Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Niñal Vs Badayog
Niñal Vs Badayog
Engrace Niñal for Herself and as Guardian ad Litem of the minors Babyline Niñal, Ingrid Niñal,
Archie Niñal & Pepito Niñal Jr. petitioners vs. Norma Badayog, respondent
Ponente: Ynares-Santiago, J.
Legal Action: Petition for review on certiorari of lower court decision
Facts:
Pepito Niñal was married to Teodulfa Bellones, the petitioners are their children. In
1985, Teodulfa was shot by Pepito resulting in her death. On December 11, 1986 – 1 year
and 8 months after Teodulfa died, Pepito married respondent Norma Badayog without any
marriage license, claiming in an affidavit that they have been living together as husband and
wife for at least 5 years, thus exempting them from securing a marriage license.
In 1997, Pepito dies, petitioners file a petition for declaration of nullity of the marriage
of Pepito to Norma on grounds that it was void due to the lack of marriage license.
Petitioners are of the view that the validity/invalidity of the second marriage will affect their
succesional rights. Petitioners are petitioning for the second marriage to be rendered void
for lack of marriage license.
Respondent file a motion to dismiss on grounds that petitioners have no cause of
action since they were not among the persons who can file an action for “annulment of
marriage” under Art. 47 of FC. RTC ruled in favor of respondent and thus this petition. This
case happened before FC so Civil Code applies.
Whether or not petitioners YES Art 47 of FC cannot be applied, the Civil Code
have the personality to will apply.
declare their father’s marriage
void after his death.
The Code is silent as to who can file a petition
to declare nullity of marriage. Void marriages,
such as deceased’s marriage to Badayog, can
be questioned despite death of one party.
Action or defense for nullity is imprescriptible.