You are on page 1of 14

VI.

CONSEQUENCES OF MARRIAGE the resulting obligation shall be reason, not safe for the members of the
enforced against the separate property family or her property.
of the spouse who has not obtained
1. PERSONAL RELATIONS
consent. Art. 36. Rights and obligations of the wife.
Civil Code Art. 15, supra The foregoing provisions shall not prejudice 1. The wife shall dutifully manage the affairs of
the rights of creditors who acted in good the household. She may purchase things
Family Code faith. (117a) necessary for the maintenance of the
family, and the husband shall be bound to
Muslim Code reimburse the expenses, if he has not
Art. 69. The husband and wife shall fix the family
domicile. In case of disagreement, the court delivered the proper sum.
shall decide.
Art. 34. Mutual rights and obligations. 2. The wife cannot, without the husband's
consent, acquire any property by gratuitous
The court may exempt one spouse from 1. The husband and the wife are obliged to title, except from her relatives who are
living with the other if the latter should live live together, observe mutual respect within the prohibited degrees in marriage.
abroad or there are other valid and and fidelity, and render mutual help and
compelling reasons for the exemption. support in accordance with this Code. 3. The wife may, with her husband's consent,
However, such exemption shall not apply if exercise any profession or occupation or
the same is not compatible with the 2. When one of the spouses neglects his or engage in lawful business which is in
solidarity of the family. (110a) her duties to the conjugal union or keeping with Islamic modesty and virtue.
brings danger, dishonor or material However, if the husband refuses to give his
injury upon the other, the injured party consent on the ground that his income is
Art. 70. The spouses are jointly responsible for the may petition the court for relief. The sufficient for the family according to its
support of the family. The expenses for such court may counsel the offender to social standing or his opposition is based on
support and other conjugal obligations shall comply with his or her duties, and take serious and valid grounds, the matter shall
be paid from the community property and, such measures as may be proper. be referred to the Agama Arbitration
in the absence thereof, from the income or Council.
fruits of their separate properties. In case of 3. The husband and the wife shall inherit
insufficiency or absence of said income or from each other in accordance with this 4. The wife shall have the right to demand the
Code. satisfaction of her mahr.
fruits, such obligations shall be satisfied
from the separate properties. (111a)
4. The husband and the wife shall have the 5. Unless otherwise stipulated in the marriage
right to divorce in accordance with this settlements, the wife retain ownership and
Art. 73. Either spouse may exercise any legitimate Code. administration of her exclusive property.
profession, occupation, business or activity
without the consent of the other. The latter
may object only on valid, serious, and moral Art. 35. Rights and obligations of the husband. 6. The wife shall be entitled to an equal and
grounds. The husband shall fix the residence of the just treatment by the husband.
family. The court may exempt the wife from
living with her husband on any of the 2. PROPERTY RELATIONS
In case of disagreement, the court shall following grounds:
decide whether or not:
Civil Code:
a. Her dower is not satisfied in accordance
1. The objection is proper; and with the stipulations; or
Art. 15, supra
2. Benefit has occurred to the family prior b. The conjugal dwelling is not in keeping
to the objection or thereafter. If the with her social standing or is, for any
benefit accrued prior to the objection,
Art. 117. The wife may exercise any profession or the property acquired by either or both of conformity with the regulations, rites, or
occupation or engage in business. However, them through their work or industry or their practices of any church, sect, or religion it
the husband may object, provided: wages and salaries shall be governed by the shall no longer be necessary to comply with
rules on co-ownership. (n)
the requirements of Chapter 1 of this Title
1.His income is sufficient for the and any ratification made shall merely be
family, according to its social Family Code: considered as a purely religious ceremony.
standing, and
(23)
Art. 74. A marriage in articulo mortis may also be
2.His opposition is founded on serious solemnized by the captain of a ship or chief
and valid grounds. Art. 80. The following marriages shall be
of an airplane during a voyage, or by the void from the beginning:
commanding officer of a military unit, in the 1. Those contracted under the ages of
In case of disagreement on this question, absence of a chaplain, during war. The sixteen and fourteen years by the male
the parents and grandparents as well as the duties mentioned in the two preceding and female respectively, even with the
family council, if any, shall be consulted. If consent of the parents;
articles shall be complied with by the ship
no agreement is still arrived at, the court
will decide whatever may be proper and in captain, airplane chief or commanding
the best interest of the family. (n) officer. (n) 2. Those solemnized by any person not
legally authorized to perform marriages;
Art. 118. The property relations between husband Art. 75. Marriages between Filipino citizens abroad
and wife shall be governed in the following 3. Those solemnized without a marriage
may be solemnized by consuls and vice-
order: license, save marriages of exceptional
a. By contract executed before the consuls of the Republic of the Philippines. character;
marriage; The duties of the local civil registrar and of a
judge or justice of the peace or mayor with
4. Bigamous or polygamous marriages not
b. By the provisions of this Code; and regard to the celebration of marriage shall falling under Article 83, Number 2;
be performed by such consuls and vice-
c. By custom. (1315a) consuls. (n) 5. Incestuous marriages mentioned in
Article 81;
Art. 124. If the marriage is between a citizen of the Art. 76. No marriage license shall be necessary
Philippines and a foreigner, whether when a man and a woman who have 6. Those where one or both contracting
celebrated in the Philippines or abroad, the attained the age of majority and who, being parties have been found guilty of the
following rules shall prevail: unmarried, have lived together as husband killing of the spouse of either of them;
and wife for at least five years, desire to
1. If the husband is a citizen of the marry each other. The contracting parties 7. Those between stepbrothers and
Philippines while the wife is a foreigner, shall state the foregoing facts in an affidavit stepsisters and other marriages
the provisions of this Code shall govern specified in Article 82. (n)
before any person authorized by law to
their relations;
administer oaths. The official, priest or
Art. 147. When a man and a woman who are
minister who solemnized the marriage shall
2. If the husband is a foreigner and the capacitated to marry each other, live
wife is a citizen of the Philippines, the also state in an affidavit that he took steps exclusively with each other as husband and
laws of the husband's country shall be to ascertain the ages and other wife without the benefit of marriage or
followed, without prejudice to the qualifications of the contracting parties and under a void marriage, their wages and
provisions of this Code with regard to that he found no legal impediment to the salaries shall be owned by them in equal
immovable property. (1325a) marriage. (n) shares and the property acquired by both of
them through their work or industry shall be
Art. 144. When a man and a woman live together as governed by the rules on co-ownership.
Art. 77. In case two persons married in accordance
husband and wife, but they are not married,
with law desire to ratify their union in
or their marriage is void from the beginning,
In the absence of proof to the contrary, If one of the parties is validly married to marriage license can be obtained, to provide
properties acquired while they lived another, his or her share in the co- themselves with a certificate of legal
together shall be presumed to have been ownership shall accrue to the absolute capacity to contract marriage, to be issued
obtained by their joint efforts, work or community or conjugal partnership existing by their respective diplomatic or consular
industry, and shall be owned by them in in such valid marriage. If the party who officials. (13a)
equal shares. For purposes of this Article, a acted in bad faith is not validly married to
party who did not participate in the another, his or her shall be forfeited in the Art. 71. All marriages performed outside the
acquisition by the other party of any manner provided in the last paragraph of Philippines in accordance with the laws in
property shall be deemed to have the preceding Article. force in the country where they were
contributed jointly in the acquisition thereof performed, and valid there as such, shall
if the former's efforts consisted in the care The foregoing rules on forfeiture shall also be valid in this country, except
and maintenance of the family and of the likewise apply even if both parties are in bad bigamous, polygamous, or incestuous
household. faith. (144a) marriages as determined by Philippine law.
(19a)
Neither party can encumber or dispose by Muslim Code:
acts inter vivos of his or her share in the Family Code
property acquired during cohabitation and
owned in common, without the consent of Art. 37. How governed. The property relations
the other, until after the termination of their between husband and wife shall be Art. 45. A marriage may be annulled for any of the
cohabitation. governed in the following order: following causes, existing at the time of the
marriage:
When only one of the parties to a void a. By contract before or at the time of the
marriage is in good faith, the share of the celebration of marriage; 1. That the party in whose behalf it is
party in bad faith in the co-ownership shall sought to have the marriage annulled
be forfeited in favor of their common b. By the provisions of this Code; and was eighteen years of age or over but
children. In case of default of or waiver by below twenty-one, and the marriage
any or all of the common children or their was solemnized without the consent of
c. By custom. the parents, guardian or person having
descendants, each vacant share shall
belong to the respective surviving substitute parental authority over the
descendants. In the absence of Art. 38. Regime of property relations. The party, in that order, unless after
descendants, such share shall belong to the property relations between the spouses, in attaining the age of twenty-one, such
innocent party. In all cases, the forfeiture the absence of any stipulation to the party freely cohabited with the other
shall take place upon termination of the contrary in the marriage settlements or any and both lived together as husband and
cohabitation. (144a) other contract, shall be governed by the wife;
regime of complete separation of property
in accordance with this Code and, in a 2. That either party was of unsound mind,
Art. 148. In cases of cohabitation not falling under the suppletory manner, by the general
preceding Article, only the properties unless such party after coming to
principles of Islamic law and the Civil Code reason, freely cohabited with the other
acquired by both of the parties through their of the Philippines.
actual joint contribution of money, property, as husband and wife;
or industry shall be owned by them in
common in proportion to their respective VII. Dissolution of Marriage 3. That the consent of either party was
contributions. In the absence of proof to the obtained by fraud, unless such party
contrary, their contributions and 1. Annulment afterwards, with full knowledge of the
corresponding shares are presumed to be facts constituting the fraud, freely
equal. The same rule and presumption shall Civil Code: cohabited with the other as husband
apply to joint deposits of money and and wife;
evidences of credit.
Art. 66. When either or both of the contracting
parties are citizens or subjects of a foreign 4. That the consent of either party was
country, it shall be necessary, before a obtained by force, intimidation or undue
influence, unless the same having 1. For causes mentioned in number 1 of Art. 49. During the pendency of the action and in
disappeared or ceased, such party Article 45 by the party whose parent or the absence of adequate provisions in a
thereafter freely cohabited with the guardian did not give his or her consent, written agreement between the spouses,
other as husband and wife; within five years after attaining the age the Court shall provide for the support of the
of twenty-one, or by the parent or spouses and the custody and support of
5. That either party was physically guardian or person having legal charge their common children. The Court shall give
incapable of consummating the of the minor, at any time before such paramount consideration to the moral and
marriage with the other, and such party has reached the age of twenty- material welfare of said children and their
incapacity continues and appears to be one; choice of the parent with whom they wish to
incurable; or remain as provided to in Title IX. It shall also
2. For causes mentioned in number 2 of provide for appropriate visitation rights of
Article 45, by the same spouse, who had the other parent. (n)
6. That either party was afflicted with a
sexually-transmissible disease found to no knowledge of the other's insanity; or
be serious and appears to be incurable. by any relative or guardian or person Art. 50. The effects provided for by paragraphs (2),
(85a) having legal charge of the insane, at (3), (4) and (5) of Article 43 and by Article
any time before the death of either 44 shall also apply in the proper cases to
party, or by the insane spouse during a marriages which are declared ab initio or
Art. 46. Any of the following circumstances shall lucid interval or after regaining sanity; annulled by final judgment under Articles 40
constitute fraud referred to in Number 3 of and 45.
the preceding Article:
3. For causes mentioned in number 3 of
1. Non-disclosure of a previous conviction Article 45, by the injured party, within The final judgment in such cases shall
by final judgment of the other party of a five years after the discovery of the provide for the liquidation, partition and
crime involving moral turpitude; fraud; distribution of the properties of the spouses,
the custody and support of the common
4. For causes mentioned in number 4 of children, and the delivery of third
2. Concealment by the wife of the fact that presumptive legitimes, unless such matters
at the time of the marriage, she was Article 45, by the injured party, within
five years from the time the force, had been adjudicated in previous judicial
pregnant by a man other than her proceedings.
husband; intimidation or undue influence
disappeared or ceased;
All creditors of the spouses as well as of the
3. Concealment of sexually transmissible absolute community or the conjugal
disease, regardless of its nature, 5. For causes mentioned in number 5 and
6 of Article 45, by the injured party, partnership shall be notified of the
existing at the time of the marriage; or proceedings for liquidation.
within five years after the marriage.
(87a)
4. Concealment of drug addiction, habitual In the partition, the conjugal dwelling and
alcoholism or homosexuality or the lot on which it is situated, shall be
lesbianism existing at the time of the Art. 48. In all cases of annulment or declaration of
absolute nullity of marriage, the Court shall adjudicated in accordance with the
marriage. provisions of Articles 102 and 129.
order the prosecuting attorney or fiscal
assigned to it to appear on behalf of the
No other misrepresentation or deceit as to State to take steps to prevent collusion Art. 51. In said partition, the value of the
character, health, rank, fortune or chastity between the parties and to take care that presumptive legitimes of all common
shall constitute such fraud as will give evidence is not fabricated or suppressed. children, computed as of the date of the
grounds for action for the annulment of final judgment of the trial court, shall be
marriage. (86a) delivered in cash, property or sound
In the cases referred to in the preceding
paragraph, no judgment shall be based securities, unless the parties, by mutual
Art. 47. The action for annulment of marriage must upon a stipulation of facts or confession of agreement judicially approved, had already
be filed by the following persons and within judgment. (88a) provided for such matters.
the periods indicated herein:
The children or their guardian or the trustee 3. Attempt of respondent to corrupt or Art. 27. By a husband. Notwithstanding the rule of
of their property may ask for the induce the petitioner, a common Islamic law permitting a Muslim to have
enforcement of the judgment. child, or a child of the petitioner, to more than one wife but one wife unless he
engage in prostitution, or can deal with them with equal
The delivery of the presumptive legitimes connivance in such corruption or companionship and just treatment as
herein prescribed shall in no way prejudice inducement; enjoined by Islamic law and only in
the ultimate successional rights of the exceptional cases.
children accruing upon the death of either of 4. Final judgment sentencing the
both of the parents; but the value of the respondent to imprisonment of more Art. 34. Mutual rights and obligations.
properties already received under the than six years, even if pardoned;
decree of annulment or absolute nullity shall 1. The husband and the wife are obliged to
be considered as advances on their 5. Drug addiction or habitual live together, observe mutual respect
legitime. (n) alcoholism of the respondent; and fidelity, and render mutual help and
support in accordance with this Code.
Art. 52. The judgment of annulment or of absolute 6. Lesbianism or homosexuality of the
nullity of the marriage, the partition and respondent; 2. When one of the spouses neglects his or
distribution of the properties of the spouses her duties to the conjugal union or
and the delivery of the children's brings danger, dishonor or material
presumptive legitimes shall be recorded in 7. Contracting by the respondent of a
subsequent bigamous marriage, injury upon the other, the injured party
the appropriate civil registry and registries may petition the court for relief. The
of property; otherwise, the same shall not whether in the Philippines or
abroad; court may counsel the offender to
affect third persons. (n) comply with his or her duties, and take
such measures as may be proper. .chan
Art. 53. Either of the former spouses may marry 8. Sexual infidelity or perversion; robles virtual law library
again after compliance with the
requirements of the immediately preceding 9. Attempt by the respondent against 3. The husband and the wife shall inherit
Article; otherwise, the subsequent marriage the life of the petitioner; or from each other in accordance with this
shall be null and void.chan robles virtual law Code.
library 10. Abandonment of petitioner by
respondent without justifiable cause 4. The husband and the wife shall
Art. 54. Children conceived or born before the for more than one year. have the right to divorce in
judgment of annulment or absolute nullity of accordance with this Code.
the marriage under Article 36 has become For purposes of this Article, the term "child"
final and executory shall be considered shall include a child by nature or by
legitimate. Children conceived or born of the ROEHR VS. RODRIGUEZ
adoption. (9a)
subsequent marriage under Article 53 shall
likewise be legitimate.
2. Absolute Divorce Facts:
Art. 55. A petition for legal separation may Petitioner Wolfgang Roehr, a German citizen, married a
be filed on any of the following grounds: Civil Code:
Filipina, Carmen Rodriguez in Germany. The marriage was
ratified in Tayasan, Negros Oriental. Private respondent filed
1. Repeated physical violence or Art. 15, supra a petition for the declaration of nullity of marriage before
grossly abusive conduct directed the RTC of Makati. Petitioner filed a motion to dismiss but
against the petitioner, a common Art. 17, Supra was denied by the trial court. The petitioner obtained a
child, or a child of the petitioner; decree of divorce from the Court of First Instance of
Muslim Code: Hamburg - Blankenese and granting the custody of the
2. Physical violence or moral pressure children to the father.
to compel the petitioner to change
religious or political affiliation; 45-55 supra Issue:
It is therefore a serious question whether any foreign
Whether or not the legal effects of a divorce obtained from a Held divorce relating to citizens of the Philippine Islands, will be
foreign country such as support and custody of the children recognized in this jurisdiction, except it be for a cause, and
can be determined in our courts? While the parties in this action are in dispute over financial
under conditions for which the courts of Philippine Islands
matters they are in unity in trying to secure the courts of
Held: this jurisdiction to recognize and approve of the Reno would grant a divorce. The lower court in granting relief as
divorce. On the record here presented this can not be done. prayed for frankly stated that the securing of the divorce,
Yes. In order to take effect, a foreign judgement must The public policy in this jurisdiction on the question of the contracting of another marriage and the bringing into
clearly show that the opposing party has been given divorce is clearly set forth in Act No. 2710, and the decisions the world of innocent children brings about such a condition
ample opportunity to do so under the Rules of Civil of this court. that the court must grant relief. The hardships of the
Procedure. Accordingly, the respondent was not given the existing divorce laws of the Philippine Islands are well
opportunity to challenge the judgement of the German The entire conduct of the parties from the time of their
known to the members of the Legislature. It is of no moment
Court, therefore, legal effects of divorce must be determined separation until the case was submitted to this court, in
in our courts. The court held that the trial court has in this litigation what he personal views of the writer on the
which they all prayed that the Reno divorce be ratified and
jurisdiction over the issue between the parties as to who subject of divorce may be. It is the duty of the courts to
confirmed, clearly indicates a purpose to circumvent the
has the parental custody. enforce the laws of divorce as written by the Legislature if
GONZALES VS. GONZALES laws of the Philippine Islands regarding divorce and to
they are constitutional. Courts have no right to say that
secure for themselves a change of status for reasons and
such laws are too strict or too liberal.
Facts: under conditions not authorized by our law. At all times the
matrimonial domicile of this couple has been within the
Plaintiff and defendant are citizens of the Philippine Islands Philippine Islands and the residence acquired in the State of
and at present residents of the City of Manila. They were Nevada by the husband of the purpose of securing a divorce
married in the City of Manila on January 19, 1919, and lived was not a bona fide residence and did not confer jurisdiction TENCHAVEZ V. ESCANO 15 SCRA 355
together as man and wife in the Philippine Islands until the upon the Court of that State to dissolve the bonds if
spring of 1926. They voluntarily separated and since that
matrimony in which he had entered in 1919. While the Facts:
time have not lived together as man and wife. Of this union
four children were born. Negotiations between the parties, decisions of this court heretofore in refusing to recognize
both being represented by attorneys, whereupon it was the validity of foreign divorce has usually been expressed in Pastor Tenchavez married Vicenta Escano on Feb. 24,
mutually agreed to allow the plaintiff for her support and the negative and have been based upon lack of matrimonial 1948 in Cebu City. As of June 1948, the newly-weds
that of her children, five hundred pesos (P500) monthly; this domicile or fraud or collusion, we have not overlooked the were already estranged. Vicenta left for the US and filed
amount to be increased in case of illness or necessity, and provisions of the Civil Code now in force in these Islands. a verified complaint for divorce against the Pastor in the
the title of certain properties to be put in her name. Shortly
Article 9 thereof reads as follows: State of Nevada on the ground of "extreme cruelty,
after this agreement the husband left the Islands, betook
himself to Reno, Nevada, and secured in that jurisdiction an entirely mental in character."
absolute divorce on the ground of desertion. Shortly The laws relating to family rights and duties,
thereafter the defendant moved to California and returned or to the status, condition and legal capacity A decree of divorce was issued by the Nevada Court.
to these Islands in August 1928, where he has since or persons, are binding upon Spaniards even Later on, Vicenta married an American, Russell Leo
remained. On the same date that he secured a divorce in though they reside in a foreign country.
Nevada he went through the forms of marriage with another Moran in Nevada. She now lives with him in California
citizen of these Islands and now has three children as a and has begotten children. She acquired American
result of that marriage. Defendant, after his departure from And article 11, the last part of which reads: citizenship on August 8, 1958. On July 30, 1955, Pastor
these Islands, reduced the amount he had agreed to pay filed a complaint for legal separation and damages
monthly for the support of his wife and four minor children . . . the prohibitive laws concerning persons, against Vicenta and her parents in the CFI-Cebu.
and has not made the payments fixed in the Reno divorce
their acts and their property, and those
as alimony.
intended to promote public order and good HELD:
Issue: morals, shall nor be rendered without effect
by any foreign laws or judgments or by At the time the divorce decree was issued,
Whether or not that the divorced acquired in Nevada is valid anything done or any agreements entered into Vicenta, like her husband, was still a Filipino
here in the Philippines? a foreign country. citizen. She was then subject to Philippine laws
under Art. 15 of the New Civil Code. Philippine law, Canson interposed three defenses: (1) adultery on the That our divorce law, Act No. 2710, is too strict or too
under the NCC then now in force, does not admit part of the plaintiff: (2) absolute divorce obtained by the liberal is not for this court to decide. (Barretto Gonzalez
absolute divorce but only provides for legal separation. defendant as decreed by the court in Reno, Nevada, vs. Gonzalez, supra.)
United States of America; and (3) that the defendant did The allotment of powers between the different
not have the means to pay the allowance sought. The governmental agencies restricts the judiciary
For Philippine courts to recognize foreign divorce lower court dismissed the complaint and declined to within the confines of interpretation, not of
decrees between Filipino citizens would be a accord validity to the divorce obtained in Reno but legislation. The legislative policy on the matter of
patent violation of the declared policy of the found that Hilaria Sikat had forfeited her right to support divorce in this jurisdiction is clearly set forth in Act No.
State, especially in view of the 3rd par. of Art. 17, because she had committed adultery. 2710 and has been upheld by this court;
of the New Civil Code which reads: Prohibitive This judgment was not appealed and it became final.
laws concerning persons, their acts or property, On June 1, 1934, the present action was instituted by ARCA V. JAVIER
the plaintiff-appellant to obtain the liquidation of the 95 PHIL 579
and those which have, for their object, public
conjugal partnership. The action is predicated on the
order, public policy and good customs shall not be Dissatisfied with the decision of the Court of First
existence of a final decree of absolute divorce rendered
rendered ineffective by laws or judgments by the court of Reno, Nevada, since 1929. Instance of Cavite ordering him to give a monthly
promulgated, or by determinations or allowance of P60 to plaintiffs beginning March 31, 1953,
conventions agreed upon in a foreign country. Held: and to pay them attorney's fees in the amount of P150
Moreover, recognition would give rise to scandalous defendant took the case directly to this Court attributing
discrimination in favor of wealthy citizens to the It is not, however, the citizenship of the plaintiff five errors to the court below. The facts are not
for divorce which confers jurisdiction upon a disputed.
detriment of those members of our society whose
court, but his legal residence within the State
means do not permit them to sojourn abroad and obtain
(Cousins Hix vs. Fluemer, 55 Phil. 851). And assuming Javier and Arca got married in Manila. Javier, an enlisted
absolute divorce outside the Philippines. that John Canson acquired legal residence in the State US Navy personnel left for the States 7 years after the
of Nevada through the approval of his citizenship birth of their first born. At such time, Arca lived with
Therefore, a foreign divorce between Filipino citizens, papers, this did not confer jurisdiction on the Nevada Javiers parents. However, due to strained relations with
sought and decreed after the effectivity of the NCC, is court to grant a divorce that would be valid in this the latter, she left and transferred to her hometown.
jurisdiction nor jurisdiction that could determine their Thereafter, Javier filed a case for divorce in Alabama
not entitled to recognition as valid in this jurisdiction.
matrimonial status, because the wife was still domiciled against Arca alleging abandonment. Arca made her
in the Philippines. The Nevada court never acquired reply claiming among other things that she never
SIKAT V. CANSON jurisdiction over her person. (Gorayeb vs. Hashim, 50 abandoned her husband and that their separation was
67 PHIL 207 Phil. 26, and Cousins Hix vs. Fluemer, supra.) This was due to a physical impossibility which justifies her
not a proceeding in rem to justify a court in separation if the husband moves to ultra-marine
Hilaria Sikat and John Canson contracted marriage and entering a decree as to the res or marriage colonies. The divorce however was granted.
lived together as husband and wife until 1911 when relation entitled to be enforced outside of the Javier got married the 2nd time but was subsequently
they separated. territorial jurisdiction of the court. divorced. After a few years, he went back to the
During the same year the wife commenced divorce Plaintiff-appellant had made her choice of two Philippines, and believing that the first two divorces
proceedings against her spouses, but the case was inconsistent remedies afforded her by law: (1) to were valid, remarried the 3rd time.
dismissed without the court passing upon the merits impugn the divorce and file an action for support,
thereof. or (2) uphold the validity of the divorce and sue Issue:
At the time of their marriage in 1904, John Canson was for a liquidation of conjugal partnership. She
an Italian citizen but on February 27, 1922, he became a chose the first remedy when she filed her action Did the Circuit Court of Mobile County acquire jurisdiction of
naturalized Filipino citizen. for support. She lost the case and should take the both spouses and effectively rendered a judgment in rem
In 1929, he went to Reno, Nevada, United States of consequences. when it granted divorce to Javier?
America, and on October 8, of that year, he obtained an The courts in the Philippines can grant a divorce
absolute decree of divorce on the ground of desertion. only on the ground of "adultery on the part of the Held:
Hilaria, in 1933, filed another action, civil case No. 5398 wife or concubinage on the part of the husband"
of the Court of First Instance of Rizal, wherein she as provided for under section 1 of Act No. 2710. No, one of the essential conditions for the validity
sought to compel the defendant to pay her a monthly The divorce decree in question was granted on the of a decree of divorce is that the court must have
pension of P500 as alimony or support. ground of desertion, clearly not a cause for divorce jurisdiction over the subject matter and in order that
under our laws. this may be acquired, plaintiff must be domiciled in
good faith in the State in which it is granted health. A few years later, she fell for a Dr. Mory to whom she to another State for the sole purpose of obtaining a divorce,
(Cousins Hix vs. Fluemer, 55 Phil., 851, 856). had a child, Leontina. She informed Kauffman that she no and with no intention of remaining, his residence there is
While it is true that Salud R. Arca filed an answer in the longer wished to stay with him to which the latter obtained not sufficient to confer jurisdiction on the courts of that
divorce case instituted at the Mobile County in view of a divorce in France where Leona was in default. Leona, after State. This is especially true where the cause of divorce is
the summons served upon her in this jurisdiction, but the divorce got married in London, and after which bore two one not recognized by the laws of the State of his own
this action cannot be interpreted as placing her under children from which the last childbirth caused Leona her life. domicile.
the jurisdiction of the court because its only purpose The heirs of Leona from the first marriage and the second
was to impugn the claim of appellant that his now claims the Estate of Samuel to which Ana Ramirez
domicile or legal residence at that time was opposed since Leona is not a recognized natural child. MANILA SURETY & FIDELITY VS. TEODORO
Mobile County, and to show that the ground of
desertion imputed to her was baseless and false. Such Held: FACTS:
answer should be considered as a special Jose Corominas, Jr. and Sonia Lizares were married in Iloilo
appearance the purpose of which is to impugn the The status of Leona Castro as recognized natural daughter on January 5, 1935. On November 29,1954, a decree of
jurisdiction of the court over the case. of Samuel Bischoff is fully and satisfactorily shown. divorce was granted by the Court of the State of Nevada
It is established by the great weight of authority dissolving the bonds of matrimony between Sonia Lizares
that the court of a country in which neither of the With reference to the right of the von Kauffman
children, it is enough to say that they are legitimate and Jose Corominas, Jr. . . .
spouses is domiciled and to which one or both of
them may resort merely for the purpose of children, born to their parents in lawful wedlock; and
obtaining a divorce has no jurisdiction to they are therefore entitled to participate in the inheritance Trinidad Teodoro met Jose Corominas, Jr. in Hongkong on
determine their matrimonial status; and a divorce which would have devolved upon their mother, if she had October 30, 1955. . . . On March 26, 1956, they went
granted by such a court is not entitled to recognition survived the testator. through a Buddhist wedding ceremony in Hongkong. Upon
elsewhere. (See Note to Succession of Benton, 59 L. R. their return to the Philippines they took up residence in a
A., 143) The voluntary appearance of the defendant The Court is of the opinion that the decree of divorce
upon which reliance is placed by the representation rented house at No. 2305 Agno Street . . . Manila. On
before such a tribunal does not invest the court with
of the Mory children cannot be recognized as valid in September 5, 1961, plaintiff and Jose Corominas, Jr. were
jurisdiction. (Andrews vs. Andrews, 188 U. S., 14;
47 L. ed., 366.) the courts of the Philippine Islands. The French tribunal married for a second time on Washoe County, Nevada.
It follows that, to give a court jurisdiction on the has no jurisdiction to entertain an action for the dissolution U.S.A.
ground of the plaintiff's residence in the State or of a marriage contracted in these Islands by person
country of the judicial forum, his residence must domiciled here, such marriage being indissoluble under the
laws then prevailing in this country. Additional Pertinent facts, also mentioned in the decision
be bona fide. If a spouse leaves the family domicile under review and controverted by the parties, are that Sonia
and goes to another State for the sole purpose of
The evidence shows that the decree was entered against Lizares is still living and that the conjugal partnership
obtaining a divorce, and with no intention of remaining,
his residence there is not sufficient to confer jurisdiction the defendant in default, for failure to answer, and there is formed by her marriage to Corominas was dissolved by the
on the courts of the State. (Ramirez vs. Gmur, 82 Phil., nothing to show that she had acquired, or had attempted to Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court of Manila upon their
855.) acquire, a permanent domicile in the City of Paris. It is joint petition, the decree of dissolution having been issued
evident of course that the presence of both the spouses in
But even if his residence had been taken up is good on October 21, 1957. Trinidad questioned the levy on the
that city was due merely to the mutual desire to procure a
faith, and the court had acquired jurisdiction to take property since the property in question was her paraphernal
divorce from each other.
cognizance of the divorce suit, the decree issued in his property.
favor is not binding upon the appellant; for the
It is established by the great weight of authority that
matrimonial domicile of the spouses being the City of
the court of a country in which neither of the spouses ISSUE:
Manila;
is domiciled and to which one or both of them may
resort merely for the purpose of obtaining a divorce
Ramirez v. Gmur Whether or not the properties in question are conjugal?
has no jurisdiction to determine their matrimonial
42 Phil 855
status; and a divorce granted by such a court is not
entitled to recognition elsewhere. RULING:
Leona Castro was the natural daughter of decedent Samuel
Bischoff. Whereas Ana Ramirez was the latter's widow to
It follows that, to give a court jurisdiction on the There is no doubt that the decree of divorce granted
which they had no children. Leona was married to Kauffman.
ground of the plaintiff's residence in the State or by the Court of Nevada in 1954 is not valid under
They had 3 children, Elena, Federico, and Ernesto. Later,
country of the judicial forum, his residence must be Philippine law, which has outlawed divorce
Kauffman brought Leona to Switzerland to recuperate her
bona fide. If a spouse leaves the family domicile and goes
altogether; that the matrimonial bonds between Jose the same being considered contrary to our Thereafter, marital discord set in, with mutual
Corominas, Jr. and Sonia Lizares have not been dissolved, concept of public policy and morality. However, recriminations between the spouses, followed by a
although their conjugal partnership was terminated in 1957; aliens may obtain divorce abroad, which may be separation de facto between them.
and that the former's subsequent marriage in Hongkong to
recognized in the Philippines provided they are valid
Trinidad Teodoro is bigamous and void.
according to their national law. After about three and a half years of marriage, private
In the present case, however, we find no need to pass on respondent initiated a divorce proceeding against
this question. The particular properties involved here which In this case, the divorce in Nevada released petitioner in Germany. He claimed that there was failure
were admittedly acquired by respondent Teodoro, cannot be private respondents from the marriage from the of their marriage and that they had been living apart
deemed to belong to such co-ownership because, as found
standards of American law, under which divorce since April, 1982. Petitioner, on the other hand, filed an
by the trial court and confirmed by the Court of Appeals,
the funds used in acquiring said properties were dissolves the marriage. action for legal separation, support and separation of
fruits of respondent's paraphernal investments which property before the Regional Trial Court of Manila.
accrued before her "marriage" to Corominas. In other Court said that Ours is not only a court of law but
words they were not acquired by either or both of the also a court of equity. The Court could not turn its Thereafter a decree of divorce was promulgated. The
partners in the void marriage through their work or industry
back on its citizen when the foreign national itself records show that under German law said court was
or their wages and salaries, and hence cannot be the
subject of co-ownership under Article 144. They remain benefited from such divorce decree; locally and internationally competent for the divorce
respondent's exclusive properties, beyond the reach of proceeding and that the dissolution of said marriage
execution to satisfy the judgment debt of Corominas. Thus, pursuant to his national law, Upton is no was legally founded on and authorized by the applicable
longer the husband of petitioner. He would have no law of that foreign jurisdiction.
VAN DORN V. ROMILLO
standing to sue in the case below as petitioner's
139 SCRA 139
Facts: husband who is entitled to exercise control over More than five months after the issuance of the
conjugal assets. divorce decree, private respondent filed two
Petitioner Alice Reyes Van Dorn is a citizen of the complaints for adultery before the City Fiscal of Manila
To maintain, as Upton does, that under our laws, alleging that, while still married to said respondent,
Philippines while private respondent Richard Upton is a
petitioner has to be considered still married to him and petitioner "had an affair with a certain William Chua as
US citizen; they were married in Hong Kong in 1972;
still subject to a wife's obligations under the NCC cannot early as 1982 and with yet another man named Jesus
after the marriage, they established their residence in
be just. Petitioner should not be obliged to live together Chua sometime in 1983".
the Philippines and begot 2 children; Alicia filed for
divorce in Nevada; the parties were divorced in Nevada, with, observe respect and fidelity, and render support to
US, in 1982; and petitioner has remarried also in private respondent. The latter should not continue to be Issue:
Nevada, this time to Theodore Van Dorn. one of her heirs w/ possible rights to conjugal
properties. She should not be discriminated against in WON the adultery case be sustained even though there has
her own country if the ends of justice are to be already been a finality of a divorce decree.
On June 18, 1983 Upton filed a suit against petitioner in
observed.
the RTC-Pasay, stating that petitioner's business in
Ermita, Manila (the Galleon Shop), is conjugal property Held:
and asking that petitioner be ordered to render an
PILAPIL V. IBAY-SOMERA
accounting of that business, and that Upton be declared
174 SCRA 653 The law specifically provides that in prosecutions for
as having the right to manage the conjugal property. Petitioner Imelda Manalaysay Pilapil, a Filipino citizen, adultery and concubinage the person who can legally
and private respondent Erich Ekkehard Geiling, a file the complaint should be the offended spouse, and
Held: German national, were married in the Federal Republic nobody else.
of Germany. The marriage started auspiciously enough,
Owing to the nationality principle embodied in and the couple lived together for some time in Malate, Corollary to such exclusive grant of power to the
Art. 13, NCC, only Philippine nationals are Manila where their only child, Isabella Pilapil Geiling, offended spouse to institute the action, it
covered by the policy against absolute divorce was born on April 20, 1980. necessarily follows that such initiator must have
the status, capacity or legal representation to do given to his second marriage. He filed a petition of probate consideration, whatever may be the nature of the property
so at the time of the filing of the criminal action. that made or appointed Alicia his special administrator of and regardless of the country wherein said property may be
This is a familiar and express rule in civil actions; in fact, his estate. Before the proceeding could be terminated, found. (emphasis ours)
lack of legal capacity to sue, as a ground for a motion to Lorenzo died. Paula filed a letter of administration over
dismiss in civil cases, is determined as of the filing of Llorentes estate. The trial granted the letter and denied the
the complaint or petition. In these cases, therefore, it is motion for reconsideration. An appeal was made to the Likewise, Lorenzo Llorente was already an American
indispensable that the status and capacity of the Court of Appeals, which affirmed and modified the judgment citizen when he divorced Paula. Such was also the
complainant to commence the action be definitely of the Trial Court that she be declared co-owner of whatever situation when he married Alicia and executed his will. As
established and, as already demonstrated, such status properties, she and the deceased, may have acquired in stated in Article 15 of the civil code, aliens may
or capacity must indubitably exist as of the time he their 25 years of cohabitation. obtain divorces abroad, provided that they are valid
initiates the action. in their National Law. Thus the divorce obtained by
ISSUE: Llorente is valid because the law that governs him is not
In the present case, the fact that private Philippine Law but his National Law since the divorce was
respondent obtained a valid divorce in his contracted after he became an American citizen.
country, the Federal Republic of Germany, it is Furthermore, his National Law allowed divorce.
Whether or not national law shall apply?
deemed admitted. Said divorce and its legal effects
may be recognized in the Philippines insofar as private
RULING: The case was remanded to the court of origin for
respondent is concerned in view of the nationality
principle in our civil law on the matter of status of determination of the intrinsic validity of Lorenzo Llorentes
persons. Art. 15. Laws relating to family rights and duties, or to the will and determination of the parties successional rights
status, condition and legal capacity of persons are binding allowing proof of foreign law.
upon citizens of the Philippines, even though living
Therefore, private respondent, being no longer GARCIA V. RECIO
abroad.
the husband of petitioner, had no legal standing October 2, 2001
to commence the adultery case under the
imposture that he was the offended spouse at the Art. 16. Real property as well as personal property is Rederick Recio, a Filipino, married Editha Samson, an
subject to the law of the country where it is situated. Australian in Malabon Rizal. However, on 1989, they got
time he filed suit.
divorced in an Australian family court.
On 1992, Rederick became an Australian Citizen. He
First, there is no such thing as one American law. The
later married Petitioner in 1994 in Cabanatuan City.
LLORENTE V. COURT OF APPEALS "national law" indicated in Article 16 of the Civil Code
Thereafter, the two separated and petitioner filed a
GR No. 124371, November 23, 2000 cannot possibly apply to general American law. There is no complaint for Declaration of Nullity of Marriage on the
FACTS: such law governing the validity of testamentary provisions ground of bigamy.
Lorenzo Llorente and petitioner Paula Llorente were in the United States. Each State of the union has its own While the suit was pending, Rederick was able to obtain
married in 1937 in the Philippines. Lorenzo was an law applicable to its citizens and in force only within the a divorce decree in Australia. Trial Court declared the
enlisted serviceman of the US Navy. Soon after, he left State. It can therefore refer to no other than the law of the marriage dissolved based on the subsequent divorce
for the US where through naturalization, he became State of which the decedent was a resident. Second, there decree obtained by the respondent.
a US Citizen. Upon his visit to his wife, he discovered that is no showing that the application of the renvoi
Issues:
she was living with his brother and a child was born. The doctrine is called for or required by New York State
child was registered as illegitimate but the name of law. Whether the divorce between respondent and Editha
the father was left blank. Llorente filed a divorce in Samson was proven;
California in which Paula was represented by counsel, John However, intestate and testamentary succession, both with
Riley, and actively participated in the proceedings, which respect to the order of succession and to the amount of Whether respondent was proven to be legally capacitated to
later on became final. He married Alicia and they lived successional rights and to the intrinsic validity of marry petitioner;
together for 25 years bringing 3 children. He made his last testamentary provisions, shall be regulated by the
Held:
will and testament stating that all his properties will be national law of the person whose succession is under
stationed in the foreign country in which the record "1. A party to a marriage who marries again before
A divorce obtained abroad by an alien may be recognized in is kept and (b) authenticated by the seal of his office. this decree becomes absolute (unless the other party
our jurisdiction, provided such decree is valid according to has died) commits the offence of bigamy."
the national law of the foreigner. However, the divorce The divorce decree between respondent and Editha Samson
decree and the governing personal law of the alien appears to be an authentic one issued by an Australian This quotation bolsters the Courts contention that the
spouse who obtained the divorce must be proven. Our family court. However, appearance is not sufficient; divorce obtained by respondent may have been restricted. It
courts do not take judicial notice of foreign laws and compliance with the aforementioned rules on evidence must did not absolutely establish his legal capacity to remarry
judgment; hence, like any other facts, both the divorce be demonstrated. according to his national law.
decree and the national law of the alien must be alleged
and proven according to our law on evidence. Fortunately for respondent, this matter was not Significance of the Certificate of Legal Capacity
objected to by the petitioner, thus by virtue of such
Was the first divorce validly obtained and binding? waiver, is deemed admitted as evidence. Legal capacity to contract marriage is determined by the
national law of the party concerned. The certificate
At the outset, the Court lays the following basic legal Who has the burden of proving a foreign law? mentioned in Article 21 of the Family Code would have been
principles; Philippine law does not provide for absolute sufficient to establish the legal capacity of respondent, had
divorce; hence, Philippine courts cannot grant it. A marriage Respondent has the burden of proof; The burden of he duly presented it in court. A duly authenticated and
between two Filipinos cannot be dissolved even by a divorce proof lies with "the party who alleges the existence admitted certificate is prima facie evidence of legal
obtained abroad, because of Articles 1522 and 1723 of the of a fact or thing necessary in the prosecution or capacity to marry on the part of the alien applicant
Civil Code. In mixed marriages involving a Filipino and defense of an action." It is a well-settled that courts for a marriage license.
a foreigner, Article 26 of the Family Code allows the cannot take judicial notice of foreign laws. Like any other
former to contract a subsequent marriage in case the facts, they must be alleged and proved. Australian marital In the case at bar, there is absolutely no evidence
divorce is "validly obtained abroad by the alien laws are not among those matters that judges are supposed that proves respondent's legal capacity to marry
spouse capacitating him or her to remarry." A divorce to know by reason of their judicial function. The power of petitioner.
obtained abroad by a couple, who are both aliens, may be judicial notice must be exercised with caution, and every
recognized in the Philippines, provided it is consistent with reasonable doubt upon the subject should be resolved in the Based on the above records, the Court cannot conclude that
their respective national laws. negative. respondent, who was then a naturalized Australian citizen,
was legally capacitated to marry petitioner on January 12,
Before a foreign divorce decree can be recognized by 2nd Issue: Is Respondent legally capacitated to 1994. The court a quo erred in finding that the
our courts, the party pleading it must prove the remarry? divorce decree ipso facto clothed respondent with
divorce as a fact and demonstrate its conformity to the legal capacity to remarry without requiring him
the foreign law allowing it. Presentation solely of the Divorce means the legal dissolution of a lawful union for a to adduce sufficient evidence to show the Australian
divorce decree is insufficient. In the case at bar, Respondent cause arising after marriage. But divorces are of different personal law governing his status; or at the very least, to
only presented the divorce decree; types. The two basic ones are (1) absolute divorce or prove his legal capacity to contract the second marriage.
a vinculo matrimonii and (2) limited divorce or a
Likewise, before a foreign judgment is given mensa et thoro. The first kind terminates the marriage, Neither can the Court grant petitioner's prayer to
presumptive evidentiary value, the document must while the second suspends it and leaves the bond in full declare her marriage to respondent null and void on
first be presented and admitted in evidence. A divorce force. There is no showing in the case at bar which the ground of bigamy. After all, it may turn out that under
obtained abroad is proven by the divorce decree itself. type of divorce was procured by respondent. Australian law, he was really capacitated to marry petitioner
Indeed the best evidence of a judgment is the judgment as a direct result of the divorce decree.
itself. The decree purports to be a written act or record of an Respondent presented a decree nisi or an interlocutory
act of an officially body or tribunal of a foreign country. decree a conditional or provisional judgment of divorce. It Hence, case was remanded to the court a quo for further
is in effect the same as a separation from bed and determination of legal capacity and to receive evidence to
However, under Sections 24 and 25 of Rule 132, a writing or board, although an absolute divorce may follow after determine if bigamy has been committed;
document may be proven as a public or official record of a the lapse of the prescribed period during which no
foreign country by either (1) an official publication or (2) reconciliation is effected. REPUBLIC V. ORBECIDO
a copy thereof attested by the officer having legal GR NO. 154380, October 5, 2005
custody of the document. If the record is not kept in On its face, the herein Australian divorce decree contains a Facts:
the Philippines, such copy must be (a) accompanied restriction that reads:
by a certificate issued by the proper diplomatic or
consular officer in the Philippine Foreign Service
On May 24, 1981, Cipriano Orbecido III married Lady according to its exact and literal import would lead to
Myros M. Villanueva in the Philippines in Lam-an, Ozamis mischievous results or contravene the clear purpose of the TITLE II
City. Their marriage was blessed with a son and a daughter. legislature, it should be construed according to its spirit and
LEGAL SEPARATION
reason, disregarding as far as necessary the letter of the
In 1986, Ciprianos wife left for the United States law. A statute may therefore be extended to cases not Art. 55. A petition for legal separation may be filed on any of
bringing along their son Kristoffer. A few years later, within the literal meaning of its terms, so long as they come the following grounds:
Cipriano discovered that his wife had been naturalized as an within its spirit or intent. (1) Repeated physical violence or grossly abusive
American citizen. conduct directed against the petitioner, a common
In view of the foregoing, we state the twin elements for the child, or a child of the petitioner;
Sometime in 2000, Cipriano learned from his son that application of Paragraph 2 of Article 26 as follows:
(2) Physical violence or moral pressure to compel
his wife had obtained a divorce decree and then
the petitioner to change religious or political
married a certain Innocent Stanley. She, Stanley and her 1. There is a valid marriage that has been affiliation;
child by him currently live in San Gabriel, California. celebrated between a Filipino citizen and a
foreigner; and (3) Attempt of respondent to corrupt or induce the
Cipriano thereafter filed with the trial court a petition petitioner, a common child, or a child of the
for authority to remarry invoking Paragraph 2 of 2. A valid divorce is obtained abroad by the alien petitioner, to engage in prostitution, or connivance
Article 26 of the Family Code. No opposition was filed. spouse capacitating him or her to remarry. in such corruption or inducement;
Finding merit in the petition, the court granted the same.
The Republic, herein petitioner, through the Office of the The reckoning point is not the citizenship of the (4) Final judgment sentencing the respondent to
Solicitor General (OSG), sought reconsideration but it imprisonment of more than six years, even if
parties at the time of the celebration of the
pardoned;
was denied. marriage, but their citizenship at the time a valid
divorce is obtained abroad by the alien spouse
(5) Drug addiction or habitual alcoholism of the
The OSG contends that Paragraph 2 of Article 26 of the capacitating the latter to remarry. respondent;
Family Code is not applicable to the instant case
because it only applies to a valid mixed marriage; 3. Legal Separation (6) Lesbianism or homosexuality of the respondent;
that is, a marriage celebrated between a Filipino citizen and
an alien. Furthermore, the OSG argues there is no law that Civil Code:
(7) Contracting by the respondent of a subsequent
governs respondents situation. The OSG posits that this is bigamous marriage, whether in the Philippines or
a matter of legislation and not of judicial determination. Art. 97. A petition for legal separation may
abroad;
be filed:

Held: 1. For adultery on the part of the wife and (8) Sexual infidelity or perversion;
for concubinage on the part of the
Taking into consideration the legislative intent and applying husband as defined in the Penal Code; (9) Attempt by the respondent against the life of the
or petitioner; or
the rule of reason, we hold that Paragraph 2 of Article 26
should be interpreted to include cases involving 2. An attempt by one spouse against the
parties who, at the time of the celebration of the (10) Abandonment of petitioner by respondent
life of the other. (n)
without justifiable cause for more than one year.
marriage were Filipino citizens, but later on, one of
them becomes naturalized as a foreign citizen and obtains a Art. 99. No person shall be entitled to a legal
divorce decree. The Filipino spouse should likewise be separation who has not resided in the For purposes of this Article, the term "child" shall include a
Philippines for one year prior to the filing of child by nature or by adoption. (9a)
allowed to remarry as if the other party were a
the petition, unless the cause for the legal
foreigner at the time of the solemnization of the
separation has taken place within the Art. 56. The petition for legal separation shall be denied on
marriage. To rule otherwise would be to sanction absurdity territory of this Republic. (Sec. 2a, Act No. any of the following grounds:
and injustice. Where the interpretation of a statute 2710)
(1) Where the aggrieved party has condoned the partnership property. The administrator appointed by the The action to revoke the donation under this Article must be
offense or act complained of; court shall have the same powers and duties as those of a brought within five years from the time the decree of legal
guardian under the Rules of Court. (104a) separation become final. (107a)
(2) Where the aggrieved party has consented to the
commission of the offense or act complained of; Art. 62. During the pendency of the action for legal Art. 65. If the spouses should reconcile, a corresponding
separation, the provisions of Article 49 shall likewise apply joint manifestation under oath duly signed by them shall be
(3) Where there is connivance between the parties to the support of the spouses and the custody and support filed with the court in the same proceeding for legal
in the commission of the offense or act constituting of the common children. (105a) separation. (n)
the ground for legal separation;
Art. 63. The decree of legal separation shall have the Art. 66. The reconciliation referred to in the preceding
(4) Where both parties have given ground for legal following effects: Articles shall have the following consequences:
separation;
(1) The spouses shall be entitled to live separately (1) The legal separation proceedings, if still pending,
(5) Where there is collusion between the parties to from each other, but the marriage bonds shall not shall thereby be terminated at whatever stage; and
obtain decree of legal separation; or be severed;
(2) The final decree of legal separation shall be set
(6) Where the action is barred by prescription. (2) The absolute community or the conjugal aside, but the separation of property and any
(100a) partnership shall be dissolved and liquidated but the forfeiture of the share of the guilty spouse already
offending spouse shall have no right to any share of effected shall subsist, unless the spouses agree to
the net profits earned by the absolute community or revive their former property regime.
Art. 57. An action for legal separation shall be filed within the conjugal partnership, which shall be forfeited in
five years from the time of the occurrence of the cause. accordance with the provisions of Article 43(2);
(102) The court's order containing the foregoing shall be recorded
in the proper civil registries. (108a)
(3) The custody of the minor children shall be
Art. 58. An action for legal separation shall in no case be awarded to the innocent spouse, subject to the
tried before six months shall have elapsed since the filing of Art. 67. The agreement to revive the former property regime
provisions of Article 213 of this Code; and referred to in the preceding Article shall be executed under
the petition. (103)
oath and shall specify:
(4) The offending spouse shall be disqualified from
Art. 59. No legal separation may be decreed unless the inheriting from the innocent spouse by intestate
Court has taken steps toward the reconciliation of the (1) The properties to be contributed anew to the
succession. Moreover, provisions in favor of the restored regime;
spouses and is fully satisfied, despite such efforts, that offending spouse made in the will of the innocent
reconciliation is highly improbable. (n) spouse shall be revoked by operation of law. (106a)
(2) Those to be retained as separated properties of
Art. 60. No decree of legal separation shall be based upon a each spouse; and
Art. 64. After the finality of the decree of legal separation,
stipulation of facts or a confession of judgment. the innocent spouse may revoke the donations made by him
or by her in favor of the offending spouse, as well as the (3) The names of all their known creditors, their
In any case, the Court shall order the prosecuting attorney designation of the latter as beneficiary in any insurance addresses and the amounts owing to each.
or fiscal assigned to it to take steps to prevent collusion policy, even if such designation be stipulated as irrevocable.
between the parties and to take care that the evidence is The revocation of the donations shall be recorded in the The agreement of revival and the motion for its approval
not fabricated or suppressed. (101a) registries of property in the places where the properties are shall be filed with the court in the same proceeding for legal
located. Alienations, liens and encumbrances registered in separation, with copies of both furnished to the creditors
Art. 61. After the filing of the petition for legal separation, good faith before the recording of the complaint for named therein. After due hearing, the court shall, in its
the spouses shall be entitled to live separately from each revocation in the registries of property shall be respected. order, take measure to protect the interest of creditors and
other. The revocation of or change in the designation of the such order shall be recorded in the proper registries of
insurance beneficiary shall take effect upon written properties.
notification thereof to the insured.
The court, in the absence of a written agreement between
the spouses, shall designate either of them or a third person The recording of the ordering in the registries of property
to administer the absolute community or conjugal shall not prejudice any creditor not listed or not notified,
unless the debtor-spouse has sufficient separate properties Formal validity law of the place of celebration; lex loci
to satisfy the creditor's claim. (195a, 108a) Where a marriage between a Filipino contractus rule
citizen and a foreigner is validly Substantial validity governed by:
Capacity to Remarry celebrated and a divorce is thereafter
validly obtained abroad by the alien 1. Personal law: status/legal capacity National law of
Art. 26. All marriages solemnized outside the spouse capacitating him or her to the parties
Philippines, in accordance with the laws in remarry, the Filipino spouse shall have 2. lex loci celebrationis:
force in the country where they were capacity to remarry under Philippine exceptions:
solemnized, and valid there as such, shall law. (As amended by Executive Order Family Code Art. 26, paragraph 1
227)
also be valid in this country, except those Consular Marriages consul granted by the
prohibited under Articles 35 (1), (4), (5) and accepting country where such consular
(6), 3637 and 38. (17a) Nota bene:
office was located to solemnize marriage