FIRST DIVISION

G.R. No. 132529. February 2, 2001

SUSAN NICDAO CARInO, Petitioner, v. SUSAN YEE CARInO, Respondent.
D E C I S I O N
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.:
The issue for resolution in the case at ar hin!es on the "ali#it$ of the t%o &arria!es contracte# $ the #ecease#
S'O( Santia!o S. Cario, %hose #eath enefits is no% the su)ect of the contro"ers$ et%een the t%o Susans
%ho& he &arrie#.
*efore this Court is a +etition for re"ie% on certiorari see,in! to set asi#e the #ecision
-
of the Court of A++eals in
CA-G.R. C. No. /-012, %hich affir&e# in toto the #ecision
0
of the Re!ional Trial Court of 3ue4on Cit$, *ranch
56, in Ci"il Case No. 3-72--5120.
Durin! the lifeti&e of the late S'O( Santia!o S. Cario, he contracte# t%o &arria!es, the first %as on 8une 09,
-717, %ith +etitioner Susan Nic#ao Cario :hereafter referre# to as Susan Nic#ao;, %ith %ho& he ha# t%o
offs+rin!s, na&el$, Sahlee an# San#ee Cario< an# the secon# %as on No"e&er -9, -770, %ith res+on#ent
Susan Yee Cario :hereafter referre# to as Susan Yee;, %ith %ho& he ha# no chil#ren in their al&ost ten $ear
cohaitation startin! %a$ ac, in -750.
In -755, S'O( Santia!o S. Cario eca&e ill an# e#ri##en #ue to #iaetes co&+licate# $ +ul&onar$
tuerculosis. =e +asse# a%a$ on No"e&er 02, -770, un#er the care of Susan Yee, %ho s+ent for his &e#ical
an# urial e>+enses. *oth +etitioner an# res+on#ent file# clai&s for &onetar$ enefits an# financial assistance
+ertainin! to the #ecease# fro& "arious !o"ern&ent a!encies. 'etitioner Susan Nic#ao %as ale to collect a total
of '-(1,999.99 fro& ?*AI, 'CCUI, Co&&utation, NA'O@CO?, Aan#B 'a!-ii!,
2
%hile res+on#ent Susan Yee
recei"e# a total of '0-,999.99 fro& GSIS @ife, *urial :GSIS; an# urial :SSS;.
(
crClC%"irtualirCr$
On Dece&er -(, -772, res+on#ent Susan Yee file# the instant case for collection of su& of &one$ a!ainst
+etitioner Susan Nic#ao +ra$in!, inter alia, that +etitioner e or#ere# to return to her at least one-half of the one
hun#re# fort$-si> thousan# +esos :'-(1,999.99; collecti"el$ #eno&inate# as #eath enefits %hich she :+etitioner;
recei"e# fro& ?*AI, 'CCUI, Co&&utation, NA'O@CO?, Aan#B 'a!-ii!. Des+ite ser"ice of su&&ons, +etitioner
faile# to file her ans%er, +ro&+tin! the trial court to #eclare her in #efault.
Res+on#ent Susan Yee a#&itte# that her &arria!e to the #ecease# too, +lace #urin! the susistence of, an#
%ithout first otainin! a )u#icial #eclaration of nullit$ of, the &arria!e et%een +etitioner an# the #ecease#. She,
ho%e"er, clai&e# that she ha# no ,no%le#!e of the +re"ious &arria!e an# that she eca&e a%are of it onl$ at
the funeral of the #ecease#, %here she &et +etitioner %ho intro#uce# herself as the %ife of the #ecease#. To
olster her action for collection of su& of &one$, res+on#ent conten#e# that the &arria!e of +etitioner an# the
#ecease# is "oi# ab initio ecause the sa&e %as sole&ni4e# %ithout the reDuire# &arria!e license. In su++ort
thereof, res+on#ent +resente#: -; the &arria!e certificate of the #ecease# an# the +etitioner %hich ears no
&arria!e license nu&er<
/
an# 0; a certification #ate# ?arch 7, -77(, fro& the @ocal Ci"il Re!istrar of San 8uan,
?etro ?anila, %hich rea#s
This is to certify that this Office has no record of marriage license of the spouses SANTA!O "ARNO #sic$ and
S%SAN N"&AO, 'ho are married in this municipality on June (), *+,+. -ence, 'e cannot issue as re.uested a
true copy or transcription of /arriage 0icense number from the records of this archives.
This certification is issued upon the re.uest of /rs. Susan 1ee "ario for 'hatever legal purpose it may
serve.
1
crClC%"irtualirCr$
On Au!ust 05, -77/, the trial court rule# in fa"or of res+on#ent, Susan Yee, hol#in! as follo%s:
2-3R34OR3, the defendant is hereby ordered to pay the plaintiff the sum of P56,))).)), half of the amount
'hich 'as paid to her in the form of death benefits arising from the death of SPO7 Santiago S. "ario, plus
attorneys fees in the amount of P8,))).)), and costs of suit.
T S SO OR&3R3&.
6
crClC%"irtualirCr$
On a++eal $ +etitioner to the Court of A++eals, the latter affir&e# in toto the #ecision of the trial court. =ence, the
instant +etition, conten#in! that:
I.
T=E =ONORA*@E COURT OE A''EA@S GRA.E@Y ERRED IN AEEIR?ING T=E EINDINGS OE T=E
@OFER COURT T=AT .DA. DE CONSUEGRA .S. GSIS IS A''@ICA*@E TO T=E CASE AT *AR.
II.
T=E =ONORA*@E COURT OE A''EA@S GRA.E@Y ERRED IN A''@YING E3UITY IN T=E INSTANT
CASE INSTEAD OE T=E C@EAR AND UNE3UI.OCA@ ?ANDATE OE T=E EA?I@Y CODE.
III.
T=E =ONORA*@E COURT OE A''EA@S GRA.E@Y ERRED IN NOT EINDING T=E CASE OE .DA. DE
CONSUEGRA .S GSIS TO =A.E *EEN ?ODIEIED, A?ENDED AND E.EN A*ANDONED *Y T=E
ENACT?ENT OE T=E EA?I@Y CODE.
5
crClC%"irtualirCr$
Un#er Article (9 of the Ea&il$ Co#e, the asolute nullit$ of a +re"ious &arria!e &a$ e in"o,e# for +ur+oses of
re&arria!e on the asis solel$ of a final )u#!&ent #eclarin! such +re"ious &arria!e "oi#. ?eanin!, %here the
asolute nullit$ of a +re"ious &arria!e is sou!ht to e in"o,e# for +ur+oses of contractin! a secon# &arria!e, the
sole asis acce+tale in la%, for sai# +ro)ecte# &arria!e to e free fro& le!al infir&it$, is a final )u#!&ent
#eclarin! the +re"ious &arria!e "oi#.
7
=o%e"er, for +ur+oses other than re&arria!e, no )u#icial action is
necessar$ to #eclare a &arria!e an asolute nullit$. Eor other +ur+oses, such as ut not li&ite# to the
#eter&ination of heirshi+, le!iti&ac$ or ille!iti&ac$ of a chil#, settle&ent of estate, #issolution of +ro+ert$ re!i&e,
or a cri&inal case for that &atter, the court &a$ +ass u+on the "ali#it$ of &arria!e e"en after the #eath of the
+arties thereto, an# e"en in a suit not #irectl$ institute# to Duestion the "ali#it$ of sai# &arria!e, so lon! as it is
essential to the #eter&ination of the case.
-9
In such instances, e"i#ence &ust e a##uce#, testi&onial or
#ocu&entar$, to +ro"e the e>istence of !roun#s ren#erin! such a +re"ious &arria!e an asolute nullit$. These
nee# not e li&ite# solel$ to an earlier final )u#!&ent of a court #eclarin! such +re"ious &arria!e "oi#.
--
crClC%"irtualirCr$
It is clear therefore that the Court is clothe# %ith sufficient authorit$ to +ass u+on the "ali#it$ of the t%o &arria!es
in this case, as the sa&e is essential to the #eter&ination of %ho is ri!htfull$ entitle# to the su)ect #eath enefits
of the #ecease#.
Un#er the Ci"il Co#e, %hich %as the la% in force %hen the &arria!e of +etitioner Susan Nic#ao an# the #ecease#
%as sole&ni4e# in -717, a "ali# &arria!e license is a reDuisite of &arria!e,
-0
an# the asence thereof, su)ect to
certain e>ce+tions,
-2
ren#ers the &arria!e "oi# ab initio.
-(
crClC%"irtualirCr$
In the case at ar, there is no Duestion that the &arria!e of +etitioner an# the #ecease# #oes not fall %ithin the
&arria!es e>e&+t fro& the license reDuire&ent. A &arria!e license, therefore, %as in#is+ensale to the "ali#it$ of
their &arria!e. This not%ithstan#in!, the recor#s re"eal that the &arria!e contract of +etitioner an# the #ecease#
ears no &arria!e license nu&er an#, as certifie# $ the @ocal Ci"il Re!istrar of San 8uan, ?etro ?anila, their
office has no recor# of such &arria!e license. In Republic v. "ourt of Appeals,
-/
the Court hel# that such a
certification is a#eDuate to +ro"e the non-issuance of a &arria!e license. Asent an$ circu&stance of sus+icion,
as in the +resent case, the certification issue# $ the local ci"il re!istrar en)o$s +roati"e "alue, he ein! the
officer char!e# un#er the la% to ,ee+ a recor# of all #ata relati"e to the issuance of a &arria!e license.
Such ein! the case, the +resu&e# "ali#it$ of the &arria!e of +etitioner an# the #ecease# has een sufficientl$
o"erco&e. It then eca&e the ur#en of +etitioner to +ro"e that their &arria!e is "ali# an# that the$ secure# the
reDuire# &arria!e license. Althou!h she %as #eclare# in #efault efore the trial court, +etitioner coul# ha"e
sDuarel$ &et the issue an# e>+laine# the asence of a &arria!e license in her +lea#in!s efore the Court of
A++eals an# this Court. *ut +etitioner con"enientl$ a"oi#e# the issue an# chose to refrain fro& +ursuin! an
ar!u&ent that %ill +ut her case in )eo+ar#$. =ence, the +resu&e# "ali#it$ of their &arria!e cannot stan#.
It is e$on# ca"il, therefore, that the &arria!e et%een +etitioner Susan Nic#ao an# the #ecease#, ha"in! een
sole&ni4e# %ithout the necessar$ &arria!e license, an# not ein! one of the &arria!es e>e&+t fro& the
&arria!e license reDuire&ent, is un#oute#l$ "oi# ab initio.
It #oes not follo% fro& the fore!oin! #isDuisition, ho%e"er, that since the &arria!e of +etitioner an# the #ecease#
is #eclare# "oi# ab initio, the #eath enefits un#er scrutin$ %oul# no% e a%ar#e# to res+on#ent Susan Yee. To
reiterate, un#er Article (9 of the Ea&il$ Co#e, for +ur+oses of re&arria!e, there &ust first e a +rior )u#icial
#eclaration of the nullit$ of a +re"ious &arria!e, thou!h "oi#, efore a +art$ can enter into a secon# &arria!e,
other%ise, the secon# &arria!e %oul# also e "oi#.
Accor#in!l$, the #eclaration in the instant case of nullit$ of the +re"ious &arria!e of the #ecease# an# +etitioner
Susan Nic#ao #oes not "ali#ate the secon# &arria!e of the #ecease# %ith res+on#ent Susan Yee. The fact
re&ains that their &arria!e %as sole&ni4e# %ithout first otainin! a )u#icial #ecree #eclarin! the &arria!e of
+etitioner Susan Nic#ao an# the #ecease# "oi#. =ence, the &arria!e of res+on#ent Susan Yee an# the #ecease#
is, li,e%ise, "oi# ab initio.
One of the effects of the #eclaration of nullit$ of &arria!e is the se+aration of the +ro+ert$ of the s+ouses
accor#in! to the a++licale +ro+ert$ re!i&e.
-1
Consi#erin! that the t%o &arria!es are "oi# ab initio, the
a++licale +ro+ert$ re!i&e %oul# not e asolute co&&unit$ or con)u!al +artnershi+ of +ro+ert$, ut rather, e
!o"erne# $ the +ro"isions of Articles -(6 an# -(5 of the Ea&il$ Co#e on 'ro+ert$ Re!i&e of Unions Fithout
?arria!e.
Un#er Article -(5 of the Ea&il$ Co#e, %hich refers to the +ro+ert$ re!i&e of i!a&ous &arria!es, a#ulterous
relationshi+s, relationshi+s in a state of concuine, relationshi+s %here oth &an an# %o&an are &arrie# to other
+ersons, &ulti+le alliances of the sa&e &arrie# &an,
-6
-
... 9O:nly the properties ac.uired by both of the parties through their actual ;oint contribution of money,
property, or industry shall be o'ned by them in common in proportion to their respective contributions ...
In this +ro+ert$ re!i&e, the +ro+erties acDuire# $ the +arties throu!h their acua! "o#n conr#bu#on shall elon!
to the co-o%nershi+. Fa!es an# salaries earne# $ each +art$ elon! to hi& or her e>clusi"el$. Then too,
contriutions in the for& of care of the ho&e, chil#ren an# househol#, or s+iritual or &oral ins+iration, are
e>clu#e# in this re!i&e.
-5
crClC%"irtualirCr$
Consi#erin! that the &arria!e of res+on#ent Susan Yee an# the #ecease# is a i!a&ous &arria!e, ha"in! een
sole&ni4e# #urin! the susistence of a +re"ious &arria!e then +resu&e# to e "ali# :et%een +etitioner an# the
#ecease#;, the a++lication of Article -(5 is therefore in or#er.
The #is+ute# '-(1,999.99 fro& ?*AI AAE' ?utual *enefit Association, Inc.B, NA'O@CO?, Co&&utation, 'a!-
ii!, an# 'CCUI, are clearl$ renu&erations, incenti"es an# enefits fro& !o"ern&ental a!encies earne# $ the
#ecease# as a +olice officer. Unless res+on#ent Susan Yee +resents +roof to the contrar$, it coul# not e sai#
that she contriute# &one$, +ro+ert$ or in#ustr$ in the acDuisition of these &onetar$ enefits. =ence, the$ are not
o%ne# in co&&on $ res+on#ent an# the #ecease#, ut elon! to the #ecease# alone an# res+on#ent has no
ri!ht %hatsoe"er to clai& the sa&e. *$ intestate succession, the sai# #eath enefits of the #ecease# shall +ass to
his le!al heirs. An#, res+on#ent, not ein! the le!al %ife of the #ecease# is not one of the&.
As to the +ro+ert$ re!i&e of +etitioner Susan Nic#ao an# the #ecease#, Article -(6 of the Ea&il$ Co#e !o"erns.
This article a++lies to unions of +arties %ho are le!all$ ca+acitate# an# not arre# $ an$ i&+e#i&ent to contract
&arria!e, ut %hose &arria!e is nonetheless "oi# for other reasons, li,e the asence of a &arria!e license.
Article -(6 of the Ea&il$ Co#e rea#s -
Art. *75. 2hen a man and a 'oman 'ho are capacitated to marry each other, live e<clusively 'ith each other as
husband and 'ife 'ithout the benefit of marriage or under a void marriage, their 'ages and salaries shall be
o'ned by them in e.ual shares and the property ac.uired by both of them through their 'or= or industry shall be
governed by the rules on co>o'nership.
n the absence of proof to the contrary, properties ac.uired 'hile they lived together shall be presumed to have
been obtained by their ;oint efforts, 'or= or industry, and shall be o'ned by them in e.ual shares. 4or purposes of
this Article, a party 'ho did not participate in the ac.uisition by the other party of any property shall be deemed to
have contributed ;ointly in the ac.uisition thereof if the formers efforts consisted in the care and maintenance of
the family and of the household.
< < <
2hen only one of the parties to a void marriage is in good faith, the share of the party in bad faith in the co>
o'nership shall be forfeited in favor of their common children. n case of default of or 'aiver by any or all of the
common children or their descendants, each vacant share shall belong to the respective surviving descendants.
n the absence of descendants, such share shall belong to the innocent party. n all cases, the forfeiture shall ta=e
place upon termination of the cohabitation.
In contrast to Article -(5, un#er the fore!oin! article, %a!es an# salaries earne# $ either +art$ #urin! the
cohaitation shall e o%ne# $ the +arties in eDual shares an# %ill e #i"i#e# eDuall$ et%een the&, e"en if onl$
one +art$ earne# the %a!es an# the other #i# not contriute thereto.
-7
Confor&al$, e"en if the #is+ute# #eath
enefits %ere earne# $ the #ecease# alone as a !o"ern&ent e&+lo$ee, Article -(6 creates a co-o%nershi+ in
res+ect thereto, entitlin! the +etitioner to share one-half thereof. As there is no alle!ation of a# faith in the
+resent case, oth +arties of the first &arria!e are +resu&e# to e in !oo# faith. Thus, one-half of the su)ect
#eath enefits un#er scrutin$ shall !o to the +etitioner as her share in the +ro+ert$ re!i&e, an# the other half
+ertainin! to the #ecease# shall +ass $, intestate succession, to his le!al heirs, na&el$, his chil#ren %ith Susan
Nic#ao.
In affir&in! the #ecision of the trial court, the Court of A++eals relie# on the case of ?da. de "onsuegra v.
!overnment Service nsurance System,
09
%here the Court a%ar#e# one-half of the retire&ent enefits of the
#ecease# to the first %ife an# the other half, to the secon# %ife, hol#in! that:
... 9S:ince the defendants first marriage has not been dissolved or declared void the con;ugal partnership
established by that marriage has not ceased. Nor has the first 'ife lost or relin.uished her status as putative heir
of her husband under the ne' "ivil "ode, entitled to share in his estate upon his death should she survive him.
"onse.uently, 'hether as con;ugal partner in a still subsisting marriage or as such putative heir she has an
interest in the husbands share in the property here in dispute.... And 'ith respect to the right of the second 'ife,
this "ourt observed that although the second marriage can be presumed to be void ab initio as it 'as celebrated
'hile the first marriage 'as still subsisting, still there is need for ;udicial declaration of such nullity. And inasmuch
as the con;ugal partnership formed by the second marriage 'as dissolved before ;udicial declaration of its nullity,
9t:he only ;ust and e.uitable solution in this case 'ould be to recogni@e the right of the second 'ife to her share of
one>half in the property ac.uired by her and her husband, and consider the other half as pertaining to the
con;ugal partnership of the first marriage.
0-
crClC%"irtualirCr$
It shoul# e stresse#, ho%e"er, that the aforecite# #ecision is +re&ise# on the rule %hich reDuires a +rior an#
se+arate )u#icial #eclaration of nullit$ of &arria!e. This is the reason %h$ in the sai# case, the Court #eter&ine#
the ri!hts of the +arties in accor#ance %ith their e>istin! +ro+ert$ re!i&e.
In &omingo v. "ourt of Appeals,
00
ho%e"er, the Court, construin! Article (9 of the Ea&il$ Co#e, clarifie# that a
+rior an# se+arate #eclaration of nullit$ of a &arria!e is an all i&+ortant con#ition +rece#ent onl$ for +ur+oses of
re&arria!e. That is, if a +art$ %ho is +re"iousl$ &arrie# %ishes to contract a secon# &arria!e, he or she has to
otain first a )u#icial #ecree #eclarin! the first &arria!e "oi#, efore he or she coul# contract sai# secon#
&arria!e, other%ise the secon# &arria!e %oul# e "oi#. The sa&e rule a++lies e"en if the first &arria!e is
+atentl$ "oi# ecause the +arties are not free to #eter&ine for the&sel"es the "ali#it$ or in"ali#it$ or their
&arria!e. =o%e"er, for +ur+oses other than to re&arr$, li,e for filin! a case for collection of su& of &one$
anchore# on a &arria!e clai&e# to e "ali#, no +rior an# se+arate )u#icial #eclaration of nullit$ is necessar$. All
that a +art$ has to #o is to +resent e"i#ence, testi&onial or #ocu&entar$, that %oul# +ro"e that the &arria!e fro&
%hich his or her ri!hts flo% is in fact "ali#. Thereu+on, the court, if &aterial to the #eter&ination of the issues
efore it, %ill rule on the status of the &arria!e in"ol"e# an# +rocee# to #eter&ine the ri!hts of the +arties in
accor#ance %ith the a++licale la%s an# )uris+ru#ence. Thus, in Nial v. Aayadog,
02
the Court e>+laine#:
9T:he court may pass upon the validity of marriage even in a suit not directly instituted to .uestion the same so
long as it is essential to the determination of the case. This is 'ithout pre;udice to any issue that may arise in the
case. 2hen such need arises, a final ;udgment of declaration of nullity is necessary even if the purpose is other
than to remarry. The clause on the basis of a final ;udgment declaring such previous marriage void in Article 7) of
the 4amily "ode connoted that such final ;udgment need not be obtained only for purpose of remarriage.
$%&R&FOR& , the +etition is GRANTED, an# the #ecision of the Court of A++eals in CA-G.R. C. No. /-012
%hich affir&e# the #ecision of the Re!ional Trial Court of 3ue4on Cit$ or#erin! +etitioner to +a$ res+on#ent the
su& of '62,999.99 +lus attorne$s fees in the a&ount of '/,999.99, is RE.ERSED an# SET ASIDE. The
co&+laint in Ci"il Case No. 3-72--5120, is here$ DIS?ISSED. No +ronounce&ent as to costs.
SO ORDERED.
Davide, Jr., C.J. (Chairman), Kapunan, an' (ar'o, ))., concur.
Puno J., on official leave.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2