SBCA-SOL BLOCK B 2020 PERSONS & FAMILY REVIEWER
Article 4. Laws shall have no retroactive effect, unless the contrary is
THE CIVIL CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES
Article 1. This Act shall be known as the Civil Code of the Philippines.
- EO 48 – The Roxas Code Commission was created, which prepared for the
main draft of the Civil Code.
- Republic Act No. 386 – The Act that instituted the Civil Code of the
Philippines
Article 2. Laws shall take effect after fifteen days following the
completion of their publication in the Official Gazette, unless it is
otherwise provided. This Code shall take effect one year after
publication.
- Took effect on August 30, 1950.
- Expressly amended by Executive Order No. 200, which was issued by then
President Corazon Aquino.
- TANADA VS. TUVERA – It is held that “unless otherwise provided” pertains
to the fifteen day period and not the publication. The publication is a
necessity—an indispensible requirement. Its absence will make the law
ineffective. The case also clarified that publication requirements apply to the
following: statutes, presidential decree, executive order, admin rules, charter
of a city, and monetary boards. The SC also declared that all laws as above
defined shall immediately upon their approval, or as soon as possible, be
published to be effective only after 15 days or on another day specified.
- PEOPLE VS. QUE PO LAY – Circulars and regulations should be published
before becoming effective. Publication is also necessary in such cases.
Article 3. Ignorance of the law excuses no one from compliance
therewith.
- Good faith is not a defense.
o Ex. Filipinos are presumed to know who the authorized marriage
solemnizers are. Asking a notary public to solemnize a wedding
does not fall under good faith, as it is a mere “ignorance of the
law”. Good faith comes in when a priest, whom forgot to renew his
license to marry, marries a couple despite such circumstance.
- Applies only to mandatory and prohibitory laws.
- “Ignorantia legis non excusat”
C.M. 2016
provided.
- Always remember that the law looks to the future. There are only certain
instances, which it can be allowed.
- The law may only be given retroactive effect in the following instances:
o When it expressly provides for retroactivity
o When it is curative or remedial
§ Reaches back on past events to correct errors or
irregularities, and to render valid and effective
attempted acts that would otherwise be ineffective.
o When it is procedural
o When it is penal in character and is favorable to the accused
- In criminal law, the law can be rendered retroactive as long as it favors the
criminal. The exception to that general rule is, however, when the criminal is
a recidivist.
- The law cannot be retroacted when:
o It impairs obligations of contracts
o It affects vested rights
o It will affect pending proceedings
Article 5. Acts executed against the provisions of mandatory or
prohibitory laws shall be void, except when the law itself authorizes
their validity.
- A mandatory or prohibitory law will be valid only if the law authorizes their
validity that acts in violation of these laws are valid and enforceable.
- Mandatory laws – required. Necessary.
o Ex. Paying taxes
- Prohibitory laws – prohibitions. Not necessarily needed to be done.
o Ex. Annulment
Article 6. Rights may be waived, unless the waiver is contrary to law,
public policy, morals or good customs, or prejudicial to a third person
with a right recognized by law. (LawPuMoGo)
- A waiver is effective when it is a “knowing and intelligent waiver”. You
wouldn’t give an indigenous man a waiver that has high falutin words. You
would give him something he would understand.
1
 SBCA-SOL BLOCK B 2020 PERSONS & FAMILY REVIEWER
- Always remember that waivers are there to make you understand what your
rights are.
- CONSUNJI VS. CA – The widow of the deceased had the right because
she was not aware of her rights and remedies. Her election to claim from
insurance funds doesn’t waive her from the company of her deceased
husband. She cannot be barred from availing death benefits.
- CUI VS. ARELLANO – A waiver is not valid when it is contrary to public
policy. Once it is such, then it shall be held null and void. Cui has then the
right to transfer law schools.
Article 7. Laws are repealed only by subsequent ones, and their
violation or non-observance shall not be excused by disuse, or
custom, or practice to the contrary.
When the courts declare a law to be inconsistent with the Constitution,
the former shall be void and the latter shall govern.
Administrative or executive acts, orders and regulations shall be valid
only when they are not contrary to the laws or the Constitution.
- Doctrine of operative fact – The general rule is once a part of the law is
declared unconstitutional; other parts not declared will still be upheld. But
when they are mutually dependent, everything will also become
unconstitutional.
- Repeal – overall abrogation or cancellation of a statute or its portions.
o Express – Specifically mentioned in the law
o Implied – Not expressly provided in the law
- The Constitution can be repealed. However, the framers of the 1987
Constitution made it hard to due to certain provisions pointed out in the
Constitution. (Basis: Father Joaquin Bernas)
Article 8. Judicial decisions applying or interpreting the laws or the
Constitution shall form part of the legal system of the Philippines.
- Res Judicata – Litigated, cannot reopen. Decided by the Supreme Court.
The SC’s decision can change. They have the final say.
- Doctrine of Stare Decisis – Where decisions follow the latest resolution of
the Supreme Court.
C.M. 2016
- Remember that once a former doctrine is overruled, the new doctrine will be
applied prospectively. However it cannot retroact to parties who had relied
on the old doctrine.
o Ex. (LegRes) When you become a lawyer, make sure you help
your client win with the latest case. If you use an old doctrine,
mag-dasal ka nalang na bobo maghanap ng kaso yung kalaban
mo na abogado.
- “Legis interpretation legis vim obtinet” – The interpretation placed upon the
written law by a competent court has the force of law.
Article 9. No judge or court shall decline to render judgment by reason
of silence, obscurity or insufficiency of the laws.
- It is a well-known fact that the three departments cannot encroach on each
other’s powers. However in certain instances, the court may legislate to fill
in the gaps—to be able to render judgment in cases that doesn’t have a law
yet.
o Ex. Judge Wagan decided on the case of the cameraman who
was accused of bringing a bullet to the airport. She decided that
he shouldn’t be held liable because there was no intent in bringing
such since it was used as an amulet. Her judgment isn’t part of
the current law regarding “laglag bala”.
Article 10. In case of doubt in the interpretation and application of laws,
it is presumed that the lawmaking body intended right and justice to
prevail.
- Basic Statutory Construction – when the law is clear, it must be applied as
is. But if it’s ambiguous, then the court has the mandate to interpret it.
However, the Court’s job is to apply the law first. Then, interpretation will
come after it is applied.
- Literal interpretations are rejected as it may be unjust or it may lead to
absurd results.
Article 11. Customs which are contrary to law, public order or public
policy shall not be countenanced.
Article 12. A custom must be proved as a fact, according to the rules of
evidence.
2
 SBCA-SOL BLOCK B 2020 PERSONS & FAMILY REVIEWER
- Courts take no judicial notice of customs, unless it is proven by competent
evidence.
- Juridical custom is not the same as social custom. Juridical custom is a
supplement to statutory law. Social customs depend on the belief or actions
of a certain group of people. But even if a custom is proven, it cannot prevail
over a statutory rule or legal rule expressed by the Supreme Court.
Article 13. When the law speaks of years, months, days or nights, it
shall be understood that years are of three hundred sixty-five days
each; months, of thirty days; days, of twenty four hours; and nights
from sunset to sunrise.
If months are designated by their name, they shall be computed by the
number of days which they respectively have.
In computing a period, the first day shall be excluded, and the last day
included.
- A perfect example of this would be the 120-effectivity of the marriage
license. 120 days cannot be converted into approximately 4 months as the
term “months” is explicitly stated to be 30 days. Some months have 31
days, and February can sometimes have 28. If the law states 120 days, it
shall be taken literally as 120 days.
- Another example would be taken from Obligation and Contracts. If you are
asked by a certain government office to pay within 20 days, you should pay
within 20 days minus holidays and weekends.
- Another is the age for marriage requirement. You are no longer part of the
consent group (18-21) if you are 21 years old and 3 months because 21
years old means 365 days and not 365 and 3 months.
Article 14. Penal laws and those of public security and safety shall be
obligatory upon all who live or sojourn in Philippine territory, subject to
the principles of public international law and to treaty stipulations.
- 1961 Vienna Convention of Diplomatic Relations – diplomatic agents are
immune from suits. However, if they go here in the Philippines for vacation
and incognito, they are not covered by such immunity.
- General rule – Citizens and foreigners are subject to all penal laws
imposed by the Philippines as well as laws enacted for the maintenance of
public security and safety.
C.M. 2016
- Exception – The Philippine Government waived this for immune leaders of
the country.
Article 15. Laws relating to family rights and duties, or to the status,
condition and legal capacity of persons are binding upon citizens of
the Philippines, even though living abroad.
- Lex Nationalii – This provision is also known as the Nationality Rule.
- More about this in the family code re: divorce.
Article 16. Real property as well as personal property is subject to the
law of the country where it is situated.
However, intestate and testamentary successions, both with respect to
the order of succession and to the amount of successional rights and
to the intrinsic validity of testamentary provisions, shall be regulated
by the national law of the person whose succession is under
consideration, whatever may be the nature of the property and
regardless of the country wherein said property may be found.
- Lex Rei Sitae – It is Latin for "the law where the property is situated". The
law governing the transfer of title to property is dependent upon.
- The general rule in this provision is that the law that governs the real and
personal property is the law of the country where the property is.
- The exception to this is with respect to the order of succession and the
amount of successional rights, intestate or testamentary. The national law of
the deceased shall regulate them.
o Ex. If X died in the Philippines, but is an American citizen and also
lives there, the law of America will apply.
- Civil Code render applicable the national law of the decedent, in intestate or
testamentary succession, with regard to four items: (CIAO)
o Capacity to succeed
o Intrinsic validity of the provisions of the will
o Amount of successional rights
o Order of succession
- MICIANO VS. BRIMO – It may have been declared in the will that Philippine
laws will govern, however it shouldn’t prejudice someone else. Also, his
condition was impossible and contrary to good morals. Since it is illegal and
void, the national law of the dead person shall govern.
- PILAPIL VS. IBAY-SOMERA – Lex Loci Celebrationis! Regardless of
where you are, you are still governed by the laws of the Philippines.
3
 SBCA-SOL BLOCK B 2020 PERSONS & FAMILY REVIEWER
However, the PH recognizes decrees validly and legally obtained abroad,
because if not, the enjoyment of rights of a foreign spouse who obtained a
divorce would eventually be prejudicial to the Filipino wife whose marriage
would still be valid under her national law.
- RHOER VS. RODRIGUEZ – In the case, the decree of divorce did not touch
as who the offending spouse was. The trial court was correct in setting the
issue of the best interest of the children, since the child’s welfare is the
paramount consideration.
- GARCIA-RECIO VS. RECIO – Someone who changed citizenship is no
longer bound by our laws.
Article 17. 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.
When the acts referred to are executed before the diplomatic or
consular officials of the Republic of the Philippines in a foreign
country, the solemnities established by Philippine laws shall be
observed in their execution.
Prohibitive laws concerning persons, their acts or property, and those
which have for their object public order, public policy and good
customs shall not be rendered ineffective by laws or judgments
promulgated, or by determinations or conventions agreed upon in a
foreign country.
- The law that will govern the forms and solemnities of public instruments,
wills, and contracts will be the law of the country where they are executed.
- Even if it is executed before a Philippine diplomatic officer in a foreign
country, the Philippine law will still prevail.
- Two parties cannot enter into an agreement if it’s not okay in our laws.
Article 18. In matters which are governed by the Code of Commerce
and special laws, their deficiency shall be supplied by the provisions of
this code.
- The Civil Code is only needed when there something lacks in the Code of
Commerce or other special laws.
C.M. 2016
Article 19. Every person must, in the exercise of his rights and in the
performance of his duties, act with justice, give everyone his due, and
observe honesty and good faith.
Article 20. Every person who, contrary to law, willfully or negligently
causes damage to another, shall indemnify the latter for the same.
Article 21. Any person who willfully causes loss or injury to another in
a manner that is contrary to morals, good customs or public policy
shall compensate the latter for the damage.
- Articles 19 (Abuse of Right Doctrine), 20, and 21 (Acts Contra Bonus
Mores) express the.
o They are all related to each other in a way that all act causes
injury to another and that it may be a basis for an award of
damages.
- In Article 19, it clearly states that the wrongdoer must be held responsible
for his actions.
- The elements of the Abuse of Right under Article 19 are:
o There is a legal right or duty
o Bad faith
o Intent of prejudicing or injuring another
- Article 20 is the general sanction for those who willfully or negligently cause
damage.
- Article 21 speaks of the “countless gaps” in statues, which the victims of
moral wrongs are helpless.
o “Contra bonus mores”
- The essential requisites for the person to be held liable under Article 21 are:
o There is an act which is legal
o Contrary to morals, good customs or public policy
o Done with the intent to injure
- Article 19 and 21 are provisions, which focus on the intentional act.
- Article 20, however, reiterates that the act may be done either willfully or
negligently.
- NIKKO HOTEL MANILA VS. REYES – Ms. Lim is not liable for any
damages since she only acted according to her duty and it was done in
good faith. She didn’t want the birthday celebrant to wonder who that person
is and why is he even there when he’s not invited.
4
 SBCA-SOL BLOCK B 2020 PERSONS & FAMILY REVIEWER
- QUISIMBING VS. MERALCO – Meralco had no right to immediately
disconnect a person’s electrical supply. There should be a due process.
They shouldn’t transgress the rights of their consumers.
- BAKSH VS. CA – The petitioner promised love and commitment, which
lead to a planning of a wedding, then inviting of guests, and then later on
pregnancy—which removed the virtue and stained her reputation. Sure, the
breach of promise to marry may not be actionable, but the petitioner in this
case clearly violated the Filipino’s concept of respect for women and that
there was no “good faith” or “good intention” as he has also impregnated
several women from different provinces. No foreigner must be allowed to
make a mockery of our laws, customs, and traditions.
Article 22. Every person who through an act or performance by
another, or any other means, acquires or comes into possession of
something at the expense of the latter without just or legal ground,
shall return the same to him.
Article 23. Even when an act or event causing damage to another’s
property was not due to the fault or negligence of the defendant, the
latter shall be liable for indemnity if through the act or event he was
benefited.
- “Nemo cum alterious detriment locupletari potest” – Doctrine of unjust
enrichment, that no person shall be allowed to profit or enrich himself at
another’s expense.
o Ex. Without X’s knowledge, a flood drove his cattle to the
cultivated land of Y. X’s cattle’s were saved, but Y’s crop was
destroyed. Is X liable for damages despite having no fault? Yes,
because he was indirectly benefitted. Nabusog yung cattle ni bes.
- Article 23 also circumvents around the concept of unjust enrichment.
Article 24. In all contractual, property or other relations, when one of
the parties is at a disadvantage on account of his moral dependence,
ignorance, indigence, mental weakness, tender age or other handicap,
the courts must e vigilant for his protection.
- The Court must protect the rights of the disadvantaged. They must render
justice and any decision must be in agreement with what is right and legal.
Article 25. Thoughtless extravagance in expenses for pleasure or
display during a period of acute public want or emergency may be
C.M. 2016
stopped by order of the courts at the instance of any government or
private charitable institution.
- Only government or private charitable institutions can invoke this.
o Ex. X and Y had a 300B-wedding the week after the Yolanda
disaster in Leyte. X and Y didn’t mind exposing to the media their
expensive, extravagant wedding, as they claimed to have worked
hard for it. However the Commission on Human Rights cried foul
since they fought that X and Y could’ve at least given 10% of their
wedding’s sponsorship to the victims of the typhoon.
Article 26. Every person shall respect the dignity, personality, privacy
and peace of mind of his neighbors and other persons. The following
and similar acts, though they may not constitute a criminal offense,
shall produce a cause of action for damages, prevention and other
relief:
(1) Prying into the privacy of another’s residence;
(2) Meddling with or disturbing the private life or family relations
of another;
(3) Intriguing to cause another to be alienated from his friends;
(4) Vexing or humiliating another on account of his religious
beliefs, lowly station in life, place of birth, physical defect, or
other personal condition.
- This provision is made to make sure that human dignity and personality are
enhanced. If it’s not properly dignified, then the laws are defective.
- Even in a democratic country like the Philippines, limits should be
established to make sure that there is social equality and that there is due
regard for decency and propriety.
- TENCHAVEZ VS. ESCANO – The awarding of moral damages is required
as it is an additional effect of legal separation. Where the wealth of the
asserting spouse renders remedy, there is no cogent reason why the court
shouldn’t grant such indemnity. Also, parents are not allowed to meddle in
their children’s marriage.
Article 27. Any person suffering material or moral loss because a
public servant or employee refuses or neglects without just cause, to
perform his official duty may file an action for damages and other relief
against the latter, without prejudice to any disciplinary administrative
action that may be taken.
5
 SBCA-SOL BLOCK B 2020 PERSONS & FAMILY REVIEWER
- This provision is intended for public officials or employees who refuses or
neglects to perform their duties, and which eventually resulted to damage or
prejudice of another person.
- Any person suffering from the refusal or neglect of any government
employee or public servant is entitled to damages.
- A government official who acts beyond his duty is personally liable for his
act.
Article 28. Unfair competition in agricultural, commercial or industrial
enterprises, or in labor through the use of force, intimidation, deceit,
machination or any other unjust, oppressive or highhanded method
shall give rise to a right of action by the person who thereby suffers
damage.
- 1947 Civil Code Commission justified such provision for unfair competition
by stating, “democracy becomes a mockery if one deprives another of a fair
chance to engage in a business or earn a living.
o Ex. X decides to name his restaurant McJonalds, and intently
copies the logo of McDonalds.
Article 29. When the accused in criminal prosecution is acquitted on
the ground that his guilt has not been proved beyond reasonable
doubt, a civil action for damages for the same act or omission may be
instituted. Such action requires only a preponderance of evidence.
Upon motion of the defendant, the court may require the plaintiff to file
a bond to answer for damages in case the complaint should be found
to be malicious.
If in a criminal case the judgment of acquittal is based upon reasonable
doubt, the court shall so declare. In the absence of any declaration to
that effect, it may be inferred from the text of the decision whether or
not the acquittal is due to that ground.
- The general rule is when a person is criminally liable he is also civilly liable.
- Sabay yung crim and civil, but if kulang yung evidence mo sa crim or na-
acquit, it doesn’t necessarily mean hindi na pwede yung civil case.
Preponderance of evidence na. (Sorry if tinagalog ko na)
- Criminal liability
o Concerned with social order
o Demands proof of guilt beyond reasonable doubt
C.M. 2016
o Harder to prove
- Civil liability
o Concerned with private rights
o Only needs a preponderance of evidence
Article 30. When a separate civil action is brought to demand civil
liability arising from a criminal offense, and no criminal proceedings
are instituted during the pendency of the civil case, a preponderance of
evidence shall likewise be sufficient to prove the act complained of.
- Even if the civil obligation arose from the criminal offense, the required
quantum of evidence is not proof beyond reasonable doubt, but
preponderance of evidence.
- Separate civil and criminal liability
Article 31. When the civil action is based on an obligation not arising
from the act or omission complained of as a felony, such civil action
may proceed independently of the criminal proceedings and regardless
of the result of the latter.
- There are certain injuries that don’t arise from the commission of a crime.
One example is a quasi-delict. What is a quasi delict?
o It exposes a person to a civil liability after doing a negligent act or
omission that is intended to damage to the person or property.
o Article 31 provides for a remedy for damages that didn’t arise from
a commission of a crime, which is the quasi-delict.
- Acquittal from a criminal liability shall not bar someone from filing a
subsequent civil action.
- Always remember that when the civil action is based on an obligation that
didn’t come from a felony, the civil action may proceed independently.
Article 32. Any public officer or employee, or any private individual,
who directly or indirectly obstructs, defeats, violates or in any manner
impedes or impairs any of the following rights and liberties of another
person shall be liable to the latter for damages:
(1) Freedom of religion;
(2) Freedom of speech;
(3) Freedom to write for the press or to maintain a periodical
publication;
(4) Freedom from arbitrary or illegal detention;
6
 SBCA-SOL BLOCK B 2020 PERSONS & FAMILY REVIEWER
(5) Freedom of suffrage;
(6) The right against deprivation of property without due process
of law;
(7) The right to a just compensation when private property is
taken for public use;
(8) The right to equal protection of the laws;
(9) The right to be secure in one’s person, house, papers, and
effects against unreasonable searches and seizures;
(10) The liberty of abode and of changing the same;
(11) The privacy of communication and correspondence;
(12) The right to become a member of associations or societies for
purposes not contrary to law;
(13) The right to take part in peaceable assembly to petition the
government for redress of grievances;
(14) The right to be free from involuntary servitude in any form;
(15) The right of the accused against excessive bail;
(16) The right of the accused to be heard by himself and counsel,
to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation
against him, to have a speedy and public trial, to meet the
witnesses face to face, and to have compulsory process to
secure the attendance of witness in his behalf;
(17) Freedom from being compelled to be a witness against one’s
self, or from being forced to confess guilt, or from being
induced by a promise of immunity or reward to make such
confession, except when the person confessing becomes a
State witness;
(18) Freedom from excessive fines, or cruel or unusual
punishment, unless the same is imposed or inflicted in
accordance with a statute which has not been judicially
declared unconstitutional; and
(19) Freedom of access to the courts.
In any of the cases referred to in this article, whether or not the
defendant’s act or omission constitute a criminal offense, the
aggrieved party has a right to commence an entirely separate and
distinct civil action for damages, and for other relief. Such civil action
shall proceed independently of any criminal prosecution (if the latter be
instituted), and may be proved by a preponderance of evidence.
C.M. 2016
The indemnity shall include moral damages. Exemplary damages may
also be adjudicated.
The responsibility herein set forth is not demandable from a judge
unless his act or omission constitutes a violation of the Penal Code or
other penal statute.
- There are two kinds of duties exercised by public officers:
o Duty owing to the public collectively (or of duties to the
public)
§ Not to any particular individual
§ Acts for the public-at-large
§ Who are ordinarily paid out of public treasury
§ Members of the legislature owe a duty to the public to
pass only wise and proper laws, but no one could
pretend that the duty was owing to himself, rather than
another.
o Duty owing to particular individuals (or of duties to
individuals)
§ Reason of their employment is that they were hired by a
particular individual to do some act for him in an official
capacity
§ Paid by those who employed them
- The liability of a public officer to an individual or the public is based on his
duty to them.
- No duty = no liability.
- An individual cannot have course of action for damages against a public
officer even though he may have been injured by the action or inaction of
the officer.
- The general rule is that the officer owes no duty to him as an individual. The
remedy in this case is not judicial, but political.
- The exception to this rule occurs when the complaining individual suffers a
particular or special injury on account of the public officer’s improper
performance or non-performance of his public duty.
- Remember that an individual can hold a public officer personally liable for
damages that violate constitutional rights, only if it results in a particular
wrong or injury to the former.
- Cause of action exists if the following elements are present:
o A right in favor of the plaintiff
o An obligation on the part of the named defendant to respect or not
to violate such right
7
 SBCA-SOL BLOCK B 2020 PERSONS & FAMILY REVIEWER
o An act or omission on the part of such defendant, violative of the
right of the plaintiff or constituting a breach of the obligation of
defendant to plaintiff for which the latter may maintain an action
for recovery of damages
- A separate civil action against an individual’s constitutional rights is
necessary.
- Judges are excluded from the provision. They can only be held liable if his
act or omission constitutes a violation of the Penal code or other penal
statute.
- Good faith is not a defense because public officials might abuse this right.
Article 33. In cases of defamation, fraud, and physical injuries, a civil
action for damages, entirely separate and distinct from the criminal
action, may be brought by the injured party. Such civil action shall
proceed independently of the criminal prosecution, and shall require
only a preponderance of evidence.
- The terms fraud, defamation, and physical injuries must be understood in
their ordinary sense.
- Reckless imprudence resulting to homicide is not punishable under this
provision, and so is criminal negligence in general.
- This provision is made to allow the citizen to enforce his rights in a private
action brought by him.
- Remember that the law penalizes the act and not the result.
Article 34. When a member of a city or municipal police force refuses
or fails to render aid or protection to any person in case of danger of
life or property, such peace officer shall be primarily liable for
damages, and the city or municipality shall be subsidiarily responsible
therefor. The civil action herein recognized shall be independent of any
criminal proceedings, and a preponderance of evidence shall suffice to
support such action.
- Failure or refusal to do their duty can be a basis for claiming damages
against them.
Article 35. When a person, claiming to be injured by a criminal offense,
charges another with the same, for which no independent civil action is
granted in this Code or any special law, but the justice of the peace
finds no reasonable grounds to believe that a crime has been
C.M. 2016
committed, or the prosecuting attorney refuses or fails to institute
criminal proceedings, the complainant may bring a civil action for
damages against the alleged offender. Such civil action shall be
supported by preponderance of evidence. Upon the defendant’s
motion, the court may require the plaintiff to file a bond to indemnify
the defendant in case the complaint should be found to be malicious.
If during the pendency of the civil action, an information should be
presented by the prosecuting attorney, the civil action shall be
suspended until the termination of the criminal proceedings.
- Read this provision before you read Articles 29 to 34 so you can understand
it more.
- It is your right to hold civil action. Unahin nalang yung criminal action, then if
kulang or natapos na, saka mo i-file yung civil para may back-up ka. (Again,
sorry if tinagalog ko na)
- The general rule is when a criminal action is instituted, the civil liability
arising from it is deemed constituted.
- The exception (Rule 111 of the Rules of Court), however, is:
o When the offended party waives civil action, reserves his right to
institute it separately, or institutes the civil action prior to the
criminal action
o Articles 32, 33, 34, and 2176 of the Civil Code
Article 36. Prejudicial questions, which must be decided before any
criminal prosecution may be instituted or may proceed, shall be
governed by the rules of court which the Supreme Court shall
promulgate and which shall not be in conflict with the provisions of
this Code.
- The general rule is when a civil and criminal case arising from the same
facts are filed in court the criminal case takes precedence.
- However, the exception is, if there exists a prejudicial question.
§ What is a prejudicial question?
Ø It arises in a case
Ø The resolution is the logical antecedent of the
issue involved
Ø Cognizance of which pertains to another
tribunal
Ø Always two cases involved:
8
 SBCA-SOL BLOCK B 2020 PERSONS & FAMILY REVIEWER
o Criminal – always suspended
o Civil – issues are determinative of
the outcome of the criminal case
Ø Two essential elements of a prejudicial
question:
o Civil action involves an issue
similar or intimately related to the
issue raised in the criminal action;
and
o The resolution of the issue
determines whether or not the
criminal action may proceed
- ABUNADO VS. PEOPLE – There is no prejudicial question since the
subsequent judicial declaration of the nullity of the first marriage was
immaterial because prior to the declaration of nullity, the crime had already
been consummated. Under the law, a marriage, even one, which is void or
voidable, shall be deemed valid until declared otherwise in a judicial
proceeding.
Article 37. Juridical capacity, which is the fitness to be the subject of
legal relations, is inherent in every natural person and is lost only
through death. Capacity to act, which is the power to do acts with legal
effect, is acquired and may be lost.
- Acquired upon birth
o An unborn child is already given a provisional personality, which
entitles him to be supported or to receive donation.
- Terminated only upon death
- Capacity to act is not inherent it is attached or conferred.
- Capacity to act can be lost through death and other valid cause provided by
law.
o Ex. Imprisonment
Article 38. Minority, insanity or imbecility, the state of being a deaf-
mute, prodigality and civil interdiction are mere restrictions on the
capacity to act, and do not exempt the incapacitated person from
certain obligations, as when the latter arise from his acts or from
property relations, such as easements. (MIDProCi)
Article 39. The following circumstances, among others, modify or limit
capacity to act: age, insanity, imbecility, the state of being a deaf-mute,
C.M. 2016
penalty, prodigality, family relations, alienage, absence, insolvency and
trusteeship. The consequences of these circumstances are governed
in this Code, other codes, the Rules of Court, and in special laws.
Capacity to act is not limited on account of religious belief or political
opinion.
A married woman, twenty-one ears of age or over, is qualified for all
acts of civil life, except in cases specified by law.
- Article 38 restricts capacity to act, while Article 39 enumerates situations,
which modifies the capacity to act.
o The objective of the two provisions is the same. It is to make an
overview of the situation that qualifies a person’s power to undertake
acts that produce legal effects.
Article 40. Birth determines personality; but the conceived child shall
be considered born for all purposes that are favorable to it, provided it
be born later with the conditions specified in the following article.
Article 41. For civil purposes, the foetus is considered born if it is alive
at the time it is completely delivered from the mother’s womb.
However, if the foetus had an intra-uterine life of less than seven
months, it is not deemed born if it dies within twenty-four hours after
its complete delivery from the maternal womb.
- P.D 603, Article 5 or the “Child and Youth Welfare Code” already amend
article 40. It now states:
o “The civil personality of the child shall commence from the time of his
conception for all purposes favorable to him, subject to the requirements
of Article 41 of the Civil Code.
- An unborn child, therefore, has a right even if the child is only literally
in the mother’s womb. Even if it is still unborn, it can already accept
donations, support, etc.
- However, the parents cannot ask for damages if the child is already
aborted since it didn’t meet the conditions set in either provision. But if
the parents are really eager to sue for damages, they can in their
behalf. They must make sure though that they didn’t consent to the
abortion and that they were “distressed and anguished” by the mere
fact that they were expecting to be parents.
- Let it also be reiterated that the birth certificate is the best proof of
birth.
9
 SBCA-SOL BLOCK B 2020 PERSONS & FAMILY REVIEWER

- The birth certificate is a public document, but even with such status it
will remain confidential. Only the following people can request such
document:
o The person him/herself
o Spouse, parent or parents, direct descendants,
guardian, or institution legally in charge of him (if a
minor)
o Court or proper public official when it is needed in an
administrative, judicial, or other official proceeding
o In case of the person’s death, the nearest kin
- QUIMIGING VS. ICAO – Although not yet born, the law already gives
a conceived child a provisional personality. Thus the baby in this case
had the right to claim support, especially since the paternity is clear.
dead. However, the deceased can disinherit his/her heir/s under any
grounds that is valid under the law.
Article 43. If there is doubt, as between two or more persons who are
called to succeed each other, as to which of them died first, whoever
alleges the death of one prior to the other, shall prove the same; in the
absence of proof, it is presumed that they died at the same time and
there shall be no transmission of rights from one to the other.
- Applies to people who are called to succeed each other.
- If there is no proof on who died first, the presumption is they died at the
same time.

- GELUZ VS. CA – The child has already been aborted, thus its juridical - Proof of death must be established by clear and positive evidence and not
and civil personality has also ended. Damages can be awarded only if only by mere inference or presumption.
the parents of such aborted child did not consent to the abortion. o Ex. A mother and a son died at the same time during a car crash.
However, the wife of the son claimed that the son died last,
- DE JESUS VS. SYQUIA – First, yes, the child can be awarded
resulting to her claiming the “pamana”.
damages since even an unborn child already has a juridical and civil
o Ex. A mother and a son were presumed to have died the same
personality, as long as it is known that such child shall be born.
time during a car crash. However, the wife of the son claimed that
Second, no, the breach of promise to marry is not actionable. One can
the son died last. But it was not proven, and such presumption
only claim damages from such ground if and only if there was already
that they died the same time was upheld.
a wedding preparation and the only thing that lacks is the groom or
bride’s participation.
- DUMALO VS. QUALITY PLASTICS – He had no more civil personality
since he was already dead. His juridical capacity was also lost through
death. However, the testamentary heirs of Oria are not entitled to claim
attorney’s fees since the respondent wasn’t aware of his death.
Article 42. Civil Personality is extinguished by death.
Article 44. The following are juridical persons:
The effect of death upon the rights and obligations of the deceased is
(1) The State and its political subdivisions;
determined by law, by contract, and by will.
(2) Other corporations, institutions and entities for public interest
or purpose, created by law; their personality begins as soon as
- Death puts an end to civil personality.
they have been constituted according to law;
- Remember that the death certificate is also important since it is the best
(3) Corporations, partnerships and associations for private
evidence that such person is already dead.
interest or purpose to which the law grants a juridical
- The Local Civil Registrar must also have all the death certificates of all dead
personality, separate and distinct from that of each
people in their locality.
shareholder, partner or member.
- No person can be buried without a death certificate.
- In case there is an epidemic and if the body needs to be buried ASAP, the
Article 45. Juridical persons mentioned in Nos. 1 and 2 of the
death certificate can be availed not later than five (5) days after the burial.
preceding article are governed by the laws creating or recognizing
- In case of rights and obligations of the dead person, it can still be regulated
by: contract, will, or the law. Creditors are given the right to claim from the them.

10
C.M. 2016
 SBCA-SOL BLOCK B 2020 PERSONS & FAMILY REVIEWER
Private corporations are regulated by laws of general application on
the subject.
Partnerships and associations for private interest or purpose are
governed by the provisions of this Code concerning partnerships.
Article 46. Juridical persons may acquire and possess property of all
kinds, as well as incur obligations and bring civil or criminal actions, in
conformity with the laws and regulations of their organization.
- A juridical person – A being of legal existence susceptible of rights and
obligations
- What are juridical persons?
o State – An organized corporate society under a government with
the legal competence to exact obedience of its commands. It can
enter into treaties and contracts. Also, according to the
Constitution, the State cannot be sued without its consent. But if it
enters in a treaty or levels itself to the rank of an individual, it
impliedly allowed itself to be sued.
o Political subdivisions – Municipal corporations that consist of
provinces, cities, and municipalities. They can be sued because it
is granted by their charters, but always remember that they are
not liable for torts committed in the discharge of their
governmental functions.
o Corporation – An artificial being created by operation of law and
has the powers and attributes granted to it by the law which
created it.
o Partnership – 2 or more persons bind themselves to make
contributions to a common fund with the intention of dividing the
profits among themselves. They are directly liable.
- Veil of corporate fiction – Remember that corporations, partnerships, and
associations for private interest and purpose may be granted a separate
and distinct personality from the shareholders or members. However, this
veil may be pierced, this making the shareholders and members liable when
the fiction is used to defeat public convenience, justify wrong, protect fraud,
defend crime, and perpetrate deception.
- The laws that created them will govern the State and other political
subdivisions, other corporations, institutions, and entities for public interest
or purpose.
- Private corporations are regulated by the laws of general application on the
subject.
C.M. 2016
- Partnerships are governed by the provisions of the Code regarding
partnership.
- Juridical persons may acquire and possess property of all kinds and incur
obligations in conformity with the laws and regulations of their organization.
- Presumption of regularity – Absence of evidence they performed in
accordance to their duty
Article 47. Upon the dissolution of corporations, institutions and other
entities for public interest or purposed mentioned in No. 2 of Article 44,
their property and other assets shall be disposed of in pursuance of
law or the charter creating them. If nothing has been specified on this
point, the property and other assets shall be applied to similar
purposes for the benefit of the region, province, city or municipality,
which during the existence of the institution derived the principal,
benefits from the same.
- Title IX, Chapter 3 of the Civil Code.
Article 48. (As now governed by Article IV of the 1987 Constitution) The
following are citizens of the Philippines:
(1) Those who are citizens of the Philippines at the time of the
adoption of this Constitution;
(2) Those whose fathers and mothers are citizens of the
Philippines;
(3) Those born before January 17, 1973, of Filipino mothers, who
elect Philippine citizenship upon reaching the age of majority;
and
(4) Those who are naturalized in accordance with law
Article 49. Naturalization and the loss and reacquisition of citizenship
of the Philippines are governed by special laws.
Article 50. For the exercise of civil rights and the fulfillment of civil
obligations, the domicile of natural persons is the place of their
habitual residence.
Article 51. When the law creating or recognizing them, or any other
provision does not fix the domicile or juridical persons, the same shall
11
 SBCA-SOL BLOCK B 2020 PERSONS & FAMILY REVIEWER
be understood to be the place where their legal representation is
established or where they exercise their principal functions.
- Domicile – The fixed, permanent residence, a place wherein, although one
may be absent from, one still has the intention of returning and remaining
for an unlimited time (animus manendi). There is only one domicile. Place of
legal representation.
o A minor follows the domicile of his or her parents.
- How to change your domicile?
o An actual removal or an actual change of domicile
o A bona fide intention of abandoning the former domicile and
establishing a new one
o Act, which correspond with the purpose – physical presence,
moving of the family, register as a voter, having kids study in that
area, etc.
- Residence – Indicates a place of abode whether permanent or temporary,
not necessarily the domicile. There may be more than one residence.
- Domicile and residence can never be interchanged in cases provided in the
Civil Code. However never confuse this with Political law, as it can be used
interchangeably there. This is manifested in the case of Romualdez-Marcos
vs. COMELEC.
- Jus Sanguinis – Citizenship by blood. This is what we follow in the
Philippines.
- Jus Soli – Citizenship by place of birth.
o This is why there is “dual citizenship”. The US is a country, which
follows the concept of Jus Soli, thus the child will be American by
place of birth. But if both the child’s parents are Filipinos, the
child, according to the nationality rule and the concept of Jus
Sanguinis, will also be a Filipino citizen.
- Animus manendi – Latin term which means “the intention of remaining”.
- Animus revertendi – Latin phrase that means “with intention to return”.
- R.A. No. 106 or “An act providing for the ways in which Philippine
citizenship may be lost or reacquired” is the law that governs the loss or
reacquisition of citizenship:
(1) By naturalization in a foreign country;
(2) By express renunciation of citizenship;
(3) By subscribing to an oath of allegiance to support the constitution
or laws of a foreign country upon attaining twenty-one years of
age or more: Provided, however, that a Filipino may not divest
himself of Philippine citizenship in any manner while the Republic
of the Philippines is at war with any country;
C.M. 2016
(4) By rendering service to, or accepting commission in, the armed
forced of a foreign country: Provided, That the rendering of
service to, or acceptance of such commission in, the armed
forces of a foreign country, and the taking of an oath of allegiance
incident thereto, with the consent of the Republic of the
Philippines, shall not divest a Filipino of his Philippine citizenship
if either of the following circumstances is present:
a. The RP has a defensive and/or offensive pact of
alliance with the said foreign country; or
b. The said foreign country maintains armed forces on
Philippine territory with the consent of the RP: Provided,
That the Filipino citizen concerned, at the time of
rendering said service, or acceptance of said
commission, and taking the oath of allegiance incident
thereto, states that he does so only in connection with
his service to said foreign country: And provided, finally,
That any Filipino citizen who is rendering service to, or
is commissioned in, the armed forces of a foreign
country under any of the circumstances mentioned in
paragraph (a) or (b), shall not be permitted to
participate nor vote in any election of the RP during the
period of his service to, or commission in, the armed
forces of the said foreign country. Upon discharge from
the service of the said foreign country, he shall be
automatically entitled to the full enjoyment of his civil
and political rights as Filipino citizen;
(5) By cancellation of the certificate of naturalization;
(6) By having been declared by competent authority a deserter of the
Philippine Armed Forces in the time of war, unless subsequently,
a plenary pardon or amnesty has been granted;
(7) In the case of a woman, upon her marriage to a foreigner if, by
virtue of the laws in force in her husband’s country, she acquires
his nationality.
- The grounds for reacquisition of citizenship are as follows:
(1) By naturalization
(2) Repatriation of deserters of the AFP and a woman who has lost
her citizenship by reason of marriage to a foreigner
(3) By direct act of Congress
- Principle of reciprocity - In international relations and treaties, the
principle of reciprocity states that favors, benefits, or penalties that are
granted by one state to the citizens or legal entities of another, should be
returned in kind.
12
 SBCA-SOL BLOCK B 2020 PERSONS & FAMILY REVIEWER
- MO YA LIM YAO VS COI – Lau Yuen Yeung was allowed to become a
Filipino citizen by virtue of her marriage to Mo Ya Lim Yao. Under Sec 15 of
the Commonwealth Act 473, an alien woman marrying a Filipino becomes
ipso facto a Filipina provided she is not disqualified under the same law.
- FRIVALDO VS COMELEC – His repatriation was legal and valid because of
the curative nature of Presidential Decree 725.
- UY TENG SU VS RP – His request for naturalization was denied due to the
fact that he seemed like he wasn’t serious in attaining his Filipino
citizenship. During the pendency of the application, he left for the United
States and even asked the Court to postpone his hearing, which was
contradictory to what he has sworn that he will “continuously” reside in the
Philippines.
- ROMUALDEZ-MARCOS VS COMELEC – Imelda Romualdez-Marcos
made it clear that her domicile was Tacloban city since she keeps going
back to celebrate her milestones in life there; birthday celebrations,
reunions, etc. It was also clarified in this case that domicile and residence
can never be interchanged in Civil Law cases, but can be interchanged in
Political Law cases.
- POE VS COMELEC – Grace Poe-Llamanzares showed sincere intent to
remain, her animus manendi, in the Philippines as showed by her acts in
making all her kids study in the Philippines, by buying a lot in Corinthian
Hills and eventually having a house there, by leaving her job in the US, by
repatriating, and everything else that clearly constituted her intent to stay in
the Philippines for good.
THE FAMILY CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES
- Otherwise known as Executive Order No. 209
o Signed into law on July 6, 1987
o Took effect on August 3, 1988
- Title X of the Family Code, or the Emancipation and Age of Majority was
amended by R.A. No. 6809
o Passed on October 20, 2989
o Took effect on December 18, 1989
Article 1. Marriage is a special contract of permanent union between a
man and a woman entered into in accordance with the 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,
C.M. 2016
except that marriage settlements may fix the property relations during
the marriage within the limits provided by this Code.
- Article II, Section 12 of the 1987 Constitution – The State recognizes the
sanctity of family life and shall protect and strengthen the family as a basic
autonomous social institution. It shall equally protect the life of the mother
and the life of the unborn from conception. The natural and primary right
and duty of parents in the rearing of the youth for civic efficiency and the
development of moral character shall receive the support of the
Government.
- Marriage is a basic civil right, fundamental to our existence and survival.
- It may be a civil contract, but unlike any other contracts marriage cannot be
modified or restricted, and can only be between a man and a woman.
- The State is also a third party in the marriage.
- Mail-order brides and trafficking in women are not allowed under the laws of
the Philippines, specifically in Republic Act No. 6955, and Republic Act No.
9208.
- Although it may be quite questionable now that we have the VAWC or
Republic Act No. 9262, the marriage between a rapist and a rape victim will
extinguish the criminal action or the penalty imposed for rape. Also, if a
husband rapes a wife, subsequent forgiveness will clear the husband of
criminal liability.
- Marriage also creates a status, or a “double status” so to speak, since there
are already two persons but one obligation. The couple is expected to
assume new relations to each other.
- The right to marry is a recognized fundamental human right under
international law. It is stated that men and women of full age, without any
limitation due to race, nationality, or religion have the right to marry and
“found a family”.
- The Constitution also protects marriage as the “Filipino family is the
foundation of the nation”.
- Marriage can be made a statutory basis for limiting one’s capacity to act or
for affecting one’s right to acquire property (like what Atty. Yamamoto
always says, the presumption of the validity of marriage is important since
there are a lot of rights that string out from it).
- Any modification in the property relations of a couple after the solemnization
of the marriage is void. Effectivity of the property relation happens on the
precise moment of the celebration of the marriage.
o However, if your marriage is void ab initio, your property relation
will also cease to exist since there is no marriage to begin with.
13
 SBCA-SOL BLOCK B 2020 PERSONS & FAMILY REVIEWER
- The law effective during the time of the solemnization determines the
validity of the marriage.
- STAR PAPER VS. SIMBOL – In the case at bar, respondents were hired
after they were found fit for the job, but were asked to resign after they
married a co-employee. Star Paper wasn’t able to clarify how a marriage
between co-workers would be detrimental to their company, but they only
explained that it is due to the fear that employees married to each other will
be less efficient. The Court ruled that the questioned policy is an invalid
exercise of management prerogative.
- PT&T VS. NLRC – PT&T’s policy runs afoul of the right against
discrimination. The record discloses clearly that their ties with the company
were dissolved principally because of the company’s policy that married
women aren’t qualified for employment in their company, and not merely
because of the dishonesty. It also deprives a woman from the freedom to
choose her status.
- ESTRADA VS. ESCRITURA – Such conjugal arrangement cannot be
penalized for there is a case for exemption from the law based on the
fundamental right to freedom of religion. In the area of religious exercise as
a preferred freedom, man stands accountable to an authority higher than
the State.
- GOITA VS. CAMPOS-RUEDA – It doesn’t mean she is not physically in
their conjugal domicile; her husband doesn’t have any more obligations with
here. The mere fact she was forced to leave their home due to his physical
assaults, the more reason he should give her support—even outside their
home. When the object of marriage is defeated by rendering its continuance
intolerable to one of the parties and productive of no possible good in the
community, relief should be obtainable.
Article 2. No marriage shall be valid, unless these essential requisites
are present:
(1) Legal capacity of the contracting parties who must be male
and female; and
(2) Consent freely given in the presence of the solemnizing
officer.
Article 3. The formal requisites of marriage are:
(1) Authority of the solemnizing officer;
(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
C.M. 2016
their personal declaration that they take each other as
husband and wife in the presence of not less than two
witnesses of legal age.
Article 4. The absence of any of the essential or formal requisites shall
render the marriage void ab initio, except as stated in Article 35(2).
A defect in any of the essential requisites shall render the marriage
voidable as provided in Article 45.
An irregularity in the formal requisites shall not affect the validity of the
marriage but the party or parties responsible for the irregularity shall
be civilly, criminally, and administratively liable.
Article 5. Any male or female of the age of eighteen years or upwards
not under any of the impediments mentioned in Articles 37 and 38, may
contract marriage.
Article 6. No prescribed form or religious rite for the solemnization of
the marriage is required. It shall be necessary, however, for the
contracting parties to appear personally before the solemnizing officer
and declare in the presence of not less than two witnesses of legal age
that they take each other as husband and wife. This declaration shall
be contained in the marriage certificate which shall be signed by the
contracting parties and their witnesses and attested by the solemnizing
officer.
In case of a marriage in articulo mortis, when the party at the point of
death is unable to sign the marriage certificate, it shall be sufficient for
one of the witnesses to the marriage to write the name of said party,
which fact shall be attested by the solemnizing officer.
- It is clearly stated in Article 1 that marriage is between a man and a woman;
hence this union is founded on the distinction of sex. Although sex change
may have become easily available, the Supreme Court held that once
someone has gone under the knife to modify their gender, his or her gender
would remain as is in the eyes of the Philippine law.
- Consent must be:
o Freely given – parties must be willing to get married
14
 SBCA-SOL BLOCK B 2020 PERSONS & FAMILY REVIEWER
o Must be made in the presence of the solemnizing officer
- Parents aren’t allowed to force their children to marry someone they don’t
like.
- As stated in Article 4, the absence of any of the essential or formal requisite
will render a marriage void. Thus, having no consent, or consent gained
through fraud, intimidation, force, or undue influence will make a marriage
void ab initio.
- Doctrine of putative marriage –
o Defense of good faith
o Renders marriage valid through good faith
o Good faith can only be availed as a defense with the authority of
the solemnizing officer and nothing else. If used in other
requisites of marriage, either formal or essential, it will be
rendered void and an ignorance of the law.
- Under the new Local Government Code, which took effect on January 1,
1992, a mayor can now solemnize marriages.
- Never forget that the solemnizing officer only needs to know if a competent
official issued the marriage license, and that’s it.
- Criminal penalties are imposable against a person who solemnizes a
marriage without authority and to those that advertise that they can
solemnize marriages.
- The local civil registrar of the place where the marriage application was filed
must issue a valid marriage license.
- The marriage license can only be availed within 120. Do not convert 120
days into months to avoid confusion. It is also effective in any part of the
Philippines. Such license cannot be used abroad.
- You can get your marriage license in Muntinlupa and get married in Cavite;
your marriage license will still be valid.
- If your name gets misspelled, your marriage license will still be valid.
- If one of the contracting parties fails to disclose a previous marriage,
divorce, falsely stated that s/he had not been previously married,
misrepresented his or her residence, or forged consent, it will be rendered
as a nullity.
- The Code doesn’t prescribe any form of marriage. As long as they have at
least two witnesses of legal age, and a declaration in the presence of the
solemnizing officer, then it is enough.
o The declaration can be through writing or orally.
o Failure of the solemnizing officer to ask, “do you take Basha as
your wife, do you take Popoy as your husband” is okay, as long
as the parties have signed the marriage contract.
- Absence of two witnesses of legal age is merely an irregularity since it is
justified that there was still a ceremony that was performed. The agreement
C.M. 2016
of the contracting parties in front of a solemnizing officer is the one that is
important.
- The witness is just there to prove that there was an exchange of vows, and
basically, that there was a marriage.
- Common-law marriages are not recognized in the Philippines.
o “Spouses” – exclusively for couples who are legally and validly
married.
- Proxy marriages are definitely not allowed in the Philippines.
(1) It renders an absence of consent
(2) The other contracting party cannot personally declare in front of the
solemnizing officer that they take each other as husband and wife
- 14 irregularities which do not affect the validity of a marriage:
(1) Absence of two witnesses of legal age;
(2) Absence of marriage certificate;
(3) Marriage solemnized in a place other than publicly in the chambers of
the judge or in open court, church, chapel, or temple, or in the office of
the consul-general, consul, or vice-consul;
(4) Issuance of marriage license in city or municipality not the residence of
either of the contracting parties;
(5) Unsworn application for a marriage license;
(6) Failure of the contracting parties to present original birth certificate or
baptismal certificate to the local civil registrar who likewise failed to ask
for the same;
(7) Failure of the contracting parties between the ages of 18 and 21 to
exhibit consent of parents or persons having legal charge of them to
the local civil registrar;
(8) Failure of the contracting parties between the ages of 21 to 25 to
exhibit advice of parents to local civil registrar;
(9) Failure to undergo marriage counseling;
(10) Failure of the local civil registrar to post the required notices;
(11) Issuance of marriage license despite absence of publication or prior to
the completion of the 10-day period for publication;
(12) Failure of the contracting parties to pay the prescribed fees for the
marriage license;
(13) Failure of the person solemnizing the marriage to send copies of the
marriage certificate to the local civil registrar; and
(14) Failure of the local civil registrar to enter the applications for marriage
licenses filed with him in the registry book in order in which they were
received.
- The breach of promise to marry is not an actionable wrong. However, once
there was already a planning—or as long as may pera nang nagastos, liable
na siya for Articles 19, 20, 21 of the Civil Code (see: Baksh vs. CA).
15
 SBCA-SOL BLOCK B 2020 PERSONS & FAMILY REVIEWER
- EUGENIO VS. VELEZ – The Vargas siblings were right. Article 294 states
that if the deceased doesn’t have a spouse, ascendants, or descendants,
and the siblings were preferred. Also, added the fact that Eugenio is still
legally married to another woman and is just the live-in partner of the
deceased. Philippine law does not recognize common-law marriages. Also,
the term “spouse” is exclusive only to lawfully wedded couples. Thus, the
custody of the body was correctly awarded to the siblings.
- ZULUETA VS. CA – The intimacies between husband and wife doesn’t
justify anyone of them in breaking property for any evidence of marital
infidelity. A person, by contracting marriage, doesn’t shed his or her integrity
or right to privacy.
- COSCA VS. PALAYPAYON, JR. – If the parties really didn’t have a
marriage license and the judge required to apply such after they were
solemnized, the marriage is void.
- WASSMER VS. VELEZ – Generally speaking, a breach of promise to marry
is not actionable. However, in this case, it was not plainly a case of mere
breach of promise to marry. They were able to formally set a wedding and
they have gone through a lot of preparation already. He doesn’t have a right
to walk out when it is already about to be solemnized. This is contrary to
good customs, for which defendant must be held answerable in damages in
accordance with Article 21 of the Civil Code.
- REPUBLIC VS. CAGANDAHAN – The respondent’s body system naturally
produces high levels of male hormones. As a result Jennifer has an
ambiguous genitalia and even has male features. There is preponderant
biological support for considering him male. Added to that, Cagandahan
didn’t take any unnatural steps to arrest or interfere with what he was born
with.
- SILVERIO VS. REPUBLIC – Petitioner wanted to change his sex due to the
sex reassignment he availed. However, even though he already
transformed, a change in name cannot alter one’s legal capacity or civil
status. But regarding Silverio’s sex change, there is no reasonable
interpretation of the provision that can justify such. The local civil registrar
can only correct and not change vital details in a birth certificate. No
correction is necessary since a person’s sex is an essential factor in
marriage and family relations. It is part of a person’s legal capacity and civil
status. For these reasons, while petitioner may have succeeded in altering
his body and appearance through science, no law authorizes the change of
entry as to sex in the civil registry.
Article 7. Marriage may be solemnized by:
(1) Any incumbent member of the judiciary within the court’s
jurisdiction;
C.M. 2016
(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, acting within the
limits of the written authority granted him by his church or
religious sect and provided that at least one of the contracting
parties belongs to the solemnizing officer’s church or religious
sect;
(3) Any ship captain or airplane chief only in cases 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;
and
(5) Any consul-general, consul or vice-consul in the case
provided in Article 10.
- All Filipinos must know who can solemnize.
- The law intentionally limited the people who can solemnize a marriage.
- Under the new Local Government Code, which took effect on January 1,
1992, a mayor can now validly solemnize a wedding.
- Article 7 defines, limits, and scopes the authority granteed to solemnizers.
- Judges can only solemnize within their court’s jurisdiction. Also, they must
be judges during the time of the marriage. Retired judges cannot solemnize
weddings.
- Jurisdiction of RTC judges – regional
- Jurisdiction of the Court of Tax Appeals, Sandiganbayan, the Court of
Appeals, and the Supreme Court – national
o Ex. If X requested Justice Carpio to marry him and his future wife
in Balesin, it is okay. But if X requested Judge Wagan to marry
him and his future wife in Balesin, it is not okay.
- If a Judge marries outside of his jurisdiction it makes the marriage null and
void, and such solemnizer will be held accountable.
- Navarro vs. Domagtoy is not the controlling doctrine.
- A Judge cannot collect fees as it simply cheapens the profession.
- For a priest, rabbi, imam, or minister of any church or religious sect to be
able to validly solemnize, the following requisites must concur:
(1) Must be duly authorized by his or her church or religious sect;
(2) Must act within the limits of the written authority granted to him or
her by the church or religious sect;
(3) Must be registered with the civil registrar general; and
16
 SBCA-SOL BLOCK B 2020 PERSONS & FAMILY REVIEWER
(4) At least one of the contracting parties whose marriage he or she is
to solemnize belongs to his or her church or religious sect
o Ex. X and Y requested Father U to solemnize their wedding in
Batanes. X is a Born Again Christian and Y is a Muslim. Is their
marriage valid? NO
o Ex. A and B requested Y to solemnize their wedding. Y is an
Imam, and both A and B are Muslims. Is their marriage valid?
YES
- The authority granted to a priest may impose the limitation as to the place
where he could solemnize a wedding.
- For a ship captain or an airplane chief to be able to validly solemnize a
marriage, the following requisites must concur:
(1) The marriage must be in articulo mortis (one of the parties is at the
point of death, and survival doesn’t necessarily means it is void,
marriage will still subsist).
(2) The marriage must be between passengers or crew members; and
(3) Generally, the ship must be at sea or the plane must be in flight, but
if the ship or plane is naka stopover and/or “ports of call”, okay parin
kasi hindi pa naman terminated yung byahe (yes so conyo).
o Ex. Captain X gave Assistant Captain Y the Captaincy during
the time their airplane crashed in Batanes. Captain X’s
girlfriend Z, who is seriously injured and is catching her breath,
asked newly appointed Captain Y to solemnize their wedding.
Captain Y agreed to it. Thus former Captain X and his now-wife
Z are married. Subsequently, Z survived. Is their marriage
valid? NO. According to Article 7, paragraph 3 only ship
Captains are allowed to marry in articulo mortis. But Assistant
Captain Y is already Captain when he did. NO PARIN. There is
no law allowing an assumption of authority for the simple
purpose of solemnizing a marriage.
- For a military commander to be able to validly solemnize a marriage, the
following requisites must concur:
(1) S/he must be a military commander of a unit;
(2) S/he must be a commissioned officer;
(3) A chaplain must be assigned to such unit;
(4) The said chaplain must be absent at the time of the marriage;
(5) The marriage must be one in articulo mortis; and
(6) The contracting parties, whether members of the armed forces or
civilians, must be within the zone of military operation. If the
chaplain is present, he must be the one who should solemnize the
marriage. If the chaplain cannot comply, then it is as if he is
absent. In which case, the officer can solemnize.
C.M. 2016
o Ex. Admiral A is the best friend of Commodore B.
They have been partners-in-crime since they were
Ensigns in the Navy. Admiral A heard of Commodore
B’s engagement to Captain C, and volunteered
himself to be the solemnizer of their wedding. The
wedding was planned, and both Commodore B and
Captain C were informed about it. The marriage was
solemnized; Commodore B and Captain C
exchanged vows, and are subsequently “man and
woman” (char). Is their marriage valid? NO.
- The general rule is a consul-general, consul, or vice consul can solemnize
a marriage abroad only when both parties are Filipinos. However, the
exception is if the marriage between the foreigner and the Filipino
solemnized by a Philippine consul is recognized as valid in the host country,
then such marriage shall be considered valid.
- Philippine laws shall be observed.
- The consul-general, consul, and vice-consul will take the responsibility of
both the solemnizing officer and local civil registrar.
- If they want to marry outside of the office of the consul-general, consul, and
vice-consul, they have to request in writing in a sworn statement.
o Ex. Maria and Joe have been together for a month since Maria
moved to New York. Maria asked Joe if it was okay to get
married. Maria suggested that maybe it would be cheaper if a
consul-general solemnize their marriage. Being broke, but
handsome, Joe obliged. After the marriage was solemnized,
Maria suddenly researched that it is void to marry a foreigner in a
Philippine Consul if the host country doesn’t allow it. Joe argued
that Americans are friendly people, and they don’t really mind. Is
the marriage valid? NO.
o Let’s change the facts: After the marriage was solemnized, Maria
suddenly researched that the US recognizes marriages
solemnized by Philippine consuls. Maria told Joe. Joe smiled and
pointed out that Americans are really friendly people. Is the
marriage valid? YES.
- The consul-general, consul, vice-consul has no power in the Philippines.
Their power is strictly limited to their offices abroad.
- The mayor can now solemnize marriages since the Local Government Code
became effective in January 1, 1992.
- When the mayor is incapacitated to perform his duties, the vice-mayor or
the highest-ranking sangguniang bayan member shall automatically
exercise the powers and perform the duties. However, such power can only
be exercised if the period of incapacity exceeds 30 days.
17
 SBCA-SOL BLOCK B 2020 PERSONS & FAMILY REVIEWER
o Ex. Popoy and Basha are both huge fans of Erap. When they
learned that mayors could now solemnize weddings, they asked
Erap’s EA if the former President could marry them. Erap was still
running for mayor against Fred Lim when they asked him, but
both Popoy and Basha didn’t mind since they have good faith that
Erap is already their mayor. Is the marriage valid? NO.
- Doctrine of putative marriage – “good faith”. The defense of good faith
can only be used when either of the contracting parties believes that their
solemnizing officer had authority to marry them. Good faith cannot be used
in other formal or essential requisites of marriage.
o Ex. When X and Y was questioned regarding the validity of their
marriage license, Y averred that the both of them had good faith
that their marriage license was valid. Is this possible? NO.
o Ex. According to X’s doctor, he only has a week left to live. Y,
panicked and asked her uncle, Father U, to marry them ASAP.
Father U apparently forgot to renew his license, but since he even
forgets to wear his pustiso, he happily obliged. After 3 years, X
survived and Father U cried, as he believed it was the miracle of
God. Is the married valid? YES. X and Y didn’t know Father U
wasn’t able to renew his license.
- NAVARRO VS. DOMAGTOY – Only a Justice of the Supreme Court has
the jurisdiction to avail such power. It can only be held outside the Judge’s
chamber when: (1) point of death, (2) remote area; or (3) both parties wrote
a sworn statement to this effect. Although the woman wrote him a
statement, the man did not.
- ARANAS VS. OCCIANO – The respondent in this case violated both the
jurisdiction and the marriage license requisite. Judge Occiano, also, wasn’t
authorized to solemnize the marriage.
Article 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 of the consul-general, consul, or vice-consul, as the case may
be, and not elsewhere, except in the cases of marriages contracted at
the point of death or in remote places in accordance with Article 29 of
this Code, or where both of the parties request the solemnizing officer
at a house or place designated by them in a sworn statement to that
effect.
- Article 8 is only directory and its non-observance will not invalidate a
marriage, but those who contracted such violation shall be held civilly,
criminally, and administratively liable.
C.M. 2016
- Articulo mortis & remote areas – exempted
Article 9. A marriage license shall be issued by the local civil registrar
of the city or municipality where either contracting party habitually
resides, except in marriages where no license is required in
accordance with Chapter 2 of this Title.
- Venue and jurisdiction is not the same.
- A marriage license can be availed in either of the couple’s municipality, but
if they got it somewhere, it’s only an irregularity. Marriage will still be valid.
- Republic Act 10354 – The Responsible Parenthood and Reproductive
Health Act of 2012
o An important requisite to be able to validly obtain a marriage
license.
Article 10. Marriages between Filipino citizens abroad may be
solemnized by a consul-general, consul, or vice-consul of the Republic
of the Philippines. The issuance of the marriage license and the duties
of the local civil registrar and of the solemnizing officer with regard to
the celebration of marriage shall be performed by said consular official.
- The consul-general, consul, and vice-consul will take in the job of both the
local civil registrar and the solemnizing officer.
- Philippine laws shall apply.
Article 11. Where a marriage license is required, each of the
contracting parties shall file separately a sworn application for such
license with the proper local civil registrar which shall specify the
following:
(1) Full name of the contracting parties;
(2) Place of birth;
(3) Age and date of birth;
(4) Civil status;
(5) If previously married, how, when and where the previous
marriage was dissolved or annulled;
(6) Present residence and citizenship;
(7) Degree of relationship of the contracting parties;
(8) Full name, residence and citizenship of the father;
(9) Full name, residence and citizenship of the mother; and
18
 SBCA-SOL BLOCK B 2020 PERSONS & FAMILY REVIEWER
(10) Full name, residence and citizenship of the guardian or person
having charge, in case the contracting parties has neither
father nor mother and is under the age of twenty-one years.
The applicants, their parents or guardians shall not be required to
exhibit their residence certificate in any formality in connection with
the securing of the marriage license.
- Proof of existence.
- Make marriages stable and secure.
Article 12. The local civil registrar, upon receiving such application,
shall require the presentation of the original birth certificates or, in
default thereof, the baptismal certificates of the contracting parties or
copies of such document dully attested by the persons having custody
of the original. These certificates or certified copies of the documents
required by this article need not be sworn to and shall be exempt from
the documentary stamp tax. The signature and official title of the
person issuing the certificate shall be sufficient proof of its
authenticity.
If either of the contracting parties is unable to produce his birth or
baptismal certificate or a certified copy of either because of the
destruction or loss of the original, or if it is shown by an affidavit of
such party or of any other person that such birth or baptismal
certificate has not yet been received though the same has been
required of the person having custody thereof at least 15 days prior to
the date of the application, such party may furnish in lieu thereof his
current residence certificate or an instrument drawn up and sworn to
before the local civil registrar concerned or any public official
authorized to administer oaths. Such instrument shall contain the
sworn declaration of two witnesses of lawful age, setting forth the full
name, residence and citizenship of such contracting party and of his or
her parents, if known, and the place and date of birth of such party. The
nearest kin of the contracting parties shall be preferred as witnesses,
or, in their default, persons of goof reputation in the province or the
locality.
C.M. 2016
The presentation of the birth or baptismal certificate shall not be
required if the parents of the contracting parties appear personally
before the local civil registrar concerned and swear to the correctness
of the lawful age of said parties, as stated in the application, or when
the local civil registrar shall, by merely looking at the applicants upon
their personally appearing before him, be convinced that either or both
of them have the required age.
Article 13. In case either of the contracting parties has been previously
married, the applicant shall be required to furnish, instead of the birth
or baptismal certificate required in the last preceding article, the death
certificate of the deceased spouse or the judicial decree of the absolute
divorce, or the judicial decree of annulment or declaration of nullity of
his or her previous marriage. In case the death certificate cannot be
secured, the party shall make an affidavit setting forth this
circumstance and his or her actual status and the name and date of
death of the deceased spouse.
Article 14. In case either or both of the contracting parties, not having
been emancipated by a previous marriage, are between the ages of
eighteen and twenty-one, they shall, in addition to the requirements of
the preceding articles, exhibit to the local civil registrar, the consent to
their marriage of their father, mother, surviving parent or guardian, or
persons having legal charge of them, in the order mentioned. Such
consent shall be manifested in writing by the interested party who
personally appears before the proper local civil registrar, or in the form
of an affidavit made in the presence of two witnesses and attested
before any official authorized by law to administer oaths. The personal
manifestation shall be recorded in both applications for marriage
license, and the affidavit, if one is executed instead, shall be attached
to the same application.
- Republic Act No. 6809 removes the emancipation under the family code
since emancipation is automatically attained when a child reaches the age
of 18.
- Parental consent – ages 18 to 21
- Parental advise – ages 21 to 25
- Absence in parental consent – defect; voidable or annullable
19
 SBCA-SOL BLOCK B 2020 PERSONS & FAMILY REVIEWER
- Preferred person to give consent – father, but if the father is not available,
mother, surviving parent or guardian, or persons having legal charge (in that
manner)
- With parental consent, but below 18 years old – void
Article 15. Any contracting party between the ages of twenty-one and
twenty-five shall be obliged to ask their parents or guardian for advice
upon the intended marriage. If they do not obtain such advice, or if it
be unfavorable, the marriage license shall not be issued till after three
months following the completion of the publication of the application
therefor. A sworn statement by the contracting parties to the effect that
such advice has been sought, together with the written advice given, if
any, shall be attached to the application for marriage license. Should
the parents or guardian refuse to give any advise, this fact shall be
stated in the sworn statement.
Article 16. In the cases where parental consent or parental advise is
needed, the party or parties concerned shall, in addition to the
requirements of the preceding articles, attach a certificate issued by a
priest, imam or minister authorized to solemnize marriage under Article
7 of this Code or a marriage counselor duly accredited by the proper
government agency to the effect that the contracting parties have
undergone marriage license for a period of three months from the
completion of the publication of the application. Issuance of the
marriage license within the prohibited period shall subject the issuing
officer to administrative sanctions but shall not affect the validity of the
marriage.
Should only one of the contracting parties need parental consent or
parental advise, the other party must be present at the counseling
referred to in the preceding paragraph.
- Parental advise – in keeping with the Filipino tradition of pamamanhikan
- Non-procurement – will not affect the marriage
Article 17. The local civil registrar shall prepare a notice which shall
contain the full names and residences of the applicants for a marriage
license and other data given in the applications. The notice shall be
posted for 10 consecutive days on a bulletin board outside the office of
C.M. 2016
the local civil registrar located in a conspicuous place within the
building and accessible to the general public. This notice shall request
all persons having knowledge of any impediment to the marriage to
advise the local civil registrar thereof. The marriage license shall be
issued after the completion of the period of publication.
- This is to make sure that the contracting parties have no legal impediment
so that their marriage will be completely valid.
- However, if the local civil registrar issues a marriage license during the time
it is prohibited, it will only be an irregularity.
Article 18. In case of any impediment known to the local civil registrar
or brought to his attention, he shall note down the particulars thereof
and his findings thereon in the application for a marriage license, but
shall nonetheless issue said license after the completion of the period
of publication, unless ordered otherwise by a competent court at his
own instance or that of any interested party. No filing fee shall be
charged for the petition nor a corresponding bond required for the
issuance of the order.
Article 19. The local civil registrar shall require the payment of the fees
prescribed by law or regulations before the issuance of the marriage
license. No other sum shall be collected in the nature of a fee or a tax
of any kind for the issuance of said license. It shall, however, be issued
free of charge to indigent parties, that is, those who have no visible
means of income or whose income is insufficient for their subsistence,
a fact established by their affidavit, or by their oath before the local
civil registrar.
- The law allows the local civil registrar to investigate, but only court
intervention directing the non-issuance of the marriage license can
empower the local civil registrar to validly refuse to issue said license. This
is to eliminate extortions and possible graft.
- The court action may be brought by the local civil registrar or by any
interested party:
o Parents
o Brothers
o Sisters
o Existing spouse
o Or anyone who may be prejudiced by such wedding
20
 SBCA-SOL BLOCK B 2020 PERSONS & FAMILY REVIEWER
- Injunction order from the court doesn’t affect the validity of the marriage. It is
simply considered an irregularity.
Article 20. The license shall be valid in any part of the Philippines for a
period of one hundred twenty days from the date of issue, and shall be
deemed automatically cancelled at the expiration of said period if the
contracting parties have no made use of it. The expiry date shall be
stamped in bold characters at the face of every license issued.
- 120 days should never be converted into months to avoid confusion.
- If the license is not claimed or used within 120 days, it shall automatically
become ineffective.
- Valid only in the Philippines, thus cannot be used abroad.
Article 21. When either or both of the contracting parties are citizens of
a foreign country, it shall be necessary for them before a marriage
license can be obtained, to submit a certificate of legal capacity to
contract marriage, issued by their respective diplomatic or consular
officials.
Stateless persons or refugees from other countries shall, in lieu of the
certificate of legal capacity herein required, submit an affidavit stating
the circumstances showing such capacity to contract a marriage.
- A refugee can ask documents from the UN.
- We are a signatory party on the Stateless convention, thus we are obliged
to give opportunity for them to get married.
- Citizens of a foreign country may contract marriage in the Philippines.
- If both parties are foreigners and they want any of the authorized
solemnizers in Article 7 to marry them, they also need to secure a marriage
license.
- Here is the one requisite for foreigners to validly acquire a marriage license
in the PH:
o Certificate of legal capacity – the PH will adhere to the national
laws of their country, but without this certification the local civil
registrar cannot give them a marriage license.
- If the marriage was celebrated without the certificate of legal capacity, it will
just be an irregularity and such marriage will still be valid.
- Stateless persons or refugees are required to file an affidavit showing their
capacity to contract a marriage.
C.M. 2016
- If a foreigner wants their country’s consul-general, consul, or vice-consul,
they can get married without a marriage license cause their country’s laws
will be in effect, not the PH’s.
Article 22. The marriage certificate, in which the parties shall declare
that they take each other as husband and wife, shall also state:
(1) The full name, sex and age of each contracting party;
(2) Their citizenship, religion and habitual residence;
(3) The date and precise time of the celebration of the marriage;
(4) That the proper marriage license has been issued according to
law, except in marriage provided for in Chapter 2 of this Title;
(5) That either or both of the contracting parties have secured the
parental consent in appropriate cases;
(6) That either or both of the contracting parties have complied
with the legal requirement regarding parental advice in
appropriate cases; and
(7) That the parties have entered into a marriage settlement, if
any, attaching a copy thereof.
Article 23. It shall be the duty of the person solemnizing the marriage to
furnish either of the contracting parties the original of the marriage
certificate referred to in Article 6 and to send the duplicate and
triplicate copies of the certificate not later than fifteen days after the
marriage, to the local civil registrar of the place where the marriage
was solemnized. Proper receipt shall be issued by the local civil
registrar to the solemnizing officer transmitting copies of the marriage
certificate. The solemnizing officer shall retain in his file the
quadruplicate copy of the marriage certificate, the original of the
marriage license and, in proper cases, the affidavit of the contracting
party regarding the solemnization of the marriage in a place other than
those mentioned in Article 8.
- The best evidence of a marriage is the marriage contract or certificate.
- As long as the local civil registrar certified it as an authentic copy, it is
admissible as evidence. A mere photocopy is useless.
- Marriage is important for legitimacy of children, claims, support, wills, etc.
- The exchange of vows is credible evidence that a marriage happened.
- SEMPER PRESUMITUR PRO MATRIMONIO – “Always presume marriage”
- Other means of evidence:
21
 SBCA-SOL BLOCK B 2020 PERSONS & FAMILY REVIEWER
o Baptismal certificate
o Birth certificate
o Judicial decisions
o Family bible
o Proposal to marry
- A marriage certificate made many years after the marriage is inadmissible.
- Cohabitation is not a direct proof of marriage.
Article 24. It shall be the duty of the local civil registrar to prepare the
documents required by this Title, and to administer oaths to all
interested parties without any charge in both cases. The documents
and affidavits filed in connection with applications for marriage
licenses shall be exempt from documentary stamp tax.
Article 25. The local civil registrar concerned shall enter all
applications for marriage licenses filed with him in a registry book
strictly in the order in which the same are received. He shall record in
said book the names of the applicants, the date on which the marriage
license was issued, and such other data as may be necessary.
- It is the duty of the local civil registrar to keep all official documents.
- LIM TAN HU VS. RAMOLETE – It was established that the petitioner was
just a common-law wife. The Philippines does not recognize common-law
marriages. Article 26 specifically provides that the word “solemnized”, which
(according to the framers) only mean marriage legally contracted by
authorized solemnizers. Thus, the petitioner has no right.
- VDA. CHUA VS. CA – The petitioner has no standing since she wasn’t able
to prove her status as the surviving spouse of the deceased. She failed to
establish her standing since she failed to show pieces of evidence like a
valid marriage contract, transfer certificates of title, residence certificates,
and the like. Although, she was able to bring a passport. Under the law, only
interested persons may oppose, and Antonietta is not.
- REPUBLIC VS. CA AND CASTRO – There was no marriage contracted
between Castro and Cardenas because not only that Castro wasn’t there
when Cardenas applied for a marriage license, but also the fact that Castro
wasn’t able to sign any marriage contract.
Article 26. All marriages solemnized outside the Philippines, in
accordance with the laws in force in the country where they are
solemnized, and valid there as such, shall also be valid in this country,
C.M. 2016
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 likewise have capacity to remarry under Philippine law. (As
amended by EO 227, July 12, 2987)
- PRINCIPLE OF LEX LOCI CELEBRATIONIS = INTERNATIONAL
COMITY
- Article 3 of the Civil Code is not binding to foreigners.
- What is international comity?
o It is when a marriage is valid here; it will also be valid abroad and
vice versa. If it is not valid abroad, then it is also not valid here
and vice versa.
- According to Atty. Yamamoto, regarding the issue in page 170, as long as
yung isa invalid na, kahit foreigner yung asawa, bawal parin.
- Bigamous or polygamous marriages are not allowed in the PH. So even if it
is allowed abroad, it will be rendered invalid here.
- Mistake in identity, also even if valid abroad, is not valid here in the PH.
- If a spouse failed to record a judicial decree with the local civil registrar after
annulment, any subsequent marriage shall be void. Even if the marriage is
planned to be contracted abroad, such marriage will also be invalid.
- Psychological incapacity is void ab initio kahit saan parte ka pa ng mundo
magpakasal.
- Common-law marriages are not recognized in the Philippines. The term
spouses can only be exclusively used by a legally, and validly solemnized
couple.
- “Solemnized” is also used in this code to reiterate the intent of the framers
to limit the scope of the provision so as not to include common-law
marriages. However, “contracting” is broader and may include other modes
of solemnization not recognized in this country.
- Same sex marriages may now be validly contracted abroad, but even if it is
valid there, it is still not valid in the Philippines.
- The Family Code clearly reiterated that only a male and a female could
marry each other.
- A proof of foreign marriage is needed because if the foreign law is not
proven, Philippine laws shall take over.
22
 SBCA-SOL BLOCK B 2020 PERSONS & FAMILY REVIEWER
- The burden of proof is now on the one who asserts the validity of a
marriage.
- There is no absolute divorce in the Philippines. However, if the foreign
spouse obtains a valid divorce abroad capacitating him or her to remarry,
the Filipino spouse shall likewise have capacity to remarry under the
Philippine law (as long as the one who procured the divorce is the alien
spouse).
- If it is the Filipino spouse who obtains the absolute divorce abroad, it will not
be allowed or recognized in the PH.
- Also what is important is the citizenship of the one who procured the divorce
during the time of the divorce and not the time of the marriage ceremony.
- When you already renounce your PH citizenship, the law that will govern
you now is your new country.
- If the marriage is between two Filipinos, and one of them obtains an
absolute divorce abroad after being naturalized as a citizen of a foreign
country where absolute divorce is recognized, such naturalized foreigner,
who was formerly a Filipino, can come back to the PH and validly remarry.
- Once divorced, the foreigner can no longer claim the properties acquired in
the PH by his or her former Filipino spouse.
- Once divorced, the foreigner also has no legal standing to file a petition for
adultery or bigamy, since only a “spouse” can file such case.
- GARCIA VS. RECIO – Our courts can only recognize a foreign divorce
decree if the party pleading has proven the divorce as a fact and
demonstrate its conformity to the foreign law allowing it. In this case, the
divorce between Samson and Recio appears to be authentic. However,
there are two types of divorces: (1) absolute divorce or a vincula matrimonii;
and (2) limited divorce decree or a mensa et thoro. Such divorce decree in
this case was a limited divorce decree since it clearly restricted Recio from
remarrying.
- PILAPIL VS. IBAY-SOMERA – Only an offended spouse can complain for
crimes against chastity. In this case, Geiling, the foreign spouse who
obtained the divorce, no longer has standing since they were already
divorced during the time he filed the case. There was no marriage vows to
protect, nor a marriage to save.
- VAN DORN VS. ROMILLO – Aliens may obtain divorces abroad, which
may be recognized in the Philippines, provided that they are valid according
to the national law of the foreigner. It is true that owing to the nationality
principle embodied in Article 15 of the Civil Code, only Filipino Nationals are
covered by the policy against absolute divorces, the same being considered
contrary to our concept of public policy and morality. Added to that, Upton is
no longer the husband of Van Dorn. Thus, he no longer has control over
conjugal assets.
C.M. 2016
- REPUBLIC VS. ORBENCINDO III – Following the doctrine in the case of
Van Dorn, a divorce decree validly obtained by the alien spouse is valid in
the Philippines and, consequently, the Filipino spouse is capacitated to
nd
remarry under Philippine law. Under the 2 paragraph of Article 26, it
should be interpreted to include cases of Filipinos who subsequently acquire
a foreign citizenship. The rule otherwise would be unjust. Citizenship during
the divorce is the one binding and not the citizenship during the marriage. It
is to give fairness to the Filipino spouse. Added to that, citizenship shouldn’t
be used as an instrument to disregard the sanctity of marriage. There must
be sincerity in obtaining such citizenship, and it shouldn’t only be because of
divorce.
- QUITA VS. CA – Arturo was a Filipino and, thus, remained legally married
to her in spite of the divorce obtained. Dandan, however, cannot claim
anything since their marriage was bigamous and under the law it is void ab
initio. She is not the surviving spouse than can inherit from him.
- LLORENTE VS. CA – The divorce decree he obtained abroad must be
respected since it is also undisputed that Lorenzo is an American citizen. It
is held in the cases of Van Dorn, Quita, and Pilapil that once it is proven that
someone is no longer a Filipino citizen and/or if the alien constitutes the
divorce, effects are recognized here in the PH.
- BAYOT VS. CA – First, she chose her American citizenship to govern her
marital status. Second, she secured the divorce as an American citizen.
Third, American laws bind her, as she is a citizen, and divorce is allowed
there. Fourth, property relations were fixed. Finally, although she was
recognized as a Filipino citizen, her American citizenship was the one that
ruled during the pendency of the divorce.
- CORPUS VS. STO. TOMAS – The alien spouse can claim no right under
the second paragraph of Article 26, as the substantive right it establishes is
in favor of the Filipino spouse. The Filipino spouse should not be
discriminated against in his or her own country if the ends of Justice are to
be served. The burden of proof is on the person that alleges the fact.
Article 27. In case of either or both of the contracting parties are at the
point of death, the marriage may be solemnized without necessity of a
marriage license and shall remain valid even if the ailing part
subsequently survives.
Article 28. If the residence of either party is so located that there is no
means of transportation to enable such party to appear personally
before the local civil registrar, the marriage may be solemnized without
necessity of a marriage license.
23
 SBCA-SOL BLOCK B 2020 PERSONS & FAMILY REVIEWER
Article 29. In the cases provided for in the two preceding articles, the
solemnizing officer shall state in an affidavit executed before the local
civil registrar or any other person legally authorized to administer
oaths that the marriage was performed in articulo mortis or that the
residence of either party, specifying the barrio or barangay, is so
located that there is no means of transportation to enable such party to
appear personally before the local civil registrar and that the officer
took the necessary steps to ascertain the ages and relationship of the
contracting parties and the absence of a legal impediment to the
marriage.
Article 30. The original of the affidavit required in the last preceding
article, together with a legible copy of the marriage contract, shall be
sent by the person solemnizing the marriage to the local civil registrar f
the municipality where it was performed within the period of thirty days
after the performance of the marriage.
Article 31. A marriage in articulo mortis between passengers or crew
members may also be solemnized by a ship captain or by an airplane
pilot not only while the ship is at sea or the plane is in flight, but also
during stopovers at ports of call.
Article 32. A military commander of a unit, who is a commissioned
officer, shall likewise have authority to solemnize marriages in articulo
mortis between persons within the zone of military operation, whether
members of the armed forces or civilians.
Article 33. Marriages among Muslims or among members of the ethnic
cultural communities may be performed validly without the necessity
of a marriage license, provided they are solemnized in accordance with
their customs, rites or practices.
Article 34. No license shall be necessary for the marriage of a man and
woman who have lived together as husband and wife for at least five
years and without any legal impediment to marry each other. The
contracting parties shall state the foregoing facts in an affidavit before
any person authorized by law to administer oaths. The solemnizing
officer shall also state under oath that he ascertained the qualifications
C.M. 2016
of the contracting parties and found no legal impediment to the
marriage.
- The Code of Muslim Personal laws of the Philippines govern Muslims, thus
they are not covered by this Code.
- Republic Act No. 6766 or the Organic Act for the Cordillera Autonomous
Region also provides that their customary laws shall govern even their
marital rites and obligations.
- However, other ethnic groups are still governed by the Family Code since
they have no separate law.
- There are two requisites for the exemption under Article 34:
o They must live as such for at least five years characterized by
exclusivity and continuity that is unbroken; and
o They must be without any legal impediment to marry each other.
- However such requisites do not qualify each other.
- The parties must be without legal impediment only at the time of the
marriage ceremony and not during all those previous 5 years.
- The 5-year cohabitation is not an essential or formal requisite. Its main
purpose is to avoid exposing the parties to humiliation, shame, and
embarrassment since they cohabited outside a valid marriage.
- Articles 29 and 30 are merely directory requirements and non-observance
will not render the marriage void.
- NINAL VS. BAYADOG – It was shown through evidence that Pepito had
legal impediment during the pendency of his cohabitation with Norma since
he was still married to Teodulfa. Assuming that Pepito and his first were
separated, such cohabitation was still not legal or valid in the eyes of the
law. Thus, their marriage was technically celebrated without a marriage
license and the absence of a formal requisite renders a marriage void.
However, the ruling in this case no longer stands anymore. Refer to
the Manzano doctrine, as it is the new ruling regarding cohabitation.
- MANZANO VS. SANCHEZ – This is currently binding doctrine. Although
David admitted that he had already been living separately from Hermina, it
doesn’t mean that they weren’t married anymore. The exception under
Article 34 of the Family Code can only be availed if the couple has, or either
couple has no legal impediment. Though David and Luzviminda may have
been cohabiting for more than the years required in the provision, the fact
that both parties are still legally and validly married to another when they
contracted their marriage, makes their marriage void ab initio. They can only
avail for such exemption when both of their spouses are already dead by
the time they contracted the marriage, since there must be no legal
impediment during the time of their marriage.
24
 SBCA-SOL BLOCK B 2020 PERSONS & FAMILY REVIEWER
- COSCA VS. PALAYPAYON, JR. – It was also recounted that Judge
Palaypayon Jr asked them to avail for a marriage license after they were
married. Such act was unbecoming of a Judge. It is also held that absence
of any formal requisite, such as a marriage license, will render a marriage
void.
- MARIATEGUI VS. CA – Presumption of marriage can be availed in the
present case. Although there was no marriage certificate presented, there
were no pieces of evidence to contradict the presumption. Added to that, the
laws presume a man and a woman, showing or representing themselves as
husband and wife, have entered into a legal and valid marriage. Thus, the
children from the third wife can inherit.
- REPUBLIC VS. DAYOT – The exception can only be availed by those
couples that have lived together as husband and wife for 5 years and
beyond. Jose and Felisa apparently haven’t even lived together for more
than 6 months. Marrying without a marriage license will obviously render a
marriage void ab initio.
Article 35. The following marriages shall be void from the beginning:
(1) Those contracted by any party below eighteen years of age
even with the consent of parents or guardians;
(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;
(3) Those solemnized without a license, except those covered by
the preceding Chapter;
(4) Those bigamous or polygamous marriages not falling under
Article 41;
(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.
- A void marriage is invalid from the start.
- Absence of the essential and formal requisites will render a marriage void.
- Void vs. voidable
o Void
§ Invalid from the start
§ Never to have taken place
§ Cannot be a source of rights
§ Can never be ratified
§ Can be questioned even after the death of either party
C.M. 2016
§ No legal effects except those declared by law
o Voidable
§ Valid until otherwise declared by the Court
§ Ratified or confirmed by cohabitation
§ Can only be assailed during the lifetime of the parties,
and not after the death of either
- General rule: good faith and bad faith are immaterial in determining
whether a marriage is null or void.
- Exceptions to the general rule:
o Article 35(2) – good faith re: solemnizing officer
o Article 41 – disappearance or presumption of death of a spouse
o Determining property disposition
§ If one party is in bad faith, his or her share will be
forfeited in favor of their common children. In case of
default of, or waiver by any or all the common children
or descendants, vacant share shall belong to the
surviving descendants. In the absence of descendants,
it shall belong to the innocent party.
- Equitable doctrine of unclean hands – Court should not grant relief to the
wrongdoer.
- Remarrying without a judicial declaration of nullity of the previous void
marriage will render subsequent marriage void.
- Collateral attack – There is another issue, and not simply the marriage
itself
o Support, Paternity
- Direct attack – Issue itself
o Remarriage
o Dissolution or partition
o Revocation of donation proper nuptias (by reason of marriage)
- Why are persons aged 18 years and below not allowed to get married?
o Health reasons
- CHI MING TSOI VS. CA – The marriage of Gina and Chi Ming Tsoi was
voided because Chi Ming Tsoi was proven to be psychologically
incapacitated, and psychologically incapacity is a ground for void marriage.
- DOMINGO VS. CA – Bigamy is listed as one of the many grounds for the
nullification of marriage. Roberto was still married to Emerlinda and that fact
clearly showed that he was not capable to contract another marriage.
Although Emerlinda was abroad due to work, Roberto cannot avail for the
exception under Article 41 since pieces of evidence clearly showed that they
still have communication and that Roberto was even financially dependent
on her.
25
 SBCA-SOL BLOCK B 2020 PERSONS & FAMILY REVIEWER
- NINAL VS. BAYADOG – Pepito and Norma’s cohabitation wasn’t legal
since Pepito was still married when they started living together. It is stated in
the OLD LAW that one of the requirements of a valid cohabitation is when
either or both parties have no legal impediment. However, this ruling no
longer stands true now. Refer to the Manzano doctrine.
Article 36. A marriage contracted by any party who, at the time of the
celebration, was psychologically incapacitated to comply with the
essential marital obligations of marriage, shall likewise be void even if
such incapacity becomes manifest only after its solemnization. (As
amended by EO 227, July 17, 1987)
- This ground can be raised by both parties
- The law does not define what psychological incapacity is, however the
Molina doctrine enumerates guidelines:
1) The burden of proof to show the nullity of the marriage belongs to
the plaintiff.
2) The root cause of the psychological incapacity must be:
i. Medically or clinically identified
ii. Alleged in the complaint
iii. Sufficiently proven by experts
iv. Clearly explained in the decision
3) The incapacity must be proven to exist at the time of the
celebration of the marriage.
4) Such incapacity must also be shown to be medically or clinically
permanent or incurable.
5) Such illness must be grave enough to bring about the disability of
the party to assume the essential obligations of marriage.
6) The essential marital obligations must be those embraced by
Articles 68 up to 71 of the Family Code as regards the husband
and wife as well as Articles 220, 221, and 225 of the same Code
in regard to parents and their children.
7) Interpretations given by the National Appellate Matrimonial
Tribunal of the Catholic Church in the Philippines.
8) The trial court must order the prosecuting attorney or fiscal and
the Solicitor General to appear as counsel for the State.
- Psychological incapacity must not be mistaken as mental incapacity.
Psychological incapacity is incurable, mental incapacity is curable.
- Psychological incapacity must be present at the time of the marriage
ceremony, but can be manifested later on during the marriage.
- Doctrine of triennial cohabitation – 3 years no consummation of
marriage; wife remains a virgin; husband is presumed to be impotent.
C.M. 2016
- You cannot assume bad faith cause the person might not know s/he is
incapacitated.
- A psychological person may remarry since it doesn’t mean that just because
a person is psychologically incapacitated with his or her present spouse;
this would also be the case with any other person other than his or her
present spouse.
- This provision will also apply to foreigners.
- An expert testimony may be extremely helpful. However, the court may or
may not accept it since the decision will be based on the totality of the
evidence.
- REPUBLIC VS. MOLINA – The Court elaborated that there is no clear
showing of a psychological incapacity, since what transpired between the
couple was merely “irreconcilable differences” and “conflicting personalities”
doesn’t constitute such. The prevailing doctrine regarding the guidelines
on how to know whether or not someone is psychologically
incapacitated. The doctrine is mentioned above.
- CHI MING TSOI VS. CA – Procreation is one of the essential marital
obligations and the constant dodging of sexual intercourse destroys the
wholeness of marriage. The Court added that if Chi Ming Tsoi’s defense
were true, his wife wouldn’t go to court to complain about something so
private as it could ruin her since she is not available to public scrutiny. The
Court added that there is absence of empathy between Gina and Chi, and
that sexual intimacy is the only way of ensuring the continuation of family
relations.
- SANTOS VS. CA – This is the first case under this provision. Louel
Santos claimed that his wife, Julia Bedia-Santos, was psychologically
incapacitated. He explained that back when they were still living together,
they were always fighting and that when she left for the US she never
contacted him ever again. However, the Court held that mere non-
communication is not a ground for psychological incapacity. Article 36 refers
to the incapacity to fulfill marital obligations.
- REPUBLIC VS. QUINTERO-HAMANO – Foreigners can still be held
psychologically incapacitated. However, in this case, the Japanese national
wasn’t psychologically incapacitated. It was held in Santos vs. CA that mere
abandonment or non-communication is not a ground for psychological
incapacity. The abovementioned case also characterized article 36 to have
a) gravity, b) judicial antecedence, and c) incurability. Sure, Toshio may
have abandoned them, but such irresponsibility is not a kind of
psychological incapacity. Although, it may be a ground for legal separation.
- CHOA VS. CHOA – The Court believed that what the couple had was
incompatibility. It was simply a defect which can be cured though
psychotherapy. In the Molina doctrine, it was explained that mere showing
26
 SBCA-SOL BLOCK B 2020 PERSONS & FAMILY REVIEWER

of irreconcilable differences and conflicting personalities couldn’t be

considered a psychological incapacity.
- DEDEL VS. CA – Sharon’s sexual perversion, infidelity, and abandonment
do not constitute psychological incapacity. It must be shown that Sharon
must be completely unable to discharge the essential obligations of
marriage.
- REPUBLIC VS. RODOLFO – Natividad’s refusal to live with Rodolfo, to
assume her duties as a wife and mother, and her emotional immaturity,
irresponsibility, and infidelity do not rise to the level of psychological
incapacity. Article 36 only accepts the most serious cases of personality
disorders. As stated in a previous case, the incapacity must be
characterized by: a) gravity, b) juridical antecedence, and c) incurability.
- KALAW VS. FERNANDEZ – Both Tyrone and Malyn were psychologically
incapacitated since the two experts were able to conclude their incapacity.
The Court even stated that what happened was that there were already a lot
of problems surrounding the marriage, which may have constrained the
couple from being the best version of themselves. The marriage between
them is void ab initio.

27
C.M. 2016