HOME LAW NOTES + PH ELECTIONS + CASE DIGESTS + GAMES + MUBI REBYU + TOYS

LAW TECH WORLD

Law, Technology and the World

CASE DIGEST: SY V. CA
Published by paul on August 12, 2013 | Leave a response

FILIPINA Y. SY, petitioner, v. THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS, respondent.

G.R. No. 127263. April 12, 2000.

Facts:

On November 15, 1973 Filipina Sy and Fernando Sy got married at the Church of Our Lady
of Lourdes in Quezon City. After some time, Fernando left their conjugal dwelling. Two children
were born out of the marriage. Frederick, their son went to his father’s residence. Filipina filed for
legal separation.

The Trial Court dissolved their conjugal partnership of gains and granted the custody of their
children to her.

Later on, Filipina was punched at the different parts of her body and was even choked by him when
she started spanking their son when the latter ignored her while she was talking to him.

The Trial Court convicted him for slight physical injuries only. A new action for legal separation was
granted by repeated physical violence and sexual infidelity. Filipina then filed for the declaration of
absolute nullity of their marriage citing psychological incapacity.

The Trial Court and Appellate Court denied her petition. On her petition to this Court, she assailed
for the first time that there was no marriage license during their marriage.

Issues:

1) Whether or not the marriage between petitioner and private respondent is void from
the beginning for lack of a marriage license at the time of the ceremony; and

2) Whether or not private respondent is psychologically incapacitated at the time of said marriage
celebration to warrant a declaration of its absolute nullity.

Ruling:

The date of celebration of their marriage on November 15, 1973, is admitted both by petitioner and
private respondent. The pieces of evidence on record showed that on the day of the marriage
ceremony, there was no marriage license. A marriage license is a formal requirement; its absence
renders the marriage void ab initio. In addition, the marriage contract shows that the marriage
 license, numbered 6237519, was issued in Carmona, Cavite, yet, neither petitioner nor private
respondent ever resided in Carmona.

The marriage license was issued on September 17,1974, almost one year after the ceremony took
place on November 15, 1973. The ineluctable conclusion is that the marriage was indeed contracted
without a marriage license. Under Article 80 of the Civil Code. those solemnized without a marriage
license, save marriages of exceptional character, are void ab initio. This is
clearly applicable in this case.

The remaining issue on the psychological incapacity of private respondent need no longer detain the
Court. It is mooted by the conclusion that the marriage of petitioner to respondent is void ab initio
for lack of a marriage license at the time their marriage was solemnized.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Case Digest: Sy v. CA Case Digest: Pesca v. Pesca

Case Digest: Yao Kee v. Sy-Gonzales Case Digest: PIMENTEL V.

PIMENTEL

Case Digest: MARABLE V. Case Digest: Sevilla v. Cardenas

MARABLE

Share this:

Posted in Case Digest

LEAVE A REPLY

Comment
Name * Email *

Website

POST COMMENT

← PREVIOUS NEXT →

SEARCH

POPULAR POSTS

Pokemon Revolution: How to Get to Giovanni in Silph Co Maze (29,244)

2014 Case Digest: Arigo v. Swift (22,512)
Pokemon Revolution: Eevee Mission at Game Corner Guide (21,818)
Pokemon Revolution: How to Get HM01 – Cut (21,202)
Case Digest: THE PROVINCE OF NORTH COTABATO, et al .… (20,213)
Case Digest: Estrada v. Escritor (20,164)
Case Digest: LA BUGAL B’LAAN TRIBAL ASSOCIATION… (19,764)
2015 Case Digest: Diocese of Bacolod v. COMELEC (19,436)
2017 Case Digest: Estipona v. Lobrigo and People (18,245)
Pokemon Revolution: How to Get to Articuno in Seafoam Island (14,711)

This work by Law Tech World is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
License.
Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2020 Law Tech World.

Powered by WordPress and Live Wire.