NAVARRO v DOMAGTOY [1996]

● Judge hernando DOMAGTOY solemnized the wedding

between Gaspar A. Tagadan and Arlyn F. Borga, despite the

knowledge that Gaspar was only separated from his wife

● He also performed a marriage ceremony between Floriano

Dador SUMAYLO and Gemma G. DEL ROSARIO outside

his court’s jurisdiction, because he solemnized a marriage

as his residence [not his jurisdiction]

Was the Tagadan marriage valid? NO.

The marriage between Tagadan and Borja was void and bigamous

there being a subsisting marriage between Tagadan and Penaranda.

Albeit, the latter was gone for seven years and the spouse had a

well-founded belief that the absent spouse was dead, Tagadan did not
institute a summary proceeding as provided in the Civil Code for the

declaration of presumptive death of the absentee, without prejudice to

the effect of reappearance of the absent spouse. [Art 41, FC??]

Was the Sumaylo marriage valid? YES

In accordance with Article 8, a sworn statement requesting the

marriage be held outside the court’s jurisdiction, but only Del Rosario

made the written request where it should have been both parties.

However, their non-compliance did not invalidate their marriage.

Domagtoy may be held administratively liable.

Did he exhibit gross misconduct, inefficiency and ignorance of the

law? YES.

He was suspended for 6 months + stern warning. xx

ARANES v OCCIANO [2002]

● Judge Salvador M. OCCIANO solemnized the marriage

between Mecedita Mata ARANES and Dominador B

OROBIA, without the requisite marriage license, outside his

territorial jurisdiction.

● When Dominador passed away, Mercedita’s right to inherit

the “vast properties” left by Orobio was not recognized, and

she was deprived of Orobia’s pensions, because their

marriage was a nullity.

● OCCIANO claims that he only solemnized the wedding

because

○ Of the parties’ earnest pleas, and their promise to

give the license to him that same day

○ He was informed of Orobia’s physical condition

after suffering a stroke

Did Occiano err in solemnizing the marriage outside his

jurisdiction? YES

Occiano’s act of solemnizing the marriage in a municipality outside his

jurisdiction is contrary to law and subjects him to administrative

liability. His act may not amount to gross ignorance of the law for he

allegedly solemnized the marriage out of human compassion but

nonetheless, he cannot avoid liability for violating the law on marriage.

Did Occiano err in solemnizing the marriage without a marriage

license? YES

A marriage which preceded the issuance of the marriage license is

void, and that subsequent issuance of such cannot render valid or add

validity to the marriage. It is the marriage license which gives the

the officer the authority to solemnize the marriage. Occiano did

not possess such authority when he solemnized Aranes and Orobia’s

marriage. In this respect, he acted in gross ignorance of the law.

He was fined and given a stern warning. xx