You are on page 1of 2

DOMINGO VS. CA 17 Sept 1993 Romero, J.

Petition to review the decision of CA

FACTS: -Delia Domingo filed a petition for Declaration of Nullity of Marriage and Separation of Property, against Roberto Domingo. Unknown to her, he had a previous marriage with one Emerlinda dela Paz on 1969 which which is still valid and existing. -Roberto filed a motion to dismiss on the ground that the petition was unnecessary since their marriage was void ab initio because of his previous marriage. It added that Delia had no property which is in his possession. -Petitioner contends that a petition for declaration of absolute nullity of marriage is required only for purposes of remarriage. -Respondent insists on the necessity of a judicial declaration of the nullity of marriage, not for the purpose of remarriage, but in order to provide a basis for the separation and distribution of the properties acquired during coverture.

HELD: Art40 The absolute nullity of a previous marriage may be invoked for purposes of remarriage on the basis solely of a final judgment declaring such previous marriage void. -Petitioners interpretation of Art40, FC is quite restrictive. -The clause denotes that such final judgment declaring the previous marriage void need not be obtained only for purposes of remarriage. -Other purposes: 1. 2. 3. Liquidation, partition, distribution & separation of property between spouses. Action for custody and support of their common children. Delivery of childrens presumptive legitimes

Art43 & 50 Effects of Nullity Based on the foregoing provisions, private respondents ultimate prayer for separation of property will simply be one of the necessary consequences of judicial declaration of absolute nullity of marriage.

ABLAZA VS. RP 11 August 2010

FACTS: 26 Dec 1949- marriage between Crescensiano Ablaza & Leonila Honato Isidro Ablaza- alleged that the marriage between C & L had been celebrated w/o marriage license, due to such a license being issued only on a 9 Jan 1950, so marriage is void ab initio. surviving brother of C. Ablaza, entitling him to of the real property of C. Ablaza before his death, making him a real party in interest.

ISSUES: WON petitioner is a real party in interest in the action to seek declaration of nilluty of marriage of his brother. HELD: Gen. Rule: The nature of the marriage already celebrated cannot be changed by a subsequent amendment of a governing law. Impact of A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC (Rule on Declaration of Absolute Nullity of Void Marriages and Annulment of Voidable Marriages) Sec2 A petition for declaration of absolute nullity of void marriage may be filed solely by the husband or wife. *This extends only to marriages covered by the FC, w/c took effect on 3 Aug 1988, but being a procedural rule that is prospective in application, is confined only to proceedings after 15 March 2003 [eff. date] The marriage between C & L was contracted on 26 Dec 1949. The applicable law was the old CC, the law in effect at the time of celebration of marriage. Old and new CC contain no provision on who can file a petition to declare the nullity of a marriage. Hence, the rule on the exclusivity of the parties on the marriage as having the right to initiate action for dec. of nullity DOES NOT APPLY.

Petitioner alleged himself to be Cs brother and surviving heir. He has material interest in the estate of C that will be adversely affected by any judgment in the suit. Art 1001,CC Should brothers and sisters or their children survive with the widow or widower, the latter shall be entitled to of the inheritance and b/s or their children to the other half Art 1003, CC If no descendants, ascendants, illegitimate children, or surviving spouse, the collateral relatives shall succeed to the entire estate of deceased in accordance. *the right of petitioner to bring action hinges upon a prior determination of whether he had any ascendants, desc, or children *Since not all marriages celebrated under the old CC required a marriage license, participation of Cs surviving wife Leonila is necessary. Leila (daughter) should also be impleaded