REPUBLIC v.
CATUBAG*  “Well-founded belief” has no exact definition under the law, and such belief
Topic: General Concepts
FACTS:
 Ludyson Catubag (Catubag) and Shanaviv Alvarez-Catubag (Shanaviv) were
married in 2003. Prior to their marriage, they had been cohabiting and begot
2 children. Catubag had been working overseas since 2001 and returned for
a while in 2003 for their marriage.
 On June 2006, while working abroad, Catubag was informed by his relatives
that Shanviv left their house and never returned. Catubag’s relatives took care
of the children.
 Worried about his wife’s sudden disappearance, Catubag took an emergency
vacation and flew back home. He looked for his wife in Enrile Cagayan, but to
no avail. He also inquired about her whereabouts from their close friends and
relatives, and travelled as far as Bicol, Shanaviv’s hometown, but again to no
avail.
 Catubag subsequently sought the help of Bombo Radyo Philippines to
broadcast the fact of his wife’s disappearance. He also searched various
hospitals and funeral parlors in Tuguegarao and Bicol, with no avail.
 On May 2012, after almost 7 years of waiting, Catubag filed with RTC a
petition to have his wife declared presumptively dead. RTC granted.
 However, the Republic, through the OSG, elevated the judgment to CA via
Rule 65, contending that Catubag failed to establish a “well-founded belief”
that his missing wife was already dead. CA dismissed the petition and MR.
Hence, this petition.
ISSUE: W/N Catubag sufficiently discharged the burden of establishing a well-founded
belief that his wife is dead? NO
PROCEDURAL ISSUES
 The Court finds that petitioner’s resort to certiorari under Rule 65 to challenge
the RTC’s Order is proper.
o Under Art. 247 of the Family Code, all judgments rendered in
summary judicial proceedings in Family Law are “immediately final
and executory.” The legal remedies in a summary proceeding for the
declaration of presumptive death is by filing with the CA a petition for
certiorari under Rule 65, and then elevated to SC via Rule 45.
ON DECLARATION OF PRESUMPTIVE DEATH
 The 4 requisites under Art. 41 of the Family Code for the declaration of
presumptive death to prosper are:
1) The absent spouse has been missing for four consecutive years, or
two consecutive years if the disappearance occurred where there is
danger of death under the circumstances laid down in Article 391 of
the Civil Code.
2) The present spouse wishes to remarry.
3) The present spouse has a well-founded belief that the absentee is
dead.
4) The present spouse files for a summary proceeding for the
declaration of presumptive death of the absentee.
depends on a case-to-case basis. In ruling in this case, the Court cited three
jurisprudences to establish a guide in determining the existence of a well-
founded belief that an absent spouse is already dead.
o Republic v. Granada: The Court found that the present spouse
failed to establish that the absent spouse is presumptively dead. The
present spouse did not report to the police nor seek the aid of mass
media. She also did not even bother to present any of the absent
spouses’ relatives to corroborate her allegations.
o Republic v. Cantor: The Court held that the present spouse
engaged in a mere "passive-search". Applying the "stringent-
standards" and degree of diligence required by jurisprudence, the
Court pointed out four acts of the present spouse which contradict
the claim of a diligent and active search:
 First, the respondent did not actively look for her missing
husband. Her hospital visits and consequent checking of
the patients’ directory were unintentional, not planned, nor
primarily directed to look for him.
 Second, she did not report her husband's absence to the
police nor did she seek the aid of the authorities to look for
him.
 Third, she did not present as witnesses the husband’s
relatives or their neighbors and friends, who can
corroborate her efforts to locate him. The persons who
allegedly made inquiries were not even named nor
identified.
 Fourth, there was no other corroborative evidence to
support her claim that she conducted diligent search.
o Republic v. Orcelino-Villanueva: A well-founded belief must result
from diligent efforts to locate the absent spouse, and entails an active
effort on the part of the present spouse to locate the missing one.
Mere absence of a spouse, devoid of any attempt by the present one
to locate the former, will not suffice. Mere allegation is not evidence
and is not equivalent to proof.
 In that case, the present spouse began her “search” by
returning home from her work overseas to look for her
missing husband. She inquired from her in-laws and
common friends as to his whereabouts, and even went as
far as Negros Oriental, where the absent spouse was born.
She also claimed that 15 years have already lapsed since
her husband's disappearance.
 Nonetheless, the Court still held that her claim was
unfounded because it merely consisted of bare assertions
without any corroborative evidence on record. She also
failed to present any person from whom she inquired about
the whereabouts of her husband, nor her children from
whom she learned of his disappearance.
 IN THIS CASE, applying the foregoing jurisprudential guidelines in
determining the existence of a "well-founded belief”, the Court finds
Catubag’s claim lacking.
o First, he failed to present any of the friends or relatives he inquired
from to corroborate his “inquires”. No explanation for such omission
 was given. Failure to present any of the persons from whom inquiries
were allegedly made tends to belie a claim of a diligent search.
o Second, he did not seek the help of other concerned government
agencies, like the local police authorities and NBI. While a finding of
well-founded belief varies with the nature of the situation, it would still
be prudent for the present spouse to seek the aid of the authorities
in searching for the missing spouse.
o Lastly, aside from the certification of Bombo Radyo's manager, he
bases his "well-founded belief' on bare assertions that he exercised
earnest efforts in looking for his wife. Again, his bare assertions,
uncorroborated by any kind of evidence, falls short of the diligence
required to engender a well-founded belief that the absentee spouse
is dead.
 Taken together, the Court is of the view that Catubag’s efforts in searching for
his missing wife, Shanaviv, are merely passive. He who alleges a fact has
the burden of proving it by some other means than mere allegations.
o Only the act of broadcasting his wife’s alleged disappearance
through a known radio station was corroborated. But at most, it just
reaffirms the unfortunate theory that she abandoned the family.
 To accept Catubag’s bare allegations would be to apply a liberal approach in
complying with the requisite of establishing a well-founded belief that the
missing spouse is dead. The Court cautioned against such liberal approach
because to do so would allow easy circumvention and undermining of the
Family Code. Courts should exercise prudence in applying the standards of
diligence required in establishing a “well-founded belief” because otherwise it
would defeat the State’s policy in protecting and strengthening the institution
of marriage.

PETITION GRANTED.