Chapter XII.

Marriage and its Incidents

MARRIAGE AS A CONTRACT

Generally marriage as any other contract has two kinds of requisites: the formal and the essential
requisites. Under our Family Code, formalities in general do NOT affect the validity of the marriage
(example of such formalities: if a judge solemnizes the marriage, the ceremony must be in OPEN COURT)
(See Arts. 7 and 8, id); however, there are so called formalities which are now considered as ESSENTIAL
requisites under our law (example: marriage license, except in marriages of exceptional character). (Art.
3, id.).

The consequences of marriage consist of the: (1) rights and obligations between husband and wife; (2)
property relations between husband and wife; (3) the family, which embraces the family as an institution
and the family home; (4) paternity and filiation; (5) adoption; (6) support; (7) parental authority; (8)
emancipation and age of majority; and (9) summary judicial proceedings in the family law.

1) Compulsory Imperative Rule – it is imperative for the parties to follow the formalities of the
place of celebration of marriage; lex loci celebrationis; a and b filiopinos; married in Indian; for
the formalities they will be governed by Indian law
2) Optional Rule – parties may follow lex loci celebrationis or the national law
3) Ecclesiastes Rule – the religious formnalitiesz of both llc opr national law must be complied
Exception: Art. 35. The following marriages shall be void from the beginning:
(2) Those solemnized by any person not legally authorized to perform marriages unless such
marriages were contracted with either or both parties believing in good faith that the solemnizing
officer had the legal authority to do so;
Pleading and proven foreign law (review); how do you prove the fact of marriage? You can take video,
photograph, anything that will prove the fact of marriage

Existence of a foreign law that will tell us of the formalities of the marriage
Yao kee – there was testimony of the brother that the marriage took place; what was proven only was
the fact of marriage but the existence of a foieign law was not properly proven

- Proven unwritten foreign law must be evidenced by the testimony of an expert witness

How about marriages contracted in the Philippines by filipinos, is it an issue? No because there is no
foreign element.

1 – marraiges conrtacted abroad between Filipinos

Recall under art. 15

Art. 26 of the FC - Art. 26. All marriages solemnized outside the Philippines, in accordance with
the laws in force in the country where they were solemnized, and valid there as such, shall also
be valid in this country, except those prohibited under Articles 35 (1), (4), (5) and (6), [36, 37]
and 38.
No. Bigamy cannot be prosecuted when the second marriage is not solemnized in the Philippines.

- If there is mistake in the identity meaning there is no consent

Under article 53, those who have undergone nullity of marriage, are ordered by the court to settle their
property so if not and in subeequent they get married, the subsequent marruafge will be void.

- Psychological incapacity of one of the parties (Art. 36)

So do not mistake to follow Articles 35 (1), (4), (5) and (6), [36, 37] and 38, just follow the
universally considered incestuous marriages for the exception.

What are the marraiges will our couret not considered valid?

1) Highly immorak such as bigamous or polygamous marriage but of course remember our court
accept polygamous marraiges provided it is celebrated in accordance with Islamic rites
2) Universally considered as incestuous

X and Y are first cousins of Swedish nationality bnut married in Switzerland; under swiss law, cousins may
marry; can theirn marriage be considered valid in the Philippines? Yes because theya re both foreginwer
and got married abroad; what are the impediments as to ofreigners? Bigamous, polygamous and
incestuous marriages.

Legal basis: Article 38. The following marriages shall be

void from the beginning for reasons of public policy.
1. Between collateral blood relatives, whether legitimate or illegitimate, up to the
fourth civil degree;
2. Between step – parents and step – children;
3. Between the parent-in-law and children – in – law
4. Between the adopting parent and the adopted child;
5. Between the surviving spouse of the adopting parents and the adopting parents and
the adopted child;
6. Between the surviving spouse of the adopted child and the adopter;
7. Between an adopted child and a legitimate child of the adopter;
8. Between the adopted children of the same adopter;
9. Between parties where one, with the intention to marry the other, killed that
person’s spouse or his or her own spouse.
Now if the proxy marriage is celebrated in the Philippines and the lex loci celebrationis is not allowing
proxy marriages then the marriage is void. If the PM is performed abroad and valid in the palce of
celebration, it does not matter if the parties to the marriage are filipinos or foreigners, if it is valid there,
it is valid here because proxy marraiges is not one of the execptions under article 26. Art. 26. All
marriages solemnized outside the Philippines, in accordance with the laws in force in the
country where they were solemnized, and valid there as such, shall also be valid in this country,
except those prohibited under Articles 35 (1), (4), (5) and (6), 36, 37 and 38.

Foreigner and filipino solemnized abroad

X is a swiss national, Y is Filipina first cousin; Swiss law allows marriage with cousin; they solemnized
their marriage in Hong Kong under whose law marriages with first cousins are valid; so they established
their domicile here in the Philippines; Q – can their marriage be considered valid in the Philippines? A –
Yes. Because it is valid in the place of celebration so again lex loci celebrationis and it is valid under the
personal law of the other husband, then you uphold the validity of marriage and also its not universally
incestuous.

However if between ascendants and descendants its another story. So even if valid sa antional law,
invalid sa isa, valid sa place of celebration, the marriage is still void because it is considered universally
incestuous.
Mixed marriage celebrated in the Philippine

True both to intrinsic and extrinsic validity;

Thus a filipino cannot marry his American 1st cousin in the philippiens such marraiugew is prohibitied by
the family code; they cannot marry without license unless the marriage is exempt from such license

Formal requisites apply to foreigners who marry in the Philippines; his capacity to marry is governed by
his national law either his national law or domicile law; the logical implication would be that an alien
who decides to marry in the Philippines must have the capacity to marry under his national law

- Indian girl wanting to mnarry a filipino guy; the filipino is 20, the Indian is 12, since she is a
foreigner she got a certificate of legal capacity in the Indian embassy, in that instance, it is fine
because she is not governed by philppine laws if indeed 12 years old can marry under Indian law;
its not an issue under art 15; but if they are here and they are brothers ands sisters (Indian boy
and Indian girl) even if they are capacitated to marry under Indian laws because of the certificate
they cannot be considered because their marriage is one of those that will not be recognized
since it is highly immoral and universally incestuous
 - Related to acknowledgment of divorce but are old cases

MARRIAGE AS A STATUS
As a status it is governed by the personal law of the party concerned which could either be the national
law or the domiciliary law.

Personal rights and obligations of the spouses – relate it with art 68 Art. 68. The husband and wife
are obliged to live together, observe mutual love, respect and fidelity, and render mutual help
and support. (109a)
Property relations of husband and wife –
Note that in the Philippines, personal relations of the spouses again are the govenre dby the filipino law
since wre follow the nationality theory. Countries following domiciliary theory the personal relations of
spouses are governbed byu the law of their domicile

Q – what if there is a foreign element; what if the spouses are of different nationality what law will
govern their personal relation; the law of the husband or the law of the wife? Answer in powerpoint –
husband is head of the family

Exceptions when can the national law of the husband be disregarded

1 – lets say the husband is a national of Timbuktu where husbands are allowed to torture their wives and
so the husband married a Filipina who keeps on torturing his wife that law will be disregard hgere in the
pohilippines for being a criminal act and for being violative of public policy

2 – so if they are fighting over their personal properties the case is filed in the Philppines and were
talking about procedural matters then yhou follow the rules of the family code; doisregard the national
law of the husband

3 – the forum may disregard the incapacity imposed by the national law of the husband to third persons
deemed in good faith conrtacting to the spouses without the knowledge of the spouses incapacity. For
example is yung sale ng conjugal property remember it must have the consent of the otuer spouse, if
not, it is concswidered invalid

^ What is the effect of the naturalization of the husband? What happens if the husband changes
nationality, it applies for naturalization in another country? What will govern?

Factual Situation Point of contact

Property relations between the husband and the National law of the husband with exceptions
wife

^ whether or not you are married here but you bring your case to pHilippine courts, the court will apply
Philippine law on property relations

EXPNS

1 – if both are alien not covered; if one is a filipino, the other is an alien, still covered

2 – so the formalities of a contract whether it is a contract of sale or a donation, so if it involves a

property that is abroad and executed in the country where the property is located, the extrisnci validity
of the contract is governed by the law of the country where the property is located; you follow the lex
situs even in the intrinsic validity of a contract involving property loicated abroad

Ex. A german man and a filipino woman went to Australia to buy property they don’t have marriage
settlement when they came back to the Philippines, they fight the property; what law will govern? It is
governed by the Philippine law; but if we’re talking about the contract of sale as to whether the COS is
valid we used the Australian law because again lex situs. Diffeetna nd property relation of the husband
and wife and the issue on contract of sale; that is the importance of characterization of conflict of laws;
so sa itong situation iba ang rules that will govern property relations iba ang rules that will govern the
contract of sale; that’s why if youre faced with such problem in the exam, if you are asked to that,
characterize first, say if the factual situation relates to the validity of the contract of sale then the point
of contact is the law of the palce where the property is located; and so on and so forth

3 – so ito yung namentio kanina, the property is in Australia, they both enter the contract here in the
Philippines, as to the validity of the contract Australian law will apply because the property is there;
Ex. X a swiss married Y a filipino in manila, they did not enter into a particular property relations, they
established a domicile here in the Philippines, and they have a son Z, uinder swiss law the complete
separation of property regime governs therefore x under swiss law can freely dispose of his property
without restriction; unlike here where you must have the consent of your spouse;

While living in the Philippines, X bought shares of stocks in SMC with his salary in the Philippines; and
then he died he left all his shares of stocks with his brother B who is a swiss; the wife and Z opposed the
samew on the ground of preterition; what law governs the property and relations? Article 80 provides
that if there are no marriage settlement, Philippine law will govern particularly the Family Code because
Y is a Filipina and they brought a case to the Philippine court. Procedural matters shall bew governed by
Philippine laws. Therefore shares of stocksthat X bought with his sweldo are co-owned by the husband
and wife, because they don’t have a marriage settlement and therefote governed by article 80.

Q – can X by will give all the shares of stocks to B? and how much does he own? No because he only
owns 50%; they are governed by the absolute community property; now can he give his entire 50% to B?
iba na ang factual situations since this involve testamentary succession; property regiomes will revolve
on how they will own the property but not as to how the decedent wil dispose of his property.

Characterize first the problem, ano ba ang issue na tinatanong whether it’s property relations or its
contract of sale, whether you follow the lex situs or what not?

What is the effect of the change of nationality now what if the husband or the wife or both change
nationalities? Will the rules stated in the preceding question be the same?

Yes. There is no effect with respect to the property regime on the basis of the doctrine of immutability of
the matrimonial property regime. The original property regime that prevailed at the start of their
marriage prevails.
Reasons ^^

-- now is the immutability of the property regime of the spouses same as the immutability of law
governing the same regime; the change in the nationality or status is different from the change in
legislation; if the law changes, then follow the new law

Ex. The family code introduced new changes in the property relations of spouses while the civil code
established the system of conjugal partnership of gains between the spouse, the FC changed the system
of regime to absolute community regime so for edxdample A a filipina and an American married here; no
marriage settlement then they are governed by the absolute community with respect to their property;
now, let’s say a filipina becomes an American and they filed a case in the court here as to WON the
properties are co-owned by the spouses then you still follow the Philippine law notwithstanding the fact
that the wife was already naturalized by an American.

Annulment is a remedy if the marriage is voidable oir annullable the marriage is a valid until annulled
whereas the declaration of nullity of a void marriage is void ab initio. Article 45

Effects of voidable marriages

- It can become validated either by free cohabitation or prescription,

- Same property regime as in a valid marriage established between the spouses
- Children are legitimate if conceived before the decree of annulment
- Marriage cannot be attacked collaterally there must be a decree to set aside the marriage
- Marriage can no longer be impugned after the death of the spouses

VOID Marriages

- Absolutely inexistent therefore it cannot become validated

- Property relation between the spouses is co-ownership
 - Children are illegitimate except for void marriages under art 36 and 53
- The marriage may be collaterally attacked
- The marriage may also be impugned even after the death of the spouses

Discussion re powerpoint

Let’s go back to the 3 questions in a conflict of law: 1) the question of jurisdiction; 2) the choice of law; 3)
the question of the effectivity of the foreign judgment.

X and Y are married in Japan but they are seeking annulment in the Ph. If they are married in Japan, the
RTC can have jurisdiction over the case because we have annulment here but the law that will be applied
is the Japanese law to determine whether or not at the time of celebration there is formal or substantive
impediment in the marriage.

Can the local courts annul the marriage of two foreigners who did not get married in the Philippines?

So if the question is whether or not Philippine court has jurisdiction? Definitely it has. If the parties are
domiciled in the Philippines it is the state of the domicile that has the greatest interest in the domestic
relations of the parties. So the practical justification for allowing courts of the domicile is that aliens may
bring their actions in the courts instead of compelling them to travel in their respective countries.

That’s why if both parties are domiciled in the Philippines even though they are foreigners, our courts
have jurisdiction.

Since the Philippines follows the nationality theory, our courts have jurisdiction and may take cognizance
of annulment and nullity suits in marriage in cases where the litigants are Filipinos.
Domiciliary of the Philippines can likewise file the same suits in the Philippines

Now in the Philippines, a filipino citizen or domiciliary can file a case for annulment or declaration of
nullity even if the defendant is non-resident of the country. Such case involves the personal status of the
plaintiff so jurisdiction can be acquired over the defendant by publication of summons.

Now, question – how about tourist? Can they come here and file for annulment? No. Only domiciliary.
Residency requirement must be established.

Now we look at the governing laws whether the marriage is extrinsically or intrinsically valid. Kunyare
and 2 domiciliaries here they are married in accordance with the foreign law, you look at the foreign law
as basis if they can be annulled you cannot apply the family code to them.

Lex loci celebrationis – if valid in the place celebrated, it is valid here; except article 35 36 37 38

Now if an action of annulment is filed here, with respect to the formalities, these are governed by the
law of the place where the marriage was performed.

Now if you want to attack the formalities of the marriage celebrated abroad, you look at the laws
abroad. If there is a formal defect, you can annul the marriage based on those laws.

Therefore the grounds of annulment are provided by the law of the place where the marriage was
celebrated.

X and Y got married in Japan and filed for annulment here and theya re both domiciliary ion the
Philippines, so what law will apply with respect to the formal validity thereof? Of course, lex loci
celebrationis, the law of Japan on marriage not Philippine laws.

Lex loci celebrationis should determine WON there is a defect in substance which will render the
marriage invalid. Because the general rule is lex loci celebrationis whether formal or substantive defect.
Summary

Marriage between foreigners – lex loci celebrationis will apply

Marriage between filipinos – Philippine laws

 So, take note of the purpose of article 26 is to avoid absurd. Situation of a Filipino spouse is
being still married to His or her alien spouse though, the latter is no longer married to the former
and they already have another spouse. So previously, the provision does not apply to the 
divorce obtained by a Filipino abroad from his or her Filipino spouse, which divorce is void
because are laws wont allow divorce. Filipinos are governed by Philippine laws, wherever they
go as to their status and capacity. But later on, we will discover different and new rules provided
by Jurisprudence.
So you know the difference between divorce and annulment so we will no longer discuss that.
So just read the cases of Pilapil v. Ibay-Somera and Vandorm v. Romillo. So these are landmark
cases under article, 26. So read them on However, we will discuss the history of the ruleswith
respect to this.
Divorce obtained by two Filipinos abroad. If a Filipino filed for divorce in a foreign country. The
foreign Court, May Grant a decree of divorce depending on its laws but it will not be recognized
here on any ground.

Now, rules on absolute divorce. Can two foreigners file for divorce here in the Philippines again.
No, because of lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter. 

So if both parties are foreigners, they filed for divorce in a foreign country, will that divorce be
recognized here? So this pertains to recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments.so it will
be recognized as valid only if two conditions occur. So first is the foreign country must have
jurisdiction to Grant the divorce. And second, the divorce has been recognized by the national
law of the parties because of the nationality theory. 

Now, if there is one Filipino and one foreigner and they file for divorce in another country, you
follow article 26 provided, it is the foreign spouse who obtained the divorce and the Filipino
spouse is capacitated to remarry. Then the Filipino spouse. May file an action here to recognize
the divorce issued by another country. This rule you’ll be surprised by the new rules, provided
for by jurisprudence so, hold on to that issue. 

These are the requisites under article 26, you already know this, marriage must be mixed, one
Filipino and one foreigner. The absolute divorce is obtained by an alien spouse and the divorce
capacitates the alien spouse to remarry. So again, we will look at the changes later.

change of citizenship, in case of change of citizenship it is the citizenship at the time of divorce,
that will control and not a time of marriage. So it's a mixed marriage at the time of divorce. 

Garcia-Recio v. Recio, this is still in relation to article 26, but we will again and we'll discuss the
changes in the rules in a while. 

Summary of the rules. So if the factual situation relates to absolute divorce sought in the
Philippines by Filipinos abroad. Then the point of contact is the lex fori except for Muslim
divorce. 

So the factual situation related to divorce between divorce obtained abroad between Filipinos.
Then the point of contact is a national law. 

if it's between the foreigners, the national law Still governs

mixed marriages as we apply the national law. Without prejudice to article 26 paragraph 2. 

Now, in legal separation to foreigners, one is swiss, and one is German and they filed for legal
separation here. Then the factual situation are the grounds given by both nationalities may be
considered.

 Legal separation article, 55 in Family Code, you already know this youalready know Devore
know the difference between legal separation and divorce. A mensa et thoro and
-inaudible-  so of course it rings a bell, right? This was discussed in your Persons. 

So you already know also, the legal separation and the difference of it from annulment of
marriage.

The grounds for legal separation. that's provided under article 55 but if one of the parties is a
foreign National, then the grounds for legal separation in this foreign country may also be taken
consideration in filing for legal separation here in the Philippines. 

Where is the jurisdiction of for legal separation, anywhere for as long as it is allowed under the
national law of the petitioners, like in the Philippines foreigners, may ask for legal separation
even if they did not get married in this country, so what is important. Is that the court has
jurisdiction over the parties. So, most countries assume jurisdiction over cases, for the legal
separation and the basis of the domicile of one of the parties or the matrimonial domicile. And
so, the rationale for this rule is the law of the domicile of the parties is that which are most
intimately connected. So, take note of that, 

is there any residency requirement in legal separation? You know, that none, no residency,
requirement, meaning tourists can actually file for legal separation here in the Philippines, so the
tourists can file. But applicable law is the foreign law and not our courts. 

So what is the rule as to prescription? 

So, this is also governed by the national law of the parties. However, under Philippine laws
article 57 in the family code.

Defenses available as provided under article 56. So if the other party does not want the petition
to Prosper they may also get their defenses from their National laws.
So kung american and then filipino filed for legal separation, the grounds for legal separation
under the family code as well as those provided under American law will be applied. 

So why is there a difference in a choice-of-law? Why is it in an annulment the lex fori will be
followed and legal separatio It's the national law? Because take note, the defect existed at the
time of the celebration of marriage. It is the law of the place where the marriage was made, that
was violated but in legal separation, the grounds arose only after the marriage took place. the
law of the place, where the marriage was celebrated, was not violated. 

So what is the summary, of conflict rules in legal separation? So, if the party is about the same
nationality as the grounds for legal separation, shall be governed by their personal law, which
would either be the national law or the domiciliary law. If the parties are of different nationalities,
the grounds available under the personal law of the husband, as well as those available on
them under the The law of the wife are all made available grounds for granting legal separation.
So this is provided in The Hague convention on legal separation. 

Let us go to the cases of marriage. So in essence, the applicable rules whether Article 15 of the
civil code on one hand or article 26, (2) of the family code on the other is determined by the law
upon which the divorce decree has been issued and second the party who obtain the divorce
decree and third, the nature of the action brought before the Philippine courts and lastly let the
law governing the personal status of the party seeking relief. 

So the corresponding effect is determining factors are in turn illustrated by relevant cases
involving the issue and decided after the issuance of EO 227. 

PILAPIL v. IBAY-SOMERA
So here in this case, the divorce was obtained in Germany by the german’s spouse. the German
spouse filed two complaints, charging the Filipino spouse with adultery. Can he still file adultery?
Take note that you already obtained a decree of divorce in Germany. So the divorce decree is
binding on the German spouse, pursuant to the nationality principle accordingly, the German
spouse, lacks legal standing to file, the complaint as as offended spouse having obtained, the
decree prior to the hearing of the said complaints. 

The second case, if you remember in your view of the landmark case, especially some of you
may have been enrolled at Ateneo with Atty. Galas another landmark case discussed in persons
in relation to marriages is the case of Republic v. Iyoy. So here the divorce. If you remember
divorce was obtained in the US by a Filipino wife, prior to her naturalization, as an American
citizen. Now, the Filipino husband here, invokes the divorce decree, secured by his Filipino wife,
as an additional ground to grant his petition for Declaration of nullity. That's why this case. So
here, the divorce decree cannot be recognized in the Philippines. So you obtain by the Filipino
wife since the Filipino wife Obtained the same was still a Filipino Citizen and was at such time
Bound by Philippine laws and family rights and duties pursuant to the nationality principle. 

REPUBLIC v. ORBECIDO. So here the divorce was obtained in the United States by the
naturalized American spouse. Now, the Filipino spouse sought enforcement of the divorce in the
Philippines. So, of course, the effects of the divorce decree must be recognized in favor of the
Filipino spouse pursuant to Article 2 of The Family code.  Accordingly, the Filipino spouse
should be allowed to remarry. 

DACASIN v. DACASIN. The of divorce of obtained in the United States by the Filipino spouse.
Now the American spouse sought enforcement of the joint custody agreement he had executed
with his former Filipino wife, which bore terms contrary to those in the divorce decree. The
divorce decree is binding on the American spouse pursuant to the nationality principle. He
cannot be allowed to evade the Same by invoking the terms of the joint custody agreement 

BAYOT v. CA,  the divorce Was obtained in Dominican Republic by a naturalized American
spouse. Now, the same naturalized American spouse sought annulment of her marriage with
the Filipino spouse by petition for annulment filed before the RTC. The divorce decree is binding
on the naturalized American spouse pursuant to the nationality principle. So accordingly, she is
left without any cause of action before the RTC as the petition for annulment presupposes a
subsisting marriage. The second case he filed in the Philippines will not Prosper precisely
because that decree of divorce obtained in Dominican Republic has sufficiently ended their
marriage.

5:27 pm
FUJIKI v. MARINAY. So here, the divorce was obtained in Japan by the Filipino wife against her
second husband, who is a Japanese national. The first husband is also a Japanese sought the
recognition of the divorce obtained by his Filipino wife against her second husband through a
petition for judicial recognition of Foreign judgment or decree of absolute nullity filed before the
RTC. So if you remember, this is a question in your first exam, so that the effect of the divorce
decree issued pursuant to Japanese law may be recognized in the Philippines in order to affect
the status of the first husband who pursuant to the nationality principle is governed by the
national or by the Japanese law. such recognition is in line with the Philippines public policy,
which characterizes bigamous Marriages as void ab initio. So pwede ang Petition for judicial
recognition of the decree of absolute nullity of marriage in Japan. 

MEDINA v. KOIKE. Divorce was jointly obtained in Japan by the Filipino wife and the Japanese
husband. So the Filipino wife sought to enforce the divorce in the Philippines through petition for
judicial recognition of foreign divorce and Declaration of capacity to remarry before the RTC. So,
the case was remanded to the CA to allow the Filipino wife to prove that the divorce obtained
abroad By her and her Japanese husband is valid according to the national law. 

So again, if you remember the correct procedure is for you to prove the fact of the divorce
decree was obtained by a court of proper jurisdiction which has jurisdiction to issue a decree of
divorce. And second we also have to prove  the divorce law on the  matter. -
REPUBLIC v. MANALO - So this is a 2018 case. So here, Marilyn Manalo was also married to a
Japanese national Minoro. So, Manalo filed a case for divorce in Japan. And after due
proceedings a divorce decree, dated December 6, 2011 was granted. Now, Manalo wants to
cancel the entry of marriage between her and Minoro from the Civil registry to Be allowed to
reuse her maiden surname Manalo. according to article 26 paragraph 2 the family code, where
a marriage between a Filipino Citizen and a foreigner is validly celebrated and divorce is
thereaafter validly obtained abroad by the alien spouse capacitating him or her to remarry, the
Filipino spouse shall likewise have capacity to remarry under Filipino law

So first issue is under article 26 paragraph 2 of the family code pwede ba ang Filipino spouse
such as in this case si Marilyn ang nag initiate ng divorce proceeding Instead the foreign
spouse. So, the ruling of the Supreme Court, that is, is yes, the Court ruled that in interpreting
the law, the intent should be taken into consideration. So the aim of the amendment is to avoid
absurd situation, having the Filipino deemed still married to a foreign spouse Even though the
latter is no longer married to the former. According to the Supreme Court, the wording of article
26 paragraph 2 the family code requires, only that there be a valid divorce obtained abroad And
does Not discriminate as to who should file the divorce Whether it is the Filipino spouse or the
foreign spouse.

also even assuming arguendo that the provision should be interpreted the divorce proceeding
should be initiated by the foreign spouse, the court will not follow such interpretation since doing
So would be contrary to the legislative intent of the law.

In the issue of The application of Article 15 of the civil code In this case. the Court ruled that
even if Manalo should be bound by the  nationality principle because again she is a Filipino and
f she initiated the divorce proceedings abroad, blind adherence to it should not be allowed if it
will cost and unjust discrimination and oppression to certain classes of individuals whose rights
are equally protected by law. 

So just take note of this case this is Wonderfully written.

Again, the Supreme Court Also, ruled that article 26 of the family code is in violation of the equal
protection Clause, they said that a limitation provided by article 26 is based on a superficial
arbitrary and Whimsical classification, the violation of the equal protection clause In this case is
shown by the discrimination against Filipina spouses, who initiate that the foreign divorce
proceeding and the Filipinos who obtained divorce decree because the foreign spouse has
initiated the divorce proceedings. So, their circumstances are alike and making a distinction
between them as regards to the validity of the divorce Decree obtained would give one undue
favor and unjustly discriminate against the other. 

So the second issue was the divorce obtained by Marilyn from Japan valid here in the
Philippines. So here the court cannot determine due to insufficient evidence. 
So just take note of this case read the ruling of the Supreme Court as to validity of the divorce
because it is still in relation to the petition for recognition and enforcement of foreign judgment
pleading proper foreign laws.