SEPTEMBER 25

RECITATION

AU: A & B both Filipinos, married in NY. A then was only 17 years old but
was given the consent of parents. This marriage is a valid marriage under
the law of NY. What is the status of the marriage?

Remember, this is a valid marriage under NY laws. It is a marriage solemnized

abroad. The relevant provision is Article 26(1). There are aspects of Article 15
(NCC) that are no longer applicable. Remember, this is the family code which
was promulgated after the NCC. The correct answer is, the marriage is valid. As
long as valid under the law of the place where the marriage was solemnized
except for Article 35(1,4,5,6), 36, 37, and 38.

AU: A & B were married in Bulacan. Thereafter, B went abroad to Nevada.

Years after, B married C another Filipino in Nevada. Before this marriage,
B was able to obtain a divorce decree and citizenship under the state of
Nevada. After the marriage of B & C, A married D. What is the status of the
marriage of A & D?

In the problem, it wasn’t clear which came first—divorce decree or citizenship.

The correct ground to use here is Article 26(2) as interpreted by the SC in the
case of Orbecido. Because even if 26(2) talks about mix marriages between a
Filipino and a foreigner, this provision must apply to Filipinoes even if one of
them acquires citizenship. But in Orbecido, it is clear that for the Filipino spouse
to be capacitated, not only is the requirement should have been complied with,
the divorce decree must be absolute, the citizenship must also come first. 2
requirements: (1) citizen must be obtained first, the (2) absolute divorce decree.

AU: If A & B are 3 degrees removed from each other and got married, what
is the status of the marriage?

First, determine if they are collateral or not.

AU: A & B were married. A few years after, B went to SG to work. On the 5th
year of B in SG, despite constant communication with B, A obrained a decree of
presumptive death. It became final and executory. Thereafter, A married C who
is the classmate of B. A few days after having been informed of the marriage, B
went back to Ph on Jan 1, 2016. On Aug 5, C gave birth to a baby boy. What is
the status of the marriage between A & C? What is the status of the child?

First question was answered in SEPTEMBER 18 class. If either of A & C acted in

good faith, the marriage is not settled—valid or voidable. Ordinarily if valid, you
need a judicial proceeding. Here, hindi, recording of the reappearance of the
absent spouse lang ang kaylangan. With that, the marriage will be terminated.
On the premise that the marriage is valid/voidable, the status of the child is
legitimate.

AU: Spouses A & B had 2 children. Thereafter, A died. B married C and

then B died. The children of A & B that the marriage between B & C is a
void marriage because of the failure to comply with Article 52 of the family
code. Is the claim tenable?

The claim is untenable. Malinaw ang Article 52. Presumptive legitime.

Presumptive siya kasi buhay pa ang mga magulang. Required siya kapag may
annulment. Ang issue lang dito, will art. 52 apply in legal separation? No, marital
bonds are not broken in legal separation, no need for delivery of presumptive
death.

QUIZ

AU: X filed a petition for declaration of nullity for his marriage with Y.
Article 36. If you are the counsel for Y, what is the first defense to consider?

The best defense is that Y did not fail to comply with her marital obligations. In
actual cases, petitioner ang siya pang hindi gumagawa ng marital obligations.
Pakita mo muna na ginagawa niya ung trabaho niya. Go to the basics. Kapag
hindi siya nakapag comply, go to the reasons. But before going there, show to
the court that your client complied with her marital obligations. In other words,
Article 36 is psychological incapacity. It must be psychological in character.

AU: Assuming this time na talagang psychological incapacity ito, in order

for the court to be convinced… in the first place… if the respondent was
not proven to be PI at the time of the solemnization of the marriage, may
the marriage still be declared null and void? There’s no proof of PI.

Despite the lack of proof and the failure to prove PI, the marriage may still be
declared as null and void if the petitioner was determined to be PI. Mind you, a
petitioner may be declared PI depending on the facts of the case. All parties may
also be declared as PI.

AU: If a spouse is declared PI, thereafter, pwede pa ba siya mag asawa?

Yes. At kapag nag paasawa siya, the subsequent marriage must also be
declared void under article 36. Correct?

No, it is a case to case basis. Incapacity is considered as relative. Incapacitated

ka lang sa asawa mo pero sa iba hindi naman.

Republic v. Quintero-Hamano
Psychological incapacity must be characterized by (a) gravity (b) juridical
antecedence and (c) incurability.—The guidelines incorporate the three
basic requirements earlier mandated by the Court in Santos:
“psychological incapacity must be characterized by (a) gravity (b)
juridical antecedence and (c) incurability.” The foregoing guidelines do
not require that a physician examine the person to be declared
psychologically incapacitated. In fact, the root cause may be “medically
or clinically identified.” What is important is the presence of evidence
that can adequately establish the party’s psychological condition. For
indeed, if the totality of evidence presented is enough to sustain a finding
of psychological incapacity, then actual medical examination of the
person concerned need not be resorted to.

Although, as a rule, there was no need for an actual medical

examination, it would have greatly helped respondent’s case had she
presented evidence that medically or clinically identified his illness.—
We find that the totality of evidence presented fell short of proving that
Toshio was psychologically incapacitated to assume his marital
responsibilities. Toshio’s act of abandonment was doubtlessly
irresponsible but it was never alleged nor proven to be due to some kind
of psychological illness. After respondent testified on how Toshio
abandoned his family, no other evidence was presented showing that
his behavior was caused by a psychological disorder. Although, as a
rule, there was no need for an actual medical examination, it would have
greatly helped respondent’s case had she presented evidence that
medically or clinically identified his illness. This could have been done
through an expert witness. This respondent did not do.

As ruled in Molina, it is not enough to prove that a spouse failed to meet

his responsibility and duty as a married person; it is essential that he
must be shown to be incapable of doing so due to some psychological,
not physical, illness.—We must remember that abandonment is also a
ground for legal separation. There was no showing that the case at bar
was not just an instance of abandonment in the context of legal
separation. We cannot presume psychological defect from the mere fact
that Toshio abandoned his family immediately after the celebration of
the marriage. As we ruled in Molina, it is not enough to prove that a
spouse failed to meet his responsibility and duty as a married person; it
is essential that he must be shown to be incapable of doing so due to
some psychological, not physical, illness. There was no proof of a natal
or supervening disabling factor in the person, an adverse integral
element in the personality structure that effectively incapacitates a
person from accepting and complying with the obligations essential to
marriage.

The medical and clinical rules to determine psychological incapacity

 were formulated on the basis of studies of human behavior in general.
Hence, the norms for determining psychological incapacity should apply
to any person regardless of nationality.—In proving psychological
incapacity, we find no distinction between an alien spouse and a Filipino
spouse. We cannot be lenient in the application of the rules merely
because the spouse alleged to be psychologically incapacitated happens
to be a foreign national. The medical and clinical rules to determine
psychological incapacity were formulated on the basis of studies of
human behavior in general. Hence, the norms used for determining
psychological incapacity should apply to any person regardless of
nationality.

The petition did not prosper. It is not enough that the respondent failed to
comply. The failure to comply must be rooted from psychological incapacity in
character. Na proprove na hindi na comply pero bakit hindi na comply? That’s a
more important question to answer.

AU: May a petition under art 36 prosper without an expert being

presented as a witness?

I don’t think so.

AU: Si B was married to C. B & C adopted X. Prior to marriage of B & C, B

had a child in the name of Y. Thereafter, X & Y married. What is the status
of the marriage?

Determine if Y is legitimate or not. Why would the law consider the marriage void
if Y is legitimate? Why did the law did not cover illegitimate child?

AU: Spouses A & B. X caused the death of A in 1988. Thereafter, X & B

were married. What is the status of the marriage?

Determine if the marriage happened during the Civil Code of the Family Code.
Then determine the qualification of “caused the death”. Caused the death may
be negligence. If negligence, it can never be void. But if it is intentional, CIVIL
CODE, the reason does not matter as long as convicted. In FAMILY CODE, intent
must be clear to marry the other, no need for conviction just preponderance of
evidence to be void.

AU: Who can question the validity of a marriage? Who would have the
personality to question the validity of the marriage?

Children will only have the personality when one of the spouse is dead. If both
spouse is alive, the children cannot question the validity of the marriage. Before
the death of either of the spouses, who can question the validity? Real-party in
interest (prior spouse) like in the case of Fujiki v. Marinay.
 When the right of the spouse to protect his marriage is violated, the
spouse is clearly an injured party and is therefore interested in the
judgment of the suit. Juliano-Llave ruled that the prior spouse “is clearly
the aggrieved party as the bigamous marriage not only threatens the
financial and the property ownership aspect of the prior marriage but
most of all, it causes an emotional burden to the prior spouse.” Being a
real party in interest, the prior spouse is entitled to sue in order to declare
a bigamous marriage void. For this purpose, he can petition a court to
recognise a foreign judgment nullifying the bigamous marriage and
judicially declare as a fact that such judgment is effective in the
Philippines. Once established, there should be no more impediment to
cancel the entry of the bigamous marriage in the civil registry.

AU: A & B were married in 1988. However, A & B are step-brothers and
step-sisters. Thereafter, B died and was survived by A and C (brother of B).
Can C question the validity of this marriage?

Would the brother have the personality if the marriage is valid? Yes. After the
death of B, the brother is an heir of the estate. In fact, regardless of the validity
of the marriage, he will always have the personality to question the marriage. If
the marriage was solemnized during the family code, the marriage is valid. But
if the marriage was solemnized before the family code, the brother will inherit
everything.

QUIZ

AU: An action for annulment was filed. Plaintiff discovered 6 months into
the marriage that the defendant was suffering from STD. Will the petition
prosper?

If the ground is fraud, it does not matter if STD is curable or not. It should be
existing at the time of the marriage to be void.

AU: A week before his 20th birthday, A was married to B without parental
consent. Thereafter, when A’s 1st child was 3 years old, A left the conjugal
abode. An action for annulment was filed. Did the action prosper?

Determine first who filed the action. If the action was filed by the parents, it will
not prosper.

AU: As alleged in the complaint, could the annulment in the marriage, A

was suffering from STD which was existing at the solemnization of the
marriage. If an action of annulment is filed, can the defendant invoke
cohabitation as a defense?
It depends on the curability of the STD. The defense is valid if the ground for the
annulment is concealment of the STD. If the ground was fraud, it is not a valid
defense. Are there any other grounds where free cohabitation is not a valid
defense? If the ground is impotency—physically incapable of consummating the
marriage.

AU: If the petitioner filed an action for annulment is aware of the STD at
the time of the marriage, will the petition prosper?

No, the action will not prosper. He is already estopped. The provisions used the
word “injured”. Alam mo na eh! Hindi ka na injured jan.

AU: if the doctrine of triennial cohabitation is applicable in annulment,

what is the effect of such doctrine in the action for annulment?

Disputable presumption. In such an action for annulment, is it possible for the

wife be not physically incapable? Yes, case where genital of the wife is too small.

AU: With a decree of annulment, can the wife retain the surname of the
husband?

Guilty spouse, no. Innocent, it depends. Innocent cannot use the surname if
ordered by the court.