3.1 The marriage is void.

Under the Family Code, a marriage is void ab initio absent marriage license
compliance. Here, the couple did not obtain a valid marriage license, and hence, did not meet with the
formal requisites of the law to classify their marriage compliant and valid.

3.2 My answer will be the same that the marriage is void. Under the Family Code, a marriage
without a marriage license is void from the beginning. Thus, there is actually no marriage to speak of.
1.a Yes, the Court can grant the motion to amend. Under the Rules on Criminal Procedure, the
information can be amended by leave of court; and provided, that it will not cause prejudice to the
accused; provided, further, that a sufficient notice is served to all the parties involved.

1.b Yes, the prosecution can re-file the information even though for the case murder. Under the
Rule on Criminal Procedure, the prosecution is given ample opportunity to withdraw and re-file a case
provided that it is done before the accused participates in the proceeding or before the arraignment is
done which would constitute double jeopardy.

Here, it is requested before the accused could be arraigned, and hence, the prosecution still has
the opportunity to re-file the case with essentially substantial amendments.
2.a No, the public prosecutor cannot move for the amendment of the information to charge A with
crime of parricide. Under the Rules on Criminal Procedure, substantial amendments to information such
as essentially changing the nature of the crime, and thus, prejudicial to the accused is not allowed.

Here, the prosecution failed to adduce enough evidence which eventually caused the
insufficient filing of the information. Accordingly, such fact or element cannot thereafter be
incorporated to the case, prejudicial to the accused.

2.b. No, A cannot be convicted of the crime parricide. Under the rules on Criminal Procedure, the
accused cannot be held guilty of a crime he is not charged with neither be held liable for aggravating or
any qualifying circumstance not alleged in the information.

1.a Under the Family Code, any irregularity in the essential requisite shall cause the marriage to be
voidable. Here, both spouses are of legal age, however, the law requires that they must obtain parental
consent to render their marriage valid, otherwise, it is voidable. It follows that the marriage is not void
ab initio but is voidable only.

1.b. Under the Family Code, persons need not obtain marriage license in case it is solemnized in
articulo mortis. Here, Isidro suffered a heart attack, placing himself at the verge of death which warrants
the exception of marriage license since it is clearly impracticable to for them to obtain such.
1.c. Under the Family Code, any pilot, whoever is ready, can solemnize the marriage. Here, it was
the assistant pilot who is likewise the person referred to by the Family Code, and thus, allowed to
solemnize marriage.

1.d. Under the Family Code, any defect in the formal requisites shall not invalidate the marriage.
Here, all essential and formal requisites are appropriately complied with, and hence, the marriage is
valid. However, the same Code provides that any person who is responsible for such defect can be
burdened with administrative, criminal, and civil charges.
2.a The accused’s Motion for Reconsideration on the ground that demurrer to evidence is applied
only to the criminal aspect of the case should be denied.

Under the Rules on Criminal Procedure, a civil action is automatically carried out in the filing of criminal
action. But while the criminal aspect of the case is dismissed, it does not however dissolve, with
certainty, the civil liability of the person involved, provided, that it comes from another source of
obligation. Therefore, the Court may still grant reasonable and just award of damages.

2.b Under the Rules on Criminal Procedure, when the accused filed demurrer to evidence without
leave of court, he losses the opportunity to present evidence in his favor on appeal. Here, accused filed
without leave of court, and hence, not entitled to present evidence.
1.a Under the Family Code, marriage between two persons whose age is between 18 to 20 requires
parental consent, otherwise, it is voidable. Here, it is voidable.

1.b Under the Family Code, marriage between two persons whose age is between 21 to 25 is a valid
marraige. Thus, the instant case is a valid marriage.

1.c Under the Family Code, incestuous marriage, which includes marriage between relatives by
blood within 4th civil degree, is void ab initio. Here, marriage between first cousins is void from the
beginning in the eyes of Philippine law.
1.d Under the principle of lex loci celebrationis, the solemnization of marriage is governed by the
law of the place/forum in which it is celebrated. It is recognized to be valid here in the Philippines
provided it is valid there as such. Further, status of Filipino citizens is governed by the personal law
wherever they may be. In sum, if the marriage is solemnized in accordance with the Hongkong laws, it is
likewise valid here in the Philippines which, likewise, makes the persons’ status to have been validly
married.

1.e Under the Family Code, defects in the formal requisites of marriage does not invalidate the
marriage. City Mayor is granted with the authority to solemnize marriage within their jurisdiction under
the LGC. Here, however, the Mayor solemnized the marriage three towns away from his jurisdiction.
Such act does not remove the power of such official but is merely a defect in the formal requisites which
does invalidate the marriage. Hence, it is a valid marriage

2. No, the marriage of Roderick and Faye is not valid.

Under the principles enshrined in the Family Code, the marriage between persons where one killed
his/her former spouse for the sole purpose of remarriage to another is void from the beginning by
reason of public policy.

Here, Faye killed Brad to death for the purpose of remarriage to Roderick. Hence, the marriage is void.