VALDEZ VS.

REPUBLIC
GR No. 180863 | September 8, 2009
Facts:
1. Petitioner Angelita Valdez married Sofio and had one child. Petitioner alleged
they have constant quarrels with Sofio which then the latter left their conjugal
home eventually. Petitioner Valdez and child waited for Sofio to come home but
didn’t so petitioner decided to go back to her parent’s house in Tarlac. Three
years have passed and no word from Sofio.

2. Sofio showed up and they talked, agreed to separate and executed a

document to that effect. After that meeting, Sofio disappeared again and from
then on, Valdez didn’t hear any news of him anymore.

3. Believing that her Sofio was dead, petitioner married the second time. Her
new husband Virgilio’s application for naturalization as an American citizen was
denied because of the wife’s subsisting 1st marriage.

4. Valdez filed a petition before the RTC seeking the declaration of presumptive
death of Sofio. RTC denied because it found that the wife did not try to find her
husband anymore in light of their mutual agreement of separation and their
daughter also alleged that her mother prevented her from finding her father
Sofio.

5. Valdez filed for an MR which the SolGen recommended so since the SolGen
argues that the requirement of "well-founded belief" under Article 41 of the
Family Code is not applicable to the instant case because the petitioner could not
expected to comply with the requirement since it (the rule) was not yet in
existence when she married her 2nd husband in 1985 (1988-FC).

SolGen further argues that before the effectivity of the FC, the wife already
acquired a vested right as to her validity of her married to her 2 nd husband due
to the presumed death of Sofio under the Civil Code.

Issue:

W/N petitioner Valdez’s marriage with Virgilio (2 nd husband) is valid

despite lack of declaration of presumptive death of 1st husband.

Ruling:

Yes. Petitioner’s marriage with Virgilio is valid despite lack of declaration of

presumptive death of 1st husband.

It is readily apparent, however, that the marriages of petitioner to Sofio and

Virgilio on January 11, 1971 and June 20, 1985, respectively, were both
celebrated under the auspices of the Civil Code.

The pertinent provision of the Civil Code is Article 83:

 Art. 83. Any marriage subsequently contracted by any person during the lifetime
of the first spouse of such person with any person other than such first spouse
shall be illegal and void from its performance, unless:

(1) The first marriage was annulled or dissolved; or

(2) The first spouse had been absent for seven consecutive years at the time of
the second marriage without the spouse present having news of the absentee
being alive, of if the absentee, though he has been absent for less than seven
years, is generally considered as dead and believed to be so by the spouse
present at the time of contracting such subsequent marriage, or if the absentee is
presumed dead according to Articles 390 and 391. The marriage so contracted
shall be valid in any of the three cases until declared null and void by a
competent court.

Hence, the presumption of death is established by law and no court declaration

is needed for the presumption to arise. Since death is presumed to have taken
place by the seventh year of absence, Sofio is to be presumed dead starting
October 1982.

Since the Civil Code applies, proof of “well-founded belief” isn’t

required. SC declared that the wife was capacitated to marry Virgilio
(2nd husband) at the time of their marriage in 1985 and therefore, their
marriage is legal and valid.