CASE DIGEST NO.

27

G.R. No. 167684

July 31, 2006
JAIME O. SEVILLA, petitioner,
vs
CARMELITA N. CARDENAS, respondent.

FACTS OF THE CASE:

Jaime O. Sevilla, herein petitioner, filed a petition for the declaration of nullity of his marriage
to Carmelita N. Cardenas, herein respondent, for their marriage was vitiated by machination, duress,
and intimidation employed by the respondents Carmelita and her father. He was forced to sign a
marriage contract with Carmelita Cardenas before a minister of the Gospel, Rev. Cirilo D Gonzales.
Moreover, he alleged that there was no marriage license presented before the solemnizing officer as
certified by the Office of the Local Civil Registrar of San Juan, Manila.

On the other hand, the respondent, Carmelita N. Cardenas refuted these allegations of Jaime and claims
that they were first civilly married and thereafter married in a church ceremony. Both were alleged to be
recorded in Local Civil Registrar. Petitioner is estopped from invoking the lack of marriage license after
having been married to respondent for 25 years.

The Regional Trial Court of Makati City declared the nullity of marriage of the parties based on the
petitioner’s allegations that no marriage license was presented before a solemnizing officer. Respondent
appealed to the Court of Appeals which reversed and set aside the decision of the trail court in favor of
the marriage. Thus, this case was elevated to the Supreme Court.

ISSUE:
1. Whether or not the certifications from the Local Civil Registrar of San Juan stating that no
Marriage License No. 2770792 as appearing in the marriage contract of the parties was issued,
are sufficient to declare their marriage null and void ab initio.

RULING:

No, the presumption of regularity of official acts may be rebutted by affirmative evidence
of irregularity or failure to perform a duty. The absence of logbook is not conclusive proof of non-
issuance of Marriage License. In the absence of showing of diligent efforts to search for the said logbook,
the court cannot easily accept that absence of the same also means non-existence or falsity of entries
therein. Moreover, the parties have comported themselves as husband and wife and lived together for
several years producing two offsprings, now adult themselves. A presumption established by our Code
of Civil Procedure is “that a man and a woman deporting themselves as husband and wife have entered
into a lawful contract of marriage”.

Eric M. Recomendable
Arellano University School of Law