Recio v Recio

G.R. No. 138322

October 2, 2001

Facts

Rederick A. Recio, a Filipino, was married to Editha Samson, an Australian citizen, in Malabon,
Rizal, on March 1987. They lived together as husband and wife in Australia. On May 1989, a decree of
divorce was issued by an Australian family court.

On June 1992, respondent became an Australian citizen. Petitioner, a Filipina and respondent
were married on January 1994 in Cabanatuan City. In their application for a marriage license, respondent
was declared as "single" and "Filipino."

In October 1995, petitioner and respondent lived separately without prior judicial dissolution of
their marriage. While the two were still in Australia, their conjugal assets were divided on May 1996, in
accordance with their Statutory Declarations secured in Australia.

Petitioner filed a Complaint for Declaration of Nullity of Marriage on the ground of bigamy on
March 1998, claiming that she learned only in November 1997, Rederick’s marriage with Editha Samson.

Issue

Whether or not the divorce obtained by respondent in Australia ipso facto capacitated him to
remarry

Ruling

The court remanded the case to the court a quo to receive evidence. Based on the records, the
court cannot conclude that respondent who was then a naturalized Australian citizen was legally
capacitated to marry petitioner. Neither can the court grant petitioner’s prayer to declare her marriage
null and void on the ground of bigamy. After all it may turn out that under Australian law he was really
capacitated to marry petitioner as result of the divorce decree. The court laid down the following basic
legal principles; a marriage between two Filipino cannot be dissolved even by a divorce decree obtained
abroad because of Articles 15 and 17 of the Civil Code.