FAMILY CODE of the

PHILIPPINES
MARRIAGE

ART 1. 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.
Law governing validity of marriage

Castillo v. De Leon-Castillo 2016

The validity of a marriage and all its incidents must

be determined in accordance with the law in effect at
the time of its celebration. In this case, the law in force
at the time Lea contracted both marriages was the Civil
Code. The children of the parties were also born while the
Civil Code was in effect i.e. in 1979, 1981, and 1985.
Hence, the Court must resolve this case using the
provisions under the Civil Code on void marriages.
 Essential Requisites
ART 2. No marriage shall be valid, unless these essential requisites are

1)⭐Legal capacity of the contracting parties who must be a male and

present:

a female; and
2)Consent freely given in the presence of the solemnizing officer.
Formal Requisites

1) ⭐Authority of the solemnizing officer;

ART 3. The formal requisites of marriage are:

2) ⭐A valid marriage license except in the cases provided for in Chapter

2 of this Title; and
3) A marriage ceremony which takes place with the appearance of the
contracting parties before the solemnizing officer and their personal
declaration that they take each other as husband and wife in the

⭐ Absence makes the marriage VOID.

presence of not less than two witnesses of legal age.
Republic v. Albios 2013
Is a marriage, contracted for the sole purpose of acquiring
American citizenship in consideration of $2,000.00, void ab initio on
the ground of lack of consent?

NO. A “freely given” consent requires that the contracting parties

willingly and deliberately enter into the marriage. Consent must
be real in the sense that it is not vitiated nor rendered defective
by any of the vices of consent under Articles 45 and 46 of the
Family Code, such as fraud, force, intimidation, and undue
influence. Consent must also be conscious or intelligent, in that
the parties must be capable of intelligently understanding the
nature of, and both the beneficial or unfavorable consequences of
their act.
Persons authorized to solemnize marriage

ART 7. Marriage may be solemnized by:

1)Any incumbent member of the judiciary within the court's jurisdiction;
2)Any priest, rabbi, imam, or minister of any church or religious sect
duly authorized by his church or religious sect and registered with the
civil registrar general xxx;
3)Any ship captain or airplane chief only in the case mentioned in Article
31;
4)Any military commander of a unit to which a chaplain is assigned, in
the absence of the latter, during a military operation, likewise only in the
cases mentioned in Article 32;
5)Any consul-general, consul or vice-consul in the case provided in Article
10.
Enumeration not exclusive. Mayor may also solemnize.
People v. Bustamante

When the issue involves the assumption of powers and

duties of the office of the mayor by the vice-mayor,
when proper, it is immaterial whether it is because the
latter is the Acting Mayor or merely acting as Mayor,
for in both instances, he discharges all the duties and
wields the powers appurtenant to said office.
Venue of Marriage — Exceptions:

Articulo Mortis and Written request

ART 8. The marriage shall be solemnized publicly in the chambers of

the judge or in open court, in the church, chapel or temple, or in the
office the consul-general, consul or vice-consul, as the case may be,
and not elsewhere, except
1. in cases of marriages contracted on the point of death or
2. in remote places in accordance with Article 29 or
3. where both of the parties request the solemnizing officer in writing in
which case the marriage may be solemnized at a house or place
designated by them in a sworn statement to that effect.
Marriage Certificate — Best proof of marriage

Proof to attack the validity of marriage

Lim Tanhu v. Ramolete

The primary evidence of a marriage must be an authentic
copy of the marriage contract. While a marriage may also be
proved by other competent evidence, the absence of the
contract must first be satisfactorily explained. The certification
of the person who allegedly solemnized a marriage is not
admissible evidence of such marriage unless proof of loss of the
contract or of any other satisfactory reason for its non-
production is first presented to the court.
SSS v. Enobiso 2013

In Trinidad v. CA, et al., this Court ruled that as proof of marriage may be
presented:
a) testimony of a witness to the matrimony;
b) the couple's public and open cohabitation as husband and wife after the
alleged wedlock;
c) the birth and baptismal certificate of children born during such union; and
d) the mention of such nuptial in subsequent documents.

Thus, the lack of prompt recording with the OCR does not amply rebut the
presumption that Lourdes was Petronilo's wife. This especially holds true
in the light of our declaration in Vda. de Jacob that the "failure to send a
copy of a marriage contract for record purposes does not invalidate
the marriage." It is not the duty of the couple to send a copy of the
marriage contract to the civil registrar.
Avenido v. Avenido 2014

Whether or not the evidence presented during the trial proves the
existence of the marriage of Tecla to Eustaquio.
While a marriage certificate is considered the primary evidence of a
marital union, it is not regarded as the sole and exclusive evidence of
marriage. Jurisprudence teaches that the fact of marriage may be
proven by relevant evidence other than the marriage certificate. Hence,
even a person’s birth certificate may be recognized as competent
evidence of the marriage between his parents.
In the case at bar, the establishment of the fact of marriage was
completed by the testimonies of Adelina, Climaco and Tecla; the
unrebutted fact of the birth within the cohabitation of Tecla and
Eustaquio of four (4) children coupled with the certificates of the
children’s birth and baptism; and the certifications of marriage issued by
the parish priest of the Most Holy Trinity Cathedral of Talibon, Bohol.
Marriages Celebrated Abroad

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.

Where a marriage between a Filipino citizen and a foreigner is

validly celebrated and a divorce is thereafter validly obtained
abroad by the alien spouse capacitating him or her to remarry,
the Filipino spouse shall have capacity to remarry under
Philippine law. (As amended by Executive Order 227)
Foreign Divorce
Republic v. Orbecido III
Given a valid marriage between two Filipino citizens, where one party is
later naturalized as a foreign citizen and obtains a valid divorce decree
capacitating him or her to remarry, can the Filipino spouse likewise
remarry under Philippine law?

We hold that Paragraph 2 of Article 26 should be interpreted to include

cases involving parties who, at the time of the celebration of the
marriage, were Filipino citizens, but later on, one of them becomes
naturalized as a foreign citizen and obtains a divorce decree. The Filipino
spouse should likewise be allowed to remarry as if the other party were a
foreigner at the time of the solemnization of the marriage.

The reckoning point is not the citizenship of the parties at the time of the
celebration of the marriage, but their citizenship at the time a valid
divorce is obtained abroad by the alien spouse capacitating the latter to
remarry.
Garcia v. Recio

The divorce decree and the governing personal law of

the alien spouse who obtained the divorce must be
proven. Our courts do not take judicial notice of
foreign laws and judgments; hence, like any other
facts, both the divorce decree and the national law of
the alien must be alleged and proven according to our
law on evidence.
Fujiki v. Marinay 2013

The Rule on Declaration of Absolute Nullity of Void Marriages

and Annulment of Voidable Marriages (A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC)
does not apply in a petition to recognize a foreign judgment
relating to the status of a marriage where one of the parties
is a citizen of a foreign country.

Moreover, in Juliano-Llave v. Republic, this Court held that the

rule in A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC that only the husband or wife can
file a declaration of nullity or annulment of marriage “does NOT
apply if the reason behind the petition is bigamy.”
⭐Republic v. Manalo 2018 En Banc

Paragraph 2 of Article 26 speaks of "a divorce x x x validly

obtained abroad by the alien spouse capacitating him or her
to remarry. " Based on a clear and plain reading of the
provision, it only requires that there be a divorce validly
obtained abroad. The letter of the law does not demand
that the alien spouse should be the one who initiated the
proceeding wherein the divorce decree was granted. It
does not distinguish whether the Filipino spouse is the
petitioner or the respondent in the foreign divorce
proceeding. The Court is bound by the words of the statute;
neither can We put words in the mouths of the lawmakers.
Morisono v. Morisono 2018
reiterating Manalo

Pursuant to Manalo, foreign divorce decrees obtained to

nullify marriages between a Filipino and an alien citizen
may already be recognized in this jurisdiction, regardless
of who between the spouses initiated the divorce;
provided, of course, that the party petitioning for the
recognition of such foreign divorce decree – presumably
the Filipino citizen – must prove the divorce as a fact and
demonstrate its conformity to the foreign law allowing it.
Noveras v. Noveras 2014

At the outset, the trial court erred in recognizing the

divorce decree which severed the bond of marriage
between the parties. Based on the records, only the
divorce decree was presented in evidence. The required
certificates to prove its authenticity, as well as the
pertinent California law on divorce were not presented.

Absent a valid recognition of the divorce decree, it

follows that the parties are still legally married in the
Philippines. The trial court thus erred in proceeding
directly to liquidation.
Void Marriages

1. Marriages that are Void ab initio

2. Psychological Incapacity
3. Incestuous Marriage
4. Void Marriage for Reason of
Public Policy
5. Bigamous Marriage Under Art 40
Void Marriages ART 35. The following marriages shall be void from the beginning:
1)Those contracted by any party below eighteen years of age
1. Marriages that even with the consent of parents or guardians;
are Void ab 2)Those solemnized by any person not legally authorized
initio
to perform marriages unless such marriages were
2. Psychological
Incapacity
contracted with either or both parties believing in good
3. Incestuous
faith that the solemnizing officer had the legal authority to
Marriage do so;
4. Void Marriage 3)Those solemnized without license, except those covered
for Reason of the preceding Chapter;
Public Policy
4)Those bigamous or polygamous marriages not failing
5. Bigamous
Marriage Under
under Article 41;
Art 40 5)Those contracted through mistake of one contracting
party as to the identity of the other; and
6)Those subsequent marriages that are void under
Article 53.
Void Marriages

1. Marriages that Psychological Incapacity

are Void ab
initio
2. Psychological ART 36. A marriage contracted by any party who, at
Incapacity
the time of the celebration, was psychologically
3. Incestuous
Marriage
incapacitated to comply with the essential marital
4. Void Marriage obligations of marriage, shall likewise be void even
for Reason of if such incapacity becomes manifest only after its
Public Policy
solemnization.
5. Bigamous
Marriage Under
Art 40
Void Marriages Psychological Incapacity
1. Marriages that
are Void ab Meaning
initio
2. Psychological "Psychological incapacity" should refer to no less than a
Incapacity mental (not physical) incapacity that causes a party to be
3. Incestuous truly incognitive of the basic marital covenants that
Marriage
concomitantly must be assumed and discharged by the
4. Void Marriage
parties to the marriage which, as so expressed by Article 68
for Reason of
Public Policy of the Family Code, include their mutual obligations to live
5. Bigamous together, observe love, respect and fidelity and render help
Marriage Under and support.
Art 40
Void Marriages
Psychological Incapacity
1. Marriages that
are Void ab Requisites
initio
2. Psychological
Psychological incapacity must be characterized by
Incapacity a) Gravity, the incapacity must be grave or serious such that the
3. Incestuous party would be incapable of carrying out the ordinary duties
Marriage required in marriage;
4. Void Marriage
b) Juridical antecedence, it must be rooted in the history of the
for Reason of
Public Policy party antedating the marriage, although the overt
5. Bigamous manifestations may emerge only after the marriage; and
Marriage Under c) Incurability, it must be incurable or, even if it were
Art 40
otherwise, the cure would be beyond the means of the party
involved. (Santos v. CA)
Void Marriages Macam v. Macam 2014
In a void marriage, it is as though no marriage had taken place; thus,
1. Marriages that it cannot be the source of any right. Consequently, any party may
are Void ab
initio
attack the marriage, directly or collaterally. A void marriage may be
2. Psychological
questioned even beyond the lifetime of the parties to the marriage.
Incapacity
3. Incestuous Indeed, a void marriage may be impugned either:
Marriage 1)directly, by filing an action attacking the validity thereof; or
4. Void Marriage 2)collaterally, in a suit instituted not to specifically question
for Reason of
the same, but where the determination of the issue of its
Public Policy
validity is essential to the resolution of the controversy, as in
5. Bigamous
Marriage Under the case at bar.
Art 40
Void Marriages Chi Ming Tsoi v. CA

1. Marriages that
are Void ab One of the essential marital obligations under the
initio Family Code is "To procreate children based on the
2. Psychological universal principle that procreation of children
Incapacity through sexual cooperation is the basic end of
3. Incestuous marriage." Constant non-fulfillment of this
Marriage obligation will finally destroy the integrity or
4. Void Marriage wholeness of the marriage.
for Reason of
Public Policy
5. Bigamous In the case at bar, the senseless and protracted
Marriage Under refusal of one of the parties to fulfill the above
Art 40 marital obligation is equivalent to psychological
incapacity.
Void Marriages ⭐Tenebro v. CA

1. Marriages that The subsequent judicial declaration of

are Void ab
initio
nullity of marriage on the ground of
2. Psychological
psychological incapacity does not retroact
Incapacity to the date of the celebration of the
3. Incestuous marriage insofar as the Philippines’ penal laws
Marriage are concerned. As such, an individual who
4. Void Marriage contracts a second or subsequent marriage
for Reason of
Public Policy during the subsistence of a valid marriage is
5. Bigamous criminally liable for bigamy, notwithstanding
Marriage Under the subsequent declaration that the second
Art 40 marriage is void ab initio on the ground of
psychological incapacity.
 ⭐Tan-Andal v. Andal
Void Marriages

1. Marriages that 1. The plaintiff-spouse must prove his or her case with
are Void ab clear and convincing evidence.
initio
2. Psychological 2. The second Molina guideline is abandoned.
Incapacity Psychological incapacity is neither a mental
3. Incestuous incapacity nor a personality disorder that must be
Marriage proven through expert opinion.
4. Void Marriage
There must be proof, however, of the durable or
for Reason of
Public Policy
enduring aspects of a person's personality, called
"personality structure," which manifests itself
5. Bigamous
through clear acts of dysfunctionality that
Marriage Under
Art 40 undermines the family. The spouse's personality
structure must make it impossible for him or her to
understand and, more important, to comply with his
or her essential marital obligations.
Void Marriages ⭐Tan-Andal v. Andal

1. Marriages that 1. A party to a nullity case is still required to prove juridical

are Void ab antecedence because it is an explicit requirement of the
initio law.
2. Psychological
Incapacity
Proof of juridically antecedent psychological incapacity
may consist of testimonies describing the environment
3. Incestuous
Marriage
where the supposedly incapacitated spouse lived that may
have led to a particular behavior.
4. Void Marriage
for Reason of 2. The third Molina guideline is amended. Psychological
Public Policy incapacity is incurable, not in the medical, but in the legal
5. Bigamous sense.
Marriage Under This means that the incapacity is so enduring and
Art 40 persistent with respect to a specific partner, and
contemplates a situation where the couple's respective
personality structures are so incompatible and
antagonistic that the only result of the union would be the
inevitable and irreparable breakdown of the marriage.
Void Marriages ⭐Tan-Andal v. Andal

1. Marriages that 1. With respect to gravity, the requirement is retained. The

are Void ab psychological incapacity cannot be mere "refusal, neglect[,] or
initio difficulty, much less ill will."242 In other words, it must be shown
2. Psychological that the incapacity is caused by a genuinely serious psychic
Incapacity cause.
3. Incestuous
2. The persuasive effect of the decisions of the National Appellate
Marriage
Matrimonial Tribunal of the Catholic Church of the Philippines on
4. Void Marriage
nullity cases pending before secular courts is retained.
for Reason of
Public Policy While Article 36 is similarly worded to the third paragraph of
5. Bigamous Canon 1095, canonical decisions based on the second paragraph
Marriage Under should likewise have a persuasive effect in secular decisions on
Art 40 psychological incapacity.
Void Marriages Incestuous Marriage
1. Marriages that
are Void ab ART 37. Marriages between the following are
initio
incestuous and void from the beginning, whether
2. Psychological
Incapacity relationship between the parties be legitimate or
3. Incestuous illegitimate:
Marriage
4. Void Marriage
1)Between ascendants and descendants of
for Reason of any degree; and
Public Policy
2)Between brothers and sisters, whether
5. Bigamous
Marriage Under of the full or half blood.
Art 40
 Void Marriage for Reason of Public Policy
Void Marriages ART 38. The following marriages shall be void from the beginning
for reasons of public policy:
1. Marriages that 1)Between collateral blood relatives whether
are Void ab legitimate or illegitimate, up to the fourth civil
initio degree;
2. Psychological 2)Between step-parents and step-children;
Incapacity 3)Between parents-in-law and children-in-law;
3. Incestuous 4)Between the adopting parent and the adopted child;
Marriage
5)Between the surviving spouse of the adopting parent
4. Void Marriage and the adopted child;
for Reason of
Public Policy 6)Between the surviving spouse of the adopted child
and the adopter;
5. Bigamous
Marriage Under 7)Between an adopted child and a legitimate child of
Art 40 the adopter;
8)Between adopted children of the same adopter; and
9)Between parties where one, with the intention to
marry the other, killed that other person's spouse, or
his or her own spouse.
Void Marriages

1. Marriages that
are Void ab
Mercado v. Tan
initio
2. Psychological
Incapacity
A judicial declaration of nullity of a previous
3. Incestuous marriage is necessary before a subsequent one can
Marriage be legally contracted. One who enters into a
4. Void Marriage subsequent marriage without first obtaining such
for Reason of
Public Policy judicial declaration is guilty of bigamy. This principle
5. Bigamous applies even if the earlier union is characterized by
Marriage Under statute as “void.”
Art 40
Void Marriages Nicdao Cariño v. Cariño
The marriage between petitioner Susan Nicdao and
1. Marriages that the deceased, having been solemnized without the
are Void ab
initio
necessary marriage license, and not being one of the
2. Psychological
marriages exempt from the marriage license
Incapacity requirement, is undoubtedly void ab initio.
3. Incestuous
Marriage Accordingly, the declaration in the instant case of
4. Void Marriage nullity of the previous marriage of the deceased and
for Reason of petitioner Susan Nicdao does not validate the
Public Policy second marriage of the deceased with respondent
5. Bigamous Susan Yee. The fact remains that their marriage was
Marriage Under
solemnized without first obtaining a judicial decree
Art 40
declaring the marriage of petitioner Susan Nicdao
and the deceased void. Hence, the marriage of
respondent Susan Yee and the deceased is, likewise,
void ab initio.
Void Marriages Montañez v. Cipriano 2012
Whether or not the RTC erred in quashing the Information for
1. Marriages that
are Void ab
bigamy filed against respondent.
initio
2. Psychological YES. Here, at the time respondent contracted the second
Incapacity marriage, the first marriage was still subsisting as it had not
3. Incestuous yet been legally dissolved. The subsequent judicial
Marriage
declaration of nullity of the first marriage would not change
4. Void Marriage
for Reason of
the fact that she contracted the second marriage during the
Public Policy subsistence of the first marriage. Thus, respondent was
5. Bigamous properly charged of the crime of bigamy, since the essential
Marriage Under elements of the offense charged were sufficiently alleged.
Art 40
Void Marriages

1. Marriages that Vitangcol v. People 2016

are Void ab
initio
2. Psychological Persons intending to contract a second marriage
Incapacity
3. Incestuous
must first secure a judicial declaration of nullity
Marriage of their first marriage. If they proceed with the
4. Void Marriage second marriage without the judicial declaration,
for Reason of they are guilty of bigamy regardless of evidence of
Public Policy
5. Bigamous
the nullity of the first marriage.
Marriage Under
Art 40
 Judicial Declaration of Presumptive Death – Art. 41

Requisites
There are four (4) requisites for the declaration of presumptive death

1. That the absent spouse has been missing for four consecutive years,
or two consecutive years if the disappearance occurred where there is
danger of death under the circumstances laid down in Article 391, Civil
Code;
2. That the present spouse wishes to remarry;
3. That the present spouse has a well-founded belief that the absentee is
dead; and
4. That the present spouse files a summary proceeding for the
declaration of presumptive death of the absentee.
Republic v. Espinosa Cantor 2013 En Banc

The Family Code was explicit that the court’s judgment in summary proceedings,
such as the declaration of presumptive death of an absent spouse under Article 41
of the Family Code, shall be immediately final and executory. Modification of the
court’s ruling, no matter how erroneous, is no longer permissible. The final and
executory nature of this summary proceeding thus prohibits the resort to appeal.

The law did not define what is meant by “well-founded belief.” It depends upon
the circumstances of each particular case. Its determination, so to speak, remains
on a case-to-case basis. To be able to comply with this requirement, the present
spouse must prove that his/her belief was the result of diligent and reasonable
efforts and inquiries to locate the absent spouse and that based on these efforts
and inquiries, he/she believes that under the circumstances, the absent spouse is
already dead. It requires exertion of active effort (not a mere passive one).
Republic v. Nolasco
Nolasco failed to conduct a search for his missing wife with such diligence as
to give rise to a "well-founded belief" that she is dead.
In the case at bar, the Court considers that the investigation allegedly conducted by
respondent in his attempt to ascertain Janet's whereabouts is too sketchy to form
the basis of a reasonable or well-founded belief that she was already dead. When
he arrived in San Jose, Antique after learning of Janet's departure, instead of
seeking the help of local authorities or of the British Embassy, he secured another
seaman's contract and went to London, a vast city of many millions of inhabitants,
to look for her there.

Respondent's testimony, however, showed that he confused London for Liverpool

and this casts doubt on his supposed efforts to locate his wife in England. We do
not consider that walking into a major city like Liverpool or London with a simple
hope of somehow bumping into one particular person there — which is in effect
what Nolasco says he did — can be regarded as a reasonably diligent search.
Santos v. Santos 2014 Leonen, J

The proper remedy for a judicial declaration of presumptive

death obtained by extrinsic fraud is an action to annul the
judgment. An affidavit of reappearance is not the proper
remedy when the person declared presumptively dead has
never been absent.
Effects of Reappearance – Art. 42

Effects of termination of subsequent marriage by

reappearance of the absent spouse- Art. 43

Effects if both parties to the subsequent marriage are in bad

faith- Art. 44
Voidable Marriages

Grounds for Annulment of Marriage

ART 45. A marriage may be annulled for any of the following
causes, existing at the time of the marriage:

1. Lack of Parental Consent;

2. Unsoundness of mind;
3. Consent obtained by Fraud;
4. Consent obtained by force, intimidation, or undue influence;
5. Physical incapacity of consummating the marriage;
6. Afflicted with STD that is serious and incurable.
LEGAL SEPARATION

Grounds
ART 55. A petition for legal separation may be filed on any of the
following grounds:
1)Repeated physical violence or grossly abusive conduct directed
against the petitioner, a common child, or a child of the
petitioner;
2)Physical violence or moral pressure to compel the petitioner to
change religious or political affiliation;
3)Attempt of respondent to corrupt or induce the petitioner, a
common child, or a child of the petitioner, to engage in
prostitution, or connivance in such corruption or inducement;
4)Final judgment sentencing the respondent to imprisonment of
more than six years, even if pardoned;
LEGAL SEPARATION

Grounds
ART 55. A petition for legal separation may be filed on any of the
following grounds:
1)Drug addiction or habitual alcoholism of the respondent;
2)Lesbianism or homosexuality of the respondent;
3)Contracting by the respondent of a subsequent bigamous
marriage, whether in the Philippines or abroad;
4)Sexual infidelity or perversion;
5)Attempt by the respondent against the life of the petitioner;
or
6)Abandonment of petitioner by respondent without justifiable
cause for more than one year.
LEGAL SEPARATION
1. Defenses
ART 56. The petition for legal separation shall be denied on any of the
following grounds:
1)Where the aggrieved party has condoned the offense or act
complained of;
2)Where the aggrieved party has consented to the commission of
the offense or act complained of;
3)Where there is connivance between the parties in the
commission of the offense or act constituting the ground for legal
separation;
4)Where both parties have given ground for legal separation;
5)Where there is collusion between the parties to obtain decree of
legal separation; or
6)Where the action is barred by prescription.
LEGAL SEPARATION
Reconciliation
There should be joint manifestation under oath of reconciliation to be filed
in court
ART 65. If the spouses should reconcile, a corresponding joint
manifestation under oath duly signed by them shall be filed with the court
in the same proceeding for legal separation.

Consequences of reconciliation
ART 66. The reconciliation shall have the following consequences:
1)The legal separation proceedings, if still pending, shall thereby be
terminated at whatever stage; and
The final decree of legal separation shall be set aside, but the separation of
property and any forfeiture of the share of the guilty spouse already
effected shall subsist, unless the spouses agree to revive their former property
regime. The court's order containing the foregoing shall be recorded in the
proper civil registries.
RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS
BETWEEN HUSBAND AND WIFE

Basic Obligations- Art. 68

Fixing of the Domicile

Joint responsibility for the Support of the family
Joint management of the household
Objection on the exercise of profession
RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS
BETWEEN HUSBAND AND WIFE

People v. Jumawan 2014 on Marital Rape

Husbands do not have property rights over their

wives’ bodies. Sexual intercourse, albeit within
the realm of marriage, if not consensual, is rape.