Aranes v.

Occiano
April 11, 2002
A.M. No. MTJ-02-1390 Puno, J.
Formal Requisites Rios, M.
Petitioner: Respondent:
Mercedita Mata Aranes Judge Salvador M. Occiano
FACTS:

1. Petitioner Aranes charges respondent judge with gross ignorance of the law. Respondent is the
Presiding Judge of the Municipal Trial Court (MTC) of Balataan, Camarines Sur. Petitioner alleges
respondent judge solemnized her marriage without the requisite marriage license and at Nabua,
Camarines Sur which is outside his territorial jurisdiction.
2. Petitioner prays that sanctions be imposed for the respondent’s illegal acts and unethical
misrepresentations which caused her hardships, embarrassment and sufferings. Respondent judge
averred that he only proceeded to solemnize the marriage out of human compassion despite the parties
did not possess the requisite marriage license and also due to the husband’s condition who just suffered
from stroke.
3. Also, respondent reiterated to the parties the necessity for the marriage license and failure to give would
render the marriage void but because of their earnest pleas and reassurance that the marriage license
would be delivered at the MTC of Balataan, Camarines Sur, he solemnized their marriage.

ISSUE:

WON the respondent is guilty of solemnizing the petitioner’s marriage without a duly issued marriage license
and conducting marriage outside his jurisdiction

RULLING:

YES, the respondent judge is guilty of solemnizing a marriage without a duly issued marriage license and for
doing so outside his territorial jurisdiction.
RATIONALE/ANALYSIS/LEGAL BASIS:

Pursuant to Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980, or B.P. 129, the authority of the regional trial court
judges and judges of inferior court to solemnize marriages is confined to their territorial jurisdiction as
defined by the Supreme Court. In addition, under Family Code Art. 7 (1) Marriage may be solemnized by any
incumbent member of the judiciary within the court’s jurisdiction. In the case at bar, the territorial jurisdiction
of respondent judge is limited to the municipality of Balataan, Camarines Sur and his act of solemnizing the
petitioner’s marriage in Nabua, Camarines is contrary to law subjecting him to administrative liability.

In People v. Lara, marriage which preceded the issuance of the marriage license is void, and that the subsequent
issuance of such license cannot render valid or even add an iota of validity to the marriage. Except in cases
provided by law, it is the marriage license that gives the solemnizing officer the authority to solemnize
marriage. Respondent judge did not possess such authority and acted in gross ignorance of the law
DISPOSITION:

Respondent Judge Salvador M. Occiano is fined P5,000.00 pesos with a STERN WARNING that a repetition
of the same or similar offense in the future will be dealt with more severely.

Aranes v Occiano A.M. No. MTJ-02-1390