You are on page 1of 1

Tamano v.Judge Ortiz, G.R. No.

126603, June 29, 1998

FACTS: Sen. Tamano and Zorayda Tamano married in civil rites. Before Sen. Tamano died, he married
Estrellita in civil rites too. A year after Sen. Tamano’s death, Zorayda and her son filed a complaint for
declaration of nullity of marriage of her husband and Estrellita on the ground that it was bigamous.

Zorayda further claimed that her husband claimed to be divorced and Estrellita as single, hence, their
marriage was fraudulent.

Estrellita filed a motion to dismiss alleging that QC RTC has no jurisdiction because only a party to a
marriage could file an action for annulment against the other spouse. Estrellita also contended that
since Tamano and Zorayda were both Muslims and married in Muslim rites, the jurisdiction to hear
and try the case is vested in Sharia courts pursuant to Art 155 of Code of Muslim.

RTC denied the petition and ruled it has jurisdiction since Estrellita and Tamano were married in
accordance with the Civil Code. Motion for reconsideration was also denied.

Petitioner referred to SC which ruled that it should be referred to CA first.

The CA ruled that the case would fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of sharia courts only when filed
in places where there are sharia courts. But in places where there are no sharia courts, the instant
petition could be at RTC.

Hence, this petition.

ISSUE: W/N Sharia courts and not the RTC has jurisdiction over the subject case and the nature of
action.

HELD: SC held that RTC has jurisdiction over all actions involving the contract of marriage and marital
relations. In this case, both petitioner and the deceased were married through a civil wedding. And
whether or not they were likewise married in a Muslim wedding, sharia courts are still not vested with
original jurisdiction over marriages married under civil and Muslim law.