MARRIAGE

- Marriage is a special contract of permanent union between a man and a woman entered into in accordance
with law for the establishment of conjugal and family life. It is the foundation of the family and an
inviolable social institution whose nature, consequences, and incidents are governed by law and not subject
to stipulation except that marriage settlements may fix the property relations during the marriage within
the limits provided by this code.

A. WHY MARRIAGE PROBLEMS HAVE BECOME IMPORTANT

2 factors that contribute to the importance of marriage problems

(1) These problems, along with the effects and incidents of marriage, are so intertwined with the prevailing
religious beliefs, the norms of morality, and the ways of life of the State in which the marriage is
celebrated or of the State of the domicile or nationality of the spouses, that they are viewed as involving
matters of public policy of these States.
(2) The mobility of persons today, and in the particular case of the Philippines, the unceasing migration of
Filipinos — whether doctors, nurses, technicians, or ordinary contract workers — obviously in search of
better economic opportunities abroad, have given rise to new and complex problems involving their
marriages, with all their effects on the persons and properties of the contracting parties.

NOTE:
● Of all domestic relations, marriage is the most important

Question at issue of marriage between more than one states:

a. Validity of marriage
b. Annulment suit
c. Action for support
d. Custody of children
e. Legitimacy of children
f. Tax case
g. Divorce suit
h. Inheritance problem
i. Criminal prosecution for bigamy

NOTE:
● These marriage conflicts problems occur chiefly because of the differences in the concept and treatment of
marriage in the various legal systems.

B. MARRIAGE AS A CONTRACT AND AS AN INSTITUTION

- Marriage is considered a “contract” because of the element of mutual consent, which is the characteristics
of all contracts

“MARRIAGE CONTRACTS” are different from ordinary civil contracts

 MARRIAGE CONTRACTS ORDINARY CIVIL CONTRACTS

1. A marriage can only be contracted between 1. This characteristic is not found in ordinary
persons of opposite sex contracts

Article 1 of the Family Code: “marriage is a special

contract between a man and a woman”

Article 2 of the Family Code: “the contracting parties

must be a male and a female”

2. A marriage contract is not considered valid if 2. A person may enter into as many ordinary contracts
one of the parties had previously entered into a as he can
similar contract with one who is still living

3. Parties to a marriage contract cannot mutually 3. Ordinary civil contract parties are usually free to
withdraw from the relationship if and when mutually withdraw from the contract if and when they
they please please

4. Marital relationships are regulated by law 4. Ordinary civil contracts are primarily regulated by
the terms and conditions stipulated by the parties
NOTE: the numerous rights and duties arising from
the marriage are not even mentioned in the contract.

5. The cause for the dissolution of the marriage

contract are different from those of an
ordinary civil contract

NOTE:
● A contract terminating a marital relationship is
void
● It is the characteristic of PERMANENCE that
distinguishes marriage from a purely
consensual transaction

➢ Marriage is a relationship creating STATUS

➢ As a status, marriage is a creature of the law and may be destroyed only in the manner specified by law.

Section 1, Article XV, 1987 Constitution

- “Recognizes the Filipino family as the foundation of the nation. Accordingly, it shall strengthen its
solidarity and actively promote its total development”

Section 2, Article XV, 1987 Constitution

- “Marriage, as an inviolable social institution, is the foundation of the family and shall be protected by the
State“

EFFECT OF MARRIAGE
 1. Confer the status of legitimacy upon children born in wedlock
2. Gives rise to relations of consanguinity and affinity

CRUCIAL QUESTION: which territorial unit, when a set of facts supposedly constitutive of a marital relation
touches two or more territorial units, is entitled to exact compliance with its own public policy or code of
morality?

C. MEANING OF MARRIAGE

➢ Under Philippine law, a marriage that is validly contracted cannot, as a general rule, be dissolved except
by death of one of the parties.

Article 1 of the Family Code:

- This definition views marriage as a sacrament
- Polygamous union are excluded
- Absolute divorce is not recognized

❖ In Conflict of Laws, marriage is and should be defined in broader terms than those in which it is
understood in internal Philippine law.
❖ The existence of a foreign marriage may be only a consideration preliminary to the decision of a case
involving succession, tax law, or some other matter not immediately affecting the mores of the forum.
❖ When there is no violent conflict between the enjoyment of an incident of marriage and the public policy or
concept of morality of the State where enjoyment is sought, an otherwise void marriage may be accorded
recognition in the forum.

D. MARRIAGE PROBLEMS IN CONFLICTS OF LAWS; POLICY CONSIDERATIONS

2 principal problems:
(1) The problem of what law governs the creation of the marriage relation.
(2) The problem of recognition of the marriage relation in States other than that in which the relationship was
created.

Necessary to keep in mind:

a. Distinction between formal validity of the marriage contract and its substantive validity
b. Various policy considerations that should affect the choice of governing law.
1. Element of predictability
2. To sustain marriages entered into in good faith
3. Third policy consideration

ELEMENT OF PREDICTABILITY
- This is important for both the parties and society in general
- The contracting parties and the whole community have an interest in knowing whether they are married
or not
“LIMPING MARRIAGES”
● It is not socially desirable for a couple to be considered married in one State but not in the other

THIRD POLICY CONSIDERATION

- The rule is that the forum, when confronted by a marriage deemed particularly offensive to its own
standards, will strike down a marriage validly contracted in other jurisdictions, if, in the circumstances of
the case, it is against its own norms of public policy or morality.
a. Example: a marriage between first cousins who are Filipino nationals will be considered void here
for “reasons of public policy,” regardless of where their domicile may be. But if the first-cousin
marriage involves American nationals who contracted marriage in a State where marriages
between first cousins are valid, they will be considered validly married here, whether they are
domiciled in the Philippines or not.

E. FORMAL VALIDITY
- In practically all legal systems, the law of the place where a marriage is celebrated governs its formal
validity.
● Locus regit actum - the place governs the act
● Lex loci celebrationis - if valid by the law of the place of celebration, it is also valid in other places,
though by the law of the latter other formalities are required.

“FORMAL VALIDITY”
- “Formal validity”, “formalities”, “formal requirements of marriage” used interchangeably
- Refers to the EXTERNAL CONDUCT required of the parties or of the solemnizing officers essential to
the formation of a legally valid marriage.

Article 2 and Article 3 of the Family Code: specify which of the requirements of marriages are essential and
which are formal

FUNCTIONS OF FORMALITIES
1. To guarantee the finality and seriousness of the solemnized act
2. Publicize the marriage
3. Furnish trustworthy evidence of its occurrence

MATTERS OF FORM:
1. Physical examination preceding the marriage
2. The proper person to solemnize it
3. The necessity of a formal ceremony
4. The manner of performance of the ceremony

ARTICLE 3, FAMILY CODE, FORMAL REQUISITES OF MARRIAGE

(1) The authority of the solemnizing officer
(2) The marriage license
(3) The marriage ceremony where the contracting parties appear before the solemnizing officer

➢ Absence of formal requisites - renders the marriage void ab initio

 ➢ Irregularity in the formal requisites - shall not affect the validity of the marriage, but the party or parties
responsible for the irregularity shall be held liable

3 WAYS OF APPLYING LOCUS REGIT ACTUM (the place governs the act):
1. The imperative or compulsory rule
➢ The law of the place where the marriage is celebrated governs the matter of formal validity,
irrespective of whether the marriage is concluded within or outside the forum. In short, the maxim
locus regit actum is applied compulsorily; the law of the place of celebration, the lex loci
celebrationis, is solely decisive.
2. The optional rule
➢ Article 7 of the Hague Convention on Marriage adopts the optional rule by providing that where
the parties to a marriage are of different nationalities, a marriage not complying with the formal
requirements in the country of celebration must satisfy the national laws of both parties in order to
be recognized by other participant States.
3. The modified or religious method
➢ The rule is modified by considering the religious form prescribed by the law of these countries as
essential for the marriage of their own nationals. A marriage performed abroad by civil ceremony
alone may not be recognized in the forum.

NOTE:
● Philippine law adheres to the imperative rule; a marriage formally valid where celebrated is valid
elsewhere
● Paragraph 17 of the Civil Code embodies the maxim locus regit actum “the forms and solemnities of
contracts, wills, and other public instruments, shall be governed by the laws of the country in which they
are executed”

ARTICLE 26 of the Family Code specifically referring to marriages contracted abroad:

“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”

REASON FOR ARTICLE 26

- When the parties choose a place as the loci celebrationis of their marriage, they are considered to have
subjected all questions of form to the law of that place, and if valid there it should be considered valid
everywhere.

There is a necessity of proving the content of the foreign law under which a marriage was celebrated and the fact
of conformity of said marriage to the requirements of said foreign law.

NOTE:
● For a foreign marriage to be recognized in the Philippines, it is first necessary to prove before the court
where the issues arise the existence of the foreign law as a question of fact, “and it is then necessary to
prove the alleged foreign marriage” under that law by convincing evidence.
 ● In the absence of proof of foreign law, the presumption arises that it is the same as Philippine internal
law.

TERMS OF THE PLACE OF CELEBRATION:

1. Proxy Marriages
- Though not allowed by the Philippines’ internal law, some legal systems permit marriage by proxy
- Following the abbreviated rule — “valid where contracted, valid everywhere” — proxy marriages,
where permitted by the law of the place where the proxy participates in the marriage ceremony,
are entitled to recognition in countries adhering to the lex loci celebrationis rule, at least insofar as
formal validity is concerned.
- For the formal validity of the marriage, it does not matter whether the place at which the principal
party appointed his proxy permits such a marriage; what is important is that it is permitted by the
law of the place where the proxy acted.
● NOTE: as internal Philippine law does not sanction proxy marriages, it is doubtful whether
this rule will be recognized here
2. Common-Law Marriages
- A marriage accomplished by cohabitation and agreement without formal ceremony
- Common-law marriages are not recognized under Philippine internal law.
3. Marriage on board a vessel on the high seas
- It has been held that since the one who exercises the greatest amount of control over the ship is
her owner, and the state most closely connected with the owner, at least in the United States, is
the State of his domicile, the marriage to be valid must conform to the law of the owner’s domicile.

“CONSULAR MARRIAGES”
- Article 10 of the Family Code, paraphrasing Article 75 of the Civil Code, provides that “marriages
between filipino citizens abroad may be solemnized by a consul-general, consul or vice-consul of the
Republic of the Philippines,” who likewise perform the duties of the local civil registrar and of the
solemnizing officer with regard to the celebration of marriage.
- The prevailing rule is that a marriage performed before a consular or diplomatic aganet empowered by a
sending State to officiate marriage is valid in the receiving State only if the latter has agreed to his acting
in that capacity.

F. SUBSTANTIVE VALIDITY

- The absence of substantive requirements will render a marriage void or voidable.

Article 2 of the Family Code - ESSENTIAL REQUISITES OF MARRIAGE

(1) Legal capacity of the contracting parties who must be male and a female
(2) Consent freely given in the presence of the solemnizing officer

MARRIAGES INVOLVING A FOREIGN ELEMENT - 2 competing principles as to the law that should govern
the substantive validity of marriage
(1) Lex loci celebratioanis
● The law of the place of the celebration of marriage
 (2) Personal law of the contracting parties
● Either the law of their domicile or nationality, depending on the theory followed by the particular
State

- These two rival principles reflect the variance in policies and treatment of the various legal systems

Where marriage is considered primarily as a Where marriage is considered primarily as a STATUS

CONTRACT and an INSTITUTION

- The law of the place of celebration is - The State with which the contracting parties
considered decisive are closely connected are perceived to have
vital interest, it is the law of their domicile
(from the point of view of the State following
● PLACE OF CELEBRATION that principle) or their nationality (from the
point of view of many civil law countries) that
is considered controlling

● DOMICILE OR NATIONALITY

Undoubtedly, the lex loci celebrationis rule has the unique advantage of being simple and easy to apply, since the
place of celebration is readily ascertainable. The obvious defect of the rule is that it works as an inducement to
evade local prohibitions since it makes marriage possible for persons who could not marry under their domiciliary
or national laws by merely going to another state to have their marriages solemnized there.

INVALID FOREIGN MARRIAGES

● Ploygamous marriage
● Incestious marriage

NOTE:
● A marriage which satisfies the requirements of the State where the marriage was contracted will
everywhere be recognized as valid unless it violates the strong public policy of another state which has the
most significant relationship to the spouses and the marriage at the time of the marriage.
● Parenthetically, marriages between parents and children or between brothers or sisters are deemed
universally incestious and void.

PHILIPPINE LAW ON SUBSTANTIVE VALIDITY

- A DISTINCTION MUST BE MADE BETWEEN MARRIAGES CONTRACTED ABROAD AND
MARRIAGES CONTRACTED IN THE pHILIPPINES INVOLVING ALIENS

NOTE:
- With reference to marriages celebrated abroad, Philippine laws primarily refers to the law of the place of
the celebration (ARTICLE 26 OF THE FAMILY CODE)
Article 26 of the family Code
“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 be valid in this country, except those prohibited under
Articles 35(1). (4), (5), and (6), 36, 37, and 38”

“Valid where celebrated, valid everywhere”

2 exceptions:
1. Filipino nationals who marry abroad before philippine consular or diplomatic officials
- In such a case, regardless of what the place of celebration prescribes, the substantive validity of
the marriage is to be determined by Philippine law
2. Marriages that are prohibited under philippine law
- Ex. bigamous or polygamous marriages; those contracted through mistake of one party as to the
identity of another

SUMMARY: Substantive Law

- Philippine law on substantive validity does not exclusively adhere to the lex loci celebrationis rule. It is a
combination of that rule, in respect of marriages celebrated abroad (with the exception just noted), and of
the personal law (national law rule) — insofar as capacity to marry is concerned — in respect of marriages
in the Philippines.

CASES:

1. GOITA V. CAMPOS RUEDA

NATURE: This is an action by the wife against her husband for support outside of the conjugal domicile. From a
judgment sustaining the defendant's demurrer upon the ground that the facts alleged in the complaint do not state
a cause of action, followed by an order dismissing the case after the plaintiff declined to amend, the latter
appealed.

FACTS:
● It was urged in the first instance, and the court so held, that the defendant cannot be compelled to support
the plaintiff, except in his own house, unless it be by virtue of a judicial decree granting her a divorce or
separation from the defendant.
● The parties were legally married in the city of Manila on January 7, 1915, and immediately thereafter
established their residence at 115 Calle San Marcelino, where they lived together for about a month,
when the plaintiff returned to the home of her parents.

PERTINENT ALLEGATIONS OF THE COMPLAINT:

1. That the defendant (HUSBAND), one month after he had contracted marriage with the plaintiff (WIFE),
demanded of her that she perform unchaste and lascivious acts on his genital organs;
2. that the plaintiff (WIFE) spurned the obscene demands of the defendant (HUSBAND) and refused to
perform any act other than legal and valid cohabitation;
3. that the defendant (HUSBAND), since that date had continually on other successive dates, made similar
lewd and indecorous demands on his wife, the plaintiff, who always spurned them, which just refusals of
the plaintiff exasperated the defendant and induce him to maltreat her by word and deed and inflict
injuries upon her lips, her face and different parts of her body;
4. that, as the plaintiff was unable by any means to induce the defendant to desist from his repugnant desires
and cease from maltreating her, she was obliged to leave the conjugal abode and take refuge in the home
of her parents.

2. WONG WOO YIU V. VIVO

- The Supreme Court held that since Philippine (internal) law only recognizes marriages celebrated
before any of the officers mentioned therein, and a village leader is not one of them, a marriage so
celebrated in a foreign country cannot be recognized in this jurisdiction, in the absence of proof of
foreign law on such marriages. In actual practice, Philippine courts are not rigid in matters of
proof where the marriage is contracted in the United States or Spain, with whose laws Philippine
judges are familiar with. It is with reference to those marriages allegedly contracted in
jurisdictions whose laws and practices are uncommon, say in China, India, or Egypt, that our
courts require evidence which is positive and convincing.
3. ADONG V. CHAONG SENG GEE
4. CHING SUAT V. CO HEONG
5. PEOPLE V. MORA DUMPO
6. LAO AND LAO V. DEE TIM
7. YAO KEE V. GONZALES
- Sy-Kiat, a Chinese national, died in 1977 in Kaloocan City, where he was residing, leaving behind
substantial real and personal properties in the Philippines. Petition for letters of administration
filed by his natural children was opposed on the ground that Sy Kiat was legally married to Yao
Kee, in Fookien, China on January 13, 1931 and that the oppositors are the legitimate children.
The probate court rendered judgment in favor of the oppositors; this was modified and set aside by
the Court of Appeals which held that both sets of children were acknowledged natural children.
Both parties moved for partial reconsideration. It was held that to establish a valid foreign
marriage, two things must be proven, namely, (1) the existence of a foreign law as a question of
fact; and (2) the alleged foreign marriage by convincing evidence. The testimonies of Yao Kee and
Gan Ching, a younger brother of Yao Kee, are not only self-serving, there is no showing that they
are competent to testify on Chinese law and custom at the time Sy Kiat and Yao Kee were
married. The fact of marriage was proved by the evidence submitted; but they do not suffice to
“establish the validity of said marriage in accordance with Chinese law or custom.” Philippine
courts cannot take judicial notice of foreign laws. They must be alleged and proved as any other
fact. In the absence of proof of Chinese law, the (processual) presumption is that it is the same as
ours. Since Yao Kee admitted in her testimony that there was no solemnizing officer as known here
in the Philippines when her marriage was celebrated, her marriage to Sy Kiat, even if true, cannot
be recognized in this jurisdiction. There being sufficient evidence of acknowledgement for both sets
of children, the decision is affirmed.