JOHN MICHAEL C.

LEQUIGAN
EH 403

A. MARRIAGE AS A CONTRACT

What is the policy in regard to marriage as a contract?

The policy of the state to marriage as a contract is that it is a special

contract unlike an ordinary civil contract it is treated differently because of
its peculiar nature. Unlike an ordinary contract, it is a inviolable social
institution whose nature, consequences and incidents is governed by law
(Art. 1, Family Code of the Philippines).

As differentiated from a simple contract, Marriage has distinctive

requirements. As what was ruled in the case of Lim V. CA (GR. L-39381)
“that Such contract is not a written act with the intervention of a notary; it is
not an instrument executed in due form before a notary and certified by
him. The marriage contract is a mere declaration by the contracting parties,
in the presence of the person solemnizing the marriage and of two
witnesses of legal age, that they take each other as husband and wife,
signed by signature or mark by the said contracting parties and the said
witnesses, and attested by the person solemnizing the marriage.” In other
words, the notarization or recording of such contract in a public document
does not validate the contract if it lacks the essential requirements.

Upon entering a contract of marriage, it has variety of legal implications;

such that it cannot be rescinded unilaterally, except on causes expressly
provided for by law. In marriage, it is a permanent union between a man
and a woman unless one party dies or the marriage is declared annulled or
void, as the case may be. This was aptly illustrated in the case of Republic
V. Albios (GR No. 198780) Wherein Albios filed a petition for nullity of
marriage for it was done only in jest, and to acquire American citizenship
and that after their marriage, they never lived as husband and wife and
never complied with their marital obligations. However, the court found the
consent freely and intelligently given and it was done voluntarily. This was
evidenced by their mutual purpose to enter into to a contract of marriage
marriage. The fact also that they did not lived as husband and wife does
JOHN MICHAEL C. LEQUIGAN
EH 403

not therefore invalidate their marriage. Hence, marriage can only be

nullified or annulled in causes provided by law.

Further when a person enters a valid marriage it prohibits such person to

enter into another contract marriage, in contrast to a ordinary contract in
which you may enter as you please. The law prohibits, as a general rule,
multiple spouses for an individual or numerous contract of marriage. As
ruled in U.S. V. Ibanez 13 Phil 686 “the law prohibits a married man or
woman from contracting another bond of union as long as the consort is
alive”. This is also known as bigamy. The state also imposes penal
sanctions in bigamy and may also give rise to civil obligations.
Nevertheless, the breach of duty to preserve marriage, the penal and civil
sanctions imposed does not affect its validity. Marriage as a contract is
usually perpetual.

B. MARRIAGE AS A STATUS

As what was held in the case of Silverio V. Republic “The comprehensive

term status… include such matters as the beginning and end of legal
personality, capacity to have rights in general, family relations, and its
various aspects, such as birth, legitimation, adoption, emancipation,
marriage, divorce, and sometimes even succession.” In other words
Marriage is treated as a status in our jurisdiction. Since it is treated as a
status, it is governed by the Nationality rule wherein the law of the
nationality of the person shall apply (Article 15). In the case of Van Dorn,
the court had an occasion to say that “It is true that owing to the nationality
principle embodied in Article 15 of the Civil Code,  only Philippine nationals
are covered by the policy against absolute divorces the same being
considered contrary to our concept of public police and morality” the said
pronouncement is reflective of the effect marriage as a Status in our
jurisdiction. (Nevertheless, in the mentioned case the exception to the rule
on divorce was applied)

The effect of Marriage as a status is that the State becomes interested of

the parties involved (Silverio V. Republic) However as to personal rights
JOHN MICHAEL C. LEQUIGAN
EH 403

and obligations, the court less likely to interfere with but as to property
relations it is governed by certain rules and provisions of law.

As a status, it is peculiar for it creates a double status. As described in the

case of Rayray v. Chae Kyung Lee 18 SCRA 450 “Indeed, marriage is one
of the cases of double status, in that the status therein involves and affects
two persons. One is married, never in abstract or a vacuum, but, always to
somebody else. Hence, a judicial decree on the marriage status of a
person necessarily reflects upon the status of another and the relation
between them”. In other words, one is never married alone but always with
another natural person. This ruling is descriptive of the treatment of
marriage as a status.

EXTRINSIC VALIDITY OF MARRIAGE

C.1 Various law on the extrinsic validity

Article 3 of the Family codes provides the formal requisites or the laws on
extrinsic validity which are:
• Authority of the solemnizing officer
• A valid marriage license
• A marriage ceremony which takes place with the apperance o the
contracting parties before the soleminizing officer and their personal
declaration that they take each other as husband and wife in the
presence of not less than 2 witnesses of legal age.

C.2 Exceptions to lex loci celebrationis

In the rule of lex loci celebrationis a marriage which is valid abroad is also
recognized herein the Philippines except if it falls under the exceptions

The rule on lex loci celebrationis usually applies in cases of marriage

between 2 Filipinos, between a foreigner and a Filipino, or 2 foreigners
celebrating here in the Philippines. The mentioned marriages are generally
valid in their place of execution as long as it does not fall under the
exceptions.
JOHN MICHAEL C. LEQUIGAN
EH 403

As to 2 foreigners celebrating abroad, generally their marriage is also

recognized here in the Philippines provided they are executed validy in the
place of its celebration.

The exceptions to the lex celebrationis rule is what is provided in Article 26

of the family “All marriages solemnized outside the Philippines in
accordance with law in force in the country where they are solemnized, and
valid as such, shall also be valid in this country except the following;
• Either or both parties are below 18 years of age
• it bigamous or polygamous marriages
• Those contracted through mistake of one contracting party as to the
identity of the other
• Subsequent marriage is performed without recording the Civil
Registry and Registry of properties the judgement of the annulment
or declaration, the partition and distribution of the children's
presumptive legitime
• One of the parties is psychologically incapacitated to comply with the
essential marital obligations
• The marriage is incestuous
• Marriage is void by reasons of public policy
• Between collateral blood relatives, whether legitimate or
illegitimate, up to the 4th civil degree
• Between step-parents and step-children
• between parents-in law and children in-law
• Betweeng the adopting parent and the adopted child
• Between the surviving spouse of the adopting parents and the
adopted child
• between the surviving spouse of the adopted child and the adopter
• between an adopted child and a legitimate child of the adopter
• between the adopted children of the same adopter
• between parties where one, with the intention to marry the other,
killed that other person's spouse or his or her own spouse.
These are the exceptions to the rule on lex loci celebrationis.
JOHN MICHAEL C. LEQUIGAN
EH 403

INSTRINSIC VALIDITY OF MARRIAGE

C.1
It refers to the capacity of the general ability of the person to marry for
instances defined by requirements of age and parental consent.
1. the parties must be at least 18 years of age
2. Consent freely given in the presence of an atuhorized solemnizing
officer

Another pertinent law is what is provided in Article 38 of the family code in

which provides “The following marriages shall be void from the very
beginning for reasons of public policy:
 Between collateral blood relatives, whether legitimate or illegitimate,
up to the 4th civil degree
 Between step-parents and step-children
 between parents-in law and children in-law
 Betweeng the adopting parent and the adopted child
 Between the surviving spouse of the adopting parents and the
adopted child
 between the surviving spouse of the adopted child and the adopter
 between an adopted child and a legitimate child of the adopter
 between the adopted children of the same adopter

EFFECTS OF MARRIAGE

1. Personal Relations
A. Various laws on personal relations
Art. 68. The husband and wife are obliged to live together, observe mutual
love, respect and fidelity, and render mutual help and support.
Art. 69. The husband and wife shall fix the family domicile. In case of
disagreement, the court shall decide.
The court may exempt one spouse from living with the other if the latter
should live abroad or there are other valid and compelling reasons for the
JOHN MICHAEL C. LEQUIGAN
EH 403

exemption. However, such exemption shall not apply if the same is not
compatible with the solidarity of the family.

Art. 70. The spouses are jointly responsible for the support of the family.
The expenses for such support and other conjugal obligations shall be paid
from the community property and, in the absence thereof, from the income
or fruits of their separate properties. In case of insufficiency or absence of
said income or fruits, such obligations shall be satisfied from the separate
properties.

Art. 71. The management of the household shall be the right and the duty
of both spouses. The expenses for such management shall be paid in
accordance with the provisions of Article 70.

Art. 72. When one of the spouses neglects his or her duties to the conjugal
union or commits acts which tend to bring danger, dishonor or injury to the
other or to the family, the aggrieved party may apply to the court for relief.

Art. 73. Either spouse may exercise any legitimate profession, occupation,
business or activity without the consent of the other. The latter may object
only on valid, serious, and moral grounds.

In case of disagreement, the court shall decide whether or not:

(1) The objection is proper, and
(2) Benefit has occurred to the family prior to the objection or thereafter. If
the benefit accrued prior to the objection, the resulting obligation shall be
enforced against the separate property of the spouse who has not obtained
consent.
The foregoing provisions shall not prejudice the rights of creditors who
acted in good faith.

B. Controlling Doctrine
As what was ruled in case of Djumantan V. domingo “Marriage of an alien
woman to a filipino husband does not ipso facto make her a Filipino Citizen
and does not excuse her from failure to depart from the country upon the
JOHN MICHAEL C. LEQUIGAN
EH 403

expiration of her extended stay here as an alien” Hence the alien woman, is
retains her citizenship despite the marriage. In cases of a Filipino woman
married to an alien husband her citizenship, as guaranteed by the
constitution
In cases of conflict of personal relations, it is the husband’s personal law
which shall prevail. Hence, although they retain their respective relationship
the husband’s personal law shall prevail except if it is contrary to law,
moral, good customs and public policy.

2. Property relations of the Spouses

A. Various Law in Property Relations

Art. 74. The property relationship between husband and wife shall be
governed in the following order:
(1) By marriage settlements executed before the marriage;
(2) By the provisions of this Code; and
(3) By the local custom.

Art. 75. The future spouses may, in the marriage settlements, agree upon
the regime of absolute community, conjugal partnership of gains, complete
separation of property, or any other regime. In the absence of a marriage
settlement, or when the regime agreed upon is void, the system of absolute
community of property as established in this Code shall govern.

Art. 76. In order that any modification in the marriage settlements may be
valid, it must be made before the celebration of the marriage, subject to the
provisions of Articles 66, 67, 128, 135 and 136.

Art. 77. The marriage settlements and any modification thereof shall be in
writing, signed by the parties and executed before the celebration of the
marriage. They shall not prejudice third persons unless they are registered
in the local civil registry where the marriage contract is recorded as well as
in the proper registries of properties.
JOHN MICHAEL C. LEQUIGAN
EH 403

Art. 78. A minor who according to law may contract marriage may also
execute his or her marriage settlements, but they shall be valid only if the
persons designated in Article 14 to give consent to the marriage are made
parties to the agreement, subject to the provisions of Title IX of this Code.

Art. 79. For the validity of any marriage settlement executed by a person
upon whom a sentence of civil interdiction has been pronounced or who is
subject to any other disability, it shall be indispensable for the guardian
appointed by a competent court to be made a party thereto.

Art. 80. In the absence of a contrary stipulation in a marriage settlement,

the property relations of the spouses shall be governed by Philippine laws,
regardless of the place of the celebration of the marriage and their
residence.
This rule shall not apply:
(1) Where both spouses are aliens;
(2) With respect to the extrinsic validity of contracts affecting property not
situated in the Philippines and executed in the country where the property
is located; and
(3) With respect to the extrinsic validity of contracts entered into in the
Philippines but affecting property situated in a foreign country whose laws
require different formalities for its extrinsic validity. (124a)
Art. 81. Everything stipulated in the settlements or contracts referred to in
the preceding articles in consideration of a future marriage, including
donations between the prospective spouses made therein, shall be
rendered void if the marriage does not take place. However, stipulations
that do not depend upon the celebration of the marriages shall be valid.
(125a)

B. Controlling doctrine
Hague convention states that the internal law designated by the spouses
before their marriage, in the absence thereof, the internal law of the state in
which the spouses have their first habitual residence. In the Philippines as
prescribed in Article 80 prescribes that In the absence of a contrary
stipulation in a marriage settlement, the property relations of the spouses
JOHN MICHAEL C. LEQUIGAN
EH 403

shall be governed by Philippine laws, regardless of the place of the

celebration of the marriage and their residence.

EXCEPT:
1. Both Spouses are aliens
2. With respect to the extrinsic validity of contracts affecting property not
situated in the Philippines
3. With respect ot the extrinsic validity of the contracts entered into the
philippines but affecting property situated in foreign country whose laws
requires different formalities for its intrinsic validity

Further in cases if one of the spouses changed his nationality thereafter the
marriage, property relations will still be governed by the Philippine laws in
accordance with the principle of Immutability. This is to respect the marital
relations of the spouses and to prevent fraud or prejudice against 3 rd party
creditors who might be affected upon changing of the regime

ADOPTION

1. Conflict rules on adoption

The process of adoption is a matter affecting the status of the parties and is
necessarily governed by lex domicile. However, in cases when the adopter
is domiciled in another and the child is also domiciled in the other it is
proposed by Coquia in his book on conflict of law that the children’s
personal law shall apply in choice of law and jurisdiction. Considering that
it is the best welfare of the child hence his interest is best and his well
being is protected. But generally, in the Philippines aliens cannot adopt
except in instances such as:

1. Aliens who have some relationship with the adopted child by

consanguinity or affinity
2. aliens who have resided in the Philippines for at least 3 consecutive
years prior to the time of filing the application for adoption and
maintans the residency until the adoption decree is issued and Ra
JOHN MICHAEL C. LEQUIGAN
EH 403

8552 also requires the submission of a certification from the alien’s

country which attests to his legal capacity to adopt and that their state
allows the entry of an adopted daughter or son.

In the case of Republic V. CA (227 Scra 401) It is illustrative of the

prohibition for aliens for an adoption. when the Husband in the petition for
adoption is an alien, it was ruled that the law prohibits him from adopting
here in Philippines. However, his wife may adopt provided it shall follow the
rules provided in Article 185. In which case they must jointly adopt as a
general rule subject to 2 exceptions
1. When one spouses seeks to adopt his own illegitamte child
2. When one spouses seeks to adopt the legitimate child of the other.
Ultimately, she was not allowed to adopt, since it does not fall in the
exceptions. They were trying to adopt the nieces and nephew of the wife.

As supplemented in the case of Uggi Lindamand Therkelsen V. Republic

that “an alien cannot adopt a filipino citizen unless the adoption would
make the filipino minor a citizen of the alien’s country”. This affirm the
general rule of the prohibition of alien to adopt here in the Philippines.

In once case however of Ng Hian V. Collector of Customs involves a

adopted minor who was adopted abroad has the same right of her adoptive
parent to enter into Philippine islands. The court rule in the affirmative and
recognize such right and pronounced that “Has right to bring into this
country with his wife minor children legally adopted by him in china, where
it is shown that the adoption was bona fide, and that the children have lived
as members of his family and have been supported by him for several
years. It can be implied that the effects of adoption abroad is valid and
recognized here in the Philippines (the adopter was born in the Philippines)