SUBJECT: TOPIC: CASE NAME:

Persons Divorce Republic v. Orbecido

RELEVANT PROVISIONS:
Art. 26. All marriages solemnized outside the Philippines, in accordance with the laws in force in the country where they were
solemnized, and valid there as such, shall also be valid in this country, except those prohibited under Articles 35 (1), (4), (5) and
(6), 3637 and 38. (17a)
Where a marriage between a Filipino citizen and a foreigner is validly celebrated and a divorce is thereafter validly obtained
abroad by the alien spouse capacitating him or her to remarry, the Filipino spouse shall have capacity to remarry under
Philippine law.
PONENTE: Quisumbing Case Date: October 5, 2005

DETAILED FACTS:
Cipriano Orbecido III was married with Lady Myros Villanueva on May 24, 1981 at the United Church of Christ in
the Philippines in Ozamis City. They had a son and a daughter named Kristoffer and Kimberly, respectively. In
1986, the wife left for US bringing along their son Kristoffer. A few years later, Orbecido discovered that his wife
had been naturalized as an American citizen and learned from his son that his wife sometime in 2000 had obtained
a divorce decree and married a certain Stanley. He thereafter filed with the trial court a petition for authority to
remarry invoking Paragraph 2 of Article 26 of the Family Code.
The trial court granted the petition. The OSG sought reconsideration but was denied.

ISSUE:
Whether or not a spouse who at the time of the celebration of
the marriage was a Filipino but later acquires a new citizenship
can obtain a divorce decree for the said marriage.
RULING:
Petition is granted.
HOLDING:
YES The court ruled that taking into consideration the
legislative intent and applying the rule of reason, Article 26 (2)
should be interpreted to include cases involving parties who, at
the time of the celebration of the marriage were Filipino
citizens, but later on, one of them becomes naturalized as a
foreign citizen and obtains a divorce decree. The Filipino
spouse should likewise be allowed to remarry as if the other
party were a foreigner at the time of the solemnization of the
marriage.
Hence, the courts unanimous decision in holding Article 26 (2)
be interpreted as allowing a Filipino citizen who has been
divorced by a spouse who had acquired a citizenship and
remarried, also to remarry under Philippine law.

*Note that respondent would have been allowed to remarry following the Courts interpretation of Art. 26 but since he
has not presented enough proof that his wife indeed has acquired a divorce decree abroad and has remarried, the Court
decided that he cant remarry until such time that he could present concrete proof of the wifes actions.

M.A. SICAD_A2021 1