosario- case of an illegitimate child where the law requires that
Eduardo) were subsisting at the time of the acquisition of the birth certificate be signed and sworn jointly by the
the subject property. Therefore, Banguis cannot be parents of the infant.
included or named in Certificate of Title as “Married to The fact that Anastacio Sr. and Fidela had openly
Adriano Tambuyat”. cohabited as husband and wife for a number of years
which resulted in them having two children is admissible
Calimag vs. Heirs of Macapaz proof to establish the validity of marriage. A presumption
Facts: Virginia Calimag co-owned a property in established by our Code of Civil Procedure is “that a man
Makati with Silvestra Macapaz. The respondents, Anastacio and a woman deporting themselves as husband and wife
Jr. and Alicia are the children of Silvestra’s brother, have entered into a lawful contract of marriage.” Semper
Anastacio Sr. and Fidela. On, 2002 Silvestra died without praesumitur pro matrimonio – Always presume marriage.
issue. A new certificate of title was issued to Calimag by
virtue of a Deed of Sale wherein Silvestra allegedly sold the Tilar vs. Tilar
99 sqm portion for P300k. Anastacio Jr. filed a criminal Facts: Jerrysus Tilar filed a petition nullity of
complaint of the falsification of public documents but was marriage on the grounds of psychological incapacity based.
eventually dismissed. The respondents, asserting that they The couple had a son and the marriage was good for the
are the heirs of Silvestra instituted the action for first few months until respondent became an extremely
Annulment of Deed of Sale and Cancellation of the title.

jealous, violent person which resulted into quarrels and (2) Every extra-judicial agreement, during
petitioner being threatened and physically harmed. She marriage, for the dissolution of the conjugal partnership of
was also a happy-go-lucky person and a gambler. The pair gains or of the absolute community of property between
eventually separated in and the respondent is now living husband and wife;
with another man in Cebu. A clinical psychologist that the (3) Every collusion to obtain a decree of legal
respondent was suffering from “aggressive personality separation, or of annulment of marriage;
disorder and histrionic personality disorder” which made (4) Any simulated alienation of property with
her psychologically incapacitated to comply with her intent to deprive the compulsory heirs of their legitime.
essential marital obligations. - Respondent failed to file her
answer despite being served with summons and the public FC 75. The future spouses may, in the marriage
prosecutor certified the absence of collusion. RTC ruled settlements, agree upon the regime of absolute
that the State cannot encroach into the domain of the community, conjugal partnership of gains, complete
Church and that resolving the validity of this Church separation of property, or any other regime. In the absence
marriage is outside the court’s authority. of a marriage settlement, or when the regime agreed upon
Ruling: The doctrine of separation of church and is void, the system of absolute community of property as
State does not apply to petitions for declaration of nullity established in this Code shall govern.
of marriage. Marriage has civil and legal consequences
which are governed by the Family Code. The petition only Espinosa vs Atty. Omana
seeks to nullify the marriage contract as postulated in the Facts: Espinosa is married to Elena Marantal.
Family Code; and the declaration of nullity of the parties' They created a “Kasunduan ng Paghihiwalay” stating their:
marriage in the religious and ecclesiastical aspect is (1) Marriage: Wish for separation and freedom to pursue
another matter. The proceedings for church annulment in other partners; (2) Children: Child custody, visitation
accordance with Canon Law is not binding upon the State rights and monthly support; (3) Property: Properties
as the couple is still considered married to each other in during marriage will given back to their rightful owners
the eyes of the civil law. (no more conjugal property). The agreement was
notarized by Atty. Omaña. Espinosa sought advice of
C. Agreements during and prior to marriage Glindo, a law graduate, and was informed that the contract
Omaña created was not valid. Espinosa and Glindo filed
1. Stipulations in marriage complaint against Omaña before the IBP Commission on
Bar Discipline. Omaña denied preparing the contract. She
• Parties may stipulate with regard to property recalled telling Espinosa that such document is illegal. Her
relations, as long as these stipulations are not office staff, Arlene Dela Pena, apologized for notarizing the
contrary to law and are entered into before document without Omaña’s knowledge, consent and
marriage, or approved by a court during marriage
authority.

Ruling: Any contract between spouses permitting
FC 1. Marriage is a special contract of permanent
separation of spouses and dissolution of property regime
union between a man and a woman entered into in
without judicial approval is void because it is contrary to
accordance with law for the establishment of conjugal and
morals and public policy. A notary public should not
family life. It is the foundation of the family and an
facilitate disintegration of marriage and family by
inviolable social institution whose nature, consequences,
encouraging separation of spouses and extrajudicially
dissolving conjugal partnership. Omaña is guilty of
stipulation, except that marriage settlements may fix the
violating Canon of Professional Responsibility. Even if it
property relations during the marriage within the limits
had been the office staff who notarized, it is still negligence
provided by this Code.
on her part in her notarial duties.

NCC 221. The following shall be void and of no
2. Breach of promise to marry
effect:

(1) Any contract for personal separation between
NCC 19. Every person must, in the exercise of his
husband and wife;
rights and in the performance of his duties, act with justice,
give everyone his due, and observe honesty and good faith.

• Gen Rule: cannot claim damages for breach of
• Abuse of Right: promise to marry
o legal right • Exception:
o breach o Deceit/ Seduction: moral + actual
o pursuing the injury to a 3rd party damages
o Incurred Expenses: actual damages
NCC 20. Every person who, contrary to law,
wilfully or negligently causes damage to another, shall Hermosisima vs. CA
indemnify the latter for the same. Facts: Soledad, then a teacher, used to go around
with Hermosisima (10 years younger), and were regarded
as engaged although no promise of marriage was made
NCC 21. Any person who wilfully causes loss or prior thereto. Cagigas gave up teaching and became a life
injury to another in a manner that is contrary to morals, insurance underwriter in Cebu. Cagigas and Hermosisima
good customs or public policy shall compensate the latter (then an apprentice pilot) had sexual intercourse in the
for the damage. petitioner’s cabin. Cagigas then informed Hermosisima
that she is pregnant, whereupon Hermosisima promised to
NCC 1403. The following contracts are marry her. In 1954, their child, Chris Hermosisima was
born. Hermosisima married one Romanita Perez so
unenforceable, unless they are ratified:
Cagigas filed for moral damages. Hermosisima admitted
(2) Those that do not comply with the Statute of paternity and expressed willingness to support the child
Frauds as set forth in this number. In the following cases but denied having promised to marry Cagigas. CA ruled in
an agreement hereafter made shall be unenforceable by favor of Cagigas, ordering Hermosisima to pay for child
action, unless the same, or some note or memorandum, support, compensation damages, and moral damages.
thereof, be in writing, and subscribed by the party charged, Ruling: Hermosisima must pay for child support
or by his agent; evidence, therefore, of the agreement and pregnancy compensation. However, moral damages
are not recoverable for breach of promise to marry. In De
cannot be received without the writing, or a secondary
Jesus v. Syquia, Court ruled that “the action for breach of
evidence of its contents: promises to marry has no standing in the civil law, apart
(c) An agreement made in consideration of from the right to recover money or property advanced
marriage, other than a mutual promise to marry; upon the faith of such promise”. The Civil Code of Spain
permitted recovery of damages for breach of promise to
FC 22. The marriage certificate, in which the marry, articles which were never in force in the
Philippines. The Code Commission, in their duty to draft
parties shall declare that they take each other as husband
the Proposed Civil Code, intended to include articles for
and wife, shall also state:
actions against breach of promise to marry. However,
(1) The full name, sex and age of each contracting these articles were eliminated in Congress. Hermosisima
party; could not be morally guilty of seduction for the following
(2) Their citizenship, religion and habitual reasons: (1) Cagigas, being 10 years older and being a
residence; teacher and life insurance underwriter, is more
(3) The date and precise time of the celebration of enlightened than Hermosisima, an apprentice pilot, when
she became intimate with Hermosisima; (2) Cagigas stated
the marriage;
that she, “overwhelmed by her love” for him, “wanted to
(4) That the proper marriage license has been bind” “by having a fruit of their engagement even before
issued according to law, except in marriage provided for in they had the benefit of the clergy.”
Chapter 2 of this Title;
(5) That either or both of the contracting parties Wassmer vs. Velez
have secured the parental consent in appropriate cases; Facts: Velez and Wassmer intended to marry on
(6) That either or both of the contracting parties September 4, 1954. On September 2, Velez disappeared
have complied with the legal requirement regarding after leaving a note to his fiancé explaining that he has to
postpone the wedding as his mother opposes it. On the
parental advice in appropriate cases; and
next day, he sent another letter promising to return soon.
(7) That the parties have entered into marriage He never did, and so Wassmer suds Velez for damages. The
settlement, if any, attaching a copy thereof lower court ordered Velez to pay actual, moral, and
exemplary damages as well as attorney’s fees. Velez filed a
• Breach of Promise to Marry: not actionable petition for relief. Wassmer moved to strike it but the
court ordered the parties to appear. Velez did not show up

and wanted to postpone the trial for two weeks. The reputation duly respected in her community. (2) Gashem is
postponement was granted, but after two weeks Valez (or an Iranian citizen residing in Dagupan City and an
his lawyer) failed to show up again. Velez’ lawyer exchange student taking a medical course at Lyceum
eventually informed the court that chances of settling the
Northwestern Colleges. Gashem courted Marilou and
case were nil.
Ruling: This is not a mere breach of promise to promised to marry her. Marilou agreed, on the condition
marry. As a general rule, a breach of promise to marry is that Gashem will marry her. Gashem visited Marilou’
not an actionable wrong. However, to actually go through parents in Pangasinan to secure their approval to the
all the preparation and publicity only to walk out when it marriage and forced Marilou to live with him in Dagupan.
is about to be solemnized is a different thing. This is an act She was a virgin before she began living with him i.e.
which is ground for an action for damages under NCC 21. Marilou surrendered her virginity to Gashem. However,
His act was against good customs and hence, he is liable
Gashem’s attitude changed. He maltreated Marilou and
under the aforesaid provision. The awards of moral
damages and exemplary damages are justified because his threatened to kill her. She sustained injuries. During their
act was wanton, fraudulent, reckless, oppressive and confrontation before the barangay captain of Guilig,
malevolent. Gashem repudiated their marriage agreement and asked
her not live with him anymore. It was found that Gashem
Tanjanco vs. CA was already married to someone in Dagupan citys. Gashem
Apolonio Tanjanco, single, of legal age started denies: (1) proposing to or agreeing to be married with
courting Araceli Santos, also single of legal age. Tanjanco Marilou; (2) seeking the approval of Marilou’s parents nor
expressed his undying love and affection, which Araceli forced Marilou to live in his aparement. (3) maltreating
eventually reciprocated. In consideration of Tanjanco’s her, but only told her to stop coming to his placed because
promises of marriage, Santos consented to his repeated he discovered that she had deceived by stealing his money
pleas to have intercourse. A doctor confirmed Araceli’s and passport. (4) that the confrontation took place; and
pregnancy, after which she informed Apolonio and pleaded also asserts that he was unnecessarily dragged to court,
with him to fulfill his promise of marriage. Upon finding incurred damages, suffered mental anxiety and
out, Apolonio stopped seeing Araceli and broke off their besmirched reputation. RTC Pangasinan favored Marilou.
engagement. To avoid embarrassment, Araceli resigned CA affirmed. Gashem argues that: NCC 21 is not applicable
from her job as secretary at IBM Philippines where she because he had not committed any moral wrong or injury
was receiving P230/month. She then filed a complaint or violated any good custom or public policy.
against Apolonio for mental anguish, besmirched Ruling: Mere breach of promise to marry is not an
reputation, wounded feelings, moral shock and social actionable wrong. Congress deliberately eliminated from
humiliation from his refusal to marry her. CFI dismissed the draft of NCC provisions that would made it so. The
complaint for failure to state a cause of action. CA also award of damages pursuant to Article 21 is justified NOT
found that no cause of action was shown to compel because of the Gashem’s promise to marry, but the fraud
recognition of a child as yet unborn, nor for its support; and deceit behind and the willful injury to Marilou’s honor
however, decreed that complaint did state a cause of action and reputation which followed thereafter.
for damages premised on NCC 21.
Ruling: CA reversed. There is no seduction when Abanag vs. Mabute
an adult woman maintained intimate sexual relations with Abanag filed a letter-complaint for Disgraceful and
repeated acts of intercourse, which shows a voluntariness Immoral Conduct against Mabute (MCTC Court
and mutual passion. If there was seduction, she would not Stenographer) She alleges that after a promise of marriage,
have yielded again, much less for a whole year. The intent Abanag lived with Mabute and became pregnant. Mabute
behind NCC 21 was to provide individuals with a remedy brought her to a “manghihilot” and gave her drugs for
when no criminal or civil suit can be filed, but there is a abortion. She refused so Mabute abandoned her. She
grievous moral wrong committed, such as seduction. became depressed and lost the baby. She stopped
schooling because of her humiliation. Mabute denies and
Baksh vs. CA claims the false charges were intended to harass and
Facts: Marilou accuses Gashem Baksh of violating destroy his reputation. RTC Catbalogan found that the
their agreement to get married and orders him to pay couple met in Singles for Christ, dated then lived together
damages, alleging that: (1) she is 22 years of age, single, when they learned of the pregnancy. Mabute said
Filipino and “a pretty lass of good moral character and miscarriage could be related to Abanag’s epileptic attacks

during the pregnancy. He had proposed marriage but marriage certificate was introduced to this effect, no
Abanag’s mother did not approve of him. RTC evidence was likewise offered to controvert these facts.
recommended dismissal on the grounds that (1) sexual The mere fact that no record of the marriage exists does
liaison is between 2 consenting adults; (2) Abanag was not not invalidate the marriage, provided all the requisites for
forced to live with Mabute (3) no law penalizes or its validity are present. The laws presume that a man and
prescribes the sexual activity of 2 unmarried persons; (4) woman who deport themselves as husband and wife, have
Abanag’s accusation that Mabute intiated the abortion was entered into a lawful contract of marriage, so much so that
“calculated to bring the act within” the scope of gross once a man and a woman have lived as husband and wife
misconduct because, there is no other evidence to support and such relationship is not denied nor contradicted, the
Abanag’s claim of abortion. presumption of their being married must be admitted. Also
Ruling: Mabute is not liable of gross misconduct. in consideration is that the respondents, despite the death
To justify suspension or disbarment, complained act must of their mother in 1941, continued to live together with
be grossly immoral (constitutes a criminal act or a highly Lupo until the latter’ s death in 1953, thereby establishing
reprehensible act). None of the complained acts can be their continued enjoyment and possession of status of
considered as grossly immoral conduct. Sexual relations legitimate children.
was consensual. Couple lived together as husband and
wife, and continued their relationship after the FC 2. No marriage shall be valid, unless these
miscarriage. Voluntary premarital sex where partners are essential requisites are present:
“not under any impediment to marry and where no deceit (1) Legal capacity of the contracting parties who
exists” is not a criminal/unprincipled act that warrants must be a male and a female; and
disbarment/disciplinary action. (2) Consent freely given in the presence of the
solemnizing officer.
D. Requisites for a valid marriage
FC 3 The formal requisites of marriage are:
Mariategui vs. CA (1) Authority of the solemnizing officer;
Facts: Lupo Mariategui passed away without (2) A valid marriage license except in the cases
having written a will. The petitioners, Lupo’s children from provided for in Chapter 2 of this Title; and
his first and second marriages executed a Deed of (3) A marriage ceremony which takes place with
Extrajudicial Partition for one of the properties left behind the appearance of the contracting parties before the
by their father. The respondents, Lupo’ s children by his solemnizing officer and their personal declaration that
third marriage, initiated a complaint claiming they were they take each other as husband and wife in the presence
deprived of their respective shares in the lot earlier of not less than two witnesses of legal age.
divided by the petitioners. They prayed for the annulment
of the Deed of Extrajudicial Partition, and the partition of FC 4. The absence of any of the essential or formal
the estate of their deceased father. TC dismissed the requisites shall render the marriage void ab initio, except
complaint, ruling that the respondents’ right to inherit as stated in Article 35 (2).
depends on the acknowledgment or recognition of their A defect in any of the essential requisites shall not
continued enjoyment and possession of status of children affect the validity of the marriage but the party or parties
of their late father. The evidence failed sustain either responsible for the irregularity shall be civilly, criminally
premise so the action cannot be sustained. CA ruled that all and administratively liable.
the children of Lupo, including the respondents, are
entitled to equal shares in his estate. CA then ordered the FC 5. Any male or female of the age of eighteen
petitioners to execute a Deed of Reconveyance in favor, years or upwards not under any of the impediments
and for the shares, of the respondents. mentioned in Articles 37 and 38, may contract marriage.
Issue: The respondents are legitimate children of
Lupo and Felipa Velasco, and thus, lawful heirs to the FC 35. The following marriages shall be void from
former’ s estate. One of the respondents, Jacinto, testified the beginning:
that when his father was still living, the latter was able to (1) Those contracted by any party below eighteen
convey to him that he (Lupo) was able to marry Felipa years of age even with the consent of parents or guardians;
“before a Justice of Peace of Taguig, Rizal.” Although no

(2) Those solemnized by any person not legally incapacity becomes manifest only after its solemnization.
authorized to perform marriages unless such marriages (As amended by E.O. 227)
were contracted with either or both parties believing in
good faith that the solemnizing officer had the legal FC 37. Marriages between the following are
authority to do so; incestuous and void from the beginning, whether
(3) Those solemnized without license, except relationship between the parties be legitimate or
those covered the preceding Chapter; illegitimate:
(4) Those bigamous or polygamous marriages not (1) Between ascendants and descendants of any
failing under Article 41; degree; and
(5) Those contracted through mistake of one (2) Between brothers and sisters, whether of the
contracting party as to the identity of the other; and full or half blood. (81a)
(6) Those subsequent marriages that are void
under Article 53. FC 38. The following marriages shall be void from
the beginning for reasons of public policy:
Void Voidable (1) Between collateral blood relatives whether
Total lack/absence of legitimate or illegitimate, up to the fourth civil degree;
essential/formal requisite (2) Between step-parents and step-children;
of marriage (3) Between parents-in-law and children-in-law;
Defect in essential requisite
(Formal Defect = Valid but
(4) Between the adopting parent and the adopted
person responsible for
defect held liable) child;
Valid for all civil purposes (5) Between the surviving spouse of the adopting
Invalid from its very
unless action is taken to parent and the adopted child;
inception
annul (6) Between the surviving spouse of the adopted
Can be ratified by child and the adopter;
Can never be ratified
cohabitation and copulation (7) Between an adopted child and a legitimate
Can be assailed collaterally
Can only be assailed child of the adopter;
through suits regarding
directly (8) Between adopted children of the same
succession, property, etc
If conceived before decree adopter; and
Children = illegitimate (9) Between parties where one, with the intention
of annulment = legitimate
Can be questioned even to marry the other, killed that other person's spouse, or his
after death of one of/both Cannot be questioned after or her own spouse.
spouses (for purposes of death of one of/both the
recognition of kids, spouses FC 45. A marriage may be annulled for any of the
succession, property)
following causes, existing at the time of the marriage:
Any interested party can
assail (Offspring, legal Only spouses can assail (1) That the party in whose behalf it is sought to
spouses, etc.) have the marriage annulled was eighteen years of age or
Has no legal effect except on over but below twenty-one, and the marriage was
properties obtained Property regime is solemnized without the consent of the parents, guardian or
through joint contribution ACP/CPG person having substitute parental authority over the party,
(co-ownership) in that order, unless after attaining the age of twenty-one,
Nullified Annulment
such party freely cohabited with the other and both lived
Only directly attacked
Directly or collaterally together as husband and wife;
(spouses only during
attacked (2) That either party was of unsound mind, unless
his/her lifetime)
such party after coming to reason, freely cohabited with
FC 36. A marriage contracted by any party who, at the other as husband and wife;
the time of the celebration, was psychologically (3) That the consent of either party was obtained
incapacitated to comply with the essential marital by fraud, unless such party afterwards, with full
obligations of marriage, shall likewise be void even if such knowledge of the facts constituting the fraud, freely
cohabited with the other as husband and wife;

(4) That the consent of either party was obtained marriage with Mijares is just a sham marriage because it
by force, intimidation or undue influence, unless the same was just to help Mijares in an administrative case filed
having disappeared or ceased, such party thereafter freely against her by her legal researcher for immorality.
cohabited with the other as husband and wife; Furthermore, Villaluz said that the annulment of his first
(5) That either party was physically incapable of marriage wasn’t final and executory yet when he married
consummating the marriage with the other, and such Mijares.
incapacity continues and appears to be incurable; or Ruling: Villaluz is guilty of bigamy. All the
(6) That either party was afflicted with a sexually- requisites and prerequisites mentioned in FC 2 and 3 were
transmissible disease found to be serious and appears to satisfied when the Mijares and Villaluz entered their
be incurable. marriage regardless of their individual intentions. Through
the principle of estoppel, Villaluz is prevented from
NCC 53. No marriage shall be solemnized unless claiming that his first marriage was still subsisting when
all these requisites are complied with: he married Mijares (2nd marriage) when he said he was
(1) Legal capacity of the contracting parties; annulled for the 3rd one. Membership of the legal
(2) Their consent, freely given; profession requires one to meet the standard of moral
(3) Authority of the person performing the fitness, which Villaluz failed to do so. These are grounds
marriage; and for either suspension or disbarment of lawyers.
(4) A marriage license, except in a marriage of
exceptional character Essential Formal
1. Legal Capacity 1. Authority of
RPC 350. Marriage contracted against provisions → Gender (M & W) Solemnizing Officer
of laws. — The penalty of prision correccional in its → Age (18 above)
→ Absence of Legal Impediment
medium and maximum periods shall be imposed upon any
(incestuous marriage, marriage
person who, without being included in the provisions of 2. Marriage License
against public policy, prior
the next proceeding article, shall have not been complied existing marriage, psychological
with or that the marriage is in disregard of a legal incapacity, FC 52 in re: FC 53)
impediment. 3. Marriage Ceremony
2. Consent
If either of the contracting parties shall obtain the → 2 witnesses
→ of parties, not parents
consent of the other by means of violence, intimidation or → publicly declared

fraud, he shall be punished by the maximum period of the
Essential Formal Effect
penalty provided in the next preceding paragraph.
Y Y Valid

Y N Void
De Mijares vs. Villaluz N Y Void
Facts: Mijares is the presiding Judge RTC Pasay N N Void
while Villaluz is a consultant at the Presidential Anti Crime Defect Y Voidable
Commission (PACC) led by former V.P. Joseph Estrada. Y Irregularity Valid
Mijares was widowed by her first husband, Primitivo, thus,
she obtained a decree declaring that he was presumptively • An impediment to a marriage may mean:
dead after an absence of 16 years. Mijares and Villaluz met o Existence of prior marriage
in 1977 wherein Villaluz became a close family friend of o Unrecognized foreign divorce decree
o Filial or other relationship between the
Mijares. They married in a civil wedding. However, the
prospective spouses.
reception, they fought due to a phone call she answered at
Villaluz’s condo. The call consisted of a woman insulting 2. Essential requisites
Mijares with offensive remarks. After they fought, Villaluz
told de Mijares to get the marriage contract and have it (a) Legal Capacity
burned. Mijares left and they never made up. Several
months later, Mijares found out from her bible study group (i) Gender
that Villaluz married Geraldez on 1994. Mijares found the
marriage certificate between Villaluz and Geraldez, which
Villaluz’ civil status is single. Villaluz claims that the

FC 2. No marriage shall be valid, unless these
essential requisites are present: FC 5. Any male or female of the age of eighteen
(1) Legal capacity of the contracting parties who years or upwards not under any of the impediments
must be a male and a female mentioned in Articles 37 and 38, may contract marriage

FC 148. In cases of cohabitation not falling under FC 35. The following marriages shall be void from
the preceding Article, only the properties acquired by both the beginning:
of the parties through their actual joint contribution of (1) Those contracted by any party below eighteen
money, property, or industry shall be owned by them in years of age even with the consent of parents or guardians;
common in proportion to their respective contributions. In
the absence of proof to the contrary, their contributions • Best evidence of age: Birth Certificate
and corresponding shares are presumed to be equal. The • If foreigner to be married, he/she must present
same rule and presumption shall apply to joint deposits of birth certificate and law of his/her country that
money and evidences of credit. they are capacitated to marry
• NCC 15: Nationality Principle
If one of the parties is validly married to another,

his or her share in the co-ownership shall accrue to the
Age Effects
absolute community or conjugal partnership existing in
Below 18 Void
such valid marriage. If the party who acted in bad faith is W/ parental consent: valid
not validly married to another, his or her shall be forfeited W/o parental consent: voidable subject to Art.
18-21
in the manner provided in the last paragraph of the 14. If father doesn’t give consent, but mother
preceding Article. gives consent, the marriage is voidable
The foregoing rules on forfeiture shall likewise W/ parental advice → valid
apply even if both parties are in bad faith. 21-25 W/o parental advice → valid but delayed
issuance of marriage license

Silverio vs. Republic
R.A. 6809 (An Act Lowering the Age of Majority from
Facts: Rommel Jacinto Dantes Silverio is a male
21 to 18 years, Amending for the purpose E.O. 209 and
transsexual. He’s a biological male who feels trapped in a
for other purposes) [December 13, 1989]
male body so he sought gender re-assignment in Bangkok,

Thailand. In 2002, he filed a petition for the change of his
Section 1. Article 234 of executive order no. 209, the
first name (from Rommel to Mely) and his sex (male to
family code of the Philippines, is hereby amended to read
female) in his birth certificate. He filed the petition before
as follows:
RTC Manila. He wanted to make these changes as he was
"Art. 234. Emancipation takes place by the
engaged to be married. RTC granted Silverio’s petition,
attainment of majority. Unless otherwise
ruling that it should be granted based on equity; that there
provided, majority commences at the age of
was no opposition to his petition (even the OSG did not
eighteen years."
make any basis for opposition at this point); that no harm,

injury or prejudice will be caused to anybody or the
Section 2. Articles 235 and 237 of the same code are
community in granting the petition. OSG filed a petition for
hereby repealed.
certiorari. CA reversed RTC

Ruling: Silverio has no legal capacity to contract
Section 3. Article 236 of the same code is also hereby
the marriage that he wished to contract. FC 2 states that a
amended to read as follows:
marriage will not be valid unless the “Legal capacity of the
"Art. 236. Emancipation shall terminate parental
contracting parties who must be a male and a female” are
authority over the person and property of the child who
present. Although the petitioner has had his biological
shall then be qualified and responsible for all acts of civil
makeup scientifically altered, his legal documents still
life, save the exceptions established by existing laws in
pertain to him as a male. Hence, he is incapable of
special cases.
contracting marriage with the man of his choosing.
"Contracting marriage shall require parental

consent until the age of twenty-one.
(ii). Age


"Nothing in this code shall be construed to has been expressly pardoned by the above named persons,
derogate from the duty or responsibility of parents and as the case may be.
guardians for children and wards below twenty-one years In cases of seduction, abduction, acts of
of age mentioned in the second and third paragraphs of lasciviousness and rape, the marriage of the offender with
article 2180 of the civil code." the offended party shall extinguish the criminal action or
remit the penalty already imposed upon him. The
Section 4. Upon the effectivity of this act, existing wills, provisions of this paragraph shall also be applicable to the
bequests, donations, grants, insurance policies and similar co-principals, accomplices and accessories after the fact of
instruments containing references and provisions the above-mentioned crimes.
favorable to minors will not retroact to their prejudice.
(iii) Absence of impediment
Section 5. This act shall take effect upon completion of its
publication in at least two (2) newspapers of general FC 5. Any male or female of the age of eighteen
circulation. years or upwards not under any of the impediments
mentioned in Articles 37 and 38, may contract marriage
FC 21. When either or both of the contracting
parties are citizens of a foreign country, it shall be FC 35. The following marriages shall be void from
necessary for them before a marriage license can be the beginning:
obtained, to submit a certificate of legal capacity to (1) Those contracted by any party below eighteen
contract marriage, issued by their respective diplomatic or years of age even with the consent of parents or guardians;
consular officials. (2) Those solemnized by any person not legally
Stateless persons or refugees from other countries authorized to perform marriages unless such marriages
shall, in lieu of the certificate of legal capacity herein were contracted with either or both parties believing in
required, submit an affidavit stating the circumstances good faith that the solemnizing officer had the legal
showing such capacity to contract marriage. authority to do so;
(3) Those solemnized without license, except
NCC 54. Any male of the age of sixteen years or those covered the preceding Chapter;
upwards, and any female of the age of fourteen years or (4) Those bigamous or polygamous marriages not
upwards, not under any of the impediments mentioned in failing under Article 41;
Articles 80 to 84, may contract marriage. (5) Those contracted through mistake of one
contracting party as to the identity of the other; and
NCC 80. The following marriages shall be void (6) Those subsequent marriages that are void
from the beginning: under Article 53
(1) Those contracted under the ages of sixteen
and fourteen years by the male and female respectively, Garcia vs. Recio
even with the consent of the parents; Facts: Recio married Samson, an Australian
citizen. Afterwards, they lived together as husband and
RPC 344 Prosecution of the crimes of adultery, wife in Australia. In 1989, a decree of divorce, under the
concubinage, seduction, abduction, rape and acts of Australian Family Court, was issued. Recio became an
lasciviousness. — The crimes of adultery and Australian citizen through naturalization on 1992 and
concubinage shall not be prosecuted except upon a married Garcia on 1994 in Cabanatuan. In their application
complaint filed by the offended spouse. for a marriage license, Recio declared himself single and
The offended party cannot institute criminal Filipino. In 1995, Garcia and Recio started living separately
prosecution without including both the guilty parties, if so Garcia filed a complaint for Declaration of Nullity on the
they are both alive, nor, in any case, if he shall have grounds of bigamy or bigamous relation on 1998. Recio
consented or pardoned the offenders. was able to secure a divorce decree from a family court in
The offenses of seduction, abduction, rape or acts Sydney, Australia. TC ruled that the marriage was
of lasciviousness, shall not be prosecuted except upon a terminated because of divorce decree between the two.
complaint filed by the offended party or her parents, Ruling: The decree of divorce submitted by Recio
grandparents, or guardian, nor, in any case, if the offender to prove his legal capacity to marry Garcia is inadmissible

as evidence and does not absolve him of bigamy. The outcome of Te’s pending case for annulment of marriage
nullity of Recio’s marriage with Samson, as shown by the with Choa had no bearing on the determination of his guilt
divorce decree issued was valid and recognized in the or innocence in the case for bigamy. All that is required to
Philippines since the Recio is a naturalized be guilty of bigamy is for the first marriage of the accused
Australian. However, there is absolutely no evidence that to be subsisting at the time the second marriage was
proves Recio’s legal capacity to marry petitioner despite contracted. Contrary to Te’s claim, the prosecution did
presenting a divorce decree. The said decree, being a present sufficient evidence that Te had committed the
foreign document was inadmissible to court as evidence offense of bigamy. Since Te’s marriage with Choa was
because it was not authenticated by the consul of the subsisting at the time he married Santella, his marriage
country where it will be used. ROC 13 provides that a with Santella is void ab initio (FC 35).
writing or document may be proven as a public or official
record of a foreign country by either: (a) an official Nollora vs. People
publication or (b) a copy thereof attested by the officer Facts: Jesusa Nollora worked in Saudi Arabia and
having legal custody of the document. married Atilano Nollora on 1999. Jesusa heard rumors that
her husband contracted a second marriage with Geraldino
Te vs. Choa on 2001. Jesusa claims Geraldino allegedly affirmed that
Facts: In September 1988, Te and Choa were she knew Atilano was married and despite this, still
married in civil rites. They did not live together after their married him. Geraldino claims as far as she knew Atilano
marriage but met each other regularly. Choa gave birth to a was single and Catholic when they married, and that she
girl. Not long after, Te stopped visiting her. Te contracted a knew of Jesusa only when the case was filed. Atilano is a
second marriage in 1990 with Julieta Santella while his muslim convert since 1992, and is thus entitled to marry 4
marriage with Choa was subsisting. Choa filed a complaint wives as allowed by the Muslim code. He presented a
for bigamy with RTC Quezon City. Before the said certificate of conversion dated 2004. In his marriage
Information was filed, Te filed an action in the same court contract with Jesusa, he indicated he is “Catholic
for the annulment of his marriage to Choa on the ground Pentecostal” and with Geraldino a “Catholic”. Neither state
that he was forced to marry her. Te claimed that Choa was he is Muslim Atilano asserted in his marriage certificate
hiding her pregnancy by another man at the time of their with Geraldino that he is single. RTC convicted Nollora,
marriage and that she was psychologically incapacitated to and acquitted Geraldino. CA affirmed.
perform her marital obligations. Choa also filed an Issue: Nollora is guilty of Bigamy. Atilano did not
administrative case with the Professional Regulation declare he was a Muslim convert in both marriages,
Commission (PRC) against Te and Santella for the indicating his criminal intent. A Muslim cannot just marry
revocation of their engineering licenses on the ground that anybody for multiple times since, there are requirements
they committed acts of immorality, as well as falsification that Shari’a law imposes, i.e. notification. Monogamy is the
on the part of Te since he stated that he was single in his general rule, while Muslims being permitted to have a
marriage contract with Santella. Te filed a motion to second wife is tolerated, not encouraged. The truth or
inhibit with the RTC and a motion to suspend proceedings falsehood of declaration of one’s religion in a marriage
with the PRC, on the ground that his civil case for certificate is not an essential requirement. In case of a
annulment of marriage was still pending. Both were marriage between a Muslim and a non-Muslim, solemnized
denied. He also filed a demurrer to evidence, claiming that not in accordance with Muslim law or this code (Code of
the prosecution did not present the original copies of his Muslim personal Laws), the Family code of the Philippines
marriage contracts with Choa and Santella and there was shall apply.
no showing that the requisites of a valid marriage were
complied with. CA upheld the denial of Te’s petitions. Avenido vs. Avenido
Among the grounds for denial was that Te’s pending Facts: In 1998, Tecla instituted a declaration of
annulment case did not pose a prejudicial question nullity of Marriage against Peregina on the ground that she
(=question based on a fact separate from the crime but is the lawful wife of Eustaquio that her marriage with
intimately connected with it that it determines the guilt or Eustaquio was solemnized on Sept 30, 1942 in Talibon,
innocence of the accused) to his bigamy case. Bohol and officiated by the Parish Priest. She alleges that a
Ruling: The civil action for annulment of marriage Marriage Certificate was recorded in the Office of Local
does not pose a prejudicial question to a bigamy case. The Civil Registrar in Talibon but, due to WWII, records were

destroyed and the only proof is a certification issued by attested before any official authorized by law to
LCR. Their Marriage allegedly begot 4 children. Sometime administer oaths. The personal manifestation shall be
in 1954, Eustaquio left his family with unknown recorded in both applications for marriage license, and the
affidavit, if one is executed instead, shall be attached to
whereabouts. Tecla was informed that he was in Davao
said applications.
living with another woman (Buenaventura) who died in
1977. In 1979, they leearned that Eustaquio married FC 15. Any contracting party between the age of
another woman (Peregina). Tecla claims that this must be twenty-one and twenty-five shall be obliged to ask their
declared void for being bigamous. Peregina answered that parents or guardian for advice upon the intended
(a) she is the legal surviving wife (b) Eustaquio died 1989 marriage. If they do not obtain such advice, or if it be
(c) their Marriage celebrated on 1979 at St. Jude Parish, unfavorable, the marriage license shall not be issued till
after three months following the completion of the
Davao. Tecla presented testimonial and documentary
publication of the application therefor. A sworn statement
evidence: (a) testimony of Adelina, sister of deceased, by the contracting parties to the effect that such advice has
Climaco, Son, and Tecla herself as witnesses to the been sought, together with the written advice given, if any,
marriage; (b) Certifications including a certificate for the shall be attached to the application for marriage license.
Loss/Destruction of Record of Marriage from OCR, Talibon, Should the parents or guardian refuse to give any advice,
Bohol. Peregrina testified on her marriage to Estaquio, her this fact shall be stated in the sworn statement.

life as his wife, how she took care of Estaquio, and her
FC 45. A marriage may be annulled for any of the
knowledge that Tecla was Estaquio’s common-law wife.
following causes, existing at the time of the marriage:
She also submitted documentary evidence: (a) Affidavit of (1) That the party in whose behalf it is sought to
Estaquio, declaring himself single and having a common have the marriage annulled was eighteen years of age or
law wife, Tecla with 4 children and (b) Marriage Contract. over but below twenty-one, and the marriage was
RTC denied the petition and dismissed the counterclaim on solemnized without the consent of the parents, guardian or
the ground that they did not show Marriage certificate. CA person having substitute parental authority over the party,
in that order, unless after attaining the age of twenty-one,
reversed on the ground that RTC should consider the
such party freely cohabited with the other and both lived
evidence submitted by Teclas together as husband and wife;
Ruling: The evidence presented during the triail
proves the existence of marriage of Tecla to Eustaquio. (v) Consent freely given by both spouses
There is a presumption of lawful marriage as they
deported themselves as husband and wife. This (a) Mistake as to identity,
presumption was supported by documentary evidence and
FC 35. The following marriages shall be void from
testimonies. The Marriage certificate is PRIMARY evidence
the beginning:
but should not be the sole and exclusive evidence. The due (5) Those contracted through mistake of one
execution established by testimonies serve as secondary contracting party as to the identity of the other; and
evidence. The Subsequent loss shown by testimony and
affidavit of officiating priest is also relevant evidence. Both FC 86. Any of the following circumstances shall
secondary evidences may be admitted to prove the fact of constitute fraud referred to in number 4 of the preceding
marriage. article:
(1) Misrepresentation as to the identity of one of

the contracting parties;
(iv) Parental consent
• Mistake of identity → marriage void
FC 14. In case either or both of the contracting o not a case of vitiated consent but that of
parties, not having been emancipated by a previous absence of consent
marriage, are between the ages of eighteen and twenty-
one, they shall, in addition to the requirements of the (b) Effect of insanity
preceding articles, exhibit to the local civil registrar, the
consent to their marriage of their father, mother, surviving FC 45. A marriage may be annulled for any of the
parent or guardian, or persons having legal charge of them, following causes, existing at the time of the marriage:
in the order mentioned. Such consent shall be manifested (2) That either party was of unsound mind, unless
in writing by the interested party, who personally appears such party after coming to reason, freely cohabited with
before the proper local civil registrar, or in the form of an the other as husband and wife;
affidavit made in the presence of two witnesses and

• Insanity → marriage voidable due to vitiated NCC 1344. In order that fraud may make a
consent contract voidable, it should be serious and should not have
been employed by both contracting parties.
(c). Effect of fraud
Anaya vs. Palaroan
FC 45. A marriage may be annulled for any of the Aurora Anaya and Fernando Palaroan were
following causes, existing at the time of the marriage: married on 1953. Fernando divulged to Aurora that
(3) That the consent of either party was obtained several months prior to their marriage, he had pre-marital
by fraud, unless such party afterwards, with full relationship with a close relative of his Aurora avers that
knowledge of the facts constituting the fraud, freely this constitutes fraud in obtaining her consent. Fernando
cohabited with the other as husband and wife; denied having had pre-marital relationship with a close
relative and denied having committed any fraud against
FC 46. Any of the following circumstances shall her. Aurora then brought up new set of averments: (1) that
constitute fraud referred to in Number 3 of the preceding prior to their marriage, Fernando only pretended to show
Article: love and affection to Aurora because she merely happened
(1) Non-disclosure of a previous conviction by to be the first girl available to marry so he could evade
final judgment of the other party of a crime involving marrying the close relative of his whose immediate family
moral turpitude; members were threatening him to into marrying; and (2)
(2) Concealment by the wife of the fact that at the that he secretly intended from the start not to perform his
time of the marriage, she was pregnant by a man other marital duties and obligations, and that he covertly made
than her husband; up his mind not to live with her
(3) Concealment of sexually transmissible disease, Ruling: The non-disclosure of Fernando of his
regardless of its nature, existing at the time of the pre-marital relationship is not a ground of annulment.
marriage; or Congress intended to confine circumstances that can
(4) Concealment of drug addiction, habitual constitute fraud as a ground for annulment of a marriage
alcoholism or homosexuality or lesbianism existing at the and non-disclosure is not one of those enumerated. There
time of the marriage. is an express exclusion on misrepresentation or deceit as
No other misrepresentation or deceit as to to chastity in the last paragraph of Art. 86. The law does
character, health, rank, fortune or chastity shall constitute not assuage her grief after her consent was solemnly given
such fraud as will give grounds for action for the for marriage. The lawmakers’ intent being plain, the
annulment of marriage. Court’s duty is to give effect to the same, whether it agrees
with the rule or not.
NCC 1338. There is fraud when, through insidious The second set of averments can also not be
words or machinations of one of the contracting parties, considered Any secret intention on the husband’s part not
the other is induced to enter into a contract which, without to perform his marital duties must have been discovered
them, he would not have agreed to. by the wife soon after the marriage. Hence her action for
annulment based on that fraud should have been brought
NCC 1339. Failure to disclose facts, when there is within four years after the marriage. This ground was only
a duty to reveal them, as when the parties are bound by pleaded in 1966, it must be declared already barred.
confidential relations, constitutes fraud.
(d). Effect of force, intimidation and undue influence
NCC 1340. The usual exaggerations in trade, when
the other party had an opportunity to know the facts, are FC 45. A marriage may be annulled for any of the
not in themselves fraudulent. following causes, existing at the time of the marriage:
(4) That the consent of either party was obtained
NCC 1341. A mere expression of an opinion does by force, intimidation or undue influence, unless the same
not signify fraud, unless made by an expert and the other having disappeared or ceased, such party thereafter freely
party has relied on the former's special knowledge. (n) cohabited with the other as husband and wife;

NCC 1342. Misrepresentation by a third person • For intimidation, you must take into account the
does not vitiate consent, unless such misrepresentation surrounding circumstances
has created substantial mistake and the same is mutual.
(n) NCC 1335. There is violence when in order to
wrest consent, serious or irresistible force is employed.
NCC 1343. Misrepresentation made in good faith There is intimidation when one of the contracting
is not fraudulent but may constitute error. (n) parties is compelled by a reasonable and well-grounded
fear of an imminent and grave evil upon his person or

property, or upon the person or property of his spouse, FC 45. A marriage may be annulled for any of the
descendants or ascendants, to give his consent. following causes, existing at the time of the marriage:
To determine the degree of intimidation, the age, (5) That either party was physically incapable of
sex and condition of the person shall be borne in mind. consummating the marriage with the other, and such
A threat to enforce one's claim through competent incapacity continues and appears to be incurable;
authority, if the claim is just or legal, does not vitiate
consent. • Impotence → ground to have the marriage
annulled when it is concealed
NCC 1336. Violence or intimidation shall annul o For men, it does not stand erect
the obligation, although it may have been employed by a o For women, can also be impotent if the
third person who did not take part in the contract. hole is too small
o presumption of potency
NCC 1337. There is undue influence when a o must be continuous and incurable
person takes improper advantage of his power over the
will of another, depriving the latter of a reasonable Jimenez vs. Cañizares
freedom of choice. The following circumstances shall be Facts: Joel Jimenez and Remedios Cañizares
considered: the confidential, family, spiritual and other married on 1950. Joel prays for annulling their marriage
relations between the parties, or the fact that the person because her vagina was too small to allow the penetration
alleged to have been unduly influenced was suffering from of a male organ for copulation and that said condition
mental weakness, or was ignorant or in financial distress. existed at the time of marriage and continues to exist. For
said reason, he left the conjugal home two nights and one
Villanueva vs. CA day after they married. The lower court required to submit
Facts: Orlando Villanueva and Lilia Canalita- a physical examination by a lady physician to determine
Villanueva got married in Palawan on April 13, 1988. On her capacity for copulation; otherwise such failure would
1992, Orlando filed for annulment marriage alleging (1) be deemed lack of interest on her part and that judgment
that threats of violence and duress forced him into upon the evidence presented by Jimenez would be
marrying Lilia, who was already pregnant; (2) that he did rendered. In 1957, the court annulled the marriage. The
not get her pregnant prior to the marriage; (3) that he City Attorney filed an MR on the ground that impotency
never cohabited with her after the marriage; and (4) that has not been sufficiently established, and that Cañizares
he later learned that Lilia’s child died during delivery. Lilia was not examined because of refusal. Instead of
prayed for the dismissal of the petition, arguing that annulment, Cañizares should be charged with contempt
Orlando (1) freely and voluntarily married her; (2) stayed and compelled to undergo physical examination. MR
with her for almost a month after their marriage; (3) wrote denied.
letters to her after he returned to Manila, during which Ruling: The marriage may not be annulled
Lilia visited him personally; and that (4) Orlando knew without the wife’s answer and a medical examination. The
about the progress of her pregnancy, which ended in lone testimony of the husband that his wife is incapable of
premature delivery. RTC dismissed the petition. CA sexual intercourse is insufficient to tear the ties that have
affirmed. bound them together as husband and wife. Whether the
Ruling: The subject marriage may not be annulled wife is really impotent cannot be deemed to have been
on the ground of vitiated consent impaired. Factual satisfactorily established, because she abstained from
findings show that Orland freely and voluntarily married taking part therein. The presumption is in favor of potency.
Lilia. There was a span of 4 years and 8 months from Any presumption could not be inferred. Women of this
alleged coerced consent, before filing for annulment. There country are by nature coy, bashful and shy and would not
was neither intimidation nor force exerted into marriage. submit to a physical examination unless compelled to by
Orlando is a security guard and it is reasonable to assume competent authority. She can neither be charged with
that he knew the rudiments of self-defense, or proper way contempt nor can she be a witness against herself
to get himself outside harm’s way. There was no fraud
when he was made to believe Lillia was pregnant. Orlando (Veronica) Alcazar vs. (Rey) Alcazar
consummated a sexual act with her prior to their marriage. Facts: Veronica and Rey got married in 2000.
The marriage cannot be annulled due to absence of Immediately after, they lived for 5 days in Mindoro
cohabitation since failure to cohabit is only relevant in Oriental then went back to Manila. Rey then flew off to
cases of annulment on grounds of lack of parental consent, Riyadh to work as an upholsterer and did not respond to
insanity, fraud, intimidation, or undue influence. or communicate with Veronica. A year and a half later, Rey
arrived in the Philippines without informing Veronica, who
(e). Effect of physical incapacity/impotence only only found out about his arrival from a co-teacher.
Still, no contact was made. Veronica concluded that Rey
was physically incapable of consummating the marriage,

citing FC 45 (5), and that there was no possibility for no longer a problem with the advent of
reconciliation. Rey never appeared but the public technology, e.g. better transportation and
prosecutor assured the absence of collusion. Veronica communication means)
presented herself, her mother Lolita Cabacungan, and • Survival of the spouse who was in articulo moris
Psychologist Nedy Tayag as witnesses. Tayag diagnosed still renders the marriage valid
and identified Rey to have Narcissistic Personality
Disorder (NPD), even prior to the celebration of marriage. Requirements:
Ruling: Physical incapacity is improper to the 1. Application
facts at hand as there was no establishment that Rey was 2. Supporting Documents → previous marriage
physically incapable to consummate the marriage. They void/annulled, etc.
even had sex after the celebration of the marriage. 3. Proof of Legal Capacity
Psychological Incapacity (FC 36) ought to be invoked to a. Birth Certificate
provide for nullity of the marriage. Nonetheless, Rey is not b. If none, Baptismal Certificate
psychologically incapacitated to perform the essential c. if none, Affidavit from Parents
marital obligations. Mere irreconcilable differences and d. or just personal appearance
conflicting personalities do not constitute psychological e. (If Alien) Certificate of Legal Capacity.
incapacity. Contrary to the assessment, the spouses have Without this, the marriage is still valid but
been apart too long, grown away from each other, and considered an irregularity
became estranged. 4. Parental Consent/ Advise when needed
5. Marriage Counseling → Otherwise still valid,
(f) Effect of affliction with STD release of ML will just be delayed
6. Publication
FC 45. A marriage may be annulled for any of the 7. Payment of Fee
following causes, existing at the time of the marriage: 8. Family Planning Seminar
(6) That either party was afflicted with a sexually-
transmissible disease found to be serious and appears to Republic vs. CA (& Castro)
be incurable. Facts: On 1970, Angelina Castro and Edwin F.
Cardenas were married before the City Court Judge of
• STD → if not disclosed at the time of the marriage, Pasig City. Cardenas attended the procurement of the
the marriage is voidable marriage license. The couple did not immediately live
together as husband and wife since the marriage was
FC 46. Any of the following circumstances shall unknown to Castro’s parents. They decided to live together
constitute fraud referred to in Number 3 of the preceding when Castro discovered she was pregnant. The
Article: cohabitation lasted for four months, and thereafter the
(3) Concealment of sexually transmissible disease, couple parted ways. Their daughter was adopted by
regardless of its nature, existing at the time of the Castro’s brother with the consent of Cardenas. Desiring to
marriage; follow her daughter in U.S, Castro wanted to have their
marriage annulled. Her lawyer discovered that there was
5. Formal Requisites no marriage license issued to Cardenas prior to the
celebration of their marriage. Castro then filed a petition
(a) Marriage license with RTC QC seeking for nullity of her marriage claiming
that no marriage license was ever issued to them. RTC
• From the Civil Registrar as its civil duty of issuing, denied the petition holding that the certification was
for the purpose of ascertaining age, inadequate to establish the alleged non-issuance of a
• Proof of State’s participation in the marriage marriage license, and that the inability of the certifying
• Validity: 120 days from issuance (FC 20) official to locate the marriage license is inconclusive to
• If you were a minor at the time you got the ML, but show that there was none issued. CA reversed.
you were of age during the marriage itself, then Ruling: the marriage between Castro and
marriage is valid Cardenas is void due to the absence of a valid marriage
• 10-day publication period (if issued before license. The certification issued by the Civil Registrar of
publication period finishes, mere defect) Pasig unaccompanied
• Issuance doesn’t mean you need to get married by any circumstances of suspicion sufficiently prove that
• The marriage of exceptional character, where the the office did not issue a license. Despite Castro’s
residence of either party is so located that there is testimony not being supported by any other witnesses, her
no means of transportation to enable such party to petition may still not be denied due to the peculiar
personally appear before the local civil registrar is circumstances of a secret marriage. Cardenas was duly
served with notice of the proceedings, which he chose to

ignore. Castro sufficiently established the absence of the possess states that it is from Carmona, Cavite, yet they are
subject marriage license. not residents of Carmona, nor did they go there for
application. Rosita asserted the validity of their marriage,
Sy vs. CA and that petitioner has a mistress with whom he has three
Facts: Fernando and Filipina has 2 children: children, and thus the annulment was filed to evade
Frederick (b. 1975) and Farrah (b. 1978). On 1832, prosecution for concubinage. RTC dismissed the petition.
Fernando left their conjugal dwelling. Filipina filed a CA affirmed.
petition for legal separation and later amended to Ruling: The marriage may not be annulled on the
separation of property and custody of children, which was ground of lack of marriage license at the precise time of
granted. Filipina went to a dental clinic owned by marriage. The marriage was solemnized prior to the
Fernando and mistress to fetch son Frederick. When he effectivity of the Family Code, thus the Civil Code applies.
refused to leave, she spanked him. Fernando pulled NCC 53 states that a valid marriage license is a requisite of
Filipina away from their son, punched her and choked her. marriage, and the absence of which renders the marriage
Filipina suffered from contusions, hematoma and filed for void ab initio. However, the absence of such license must
attempted parricide. Fernando was convicted of slight be apparent on the marriage contract, or at the very least,
physical injuries. RTC later granted the petition for legal supported by a certification from the local civil registrar
separation on the ground of physical violence, sexual that no such marriage license was issued. In this case, the
infidelity, attempt on life, and abandonment. Filipina filed marriage contract reflects a marriage license number.
for petition for declaration of absolute nullity on grounds There was also a certification issued by the Local Civil
of psychological incapacity. RTC denied. CA affirmed. In the Registrar of Carmona stating that a marriage license does
SC, a new issue was raised: the marriage was contracted exist, and is named to the couple. This proves the
without license. The marriage license date indicated presumption of regularity (government office presumed to
September 17, 1974 whereas the actual wedding (also have performed their duty) in issuing a marriage license.
indicated in children’s birth certificates) was on November That the couple are not residents of Carmona is a mere
15, 1973 in the Church of Our Lady Lourdes in Quezon irregularity that does not affect the validity of the
City. marriage. Rev. Navarro is shown to have performed a
Ruling: The marriage between Filipina and marriage ceremony. This will be presumed in the absence
Fernando Sy is void from the beginning for a lack of a of any showing to the contrary. Moreover, the solemnizing
marriage license at the time of the ceremony. A marriage officer is not duty-bound to investigate whether or not a
license is a formal requirement; pursuant to NCC 80(3), a marriage license has been duly and regularly issued by the
marriage contracted without a marriage license is void ab local civil registrar.
initio. The license was issued in Carmona, Cavite, yet,
neither party ever resided there. There being no claim of (Anthony) De Castro vs. (Annabelle) De Castro
an exceptional character in the marriage, NCC 72-79 Facts: Anthony and Annabelle De Castro applied
(exceptions) cannot apply. Although the issue of the lack of for a marriage license on September 1994. Upon returning
marriage license at the time of the marriage ceremony was to the Civil Registrar, they discovered that the license has
only first raised by the petitioner in her SC appeal, the expired. On March 1995, the couple executed an affidavit
Court held that they would not apply the rule against stating they have lived together as husband and wife for at
raising new facts during appeals as doing so would least 5 years to be able to get married on that same day.
undoubtedly resolve the issue at bar. Even though the However, in truth, they have only met in 1991, which
documents presented were only photocopies, they were makes them known to each other for only a maximum of 4
marked and admitted with no objections from both years. Thereafter, they did not go home to the same house
parties, thus, deeming them sufficient proof of facts. as expected from newlyweds, instead going to their
separate homes. 8 months after, Reinna De Castro was
(Restituto) Alcantara vs. (Rosita) Alcantara born, to Annabelle, in all intents and purposes, a single
Facts: On 1982, Restituto and Rosita met a fixer in mother. Annabelle filed a complaint for support against
Manila City Hall who arranged their wedding before Rev. Anthony. Anthony denied obligation to support, stating
Navarro of the CDCCBR Chapel on the same day without that their marriage was invalid for lack of marriage
securing a a marriage license. They had another wedding license; and that he never acknowledged/seen the child,
on 1983 in Manuguit Church in Tondo, Manila, but still did and that she could not be his child.
not secure a marriage license. Restituto asserts that they Ruling: The marriage is void due to the absence of
have a fake marriage license procured from Carmona, a valid marriage license. The affidavit is of no value since
Cavite, as neither of them are from Carmona, nor did they the purpose of the affidavit, declaring cohabitation as
apply for a license from the Local Civil Registrar. They had husband and wife, serves to avoid shame and scandal upon
2 children, but in the couple separated in 1988. Resituto unions outside lawful marriages. In this case, there was no
filed a petition for annulment of marriage, raising the lack shame or scandal to avoid. Thus, the document was
of a marriage license, and that the marriage license they misused and immaterial, and its execution does not

replace the marriage license requirement. However, the (Ludivina) Villarica vs. (Wiliam) Villarica
child was found to be the illegitimate child of Anthony Facts: Ludivina and William married twice: (First)
through proof in the Certificate of livebirth, indicating in a civil ceremony registered at the civil registrar of
Anthony as the father, and another affidavit executed for Meycuayan, Bulacan; and (Second) using the same
tax exemption wherein Anthony stated he is the father of marriage license in a church ceremony registered at the
the child. Reinna is therefore entitled to child support. civil registrar of Mandaluyong. Ludivina sought the
nullification of the second marriage. RTC declared the
(Syed) Abbas vs. (Gloria) Abbas second marriage void on the ground that William was
Syed (Pakistani) and Gloria (Filipino) married on psychologically incapacitated to comply with his marital
1992 at a Taipei Mosque in Taiwan. Syed arrived in the obligations. When Ludivina asked the Mandaluyong Civil
Philippines and was made to undergo a certain ceremony Registrar to update its records to reflect the decision, the
in his mother-in-law’s house which turned out to be a registrar refused on the grounds that the first marriage
marriage ceremony where they signed a document. The was still valid and subsisting. Ludivina moved for the
marriage license was registered in the Civil Registrar of amendment of the RTC decision to include nullification of
Carmona, Cavite wherein both Gloria and Syed don’t reside the first marriage. RTC ordered t the Mandaluyong civil
in. Syed later went to the Office of the Civil Registrar of registrar and NSO to cancel the first marriage. CA affirmed.
Carmona to check but was issued by the Municipal Civil Ruling: The first civil marriage wedding may not
Registrar (Encarnacion) a certification that the supposed remain subsisting after the second church wedding has
license was of another marriage issued to Arlindo Getalado been declared annulled. It is absurd that the second
and Myra Mabilangan. Gloria filed bigamy cases against marriage be annulled on the grounds of psychological
Syed in 2001 and 2002. Syed presented Bagsic, an incapacity of the husband to perform his marital duties,
employee of the Municipal Civil Registrar of Carmona, but to consider him capable of doing so in the first
Cavite who testified that their office did not issue any marriage when the two marriages were contracted a
other license of the same serial number to any other fortnight apart. The nullification of the first marriage on
person. Gloria presented Rev. Mario Dauz, who testified the grounds of psychological incapacity is barred by virtue
that he solemnized their marriage at the residence of the of res judicata. The grounds for nullification used to annul
bride on with two witnesses, Atty. Sanchez (sponsor) and the second can also be used to annul the first marriage
Mary Ann Ceriola. Atty. Sanchez testified that a certain considering that the two marriage were celebrated using
Qualin secured the marriage license. Felicitas Goo, the the same marriage license a few days apart. Thus, it is
bride’s mother, testified that a man went to their house unnecessary to file for annulment of the first marriage
with the application for marriage license and then went
back three days later showing the marriage license. She (Raquel) Kho vs. Republic (& Veronica Kho)
further said that she did not read all of the contents of the Facts: Raquel filed a petition for declaration of
marriage license. Syed and Gloria has a daughter born on nullity of marriage with Veronica. On 1972, his parents
1993. Gloria testified that Syed married a certain Maria ordered a clerk to arrange for the documents needed for
Corazon Buenaventura hence the bigamy case. She also did his wedding with Veronica. The marriage took place at 3
not know if their marriage in Taiwan was celebrated under A.M. to avoid the public. Raquel never went to the civil
Muslim rites because the one who celebrated the marriage registrar or fill up or sign documents for a marriage license
was Chinese and the people around them were Chinese. and the clerk was unable to procure the license due to time
RTC ruled in favor of Syed (void). CA reversed: the constraints. All marriage requisites were complied with
registrar failed to state that there was a diligent search for except for the license. Raquel presented a Certification
the marriage license. from the Civil Registrar confirming that they have no
Ruling: The marriage of Syed and Gloria is void license on record. Veronica filed for dismissal for lack of
for absence of a marriage license (FC 4). Gloria failed to cause of action and lack of evidence that they do not have a
present the license and simply relied on testimonies of her license. She avers that they both personally went to the
witnesses. There’s a presumption of regularity of official civil registrar to secure a license before the solemnization.
acts (issuance of marriage license). The respondents RTC declared the marriage void ab initio pursuant to NCC.
(party alleging a valid marriage) failed to prove the CA reversed on the ground of presumption of existence of
existence of the license. They were not able to prove the a license, and that the absence of indication of the license
irregularity or failure to perform a duty regarding the in the marriage contract is a mere defect in a formal
search of the Municipal Civil Registrar of the marriage requisite and does not invalidate the marriage. CA also
license. (Side Issue): There was no doubt on the authority took note of Raquel’s questionable motives due to an
of the solemnizing officer and the conduct of the marriage alleged liaison with another woman; and that it is only
ceremony. now he is pursuing this action when he did nothing the
past 25 years of marriage
Ruling: The marriage is void ab initio. CA did not
judge according to law and evidence but rather on ethical

considerations and motive Since the marriage was The applicants, their parents or guardians shall
contracted before the FC took effect, NCC governs. not be required to exhibit their residence certificates in
According to NCC 53, one of the requisites of a marriage is any formality in connection with the securing of the
a marriage license. Acc to NCC 80, without a marriage marriage license.
license, a marriage is considered void ab initio. The
marriage license is the essence of the marriage contract b. proof of capacity
and the State’s demonstration of its involvement and
participation in any marriage. Jurisprudence shows that DOJ Opinion 50 S. 1991 (April 30, 1991) Any
the Certification from the Civil Registrar is considered irregularity in the formal requisites of a marriage, one of
valid evidence Veronica failed to produce the alleged which is a marriage license, will not affect the validity of
marriage license they secured or any other evidence to
the marriage. Marriage under a license is not invalidated
back her claim. Raquel’s motives are immaterial since the
law clearly states that in the absence of a marriage license, by the fact that the license was wrongfully or fraudulently
the marriage must be deemed void ab initio. obtained without prejudice to the prosecution of the
parties. The solemnizing officer does not have to
1. Where to apply investigate whether or not the license has been properly
issued. It is the absence of essential or formal requisite
FC 9. A marriage license shall be issued by the that will render the marriage void ab initio.
local civil registrar of the city or municipality where either

contracting party habitually resides, except in marriages
DOJ Opinion 146 S. 1991 (Oct. 17, 1991). The
where no license is required in accordance with Chapter 2
attainment of the required minimum age for marriage
of this Title.
should be reckoned, not on the date of filing of the

application for issuance of a marriage license, but on the
FC 10. Marriages between Filipino citizens abroad
date of marriage. Legal age and license are two different
may be solemnized by a consul-general, consul or vice-
requisites for marriage, and the presence of both
consul of the Republic of the Philippines. The issuance of
requisites at the time of the celebration of the marriage is
the marriage license and the duties of the local civil
mandatory for the validity of the marriage.
registrar and of the solemnizing officer with regard to the

celebration of marriage shall be performed by said

consular official.
FC 12. The local civil registrar, upon receiving

such application, shall require the presentation of the
2. Requirements for issuance
original birth certificates or, in default thereof, the

baptismal certificates of the contracting parties or copies
a. application
of such documents duly attested by the persons having

custody of the originals. These certificates or certified
FC 11. Where a marriage license is required, each
copies of the documents by this Article need not be sworn
of the contracting parties shall file separately a sworn
to and shall be exempt from the documentary stamp tax.
application for such license with the proper local civil
The signature and official title of the person issuing the
registrar which shall specify the following:
certificate shall be sufficient proof of its authenticity.
(1) Full name of the contracting party;
If either of the contracting parties is unable to
(2) Place of birth;
produce his birth or baptismal certificate or a certified
(3) Age and date of birth;
copy of either because of the destruction or loss of the
(4) Civil status;
original or if it is shown by an affidavit of such party or of
(5) If previously married, how, when and where
any other person that such birth or baptismal certificate
the previous marriage was dissolved or annulled;
has not yet been received though the same has been
(6) Present residence and citizenship;
required of the person having custody thereof at least
(7) Degree of relationship of the contracting
fifteen days prior to the date of the application, such party
parties;
may furnish in lieu thereof his current residence certificate
(8) Full name, residence and citizenship of the
or an instrument drawn up and sworn to before the local
father;
civil registrar concerned or any public official authorized
to administer oaths. Such instrument shall contain the
mother; and
sworn declaration of two witnesses of lawful age, setting
forth the full name, residence and citizenship of such
guardian or person having charge, in case the contracting
contracting party and of his or her parents, if known, and
party has neither father nor mother and is under the age of
the place and date of birth of such party. The nearest of kin
twenty-one years.
of the contracting parties shall be preferred as witnesses,

or, in their default, persons of good reputation in the her husband, unless in the meantime she has given birth to
province or the locality. a child. (n)
The presentation of birth or baptismal certificate
shall not be required if the parents of the contracting
Corpus vs. Sto Tomas
parties appear personally before the local civil registrar
Facts: Gerbert Corpus, formerly Filipino and then
concerned and swear to the correctness of the lawful age
a naturalized Canadian, married Daisylyn Sto Tomas.
of said parties, as stated in the application, or when the
However, due to work commitments, Gerbert immediately
local civil registrar shall, by merely looking at the
went back to Canada. Upon return to the Philippines to
applicants upon their personally appearing before him, be
surprise his wife, he learned that his wife is having an
convinced that either or both of them have the required
affair with another man. Saddened, he went back to
age.
Canada and met another Filipino whom he wanted to

marry. Corpus filed for divorce of his previous marriage in
FC 13. In case either of the contracting parties has
a Canadian court which was granted. Corpus went back to
been previously married, the applicant shall be required to
the Philippines with the desire to marry his new fiance,
furnish, instead of the birth or baptismal certificate
and to file into the Civil Registrar the decree of divorce
required in the last preceding article, the death certificate
issued in Canada. NSO informed Corpus that the decree
of the deceased spouse or the judicial decree of the
must first be judicially recognized. Sto. Tomas also sent a
absolute divorce, or the judicial decree of annulment or
nitride letter stating his support and same interest with
declaration of nullity of his or her previous marriage.
Corpus’ actions. However, RTC denied the petition because
In case the death certificate cannot be secured, the party
he was a Canadian citizen and only Filipino citizens can
shall make an affidavit setting forth this circumstance and
avail of the remedy provided by FC 26
his or her actual civil status and the name and date of
Ruling: FC 26 does not extend to aliens the right
death of the deceased spouse.
to petition for recognition of a foreign divorce decree as

the substantive right it establishes is in favor of the
FC 14. In case either or both of the contracting
Filipino spouse However, this does not necessarily strip
parties, not having been emancipated by a previous
Corpus of legal interest to petition for the recognition of
marriage, are between the ages of eighteen and twenty-
his foreign divorce decree. Case remanded to trial court for
one, they shall, in addition to the requirements of the
proceedings based on rulings above.
preceding articles, exhibit to the local civil registrar, the

consent to their marriage of their father, mother, surviving
c. parental advice
parent or guardian, or persons having legal charge of them,

in the order mentioned. Such consent shall be manifested
FC 15. Any contracting party between the age of
in writing by the interested party, who personally appears
twenty-one and twenty-five shall be obliged to ask their
before the proper local civil registrar, or in the form of an
parents or guardian for advice upon the intended
affidavit made in the presence of two witnesses and
marriage. If they do not obtain such advice, or if it be
attested before any official authorized by law to
unfavorable, the marriage license shall not be issued till
administer oaths. The personal manifestation shall be
after three months following the completion of the
recorded in both applications for marriage license, and the
publication of the application therefor. A sworn statement
affidavit, if one is executed instead, shall be attached to
by the contracting parties to the effect that such advice has
said applications.
been sought, together with the written advice given, if any,

shall be attached to the application for marriage license.
FC 21. When either or both of the contracting
Should the parents or guardian refuse to give any advice,
parties are citizens of a foreign country, it shall be this fact shall be stated in the sworn statement.
necessary for them before a marriage license can be
obtained, to submit a certificate of legal capacity to d. marriage counseling
contract marriage, issued by their respective diplomatic or
consular officials. FC 16. In the cases where parental consent or
parental advice is needed, the party or parties concerned

shall, in addition to the requirements of the preceding
• Foreign Divorce Decree → PH spouse can file for articles, attach a certificate issued by a priest, imam or
recognition of a foreign divorce decree obtained minister authorized to solemnize marriage under Article 7
by the Foreigner spouse from his/her country of of this Code or a marriage counselor duly accredited by the
nationality proper government agency to the effect that the
contracting parties have undergone marriage counseling.
NCC 84. No marriage license shall be issued to a Failure to attach said certificates of marriage counseling
widow till after three hundred days following the death of shall suspend the issuance of the marriage license for a

period of three months from the completion of the their subsistence a fact established by their affidavit, or by
publication of the application. Issuance of the marriage their oath before the local civil registrar.
license within the prohibited period shall subject the
issuing officer to administrative sanctions but shall not h. family planning certificate
affect the validity of the marriage.
P.D. 965 [July 20, 1976]
Should only one of the contracting parties need parental
consent or parental advice, the other party must be A DECREE REQUIRING APPLICANT FOR MARRIAGE
present at the counseling referred to in the preceding LICENSE TO RECEIVE INSTRUCTIONS ON FAMILY
paragraph. PLANNING AND RESPONSIBLE PARENTHOOD

e. publication Section 1. Office of Family Planning. There is
hereby created in every city and municipality an Office of
FC 17. The local civil registrar shall prepare a Family Planning to be headed by the city or municipal
notice which shall contain the full names and residences of health officer. He shall be assisted by the city or rural
the applicants for a marriage license and other data given health nurse, members of the city or rural health unit, and
in the applications. The notice shall be posted for ten such other personnel from the different agencies of the
consecutive days on a bulletin board outside the office of government involved in the family planning program, who
the local civil registrar located in a conspicuous place shall perform family planning duties in addition to their
within the building and accessible to the general public. regular duties. Private entities or individuals duly
This notice shall request all persons having knowledge of accredited by the Commission on Population engaged in
any impediment to the marriage to advise the local civil family planning activities may also be impressed into the
registrar thereof. The marriage license shall be issued after service.
the completion of the period of publication.
Section 2. Duties of Family Planning Office. The
• If issued less than 10 days after publication, it’s a Office of Family planning shall give instructions and
mere defect. information on family and responsible parenthood to
applicants for marriage license and other interested
f. investigation of impediments persons in the form of personal instruction and/or
handbook, pamphlets or brochures. Furthermore, such
FC 18. In case of any impediment known to the instructions and information shall be consistent with the
local civil registrar or brought to his attention, he shall policies of the Commission on Population.
note down the particulars thereof and his findings thereon
in the application for marriage license, but shall Section 3. Certificate of Compliance. Applicants
nonetheless issue said license after the completion of the for marriage license shall, upon filing an application
period of publication, unless ordered otherwise by a therefore, be obliged to receive instructions and
competent court at his own instance or that of any interest information on family planning and responsible
party. No filing fee shall be charged for the petition nor a parenthood from the Family Planning Office. Such
corresponding bond required for the issuances of the instructions and information may be in the form of
order. personal instruction or in the form of brochures,
pamphlets, or handbooks. In places where there are no
• Art.18 is in effect “Dead letter” as it merely health officers, any person duly accredited by the
requires the civil registrar to “note down the Commission on Population may give the instructions
particulars of” impediments brought to his herein provided.
attention. The civil registrar must still issue the No marriage license shall be issued by the Local
marriage license unless prohibited by a court Civil Registrar unless the applicants present a certificate,
order. issued at no cost to the applicants, by an Office of Family
Planning that they had received instructions and
g. payment of fees information on family planning and responsible
parenthood.
FC 19. The local civil registrar shall require the If, for any reason, the information or instructions
payment of the fees prescribed by law or regulations shall not have been given within the period required by
before the issuance of the marriage license. No other sum law for the issuance of a marriage license, a certification to
shall be collected in the nature of a fee or tax of any kind that effect shall be given to the Civil Registrar by the Office
for the issuance of said license. It shall, however, be issued of Family Planning and the former shall withhold the
free of charge to indigent parties, that is those who have no issuance of the marriage license for a period of two weeks
visible means of income or whose income is insufficient for to enable the Family Planning Office to give instructions

and information and the applicants to receive the same. At
the end of such period, when no instructions shall have 4. Period of validity
been given, the Civil Registrar may issue the marriage
license. FC 20. The license shall be valid in any part of the
Philippines for a period of one hundred twenty days from
Section 4. Assistance of National Office. the date of issue, and shall be deemed automatically
Agencies of the National Government charged with the canceled at the expiration of the said period if the
implementation of the Family Planning program shall contracting parties have not made use of it. The expiry
render assistance to family planning offices herein created. date shall be stamped in bold characters on the face of
every license issued.
Section 5. Penalties. Any member of the Office of
Family planning who fails or refuses without just cause to De Castro vs. De Castro (supra)
give the instructions and the certificate herein provided: Ruling: The marriage is void due to the absence of
any local Civil Registrar who issues the marriage license a valid marriage license. Courts may pass upon the validity
without the requisite certification from the Office of Family of a marriage even in a suit not directly instituted to
Planning, or any person who obtains the certificate question the validity of said marriage, so long as it is
fraudulently, shall be subject to appropriate administrative essential to the determination of the case. Absence of any
or criminal charges. of the essential or formal requisites shall render the
marriage void, whereas a defect in the requisites shall
Section 6. Rules and Regulation. The render the marriage voidable. The false affidavit cannot be
Commission on Population shall issue rules and considered an irregularity that would render the marriage
regulations to implement the provisions of this Decree. merely voidable. The law dispenses with the marriage
license requirement for a man and woman who have lived
Section 7. Repeal of Prior Law. All laws and together exclusively as husband and wife for a continuous
ordinances inconsistent with the provisions of this Decree period of at least 5 years. In the case, there was no
are hereby repealed or modified accordingly. cohabitation at all, thus they were not exempt from the
marriage license requirement. The false affidavit has no
Section 8. Effectivity. This Decree shall take value whatsoever since failure to obtain the license
effect immediately. already renders their marriage void.

Done in the City of Manila, this 20th day of July, in the year 5. Duties of the Civil Registrar
of Our Lord, nineteen hundred and seventy-six.
FC 24. It shall be the duty of the local civil
• If you don’t go to the seminar, it is a mere registrar to prepare the documents required by this Title,
irregularity. and to administer oaths to all interested parties without
any charge in both cases. The documents and affidavits
3. Place where valid
filed in connection with applications for marriage licenses

FC 20. The license shall be valid in any part of the shall be exempt from documentary stamp tax. (n)
Philippines for a period of one hundred twenty days from
the date of issue, and shall be deemed automatically FC 25. The local civil registrar concerned shall
canceled at the expiration of the said period if the enter all applications for marriage licenses filed with him
contracting parties have not made use of it. The expiry in a registry book strictly in the order in which the same
date shall be stamped in bold characters on the face of are received. He shall record in said book the names of the
every license issued.
applicants, the date on which the marriage license was

issued, and such other data as may be necessary. (n)
• Expiration of license is not mere
defect/irregularity
• There is no license at all → Marriage void ab initio Republic vs. CA (supra)
• The purpose of the first sentence of Art. 20 is “to Ruling: The certification of the lack of record in
know at a glance the expiry date of the license” the civil registrar stands as proof that the marriage did not
meet the requisites of a valid marriage, i.e. securing a
• Good faith does not cover a case where there is
marriage license. The Registrar has authority as such
absolutely no license. There must be at least an
because the office is in charge of keeping the record of all
attempt to secure a marriage license and that once
the licenses issued. ROC 132 Sec. 129 Section 29
the license is issued regardless of whether or not
recognizes that a written statement signed by an officer
there is an irregularity, as long as there is a
license, there is good faith.

with custody of the records is admissible evidence that the 6. Marriages exempt from license requirement
records of his office contain no such record or entry.
FC 27. In case either or both of the contracting
Alcantara vs. Alcantara (supra) parties are at the point of death, the marriage may be
Ruling: The marriage contracted by the petitioner solemnized without necessity of a marriage license and
and respondent was valid. The issuance of marriage shall remain valid even if the ailing party subsequently
license not at the place of residence of the parties , and the survives. (72a)
issuance of a marriage license despite the absence of
publication prior to the completion of the 10-day period FC 28. If the residence of either party is so located
are considered mere irregularities that do not affect the that there is no means of transportation to enable such
validity of the marriage. The discrepancy between the party to appear personally before the local civil registrar,
marriage license number in the certification and the actual the marriage may be solemnized without necessity of a
marriage license number can be assumed to be a mere marriage license. (72a)
typographical error. Semper praesumitur pro
matrinomonio: Presumption is always in favor of validity FC 29. In the cases provided for in the two
of the marriage. preceding articles, the solemnizing officer shall state in an
affidavit executed before the local civil registrar or any
Abbas vs. Abbas (supra) other person legally authorized to administer oaths that
Ruling: The marriage of Syed and Gloria was void the marriage was performed in articulo mortis or that the
ab initio. There’s no issue with the essential requisites and residence of either party, specifying the barrio or
the formal requisites of the authority of the solemnizing barangay, is so located that there is no means of
officer and the conduct of the marriage ceremony. transportation to enable such party to appear personally
However, there was no valid marriage license issued. CA before the local civil registrar and that the officer took the
focused on the wording of the certification, stating that it necessary steps to ascertain the ages and relationship of
did not comply with ROC 132 Sec. 28 [Proof of lack of the contracting parties and the absence of legal
record - A written statement signed by an officer having the impediment to the marriage. (72a)
custody of an official record or by his deputy that after
diligent search, no record or entry of a specified tenor is FC 30. The original of the affidavit required in the
found to exist in the records of his office, accompanied by a last preceding article, together with the legible copy of the
certificate as above provided, is admissible as evidence that marriage contract, shall be sent by the person solemnizing
the records of his office contain no such record or entry.] CA the marriage to the local civil registrar of the municipality
deduced that from the absence of the words “despite where it was performed within the period of thirty days
diligent search” in the certification, and since the after the performance of the marriage. (75a)
certification used stated that no marriage license appears
to have been issued, no diligent search had been conducted FC 31. A marriage in articulo mortis between
and thus the certification could not be given probative passengers or crew members may also be solemnized by a
value. The presumption of regularity of official acts may be ship captain or by an airplane pilot not only while the ship
rebutted by affirmative evidence of irregularity or failure is at sea or the plane is in flight, but also during stopovers
to perform a duty. The respondents were not able to prove at ports of call. (74a)
the irregularity or failure to perform a duty regarding the
search of the Municipal Civil Registrar of the marriage FC 32. A military commander of a unit, who is a
license. ROC 131 Sec. 3 (m) provides that it is a disputable commissioned officer, shall likewise have authority to
presumption that an official duty has been regularly solemnize marriages in articulo mortis between persons
performed, absent contradiction or other evidence to the within the zone of military operation, whether members of
contrary. the armed forces or civilians. (74a)

Kho vs. Republic (supra) FC 33. Marriages among Muslims or among
Ruling: The marriage is void ab initio. members of the ethnic cultural communities may be
Jurisprudence shows that to be considered void on the performed validly without the necessity of marriage
ground of absence of a marriage license, the law requires license, provided they are solemnized in accordance with
that the absence must be apparent on the marriage their customs, rites or practices. (78a)
contract, or at the very least, supported by a certification
from the local civil registrar that no such marriage license FC 34. No license shall be necessary for the
was issued. In this case, Veronica failed to produce the marriage of a man and a woman who have lived together
alleged marriage license they secured or any other as husband and wife for at least five years and without any
evidence to back her claim. 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 (2) however, the shari'a district court may, upon
solemnizing officer shall also state under oath that he petition of a proper wali, order the solemnization
ascertained the qualifications of the contracting parties are of the marriage of a female who though less than
found no legal impediment to the marriage. (76a)
fifteen but not below twelve years of age, has

NCC 76. No marriage license shall be necessary attained puberty.
when a man and a woman who have attained the age of (3) marriage through a wali by a minor below the
majority and who, being unmarried, have lived together as prescribed ages shall be regarded as betrothal and
husband and wife for at least five years, desire to marry may be annulled upon the petition of either party
each other. The contracting parties shall state the within four years after attaining the age of
foregoing facts in an affidavit before any person puberty, provided no voluntary cohabitation has
authorized by law to administer oaths. The official, priest taken place and the wali who contracted the
or minister who solemnized the marriage shall also state marriage was other than the father or paternal
in an affidavit that he took steps to ascertain the ages and grandfather.
other qualifications of the contracting parties and that he
found no legal impediment to the marriage. (n) Article 17. Marriage ceremony. No particular form of
marriage ceremony is required but the ijab and the gabul
P.D. 1083 (A Decree to Ordain and Promulgate a Code in marriage shall be declared publicly in the presence of
Recognizing the System of Filipino Muslim Laws, the person solemnizing the marriage and two competent
codifying Muslim personal laws, and providing for its witnesses. This declaration shall be set forth in an
Administration and for Other Purposes) instrument in triplicate, signed or marked by the
contracting parties and said witnesses, and attested by the
Chapter Two: Marriage (nikah) person solemnizing the marriage. One copy shall be given
to the contracting parties and another sent to the circuit
Section 1. Requisites of marriage registrar by the solemnizing officer who shall keep the
third.
Article 14. Nature. Marriage is not only a civil contract but
a social institution. Its nature, consequences and incidents Article 18. Authority to solemnize marriage. Marriage may
are governed by this code and the shari'a and not subject be solemnized:
to stipulation, except that the marriage settlements may to (a) by the proper wali of the woman to be
a certain extent fix the property relations of the spouses. wedded;
(b) upon authority of the proper wali, by any
Article 15. Essential requisites. No marriage contract shall person who is competent under muslim law to
be perfected unless the following essential requisites are solemnize marriage; or
compiled with: (c) by the judge of the shari'a district court of
(a) legal capacity of the contracting parties; shari'a circuit court or any person designated by
(b) mutual consent of the parties freely given; the judge, should the proper wali refuse without
(c) offer (ijab) and acceptance (qabul) duly justifiable reason, to authorize the solemnization.
witnessed by at least two competent persons after
the proper guardian in marriage (wali) has given Article 19. Place of solemnization. Marriage shall be
his consent; and solemnized publicly in any mosque, office of the shari'a
(d) stipulation of customary dower (mahr) duly judge, office of the district or circuit registrar, residence of
witnessed by two competent persons. the bride or her wali, or at any other suitable place agreed
upon by the parties.
Article 16. Capacity to contract marriage.
(1) any muslim male at least fifteen years of age Article 20. Specification of dower. The amount or value of
and any muslim female of the age of puberty or dower may be fixed by the contracting parties (marh-
upwards and not suffering from any impediment musamma) before, during, or after the celebration of the
under the provisions of this code may contract marriage. If the amount or the value thereof has not been
marriage. A female is presumed to have attained so fixed, a proper dower (mahr-mithl) shall, upon petition
puberty upon reaching the age of fifteen.

of the wife, be determined by the court according to the Republic vs. Dayot
social standing of the parties. Facts: Jose and Felisa were married on 1986,
solemnized by Rev. Tomas V. Atienza. In lieu of a marriage
license, Jose and Felisa executed a sworn affidavit
Article 21. Payment of dower. Subject to the stipulation of
attesting that both had attained the age of maturity, and
the parties, the dower may be fully or partially paid before, that being unmarried, they had lived together as husband
during, or after the marriage. The property or estate of the and wife for at least five years. On 1993, Jose filed for
husband shall be liable for the unpaid dower, or any part nullity of marriage claiming there was no ceremony, no
thereof. sworn affidavit and that consent was obtained through
fraud. RTC Laguna ruled in favor of Felisa on the grounds
Article 22. Breach of contract. Any person who has that (1) Jose acknowledged Felisa as his wife in notarized
statement of Assets and Liabilities; (2) Company ID
entered into a contract to marry but subsequently refuses
identifies Felisa as the wife; (3) Jose’s sister testified that
without reasonable ground to marry the other party who they were married and that she was signed witness to
is willing to perform the same shall pay the latter the marriage; (4) Jose’s Action had prescribed since NCC 87
expenses incurred for the preparation of the marriage and requires that the action for annulment of marriage must be
such damages as may be granted by the court. commenced by the injured party within four years after
discovery of the fraud. CA initially affirmed but later
Niñal vs. Bayadog reversed citing Niñal vs. Bayadog, i.e. NCC 76 means that
Facts: On 1974, Pepito Niñal married Teodulfa the 5-year common-law cohabitation period is computed
Bellones. (The petitioners are their children). On 1985, back from the date of celebration of marriage, and refers to
Teodulfa was shot by Pepito and died. Pepito married a period of legal union had it not been for the absence of a
respondent Norma Bayadog on 1986 without a marriage marriage.
license. The couple instead issued an affidavit stating that Ruling: The falsity of an affidavit of marital
they lived together as husband and wife for at least 5 years cohabitation, where the parties have in truth fallen short of
and thus exempt from securing a marriage license. Pepito the 5-year minimum requirement, effectively renders the
died in a car accident on 1997. For successional rights, the marriage void ab initio for lack of marriage license. Under
petitioners seek to nullify the marriage between Pepito statutory construction, exceptions, as a general rule,
and Norma for lack of a marriage license. Bayadog filed a should be strictly but reasonably construed. All doubts
MTD on the ground that petitioners have no cause of should be resolved in favor of the general provisions
action since they are not among the persons who could file rather than the exception. For the exception in NCC 76 to
an action for annulment of marriage under FC 47. RTC apply, the man and woman must have attained the age of
ruled that petitioners should have filed the action before majority, and that, being unmarried, they have lived
the death of their father applying FC 47. together as husband and wife for at least five years. Jose
Ruling: Pepito’s marriage to Norma is invalid and Felisa have not lived together for five years at the time
based on their 5 year cohabitation? Both marriages were they executed their sworn affidavit and contracted
solemnized prior to the FC’s effectivity so NCC governs. marriage. The Republic admitted that Jose and Felisa
NCC 53 states that a valid marriage license is a requisite of started living together only in June 1986, or barely five
marriage and its absence renders the marriage void ab months before the celebration of their marriage. To permit
initio pursuant to NCC 80 (3). However, NCC 76 recognizes a false affidavit to take the place of a marriage license is to
the marriage of a man and a woman who have lived allow an abject circumvention of the law.
together and exclusively with each other as husband and
wife for a continuous and unbroken period of at least five (b) Authority of the solemnizing officer
years before the marriage. The 5 year cohabitation is
counted back from the date of marriage and should be a 1. Who are authorized
period of legal union had it not been for the absence of
marriage. There must be exclusivity, i.e. no third party was • Solemnizing Officer → Art 7 + RA 7160 (City
involved at any time within the 5 years and continuity that Mayor)
is unbroken. Both parties must be capacitated to marry o → total absence would make the marriage
each other in that 5 year period. Given that Pepito’s wife void but if one or both parties believe in
was still alive 1 year and 8 months prior to his marriage to good faith that the person is authorized,
Norma, it cannot be counted as valid cohabitation as it is then the marriage is valid
not contemplated by law. Assuming that Pepito and his o BELIEF MUST BE WITHIN REASON, e.g. if
wife were separated in fact for 5 years, it still would not be judge was suspended but did not tell the
valid. The fact remains that Pepito’s cohabitation with parties = valid;
Norma was not contemplated by law. • Local Gov’t Code of 1991 restored to mayors their
authority to solemnize marriages

• Ambassadors are not authorized to solemnize solemnize marriages in articulo mortis between persons
marriages as their position is more “political” in within the zone of military operation, whether members of
nature the armed forces or civilians.
• All other requirements, such as the parties not
belonging to the same denomination as the NCC 56. Marriage may be solemnized by:
solemnizing officer, merely render the marriage (1) The Chief Justice and Associate Justices of the
irregular, but still valid. What is important is that Supreme Court;
the solemnizing officer has the authority to (2) The Presiding Justice and the Justices of the
perform and solemnize a marriage. Court of Appeals;
• Marriage in articulo mortis and performed on the (3) Judges of the Courts of First Instance;
battlefield on airplanes and ships are valid only if (4) Mayors of cities and municipalities;
performed under the circumstances stated and (5) Municipal judges and justices of the peace;
under articulo mortis. (6) Priests, rabbis, ministers of the gospel of any
• The ship captain or airplane chief may solemnize denomination, church, religion or sect, duly registered, as
marriages only during voyage and in articulo provided in article 92; and
mortis. (7) Ship captains, airplane chiefs, military
• If at least one of the parties believed in good faith commanders, and consuls and vice-consuls in special cases
that the solemnizing officer has authority, even if provided in articles 74 and 75.
not authorized, the marriage is valid.
• Ignorance of law does not count towards belief of NCC 74. A marriage in articulo mortis may also be
good faith solemnized by the captain of a ship or chief of an airplane
during a voyage, or by the commanding officer of a military
FC 7. Marriage may be solemnized by: unit, in the absence of a chaplain, during war. The duties
(1) Any incumbent member of the judiciary within mentioned in the two preceding articles shall be complied
the court's jurisdiction; with by the ship captain, airplane chief or commanding
(2) Any priest, rabbi, imam, or minister of any officer.
church or religious sect duly authorized by his church or
religious sect and registered with the civil registrar NCC 76. No marriage license shall be necessary
general, acting within the limits of the written authority when a man and a woman who have attained the age of
granted by his church or religious sect and provided that at majority and who, being unmarried, have lived together as
least one of the contracting parties belongs to the husband and wife for at least five years, desire to marry
solemnizing officer's church or religious sect; each other. The contracting parties shall state the
(3) Any ship captain or airplane chief only in the foregoing facts in an affidavit before any person
case mentioned in Article 31; authorized by law to administer oaths. The official, priest
(4) Any military commander of a unit to which a or minister who solemnized the marriage shall also state
chaplain is assigned, in the absence of the latter, during a in an affidavit that he took steps to ascertain the ages and
military operation, likewise only in the cases mentioned in other qualifications of the contracting parties and that he
Article 32; found no legal impediment to the marriage.
(5) Any consul-general, consul or vice-consul in
the case provided in Article 10. R.A. 7160 (1991 Local Government Code), ARTICLE I
The Municipal Mayor Section 444. The Chief Executive:
FC 10. Marriages between Filipino citizens abroad Powers, Duties, Functions and Compensation.
may be solemnized by a consul-general, consul or vice- (b) For efficient, effective and economical
consul of the Republic of the Philippines. The issuance of governance the purpose of which is the general
the marriage license and the duties of the local civil welfare of the municipality and its inhabitants
registrar and of the solemnizing officer with regard to the pursuant to Section 16 of this Code, the municipal
celebration of marriage shall be performed by said mayor shall:
consular official. (1) Exercise general supervision and
control over all programs, projects,
FC 31. A marriage in articulo mortis between services, and activities of the municipal
passengers or crew members may also be solemnized by a government, and in this connection, shall:
ship captain or by an airplane pilot not only while the ship (xviii) Solemnize marriages, any
is at sea or the plane is in flight, but also during stopovers provision of law to the contrary
at ports of call. notwithstanding;

FC 32. A military commander of a unit, who is a WHO ARE AUTHORIZED
commissioned officer, shall likewise have authority to

Chief Justice? YES late for him to contact Beso. Daguman speculated that it
Sec. of Justice? NO → not a member of the was Yman’s doing because he admitted having another girl
judiciary named Lita Dayungan. Beso charged Judge Daguman for
solemnizing marriage outside his jurisdiction and of
Members of
→ any incumbent member w/in their negligence for not retaining a copy and registering the
the
territorial jurisdiction marriage contract to the Local Civil Registrar.
Judiciary
→ if done outside their jurisdiction, Ruling: Daguman solemnized outside his
marriage is still valid. (irregularity, judge to jurisdiction. FC 7 provides that judges who are appointed
be held liable) to specific jurisdictions may officiate in weddings only
→ If suspended, not allowed within said areas and not beyond. The case also does not
Municipal fall within the exceptions enumerated in FC 8. Under FC
→ if suspended, not allowed unless one or 23, it is also Daguman’s duty to send duplicate and
and City
both parties believe in good faith triplicate copies of the certificates not later than 15 days
Mayors
→ Authority filed in the national library for after the marriage to the local civil registrar of the place
their license where the marriage was solemnized. A judge must not only
Religious → if the parties are not part of the apply the law but also live and abide by it and render
congregation of the solemnizer, marriage is justice at all times without resorting to shortcuts.
still valid. (irregularity)
→ only if in Articulo Mortis 2. How authorized
→ only if between passengers or crew
members (even if stow away still okay bec. FC 7. Marriage may be solemnized by:
Ship (2) Any priest, rabbi, imam, or minister of any
law doesn’t distinguish)
Captains, church or religious sect duly authorized by his church or
→ only allowed during the travel/ stopovers
Airplane religious sect and registered with the civil registrar
or ports of call inside the vessel
Chiefs general, acting within the limits of the written authority
REMEMBER ART 17 NCC → forms and
solemnities of the Marriage depend on the granted by his church or religious sect and provided that at
place where the marriage is celebrated least one of the contracting parties belongs to the
→ only if in Articulo Mortis solemnizing officer's church or religious sect;
→ officiating officer must be commissioned
officer CHAPTER 4
Military
→ done during military operation, and
Commander Authority to Solemnize Marriages
within location
→ a chaplain must be assigned to the unit,
and he must be absent NCC 92. Every priest, or minister, or rabbi
→ Ambassadors are not allowed authorized by his denomination, church, sect, or religion to
→ only marriages between FILIPINOS solemnize marriage shall send to the proper government
Consul office a sworn statement setting forth his full name and
→ if between Filipino and Foreigner, and
both in good faith, valid domicile, and that he is authorized by his denomination,
church, sect, or religion to solemnize marriage, attaching
Beso vs. Daguman to said statement a certified copy of his appointment. The
Facts: On 1997, Zenaida Beso and Bernardito A. director of the proper government office, upon receiving
Yman went to Judge Daguman’s residence in Calbayog such sworn statement containing the information
asking him to solemnize their marriage right then and required, and being satisfied that the denomination,
there. Despite being a judge of Sta. Margarita City, church, sect, or religion of the applicant operates in the
Daguman solemnized their marriage in Calbayog because Philippines, shall record the name of such priest or
Beso was an OFW and will have to fly abroad that same minister in a suitable register and issue to him an
day. The witnesses were Pacifico Maghacot, Ramon Dean authorization to solemnize marriage. Said priest or
and Teresita Dean. After the wedding, Yman abandoned minister or rabbi shall be obliged to exhibit his
Beso. Beso went to the City Civil Registrar only to find out authorization to the contracting parties, to their parents,
that their marriage was not registered. She contacted grandparents, guardians, or persons in charge demanding
Daguman, but Daguman said that he has no copies the same. No priest or minister not having the required
anymore. Daguman had four copies: he gave one tothe authorization may solemnize marriage.
husband and left the rest at his desk on
his private office. Few days after, he gathered all the NCC 93. Freedom of religion shall be observed by
papers only to find out that all of them were missing. He public officials in the issuance of authorization to
issued a subpoena to Yman (husband) who said that Beso solemnize marriages. Consequently, no public official shall
got all the copies during the wedding party. It was also too

attempt to inquire into the truth or validity of any religious informed of any change in his religious status. This
doctrine held by the applicant or by his church. information is necessary for the protection of the public.
The duty to secure the cancellation of the requisite
NCC 94. The public official in charge of resignation devolves, not upon respondent, but upon the
registration of priests and ministers shall cancel the head of his organization or upon the official charge of such
authorization issued to a bishop, head, priest, rabbi, pastor registration, upon proper showing of the reason for such
or minister of the gospel of any denomination, church, sect, cancellation, because the law likewise imposes upon the
or religion, on his own initiative or at the request of any interested party the duty of effecting such cancellation,
interested party, upon showing that the church, sect or who in the instant case is the respondent himself. This he
religion whose ministers have been authorized to failed to so. He also failed to attach to his certificate of
solemnize marriage is no longer in operation. The candidacy, a copy of his alleged resignation as minister
cancellation of the authorization granted to a priest, pastor knowing full well that a minister is disqualified by law to
or minister shall likewise be ordered upon the request of run for a municipal office. The documents Paraiso
the bishop, head, or lawful authorities of the presented to show his alleged resignation were held to be
denomination, church, sect or religion to which he belongs. self-serving and appeared to have been prepared
haphazardly, leading the court to believe that these were
NCC 95. The public official in charge of made only to cure his ineligibility to hold office. Paraiso
registration of priests and ministers, with the approval of was disqualified when he ran for mayor while was still
the proper head of Department, is hereby authorized to holding a religious position granting him power to
prepare the necessary forms and to promulgate solemnize marriages.
regulations for the purpose of enforcing the provisions of
this Title. Said official may also by regulations fix and OCA vs. Tormis
collect fees for the authorization of priests and ministers to Facts: OCA created a judicial audit team to
solemnize marriages. investigate MTC Cebu for alleged misdeeds in the
solemnization of marriages. Two undercover agents
NCC 96. The existing laws which punish acts or posing as a couple, went to ask about the marriage
omissions concerning the marriage license, solemnization application process. They were told by the guard to look
of marriage, authority to solemnize marriages, and other for a certain "Meloy." Helen assured the female undercover
acts or omissions relative to the celebration of marriage that their marriage process could be hurried. She also
shall remain and continue to be in force. claimed that it was possible for the marriage to be
solemnized the next day, but the marriage certificate
Villar vs. Paraiso would only be dated when the marriage license became
Facts: Vilar and Paraiso were candidates for the available. Jacqui Lou Baguio-Manera claimed that her
office of Mayor of Rizal, Nueva Ecija, Paraiso was declared marriage was solemnized by Judge Tormis with the aid of
winner. However, Vilar instituted quo warranto "Meloy," who asked for a fee of ₱l,500.00. She and her then
proceedings contending that Paraiso be declared ineligible fiance were not required to present a marriage license;
to assume office because he was a minister of the United they were only directed to bring their birth certificates.
Church of Christ in the Philippines (UCCP) and was Their marriage certificate was marked with the
therefore disqualified to be a candidate under RAC Sec. annotation, "No marriage license was necessary, the
2175. Villar further contend that Paraiso was granted a marriage being solemnized under FC 34.
license to solemnize marriages and such license has never Tormis’ defenses were that: (1) OCA’s actions was
been cancelled nor has Paraiso requested for its an "entrapment.”; (2) there was nothing wrong with
cancellation. Paraiso denied his ineligibility and claimed solemnizing marriages on the same date the marriage
that he resigned as minister of UCCP and that even if he license was issued, in view of the affidavits of cohabitation
was not eligible to the office, petitioner could not be which are presumed regular; (3) Baguio-Manera's affidavit
declared elected to take his place. The lower court favored was hearsay and when asked about the affidavit, they
Villar but stated that the latter could not be declared as confirmed that they had been living together for five years;
mayor. (4) the filing clerks should be blamed for the irregularities
Ruling: Paraiso, being an ecclesiastic, is ineligible in the number of marriages solemnized in her sala. OCA
to hold office. Paraiso never ceased as minister and the dismissed Tormis, together with other judges and MTC
resignation he filed before elections is but a mere scheme employees for turning the solemnization of marriages into
to circumvent the law. If he intended to resign as minister, a business. OCA found them guilty of gross inefficiency or
he should resign in due form and have the acceptance of neglect of duty for: (1) solemnizing marriages with
his resignation registered with the Bureau of Public questionable documents; (2) failure to make sure that the
Libraries. The purpose of registration is twofold: (1) to solemnization fee has been paid (3) solemnizing marriages
inform the public not only the authority of the minister to wherein one of the contracting parties is a foreigner who
discharge religious functions, but equally (2) to keep it submitted a mere affidavit of his capacity to marry in lieu

of the required certificate from the embassy and (4)
solemnizing a marriage with an expired license. Tenchavez vs. Escaño
Ruling: The irregularities committed by Tormis Facts: Vicenta Escaño (scion of a promintent
warrant her dismissal from service. Tormis violated family) and Tenchavez (of undistinguished stock) married
Canons 1.01 (engaging in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or on 1948. They planned to elope, but was thwarted when
deceitful conduct), 7.03 (engaging in conduct that her mother found out. Vicenta was taken home, where she
adversely reflects on his fitness to practice law), and the confessed that she already married Pastor. Her parents
lawyer’s oath (to support the Constitution and obey the sought the advice of a priest, who told them that he
laws). The acts clearly constitute gross misconduct. The believed it was an invalid marriage due to the lack of
repetitiveness of her act shows clear intent to violate the authority from the Archbishop or parish priest in the
law. Although it is true that marriages under FC 34 merit celebration of the marriage. The priest wanted them to
exemption from a marriage license, Tormis should have recelebrate the marriage, but it didn’t take place since
complied with the mandate of personally ascertaining the Vicenta’s family found out through an anonymous letter
circumstances of cohabitation of the parties. Records that Pastor and Pacita Noel had an amorous relationship.
reveal that the declarations embodied in the required joint Vicenta continued to live with her parents while Pastor
affidavit of cohabitation of the parties do not actually returned to his job in Manila. Their relationship slowly
represent the accurate circumstances of their alleged deteriorated. Vicenta went to U.S. and was issued a divorce
cohabitation. In cases where one or both of the contracting decree on the grounds of “extreme cruelty”. She married
parties are foreigners, FC provides that a certificate of legal an American citizen, had children with him, and acquired
capacity to marry is necessary before the acquisition of a American citizenship. Tenchavez initiated proceedings
marriage license. As the solemnizing officer, Tormis should against Escano and her parents, for legal separation and in
have ensured that pertinent requirements were secured damages. Vicenta claimed that (1) she validly divorced
before issuance of the marriage license. Thus, the absence Tenchavez and validly married her current husband; and
of a certificate of legal capacity should have prompted her (2) the judgment did not decree a legal separation but
to question the propriety of the issuance. The court freed Tenchavez from supporting his wife and acquiring
employees acted as "fixers” and 'facilitators” as evidenced property to the exclusion of his wife. This allowed the
by superimpositions and erasures in the addresses of the counterclaim of Vicenta’s parents for damages.
contracting parties so they would appear to be residents of Ruling: Tenchavez and Escano were validly
either Barili or Liloan, Cebu. married. They were above the age of majority, qualified,
consented to the marriage and was performed by a
3. Effect of absence of authority Catholic priest in the presence of competent witnesses.
The lack of ecclesiastical authorization is irrelevant
• Absence of any essential or formal requisites = because of the separation of Church and State and. The
void except those in FC 35(2) authority of the solemnizing officer is only a formal
• Defect in any of the essential requisites = voidable requirement, the lack of which does not invalidate the
• Irregularity in formal requisites = valid marriage; marriage if one or both of them believed in good faith that
but party/parties responsible for irregularity is the solemnizing officer had authority. The good faith of the
held civilly, criminally and administratively liable parties will be presumed, unless the contrary is proved. In
this case, it was proven that the issue as to the authority of
FC 4. The absence of any of the essential or formal the solemnizing priest arose only after the marriage was
requisites shall render the marriage void ab initio, except celebrated. Even assuming that Escano’s claims that she
as stated in Article 35 (2). her Pacita conspired with Tenchavez to use fraud and
undue influence to deceive her into entering the marriage,
FC 35. The following marriages shall be void from such vices do not render a marriage void, but merely
the beginning: voidable, thus the marriage remained valid until annulled,
(2) Those solemnized by any person not legally which was never done.
authorized to perform marriages unless such marriages
were contracted with either or both parties believing in Ronulo vs. People
good faith that the solemnizing officer had the legal Facts: Joey Umadac and Claire Bingayen were
authority to do so; scheduled to marry on 2003. However, the officiating
priest refused to solemnize the marriage upon learning
RPC 352. Performance of illegal marriage that the couple did not have a marriage license. The couple
ceremony. - Priests or ministers of any religious went to an Aglipayan Church where the Ronulo agreed to
denomination or sect, or civil authorities who shall perform a ceremony despite knowing that the couple had
perform or authorize any illegal marriage ceremony shall no marriage license. Ronulo was charged and found guilty
be punished in accordance with the provisions of the of violating Art. 352 of the RPC by MTC Batac, Ilocos Norte.
Marriage Law. Witnesses confirm that the couple declare during the

ceremony that they take each other as husband and wife. the parties before the solemnizing officer and the
Ronulo asserts that what he performed was a blessing, not declaration of the contracting parties that they
a marriage ceremony and because of the principle of take each other as husband and wife. Today, the
separation of Church and State, the State cannot qualify the marriage certificate reflects this declaration.
church blessing into a marriage ceremony. RTC affirmed • Intended to avoid “marriage by proxy”
MTC’s ruling. CA affirmed RTC’s ruling. • The law does not require a specific ceremony; nor
Ruling: Ronulo performed an illegal marriage specific words or symbols.
ceremony. FC 6 allows any religion or sect the freedom to • Absence of marriage ceremony not included in
conduct its respective marital rites as long as the core “void marriages” but absence of marriage
requirements of the law are observed. The blessing certificate and lack of authority of solemnizing
involved the couple appearing personally before a officer are void marriages.
solemnizing officer, and declared in the presence of not • A marriage ceremony conducted without the
less than two witnesses of legal age that they take each other requirements merely renders the marriage
other as husband and wife. The fact that the requirements irregular, but still valid.
were present qualifies the blessing into a marriage
ceremony. Ronulo admitted that he knew the couple did 1. Form of ceremony
not have a marriage license yet performed the ceremony
anyway. This makes the ceremony illegal. The non filing of FC 3. The formal requisites of marriage are:
a criminal case against the couple does not preclude the (3) A marriage ceremony which takes place with
filing of the present case against Ronulo. ⁃ since it is not an the appearance of the contracting parties before the
element of the crime under RPC 352. solemnizing officer and their personal declaration that
they take each other as husband and wife in the presence
4. Duties of the solemnizing officer of not less than two witnesses of legal age.

FC 23. It shall be the duty of the person FC 6. No prescribed form or religious rite for the
solemnizing the marriage to furnish either of the solemnization of the marriage is required. It shall be
contracting parties the original of the marriage certificate necessary, however, for the contracting parties to appear
referred to in Article 6 and to send the duplicate and personally before the solemnizing officer and declare in
triplicate copies of the certificate not later than fifteen days the presence of not less than two witnesses of legal age
after the marriage, to the local civil registrar of the place that they take each other as husband and wife. This
where the marriage was solemnized. Proper receipts shall declaration shall be contained in the marriage certificate
be issued by the local civil registrar to the solemnizing which shall be signed by the contracting parties and their
officer transmitting copies of the marriage certificate. The witnesses and attested by the solemnizing officer.
solemnizing officer shall retain in his file the quadruplicate
copy of the marriage certificate, the copy of the marriage FC 33. Marriages among Muslims or among
certificate, the original of the marriage license and, in members of the ethnic cultural communities may be
proper cases, the affidavit of the contracting party performed validly without the necessity of marriage
regarding the solemnization of the marriage in place other license, provided they are solemnized in accordance with
than those mentioned in Article 8. their customs, rites or practices.

FC 24. It shall be the duty of the local civil FC 8. The marriage shall be solemnized publicly in
registrar to prepare the documents required by this Title, the chambers of the judge or in open court, in the church,
and to administer oaths to all interested parties without chapel or temple, or in the office the consul-general, consul
any charge in both cases. The documents and affidavits or vice-consul, as the case may be, and not elsewhere,
filed in connection with applications for marriage licenses except in cases of marriages contracted on the point of
shall be exempt from documentary stamp tax. death or in remote places in accordance with Article 29 of
this Code, or where both of the parties request the
5. Effect of irregularity solemnizing officer in writing in which case the marriage
may be solemnized at a house or place designated by them
FC 4. The absence of any of the essential or formal in a sworn statement to that effect.
requisites shall render the marriage void ab initio, except
as stated in Article 35 (2) Martinez vs. Tan
Facts: Rosalia Martinez assails her alleged
(c) Marriage Ceremony marriage with Angel Tan on 1907 in Leyte. RTC Cebu
ruled in favor of Tan, with the following evidence: (1) a
• The barest minimum, and thus the essence of the document expediente de matrimonio civil (written in
marriage ceremony, is the personal appearance of Spanish and consisting of a petition directed to the justice

of the peace, signed by them, stating that they have deemed to constitute an ostensibly valid marriage for
mutually agreed to enter into a contract of marriage, and which Lucio might be held liable for bigamy unless he first
ask that the justice solemnize the marriage) which the secures a judicial declaration of nullity before he contracts
plaintiff admits that she signed; (2) The testimonies of Tan, a subsequent marriage. The declaration of nullity retroacts
Zacaria Esmero, Pacita Ballori, and Jose Santiago that they to the date of the first marriage as if no marriage took
(together with Rosalia) appeared before the justice of the place. Thus, the first element of bigamy, “the offender has
peace, with Esmero and Ballori as witnesses, Santiago as been legally married”, has not been satisfied and so Lucio
Bailiff, and that they all signed the document mentioned. was free to marry Maria Jececha.
Martinez admits that she signed the document, but says
that she signed it at home, without reading it, and at the 2. Place for ceremony
request of Tan, who told her that it was a paper
authorizing him to ask the consent of her parents to the FC 8. The marriage shall be solemnized publicly in
marriage and that what took place did not constitute a the chambers of the judge or in open court, in the church,
legal marriage. Martinez’ claim is supported by her sister- chapel or temple, or in the office the consul-general, consul
in-law, Rosario Bayot. or vice-consul, as the case may be, and not elsewhere,
Ruling: The marriage between Martinez and Tan except in cases of marriages contracted on the point of
is valid. They were proven to have participated in a death or in remote places in accordance with Article 29 of
marriage ceremony wherein they declared and mutually this Code, or where both of the parties request the
agreed to be married before an authorized solemnizing solemnizing officer in writing in which case the marriage
officer (i.e. the justice of peace) and in the presence of two may be solemnized at a house or place designated by them
witnesses (i.e. Pacita and Zacarias), which declaration is in a sworn statement to that effect.
contained in a marriage certificate (i.e. the expediente de
matromonio civil) signed by Rosalia, Angel, and the FC 28. If the residence of either party is so located
witnesses and attested to by the justice of peace. Martinez that there is no means of transportation to enable such
did not leave the house without Bayot, thus such testimony party to appear personally before the local civil registrar,
lost force when witness Ballori’s testimony is considered the marriage may be solemnized without necessity of a
wherein instead of examining dress patterns, she and marriage license.
Rosalia went instead to the office of the justice of peace
and took part in the ceremony. There is also evidence FC 29. In the cases provided for in the two
consisting of eight letters, three of which Rosalia admitted preceding articles, the solemnizing officer shall state in an
to writing, corroborating with Ballori’s testimony and affidavit executed before the local civil registrar or any
checking in with what Martinez said during trial about her other person legally authorized to administer oaths that
and Tan going to Ormoc (wherein Martinez subsequently the marriage was performed in articulo mortis or that the
went to Cebu later and commenced the motion). There is residence of either party, specifying the barrio or
also Esmero’s account on during and after the marriage barangay, is so located that there is no means of
ceremony. transportation to enable such party to appear personally
before the local civil registrar and that the officer took the
Morigo vs. People necessary steps to ascertain the ages and relationship of
Facts: Lucio Morigo and Lucia Barrete married on the contracting parties and the absence of legal
1990 after Lucia came back from Canada to the impediment to the marriage.
Philippines. Barrete reported back to her work in Canada
leaving Morigo behind after the latter refused to join her in FC 32. A military commander of a unit, who is a
Canada. Lucia obtained with the Ontario Court a decree of commissioned officer, shall likewise have authority to
divorce of her marriage with Lucio. In 1992, Morigo solemnize marriages in articulo mortis between persons
married Maria Jececha Lumbago. Lucio filed a complaint within the zone of military operation, whether members of
for nullity of marriage in RTC Bohol on the ground that no the armed forces or civilians.
marriage ceremony took place. Instead, Lucio was charged
with Bigamy. Lucio moved for suspension on the ground FC 33. Marriages among Muslims or among
that the civil case for nullification of his marriage posed a members of the ethnic cultural communities may be
prejudicial question in the bigamy case. RTC denied and performed validly without the necessity of marriage
convicted him of bigamy. CA affirmed. license, provided they are solemnized in accordance with
Ruling: Lucio did not commit bigamy. Lucio’s their customs, rites or practices.
marriage with Lucia is void given that there was no
marriage ceremony by a solemnizing officer. What 3. Issuance of marriage certificate
transpired was a mere signing of marriage contract which
bears no semblance to a valid marriage and thus, needs no FC 6. No prescribed form or religious rite for the
judicial declaration of nullity. Such act alone, cannot be solemnization of the marriage is required. It shall be

necessary, however, for the contracting parties to appear next day leaving Pedro, and children Domingo and Melecio.
personally before the solemnizing officer and declare in Melecio, through Pedro, initiated a complaint against de
the presence of not less than two witnesses of legal age Leon, seeking to acquire a portion of the property left
that they take each other as husband and wife. This behind by Flaviana. CFI Laguna ruled in favor of the
declaration shall be contained in the marriage certificate Madridejo.
which shall be signed by the contracting parties and their Ruling: The marriage between Pedro and Flaviana
witnesses and attested by the solemnizing officer. was valid. The mere fact that the parish priest of Siniloan,
In case of a marriage in articulo mortis, when the Laguna, who married Pedro and Flaviana failed to send a
party at the point of death is unable to sign the marriage copy of the marriage certificate to the municipal secretary
certificate, it shall be sufficient for one of the witnesses to does not invalidate the marriage in articulo mortis, it not
the marriage to write the name of said party, which fact appearing that the essential requisites required by law for
shall be attested by the solemnizing officer. its validity were lacking in the ceremony, and the
forwarding of a copy of the marriage certificate is not one
FC 22. The marriage certificate, in which the of said essential requisites. However, this marriage was
parties shall declare that they take each other as husband not sufficient to legitimize the status of Melecio as the son
and wife, shall also state: of both Pedro and Flaviana.
(1) The full name, sex and age of each contracting
party; People vs. Borromeo
(2) Their citizenship, religion and habitual Facts: On 1981, Susana’s 4-year old niece
residence; reported to her grandmother (Susana’s mother) that Elias
(3) The date and precise time of the celebration of Borromeo (Susana’s husband) was killing Susana. The
the marriage; dead body was confirmed by the father and brother of
(4) That the proper marriage license has been Susana; beside it was her crying 1-month-old child. Elias
issued according to law, except in marriage provided for in was standing nearby with a bloody bolo. When the police
Chapter 2 of this Title; arrived, Elias even smoked first before voluntarily
(5) That either or both of the contracting parties surrendering. RTC convicted Elias for After the court’s
have secured the parental consent in appropriate cases; conviction parricide. Borromeo contends that the court
(6) That either or both of the contracting parties erred in holding that he and the victim married in a church
have complied with the legal requirement regarding wedding ceremony when the priest said otherwise.
parental advice in appropriate cases; and Furthermore, there was no marriage contract executed on
(7) That the parties have entered into marriage the occasion or later on. Thus, his conviction should only
settlement, if any, attaching a copy thereof. be for homicide
Ruling: The lack of existence of a record of of
FC 23. It shall be the duty of the person marriage in the registry of marriage does not invalidate a
solemnizing the marriage to furnish either of the marriage. As long as the requisites for validity are present,
contracting parties the original of the marriage certificate the absence of a marriage in the registry of marriage does
referred to in Article 6 and to send the duplicate and not invalidate a marriage. The existence of a marriage
triplicate copies of the certificate not later than fifteen days certificate in the registry is not one of the requisites. Also,
after the marriage, to the local civil registrar of the place The accused himself admitted during his testimony that
where the marriage was solemnized. Proper receipts shall the latter was his wife (“Asawa ko po”). There is no better
be issued by the local civil registrar to the solemnizing proof of marriage than the willing admission by the
officer transmitting copies of the marriage certificate. The accused. There is a presumption that persons living
solemnizing officer shall retain in his file the quadruplicate together as husband and wife are married. To do so
copy of the marriage certificate, the copy of the marriage otherwise is a violation of morals. In that case, it falls upon
certificate, the original of the marriage license and, in the person who says there’s none to prove it.
proper cases, the affidavit of the contracting party
regarding the solemnization of the marriage in place other
than those mentioned in Article 8.

Madridejo vs. De Leon
Facts: Flaviana Perez (plaintiff Melecio
Madridejo’s mother) , initially married Eulogio de Leon,
with whom she begot one child (Domingo). After Eulogio’s
death, Flaviana lived together with Pedro Madridejo and
soon after had an offspring (Melecio) with him. During her
deathbed, Flaviana married Pedro, with the parish priest of
Siniloan as the solemnizing officer. Flaviana then died the

Persons Reviewer For Aug 30 (To Print) PDF

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Persons Reviewer For Aug 30 (To Print) PDF

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

THE

U.P. SIGMA RHO FRATERNITY 1

Potrebbero piacerti anche