Note: Date of effectivity of Municipal Ordinances is NOT
covered by this rule but by the Local Government Code.
(Tañada vs. Tuvera, supra).
IGNORANCE OF THE LAW EXCUSES NO
ONE (Art. 3)
Conclusive Presumption – every person is presumed to
know the law even if they have no actual knowledge of the
law.
 Applies only to mandatory and prohibitory laws.
 Does not apply to foreign laws because there is no
judicial notice of such foreign laws; it must be proved like
any other matter of fact (Ching Huat vs. Co Heong L-
1211, January 30, 1947).
Note: Mistakes in the application or interpretation of difficult
or doubtful provisions of law may be the basis of good faith
and has been given the same effect as a mistake of fact,
which may excuse one from the legal consequences of his
conduct (Art. 526, 2155, NCC).
NON RETROACTIVITY OF LAWS
(Art. 4)
General Rule: No retroactive effect.
Exceptions: (P2UT NICE)
1. Tax laws when expressly declared or is clearly the
legislative intent (Cebu Portland Cement vs. Coll. G.R.
No. 18649, February 27, 1965)
2. Interpretative statutes
3. Procedural or Remedial
4. Curative or Remedial statutes
5. Emergency laws
6. Laws creating new rights (Bona vs. Briones G.R. No. L-
10806, July 6, 1918; Bustamante et al. vs. Cayas, G.R.
Nos. L-8562-8563, December 17, 1955)
7. Unless the law otherwise provides
8. Penal laws favorable to the accused.
Exceptions to the Exception: (E–I)
1. Ex Post Facto Laws
2. Laws that impair obligation of contracts (Asiatic
Petroleum vs. Llanes, G.R. No. L-25386, October 20,
1926)
ACTS CONTRARY TO LAW (Art. 5)
General Rule: Acts contrary to mandatory or prohibitory
laws are VOID.
Exceptions: (PAVE)
1. The law makes the act valid but punishes the violator
(ex. Marriage solemnized by a person without legal
authority)
2. The law itself authorizes its validity (ex. Lotto,
sweepstakes)
3. The law makes the act only voidable (ex. Voidable
contracts where consent is vitiated)
4. The law declares the nullity of an act but recognizes its
effects as legally existing (ex. Child born before
annulment of marriage is considered legitimate)
WAIVER OF RIGHTS (Art. 6)
General Rule: Rights can be waived.
Requisites for a valid waiver: (CUE–CF)
1. Full capacity to make the waiver.
2. Waiver must be unequivocal
3. Right must exist at the time of the waiver
4. It must not be contrary to law, public policy, morals or
good customs or prejudicial to a third person with a right
recognized by law.
5. When formalities are required, the same must be
complied with.
Exceptions: (C–PEN)
1. Waiver is contrary to law, public order, public policy,
morals or good customs;
2. If the waiver is prejudicial to a third party with a right
recognized by law.
3. Alleged rights which really do not yet exist, as in the case
of future inheritance
4. If the right is a natural right, such as right to be
supported.
JUDICIAL DECISIONS FORM PART OF THE
LEGAL SYSTEM or DOCTRINE OF STARE
DECISIS (Art. 8)
DOCTRINE OF STARE DECISIS enjoins adherence to
judicial precedents and is based on the principle that once a
question of law has been examined and decided, it should
be deemed settled and closed to further argument.
Judicial decisions, although in themselves not laws, assume
the same authority as the statute itself (People vs. Licera
G.R. No. L-39990, July 2, 1975).
 No publication required, binding on parties after the
lapse of appeal period, and will bind all future cases with
identical facts, until reversed by SC.
They are part of the law as of the date of the enactment of
said law because the Supreme Court’s interpretation merely
establishes the contemporaneous legislative intent that the
construed law purports to carry into effect (People v. Licera G.R.
No. L-39990, July 2, 1975).
HOWEVER, when a doctrine is overruled and a different
view is adopted, the new doctrine should be applied
prospectively and should not prejudice parties who relied on
the old doctrine (People v. Jabinal G.R. No. L-30061, February 27,
1974).
CUSTOMS
(Arts. 11 and12)
Rules of conduct formed by repetition of acts uniformly
observed as a social rule. They are legally binding and
obligatory.
 Lex Rei SItae: The law of the country where the property
General Rule: Customs must be proved as a fact according is situated shall govern property transactions. (Article 16
to the rules of evidence. (1))

Exception: A court may take judicial notice of a custom if
there is already a decision rendered by the same court
recognizing the custom.
Requisites to Make a Custom an Obligatory Rule:
(P2TO)
1. Plurality or repetition of acts;
2. Practiced by the great mass of the social group;
3. Continued practice for a long period of time;
4. The community accepts it as a proper way of acting,
such that it is considered as obligatory upon all.
Exception: Order and amount of successional rights,
intrinsic validity of testamentary provisions, and capacity
to succeed governed by the national law of decedent.
(Article 16 (2))
4. Laws on forms and solemnities
Lex Loci Celebrationis: Forms and solemnities of
contracts, wills, and other public instruments (extrinsic
validity) shall be governed by the laws of the country in
which they are executed. (Article 17)

RULE ON PERIODS Exceptions:

(Art. 13) a. Marriage between Filipinos solemnized abroad shall
be void though valid abroad when void under
1. Years - 365 days, unless year is identified Philippine laws. (Article 26(1) FC)
2. Months - 30 days, unless month identified b. Intrinsic Validity of Contracts: Validity is determined
3. Days – 24 hours by the following rules:
4. Nights-sunset to sunrise i. The law stipulated by the parties shall be
5. Calendar week – Sunday to Saturday applied;
6. Week – Count 7 days as indicated, not necessarily
Sunday to Saturday
ii. In default thereof, and the parties are of the
 To count the period, first day is excluded, last day is same nationality, their national law shall be
included. applied;
iii. If the parties are not of the same nationalities,
Exception: Rule does NOT apply to computation of age; the law of the place of the perfection of the
each year is counted based on birth anniversary. obligation shall govern its fulfillment;
iv. If the above places are not specified and they
Policy if the Last Day is a Sunday or a Legal Holiday: cannot be deduced from the nature and
1. If the act to be performed within the period is prescribed circumstances of the obligation, then the law of
or allowed (1) by the Rules of Court, (2) by an order of the passive subject shall apply.
the court, or (3) by any other applicable statute, the last
day will automatically be considered the next working Lex Nationalii Lex Rei Sitae Lex Loci
day. Celebrationis
2. If the act to be performed within the period arises from a Art. 15, CC Art. 16, CC Art. 17, CC
contractual relationship, the act will become due despite Citizenship is Law of the place Law of the place where
the fact that the last day falls on a Sunday or Holiday. the basis for where the property the contract was
determining the is situated is the executed is the basis for
personal law basis for determining law
Applicable Laws
applicable determining law applicable
1. Penal Laws and laws of public security (Article 14)
applicable
Territoriality rule governs regardless of the nationality
Covers family Covers both real Covers only the forms
but subject to principles of international law and to rights and and personal and solemnities
treaty stipulations. duties, status, property (extrinsic validity)
2. Laws relating to family rights and duties, or to condition and
status, condition and legal capacity of persons. legal capacity
Nationality rule applies regardless of their place of of persons.
residence. Exception: Exceptions: Exceptions:
Art. 26, par. 2 (CIAO) 1. Art. 26, par. 1 of
Exception: Divorce validly obtained abroad by alien of Family Code  Capacity to Family Code
succeed 2. Intrinsic validity of
spouse capacitating him or her to remarry, the Filipino
 Intrinsic validity contracts
spouse shall have capacity to remarry under Philippine of the will
law. (Article 26 (2) Family Code)  Amount of
successional
3. Laws on property (real and personal) rights
 Order of
succession
Rules on Personal Law: Domiciliary Rule and Nationality
Rule Distinguished
Domiciliary Rule Nationality Rule
Basis for determining personal Basis for determining personal
law of an individual is his law is his CITIZENSHIP
DOMICILE
5. Renvoi Doctrine: Occurs when a citizen of another
country dies as a domiciliary of another country. Where
the conflict rules of the forum refer to a foreign law, and
the latter refers it back to the internal law, the law of the
forum shall apply.
Transmission Theory: If the foreign law refers it to a
third country, the said country’s law shall govern.
6. Doctrine of Processual Presumption
The foreign law, whenever applicable, should be proved
by the proponent thereof; otherwise, such law shall be
presumed to be exactly the same as the law of the
forum.
Rule on Prohibitive Laws
General Rule: Prohibitive laws concerning persons, their
acts or property, and laws which have for their object public
order, public policy or good customs are NOT rendered
ineffective by laws, or judgments promulgated or by
determinations or conventions agreed upon in foreign
country. (Art. 17(3))
Exception: Art. 26, par. 2 Family Code (ex. Divorce Law)
HUMAN RELATIONS
ABUSE OF RIGHT (Art. 19)
Elements: (LEP)
1. Existence of a legal right or duty;
2. Which is exercised in bad faith;
3. For the sole intent of prejudicing or injuring another.
Doctine of Violenti Non Fit Injuria (to which a person
assents is not esteemed in law as injury) – refers to self-
inflicted injuries or to the consent to injury which precludes
the recovery of damages by one who has knowingly and
voluntarily exposed himself to danger, even if he is not
negligent in doing so (Nikko Hotel Manila Garden, et all vs.
Roberto Reyes (Amay Bisaya) G.R. No. 154259, Feb. 28,
2005).
Damnum Absque Injuria (damage without injury) – A
person who exercises his legal right does no injury.
HOWEVER, it cannot be said that a person exercises a right
when he unnecessarily prejudices another or offends morals
or good customs.
 When damages result from a person’s exercise of rights,
it is damnum absque injuria (ABS-CBN v. Republic
Broadcasting Corp. G.R. No. 128690, January 21,
1999).
ACTS CONTRARY TO LAW (Art. 20)
Every person who is criminally liable shall also be civilly
liable, whether the act is intentional or unintentional.
ACTS CONTRA BONUS MORES
(Art. 21)
Elements: (L-C-I)
1. There is a legal act;
2. But which is contrary to morals, good customs, public
order or public policy; and,
3. It is done with intent to injure.
Articles 19, 20 and 21 are related to one another and under
these articles, an act which causes injury to another may be
made the basis for an award of damages (Albenson
Enterprises Corp. v. CA, G.R. No. 88694, January 11, 1993).
Articles 19 and 21 refer to INTENTIONAL acts while Article
20 pertains either to WILLFUL or NEGLIGENT acts, which
must be contrary to law. (Ibid.)
PRINCIPLE OF UNJUST ENRICHMENT
Accion In Rem Verso (Art.– 22)
action for recovery of what has been
paid without just cause.
Application:
1. When someone acquires or comes into possession of
something, which means delivery or acquisition of things;
AND
2. Acquisition is undue and at the expense of another,
which means without just or legal ground.
Accion in Rem Verso and Solutio Indebiti
Solutio Indebiti
Accion In Rem Verso
(Art. 2154)
It is not necessary that the Payment was made by mistake
payment be made by mistake, is an essential element to
payment could have been made maintain the action for recovery.
knowingly and voluntarily but
nevertheless, there would be
recovery of what has been paid
Requisites: (JELA)
1. Defendant has been enriched;
2. Enrichment is without just or legal ground;
3. Plaintiff has suffered a loss; and
4. He has no other action based on contract, quasi–
contract, crime or quasi–delict.
Note: For a more comprehensive discussion of Articles 19-
35, please see discussion thereof under Torts.
PREJUDICIAL QUESTION
(Art. 36)
General Rule: If both criminal and civil cases are filed in 1. Minority
court, the criminal case takes precedence. 2. Insanity or imbecility
3. State of being deaf mute
Exceptions: 4. Prodigality
1. In case of prejudicial questions, the criminal case is 5. Civil interdiction
suspended because the issues in the civil case are
determinative of the outcome of the criminal case. Modifications/ Limitations on Capacity to Act (Art. 39):
 A prejudicial question is that which arises in a case, (FI3T P2A3D)
the resolution of which is a logical antecedent of the 1. Family Relations;
issue involved therein, and the cognizance of which 2. Insanity;
pertains to another tribunal (Yap v. Paras, G.R. No. 3. Imbecility;
101236, January 30, 1992). 4. Insolvency;
5. Trusteeship;
Requisites: (Section 7, Rule 111, Rules of Court) 6. Penalty;
a. Previously instituted civil action involves an issue 7. Prodigality;
similar or intimately related to the issue raised in the 8. Age;
subsequent criminal action. 9. Alienage;
b. The resolution of such issue determines whether or 10. Absence; and
not the criminal action may proceed. 11. State of being deaf-mute.

2. Independent civil action granted by law (CD-QR)
a. Breach of constitutional and other rights (Art. 32)
b. Defamation, fraud, physical injuries (Art. 33)
c. Refusal or failure of city or municipal police to give
protection (Art. 34)
d. Quasi-delict or culpa-aquiliana (Art.2177)
Note: The consequences of the restrictions and
modifications in a person’s capacity to act are provided by
the Civil Code, other codes, special laws, and the Rules of
Court.
NATURAL PERSONS

Note: The Civil Code has SUPPLETORY application in Beginning of Personality

matters governed by special laws. General Rule: Birth determines personality (actual
personality) (Art. 40).
CIVIL PERSONALITY
Exception: The law considers the conceived child as born
Aptitude of being the subject, active or passive, of rights and for all purposes favorable to it if born alive. Therefore, the
obligations. child has a presumed personality, which has two
characteristics:
Juridical Capacity and Capacity to Act 1. Limited; and
Juridical Capacity Capacity To Act 2. Provisional/conditional (Quimiguing vs. Icao, G.R. No. L-
Fitness to be the subject of Power to do act with legal 26795, July 31, 1970)
legal relations (Art. 37) effects (Art. 37)
Passive Active Note: The concept of provisional personality CANNOT
Inherent Merely acquired be invoked to obtain damages for and in behalf of an
Lost only through death Lost through death and other aborted child (Geluz vs. CA, G.R. No. L-16439, July 20,
causes 1961).
Can exist without capacity to Cannot exist without juridical
act capacity
When is a Child Considered Born:
Cannot be limited or restricted Can be restricted, modified or
limited General Rule: For civil purposes, the fetus is considered born
if it is alive at the time it is completely delivered from the
Theories on Capacity to Act mother’s womb.
Theory of General Theory of Special
Capacities Capacities Exception: If the fetus had an intrauterine life of less than 7
Applies to natural persons Applies to juridical persons months, it is NOT deemed born if it dies within 24 hours after
This limits the power of its complete delivery from the maternal womb (Article 41).
One has the ability to do all
things with legal effects except juridical persons only to those
only in those specific that are expressly conferred
Presumption of Survivorship:
circumstances where the upon them or those which can
In case of doubt as to which of two or more persons called
capacity to act is restrained be implied therefrom or
incidental thereto to succeed each other died first:
1. Whoever alleges the death of one prior to the other, shall
Restrictions on Capacity to Act do not exempt the prove the same
incapacitated person from certain obligations as when the 2. In the absence of proof, the presumption is that the
latter arise from his acts or from property relations such as parties died at the same time and there shall be no
easements (Art. 38): (MID-PC) transmission of rights from one another (Art. 43)
Note: Art. 43 apply when the parties are called to succeed MARRIAGE
each other or are heirs to one another. But if the parties are
not called to succeed each other, Rule 131, Sec. 3 (jj) of the
A special contract of permanent union between a man and a
Rules of Court applies. Both are to be applied only in the
woman entered into in accordance with law for the
absence of facts. establishment of conjugal and family life. It is the foundation
of the family and an inviolable social institution whose nature,
The legitimacy or illegitimacy of a child attaches upon his/ consequences and incidents are governed by law and not
her conception (Continental Steel Manufacturing Corp. v. subject to stipulation (Art. 1).
Hon. Accredited Voluntary Arbitrator, et al., G.R. No. 182836,  Although a marriage contract is considered a primary
October 13, 2009). evidence of marriage, its absence is not always proof
that no marriage took place. Testimony of one of the
parties to the marriage, witnesses or solemnizing officer
JURIDICAL PERSONS
is admissible to prove the fact of marriage. (Balogbog v.
The following are juridical persons: CA, G.R. No. 83598, March 7, 1997).
1. State and its political subdivisions  Once the presumption of marriage arises, other evidence
2. Corporations, institutions and entities for public purpose may be presented in support thereof. The evidence need
or interest not necessarily or directly establish the marriage but
3. Corporations, partnership and associations for private must at least be enough to strengthen the presumption
interest or purpose to which the law grants a juridical of marriage. Every intendment of law leans toward
personality, separate and distinct from that of each legitimizing marriage (Delgado vda de De la Rosa v.
shareholder, partner or member (Art. 44) Heirs of Marciana vda de Damian, GR No 155733,
January 27, 2006)
Creation:
1. For (1) and (2), by the laws creating or recognizing them; Marriage and Ordinary Contract Distinguished
government corporations are created by their special Marriage Ordinary Contract
charters passed by the legislature Special contract Merely a contract
2. Private corporations are governed by BP 68; and Social institution Merely a contract
3. Partnerships and associations for private interest or Governed by law on marriage Governed by law on contracts
purpose are governed by the provisions of this Code Not subject to stipulations Generally subject to
concerning partnerships. except in property relations stipulations
Minors may contract thru their
Note: The estate of a deceased should be considered an Legal capacity is required parents or guardians or in
artificial or juridical person for the purposes of the settlement some cases by themselves
and distribution of his estate which include the exercise Contracting parties must only
Two or more parties
during the judicial administration thereof of his rights and the be two persons – one is a
regardless of gender
fulfillment of obligations which survived after his death female and the other is a male
(Limjoco vs. Intestate Estate of Pedro Fragrante, No. L–770 Parties can fix a period for its
Permanent Union efficacy to be ineffective after
April 27, 1948).
a few years

Cessation of Civil Personality Breach of obligations of

husband and wife does not
1. If natural persons: by death (Art. 42)
give rise to an action for
 The effect of death upon the rights and obligations of damages. The law provides Breach of ordinary contracts
the deceased is determined by law, contract, and by penal and civil sanctions such gives rise to an action for
will because some rights and obligations survive the as prosecution for adultery or damages
death of a person concubinage and
2. If juridical persons: by termination of existence proceedings for legal
 Dissolution of private corporations is governed by separation.
Title IV of the Corporation Code Can be dissolved only by Can be dissolved by mutual
 Dissolution of corporations for public interest or death or annulment, not by agreement and by other legal
purposes is governed by the provisions of their mutual agreement causes
respective charters and in its absence by the
Corporation Code Breach of Promise to Marry
General Rule: It is not by itself an actionable wrong
(Hermosisima vs. CA L-14628, September 30, 1960). One
FAMILY CODE
cannot seek specific performance to compel marriage.
The Family Code of the Philippines took effect on August 3,
Exceptions: To be actionable, there must be another act
1988.
independent of the breach of promise to marry which gives
rise to liability as where there was financial damage, social
humiliation, and moral seduction.
1. Mere breach of promise to marry is not an actionable
wrong; but to formally set a wedding and go through all
the preparations and publicity, only to walk out of it when
the matrimony is about to be solemnized, is quite
different. This is palpably and unjustifiably contrary to
good customs for which defendant must be held
answerable in damages pursuant to Art. 21 NCC.
(Wassmer vs. Velez, No. L-20089, December 26, 1964)
2. Where a man’s promise to marry was the proximate
cause of giving herself unto him in sexual congress and
there is proof he had no intention of marrying her, the
promise being a deceptive device, damages may be
awarded pursuant to Art. 21 NCC because of the fraud
and deceit behind it and the willful injury to her honor and
reputation (Baksh vs. CA, G.R. No. 97336, February 19,
1993).
Essential Requisites of Marriage: (LC)
1. Legal capacity of the contracting parties, who must be a
male and a female
a. Eighteen years old or above
b. Not under any impediment mentioned in Arts. 37 and
38 (Art. 5)
2. Consent freely given in the presence of a solemnizing
officer (Art. 2)
 No particular form required
 Capable of intelligently understanding the nature
and consequences of the act
Formal Requisites of Marriage: (ALM)
1. Authority of the solemnizing officer
2. Valid Marriage License
3. Marriage ceremony where the contracting parties appear
before the solemnizing officer, with their personal
declaration that they take each other as husband and
wife in the presence of not less than two witnesses of
legal age (Art. 3)
Effects of: (Art. 4)
1. ABSENCE of essential or formal requisites: The
marriage is VOID AB INITIO (ex: expired marriage
license, marriage by way of jest)
Exception: Marriage is valid where either or both parties
believed in good faith that the solemnizing officer had
legal authority to do so when he had none at the time of
the solemnization of the marriage (Art. 35(2))
2. DEFECT in any of the essential requisites: The marriage
is VOIDABLE (ex: consent obtained through force and
intimidation)
3. IRREGULARITY in any of the formal requisites: Does
NOT affect the validity of the marriage BUT will hold the
party responsible for such irregularity civilly, criminally
and administratively liable
Exception: Marriage is VOIDABLE where contracting party 18
years old or over but below 21 without the consent of the parents
Authority of Solemnizing Officer
It is not the presence/absence of the solemnizing officer
which constitutes the formal requirement but the
absence/presence of the authority of such solemnizing
officer at the time of the solemnization of the marriage.
General Rule: The Solemnizing officer is not duty bound to
investigate whether the marriage license was regularly
issued.
 Must only determine if it was issued by a competent
official
 If so, it may be presumed that the said official fulfilled the
duty to ascertain whether the contracting parties fulfilled
the requirements of law (People vs. Janssen)
Exception: In cases of marriage in articulo mortis, in remote
places, and between a man and a woman living together as
husband and wife for at least 5 years without legal
impediment to marry each other
 Solemnizing officer must take steps to ascertain the
ages, relationship, and qualifications of contracting
parties (Art. 29)
Persons Authorized to Solemnize Marriages (Art. 7):
PMJCCC
1. Priest, rabbi, imam or ministers of any church or religious
sect
a. duly authorized by his church or religious sect
b. registered with the Office of the Civil Registrar
General
c. acting within the limits of the written authority
granted
d. at least one of the parties belongs to the solemnizing
officer’s church or religious sect
2. Municipal and city mayors (Local Government Code,
January 1, 1992)
 The term “Mayor” includes a Vice-Mayor who is the
“Acting Mayor” or who is merely acting as a Mayor
(People vs. Bustamante, citing Laxamana vs.
Baltazar)
3. Incumbent members of the judiciary within the court’s
jurisdiction
4. Ship captains or air plane chiefs (Art. 31)
 Only in cases of marriages in articulo mortis between
passengers or crew members
 During the voyage, while plane is in flight or ship is
at sea and during stopovers at ports of call
 Assistant pilot has no authority to solemnize a
marriage even if airplane chief dies during the trip
5. Commanders of military unit, in the absence of chaplain
(Art. 32)
 Must be a commissioned officer – rank should start
from second lieutenant, ensign and above (Webster
Dictionary, 1991 edition)
 Only in cases of marriage in articulo mortis between
members of the armed forces or civilians within the
zone of military operation
6. Consul generals, consuls or vice–consuls of the
Republic of the Philippines abroad (Art. 10)
 Only in cases of marriage between Filipino citizens
abroad
 The marriage ceremony is in accordance with the
laws of the Philippines (Art. 17, NCC)
  Also performs the duties of the local civil registrar
 Consuls on home assignment in the Philippines
cannot solemnize marriage
Valid Marriage License
The license is valid in any part of the Philippines for 120 days
from date of issue, which is the date when the local civil
registrar signed the license.
 Automatically canceled at the expiration of the period if
contracting parties have not made use of it (Art. 20)
 The requirement that the parties or one of them must
reside in the place of the issuance of the license is a
mere formal requirement. If there is no compliance with
the same, the defect is a mere infirmity that does not
affect the validity of the marriage (Ty vs. Court of
Appeals, 2003).
 When either or both parties are foreign citizens, they
must first submit a CERTIFICATE OF LEGAL
CAPACITY TO MARRY issued by their
diplomatic/consular officials before marriage license can
be obtained (Art. 21)
Exception: Marriage of both foreign citizens will be
solemnized by their country’s consul-general assigned in
the Philippines, if their country’s law allows the same
Stateless persons/refugees from other countries shall submit
an affidavit stating circumstances to show capacity to
contract marriage before a marriage license can be obtained
(Art. 21)
Marriages Exempt from License Requirement (MOLAR)
(Art.27)
1. Among Muslims or members of ethnic cultural
communities solemnized in accordance with their
customs, rites and practices (Art. 33)
2. Solemnized outside the Phil. where no marriage license
is required by the country where they were solemnized
3. Of a man and a woman who have lived together as
husband and wife for at least 5 years and without legal
impediment to marry each other (Art. 34)
Requisites:
a. The man and woman must have
been living together as husband and wife for at least five
years before the marriage;
b. The parties must have no legal
impediment to marry each other;
c. The fact of absence of legal
impediment between the parties must be present at the
time of marriage;
d. The parties must execute an
affidavit stating that they have lived together for at least
five years (and are without legal impediment to marry
each other); and
e. The solemnizing officer must
execute a sworn statement that he had ascertained the
qualifications of the parties and that he had found no
legal impediment to their marriage (Manzano v. Sanchez
G.R. No. MTJ–00–1329, March 08, 2001)
 The 5–year period should be computed on the basis
of cohabitation as husband and wife where the only
missing factor is the marriage contract to validate the
union (ex: if both cohabited at the age of 17,
counting starts when parties reach 18 years)
 This 5–year period should be the years immediately
before the day of the marriage and it should be a
period of cohabitation characterized by
EXCLUSIVITY – meaning no legal impediment was
present at any time within the 5 years and
CONTINUITY – that is unbroken (Republic v. Dayot,
G.R. No. 175581,March 8, 2008)
4. In articulo mortis
 Remains valid even if ailing party subsequently
survives (Art. 27)
5. In remote places
 Residence of either party is so located that there is
no means of transportation to enable them to
personally appear before the local civil registrar (Art.
28)
Marriage Ceremony
There is no particular form prescribed by the Family Code.
The absence of two witnesses of legal age is merely an
irregularity but the party responsible for the irregularity shall
be civilly, criminally, and administratively liable.
Marriages by proxy
1. If it was solemnized in the Philippines, the marriage is
VOID because physical appearance is required under
Art. 6.
2. If performed abroad, whether between Filipinos or
foreigners or mixed, the controlling article is Art. 26 of the
Family Code.
Authorized Venues of Marriage (Art. 8)
General Rule: Must be solemnized publicly, and not
elsewhere, in the:
1. Chambers of the judge or in open court
2. Church, chapel or temple
3. Office of consul–general, consul or vice–consul
Exceptions:
1. Marriage in articulo mortis;
2. Marriage in remote places;
3. Marriage at a house or place designated by the parties
in a sworn statement to that effect, with the written
request of both parties to the solemnizing officer
Note: This provision is only directory and the requirement
that the marriage be solemnized in a particular or a public
place is not an essential requisite.
 FOREIGN MARRIAGE
Validity of Marriage
General Rule: Where one or both parties to the marriage are
citizens of the Philippines, the foreign marriage is valid in this
country if solemnized in accordance with the laws of the
country of celebration. (Art. 26)
 In case a Filipino contracts a foreign marriage which is
null and void in the place where it was solemnized, the
same shall also be null and void in the Philippines even
if such was valid if celebrated under Philippine laws
 If both are foreigners, lex loci celebrationis applies
Exceptions: Foreign marriages shall not be recognized in
the Philippines if: (B2MA-PIP)
1. Contracted by a national who is below 18 years of age
(Art. 35(1))
2. Bigamous or polygamous except as provided in Art. 41,
FC (Art. 35(4))
3. Contracted through mistake of one party as to the
identity of the other (Art. 35(5))
4. Contracted following the annulment or declaration of
nullity of a previous marriage but before partition
(Art.35(6))
5. Void due to psychological incapacity (Art. 36)
6. Incestuous (Art.37)
7. Void for reasons of public policy (Art. 38)
Divorce
General rule: No divorce is allowed in the Philippines
Exceptions:
1. Between 2 aliens – if valid in their national laws even if
marriage was celebrated in the Philippines
2. Between a Filipino and an Alien – if (a) there is a valid
marriage celebrated between a Filipino citizen and a
foreigner; and (b) a valid divorce according to the
national law of the foreigner is obtained abroad by the
alien spouse capacitating him or her to remarry. Art.
26(2))
 The Filipino spouse should likewise be allowed to
re–marry as if he or she was a foreigner at the time
of the solemnization of the marriage. To rule
otherwise would sanction absurdity and injustice
 Party pleading it must prove divorce as a fact and
demonstrate its conformity to the foreign law
allowing it, which must be proved as courts cannot
take judicial notice of foreign laws. If a valid divorce
decree has been obtained abroad, there is no more
need to file an action to nullify the marriage. The
plaintiff has no more personality to sue since the
marriage bond has already been severed (Felicitas
Amor-Catalan vs. CA, G.R. No. 167109, February 6,
2007).
 Article 26 (2) applies where parties were Filipino
citizens at the time of celebration of the marriage, but
later on, one of them becomes naturalized as a
foreign citizen and obtains a divorce decree because
the reckoning point is their citizenship at the time a
valid divorce is obtained abroad by the alien spouse
capacitating the latter to re–marry. (Rep. vs.
Cipriano Obrecido III, G.R. No. 154380, Oct. 5,
2005)
 In Edgar San Luis v. Felicidad Sagalongos (G.R. No.
134029, February 6, 2007), whether a Filipino who
had been divorced by his alien spouse abroad may
validly remarry in the Philippines considering that the
marriage was solemnized before the Family Code, it
was held that it need not retroactively apply the
provisions of the Family Code, particularly Article 26,
par. (2), considering that there is sufficient
jurisprudential basis allowing the retroactivity of the
Family Code.
 There must be a showing that the divorce decree
gave the foreigner spouse legal capacity to remarry
because in some jurisdictions, remarriage may be
limited or prohibited (Bayot vs. Bayot, G.R. No.
155635 & 163979, November 7, 2008).
VOID MARRIAGES (Art. 35)
Due to absence of any of the essential requisites: (BB–
LAPIS)
1. Contracted by any party below 18 years of age even with
parental consent;
2. Solemnized by any person NOT LEGALLY authorized to
perform marriages UNLESS one or both of the parties
believed in good faith that the solemnizing officer had the
legal authority to do so;
3. Solemnized WITHOUT a license except as otherwise
provided;
4. Bigamous or polygamous marriages except Art 41;
5. Marriages contracted through mistake of one of the
parties as to the physical identity of the other
6. Subsequent marriages that are void under Article 53 of
the Family Code
7. Contracted by a party who at the time of the marriage
was psychologically incapacitated.
Note: Enumeration in Art 35 is NOT exclusive.
Psychological Incapacity (Art. 36)
No less than a mental (not physical) incapacity that causes a
party to be truly incognitive of the basic marital covenants
that concomitantly must be assumed and discharged by the
parties to the marriage. Its meaning is confined to the most
serious cases of personality disorders clearly demonstrative
of an utter insensitivity or inability to give meaning and
significance to the marriage. This psychological condition
must exist at the time the marriage is celebrated. (Santos vs.
CA, G.R. No. 112019, January 4, 1995)
Requisites of Psychological Incapacity: (JIG)
1. Gravity – must be grave/serious such that the party
would be incapable of carrying out the ordinary duties
required in a marriage;
2. Juridical Antecedence – Must be rooted in the history of
the party antedating the marriage, although the overt
manifestations may emerge only after the marriage; and
3. Incurability – Must be incurable or, even if it were
otherwise, the cure would be beyond the means of the
 party involved. (Santos vs. CA, G.R. No. 112019,
January 4, 1995)
May involve a senseless, protracted and constant refusal to
comply with the essential marital obligations by one or both
of the spouses although he, she or they are physically
capable of performing such obligations (Chi Ming Tsoi v. CA,
G.R. No. 119190, Jan. 16, 1997)
A person who is unable to distinguish between fantasy and
reality would be unable to comprehend the legal nature of the
marital bond much less its psychic meaning and the
obligations attached to the marriage, including parenting.
One unable to adhere to reality cannot be expected to adhere
as well to any legal or emotional commitments (Antonio v.
Reyes, G.R. No. 155800, March 10, 2006)
While disagreements on money matters would, no doubt,
affect the other aspects of one’s marriage as to make the
wedlock unsatisfactory, this is not a sufficient ground to
declare a marriage null and void. In fact, the Court takes
judicial notice of the fact that disagreements’ regarding
money matters is a common, and even normal, occurrence
between husbands and wives. (Tongol vs. Tongol, G.R. No.
157610, October 19, 2007)
Petitioner is not entitled to moral damages based on
declaration of psychological incapacity because the award of
moral damages should be predicated, not on the mere act of
entering into the marriage, but on specific evidence that it
was done deliberately and with malice by a party who had
known of his or her disability and yet willfully concealed the
same. (Noel Buenaventura v. CA, et al., G.R. No. 127358,
March 31, 2005)
Essential Elements: (MAVFFCCI)
1. Mental condition
2. Applies to a person who is maritally contracted to
another
3. Marriage entered into with volition
4. Failure to perform or comply with the essential
obligations in marriage
5. Failure to perform is chronic
6. Cause is psychological in nature
7. Cause is serious, with juridical antecedence, and must
be incurable
8. Incapacity results in the failure of the marriage.
Jurisprudential Guidelines (Molina Doctrine) (Republic v.
Molina G.R. No. 108763, February 13, 1997): (PROBE PIG)
1. Plaintiff has burden of proof;
2. Root cause of the psychological incapacity must be:
a. Medically or clinically identified
b. Alleged in the complaint:
i. Sufficiently proven by experts
ii. Clearly explained in the decision
3. Incapacity proven to be existing at the time of the
celebration of marriage;
4. Incapacity must be permanent or incurable;
5. Illness is grave enough to bring about disability to
assume essential marital obligations;
6. Marital obligations refer to Art. 68–71, 220,221 and 225
of the FC;
7. Interpretations of the National Appellate Matrimonial
Tribunal of the Catholic Church of the Philippines while
not controlling should be given great respect;
8. Trial court must order the prosecuting attorney or fiscal
and the Solicitor General to appear for the state.
Note: The SC held in Te vs. Te (G.R. No. 161793, February
13, 200) as decisive the psychological evaluation made by
the expert witness and thus ruled that the marriage of the
parties is null and void on the ground of both parties’
psychological incapacity. The clinical psychologist did not
personally examine the respondent, and relied only on the
information provided by petitioner. Further, the psychological
incapacity was not shown to be attended by gravity, juridical
antecedence, and incurability, deviating from Republic vs.
CA and Molina (1997) ruling, upon the Court’s reasoning that
the impositions of the Molina case were inappropriate, as
cases of psychological incapacity should be decided not on
the basis of a priori assumptions, predictions or
generalizations but according to its own facts. Courts should
interpret the provision on a case-to-case basis; guided by
experience, the findings of experts and researchers in
psychological disciplines, and by decisions of church
tribunals. The Molina doctrine has become a strait-jacket,
forcing all sizes to fit into and be bound by it. The Court in
conveniently applying Molina, has allowed diagnosed
sociopaths, schizophrenics, nymphomaniacs, narcissists
and the like, to continuously debase and pervert the sanctity
of marriage.
The wife’s promiscuity and the psychiatrist’s report that she
was suffering from social personality disorder exhibited by
blatant display of infidelity, emotional immaturity, and
irresponsibility cannot be equated with psychological
incapacity (Dedel vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 151867,
January 29, 2004).
Similarly, the husband’s alleged alcoholism, drunkenness,
his habitual verbal and physical abuse of the wife, failure to
support the latter and her children, and unbearable jealousy,
do not constitute psychological incapacity (Republic vs.
Melgar, G.R. No. 139676,March 31, 2006).
In Marcos v. Marcos (GR. NO. 136490, October 19, 2000),
the SC held that psychological incapacity may be established
by the totality of the evidence presented. The facts alleged in
the petition and the evidence presented, considered in
totality, should be sufficient to convince the court of the
psychological incapacity of the party concerned. (Bernardino
S. Zamora vs. CA, G.R. No. 141917, February 7, 2007)
 The complete facts should allege the physical
manifestations, if any, as are indicative of psychological
incapacity at the time of the celebration (Sec. 2(d) A.M.
No. 02-11-10-SC, March 15, 2003)
 There is NO REQUIREMENT that the person sought to
be declared psychologically incapacitated should be
 personally examined by a physician/ psychologist as a
condition sine qua non to arrive at such declaration. It
can be proven by independent means that one is
psychologically incapacitated, There is no reason why
the same should not be credited. (Republic of the
Philippines vs. Laila Tanyag-San Jose and Manolito San
Jose, G.R. No. 168328, February 28, 2007)
Psychological incapacity is not meant to comprehend all
possible cases of psychoses. The fourth guideline in Molina
requires that the psychological incapacity as understood
under Art. 36 (FC) must be relevant to the assumption of
marriage obligations, not necessarily to those not related to
marriage, like the exercise of a profession or employment in
a job (Tongol vs. Tongol, G.R. No. 157610, October 19,
2007).
The new Rule promulgated by the SC on 4 March 2003 on
Annulment and Declaration of Nullity of Marriage dispensed
with the certification from the Solicitor General, stating
therein his reasons for his agreement or opposition to the
petition. Attachment of expert opinions to the petition is also
dispensed with (Tongol vs. Tongol, G.R. No. 157610,
October 19, 2007).
Rule on Declaration of Absolute Nullity of Void Marriages and
Annulment of Voidable Marriages (A.M. No. 02- 11- 10 SC,
March 15, 2003), provides option to the trial judge to refer the
case to a court- appointed psychologist/ expert for an
independent assessment and evaluation of the psychological
state of the parties, in order to assist the court to arrive at an
intelligent and judicious determination of the case.
of the parties to the marriage can be proved in a civil
case
The following can now marry each other: (LSG-CA)
1. Brother–in–law and sister–in–law;
2. Stepbrother and stepsister;
3. Guardian and ward;
4. Adopted and illegitimate child, parents and relatives by
consanguinity or affinity of the adopter;
5. Parties who have been convicted of adultery or
concubinage.
6. Collateral relatives by the half blood
Void Subsequent Marriages
1. Without judicial declaration of nullity of previous void
marriage (Art. 40)
2. Without judicial declaration of presumptive death of
absent spouse (Art. 41)
3. Where the absent spouse was presumed dead, and both
the present spouse and would–be spouse were in bad
faith in contracting marriage (Art. 44)
4. Failure to comply with Art 52 requiring the partition and
distribution of properties and delivery of children’s
presumptive legitimes which should be recorded in the
appropriate civil registry and registry of property after
obtaining judgment for declaration of nullity or annulment
(Art. 53).
Note: Failure to record in the civil registry and registry of
property the judgment of annulment or of absolute nullity of
the marriage, partition and distribution of the property of the
spouses and the delivery of the children’s presumptive
legitimes shall not affect third persons (Arts. 52–53).

Note: Final judgment denying a petition for nullity on the Void and Voidable Marriage Distinguished
ground of psychological incapacity bars a subsequent Void Voidable
petition for declaration of nullity on the ground of lack of Decree of nullity Decree of annulment
Incapable of ratification Ratified by free cohabitation
marriage license. There is res judicata (Mallion vs. Alcantara,
Can be attacked directly or Can be attacked directly only
G.R. No. 141528, October 31, 2006).
collaterally
Co–ownership of properties Generally Conjugal
Incestuous marriages, whether the relationship is through joint actual Partnership or Absolute
legitimate or illegitimate, between (Art. 37): contributions Community
1. Ascendants & Descendants of any degree; Always void Valid until annulled
2. Brothers & Sisters whether full or half–blood Action for declaration of Action prescribes
nullity does not prescribe
Those contrary to public policy contracted between (Art. Only the spouses can have Those provided under Art. 47
38): (C-KA3PS3) their marriage declared void
1. Collateral blood relatives whether legitimate or starting March 15, 2003; but
illegitimate up to the 4th civil degree before such date, any
2. Step–parents & step children interested party can do so
3. Parents–in–law & children–in–law
4. The adopting parent & the adopted child Judicial Declaration of Nullity
5. The surviving spouse of the adopting parent & the The absolute nullity of a previous marriage may be invoked
adopted child for purposes of remarriage on the basis solely of a final
6. The surviving spouse of the adopted child & the adopter judgment declaring such previous marriage void (Art. 40).
7. Adopted child & a legitimate child of the adopter  Remarriage is not the sole purpose of declaration of
8. Adopted children of the same adopter nullity of a marriage as it can be declared void for other
9. Parties where one, with the intention to marry the other, purposes
killed the latter’s spouse, or his/her spouse.
 There is no need for conviction in a criminal case of
the guilty party. The fact of killing committed by one
For purposes of remarriage, the only legally acceptable basis
for declaring a previous marriage an absolute nullity is a final
judgment declaring such previous marriage void
 Parties to a marriage should not be permitted to judge
for themselves its nullity, only competent courts having
such authority. Prior to such declaration of nullity, the
validity of the first marriage is beyond question (Landicho
vs. Rolova L-22579, February 23, 1968).
 One who enters into a subsequent marriage without first
obtaining such judicial declaration is guilty of bigamy.
This principle applies even if the earlier union is
characterized by statute as “void.” (Manuel vs. People,
G.R. No. 165842,November 29, 2005)
 Interestingly, in Lucio Morigo vs. People, GR No.
145226, Feb. 6, 2004, the SC ruled that a judicial
declaration of nullity is NOT NEEDED where NO
MARRIAGE CEREMONY at all was performed by a duly
authorized solemnizing officer, as where the parties
merely signed a marriage contract on their own without
the presence of the solemnizing officer
For purposes other than remarriage, such as but not limited
to determination of heirship, legitimacy or illegitimacy of a
child, settlement of estate, dissolution of property regime or
criminal case, other evidence is acceptable to show the
nullity of the marriage and the court may pass upon the
validity of marriage so long as it is essential to the
determination of the case (Niñal vs. Bayadog, G.R. No.
133778, March 14, 2000).
 Collateral attack of marriage is allowed
 In a case for concubinage, the accused need not present
a final judgment declaring his marriage void, for he can
adduce evidence in the criminal case of the nullity of his
marriage other than proof of a final judgment declaring
his marriage void (Beltran vs. People, G.R. No. 137567,
June 20, 2000).
Who may file Action for Declaration of Nullity
Before March 15, 2003 – Any interested party can file a direct
case for nullity of marriage, e.g., a father can file a case for
declaration of nullity of a bigamous marriage entered into by
his daughter and a married man.
March 15, 2003 and onwards – A petition for declaration of
absolute nullity of void marriage may be filed solely by the
husband or wife. A.M. 02-11-10-SC which provides for the
same is prospective in its application. (Juan de Dios Carlos
vs. Falicidad Sandoval, G.R. No. 179922, December 16,
2008)
Imprescriptibility of Action for Declaration of Nullity
General Rule: The action or defense for the declaration of
absolute nullity of a marriage shall not prescribe (Art. 39, as
amended by R.A. 8533 approved on February 23, 1998).
Declaration of Nullity not a Prejudicial Question
The pendency of the civil action for nullity of marriage does
not pose a prejudicial question in a criminal case for
concubinage. (Beltran vs. People, G.R. No. 137567, June
20, 2000). This ruling applies in a case for bigamy by analogy
since both crimes presuppose the subsistence of a marriage.
(Bobis vs. Bobis, G.R. No.138509, July 31, 2000).
BIGAMOUS MARRIAGES (Art. 41)
General Rule: A marriage contracted by any person during
the subsistence of a previous valid marriage shall be null
and void (Gomez v. Lipana, GR. No. L–23214, June 30,
1970)
.
Exception: Before the celebration of the subsequent
marriage, a declaration of presumptive death is obtained
after complying with the following requirements: (JAB)
1. Absence of the other spouse must have been for 4
consecutive years, or 2 years where there was danger of
death under circumstances laid down in Art. 391 of the
NCC
2. Well-founded belief of the present spouse who wishes to
marry that absent spouse is already dead
3. Judicial declaration of presumptive death; present
spouse must file a summary proceeding for the
declaration of the presumptive death of the absentee
without prejudice to the latter’s reappearance
Note: This is intended to protect the present spouse from
criminal prosecution for bigamy under Art 349 of the Rev
Penal Code. However, if the bigamous marriage was
committed abroad, the guilty party cannot be criminally
prosecuted for bigamy in the Philippines as our penal
statutes are territorial in nature.
Exception to the exception: If both spouses of the
subsequent marriage acted in bad faith, said marriage shall
be void ab initio and all donations made by one in favor of
the other are revoked by operation of law. (Art. 44)
Effect of Reappearance of Absent Spouse:
General Rule: The subsequent bigamous marriage under
Article 41 remains valid despite reappearance of the
absentee spouse.
Exception: Subsequent marriage is automatically
terminated if the reappearance was recorded in a sworn
statement in the civil registry of the residence of the parties
to the subsequent marriage at the instance of any interested
person with due notice to said spouses, without prejudice to
the fact of reappearance being judicially determined in case
such fact is disputed.
Exception to the exception: If there was a previous
judgment annulling or declaring the first marriage a nullity,
the subsequent bigamous marriage remains valid.
Notes:
 If the absentee reappears, but no step is taken to
terminate the subsequent marriage either by affidavit or
by court action, such absentee’s mere reappearance,
even if made known to the spouses in the subsequent
marriage will not terminate such marriage (SSS v.
Bailon, G.R. No 165545, March 24, 2006).
 Judgment declaring a spouse presumptively dead is
unappealable because the proceedings thereon are
summary in nature as per Art. 153 FC. The remedy is
special civil action for certiorari (Heirs of Maura So vs.
Obliosca, G.R. No. 147082, January 28, 2008).
See Comparative Chart on Effects of Declaration of Nullity,
Annulment and Termination of Marriage in Art. 41 and Legal
Separation.
c. It is incurable;
d. It is unknown to the other spouse;
e. The other spouse must not also be impotent.
Doctrine of Triennial Cohabitation – Presumption that the
husband is impotent should the wife still remain a virgin
for at least 3 years from time spouses started cohabiting.
6. Sexually transmissible disease of either party found to
be serious and appears to be incurable.

Elements: (ESSA)
VOIDABLE MARRIAGES (Art. 45)
a. Existing at the time of marriage
b. Sexually transmissible disease
Grounds: (UP–FAVS) must exist AT THE TIME of c. It is serious; and
marriage d. Appears incurable
1. Age of the party in whose behalf the marriage is sought
to be annulled was 18 years of age or over but below 21, The enumeration in Article 46 is EXCLUSIVE (Anaya vs.
and the marriage was solemnized without the consent of Palaroan, GR. No. L–27930, November 26, 1970).
the parents, guardian or person exercising substitute
parental authority over the party, in that order; Note: Misrepresentation as to character, health, rank,
2. Unsound mind of either party fortune or chastity is NOT a ground for annulment.
3. Consent of either party obtained by fraudulent means as
enumerated in Art. 46: (NPSD)
a. Non–disclosure of a previous conviction by final Grounds
Persons
Prescrip-tive
judgment of the other party of a crime involving moral Who May Ratifi-cation
(F2I2NS) Period
Sue
turpitude; Force, Injured party W/in 5 years Free cohabita-
b. Concealment by the wife of the fact that at the time intimidation, from the time tion after
of the marriage, she was pregnant by a man other or undue the force, disap-
than her husband; influence intimidation, or pearance of
 Must have been done in bad faith. If the woman undue force, intimida-
did not expressly inform the man of her influence tion / undue
ceased influence
pregnancy but such physical condition was respect-tively
readily apparent to the man, he cannot claim Fraud Injured party W/in 5 years Free cohabita-
lack of knowledge thereof. (Buccat vs. Buccat, from the tion even with
G.R. No. 47101, April 25, 1941) discovery of full know-ledge
c. Concealment of a sexually transmissible disease, fraud of
regardless of its nature, existing at the time of the facts constitu-
ting the fraud
marriage; and
Incapabi-lity Injured party W/in 5 years No ratification
 Nature or gravity of disease is irrelevant; it is to consum- after the since defect is
enough that there was concealment at the time mate celebration of permanent
of the ceremony the marriage
d. Concealment of drug addiction, habitual alcoholism, Insanity Sane spouse Anytime Free cohabita-
homosexuality or lesbianism existing at the time of who has no before the tion after
the marriage know-ledge death of either insane regains
of the insanity party sanity
4. Vitiated consent of either party through force,
intimidation or undue influence
 Criminal liability attaches to anyone who uses
violence, intimidation and fraud in contracting a Relative Anytime
marriage (Art. 350 RPC) guardian or before the
5. Physical incapability of either party to consummate the persons death of either
Free cohabita-
having legal party
marriage with the other, and such incapacity continues tion after
charge of the
and appears to be incurable (impotency) insane
insane regains
 Permanent inability on the part of one of the spouses Insane During lucid
sanity
to perform the complete act of sexual intercourse, spouse interval or after
arising from physical and other causes, including regaining
psychological causes sanity
Parent/ legal Anytime
 Need not be universal; condition may exist only as to
guardian before the “no
the present spouse and not as to others having consent” party Free cohabita-
charge of the reaches 21 tion after
Non– consent “no–consent”
Requisites for annulment due to Impotence: (CUPIN) reaching age
a. It exists at the time of the celebration of the marriage; party of 21
b. It is permanent;
 ”No consent “ W/in 5 years
party after reaching
21
STD Injured party W/in 5 years No ratifica-tion
after the since defect is
celebration of perma-nent.
the marriage
Note: Whichever comes first may convalidate the marriage:
Cohabitation OR Prescription.
Additional Requirements for Annulment or Declaration
of Nullity
Prosecuting attorney or fiscal should:
1. Appear on behalf of the state
2. Take steps to prevent collusion between the parties
3. Take care that evidence is not fabricated or suppressed
Collusion
Public Prosecutor shall be ordered by the court to investigate
and to submit a report on whether parties are in collusion
when:
1. No answer is filed or the answer does not tender an
issue;
2. Respondent filed his answer but failed to appear at the
pre-trial (Secs. 8(3) and 13(b), A.M. No. 02-11-12-SC,
March 15, 2003)
Note: The same also applies to Legal Separation pursuant
to Secs. 5(c) and 10(2) of A.M. No. 02-11-11-SC, March 15,
2003.
There will be collusion only if the parties had arranged to
make it appear that a ground existed or had been committed
although it was not, or if the parties had connived to bring
about a matrimonial case even in the absence of grounds
therefor (Ocampo vs. Florenciano, GR. No. L–13553,
February 23, 1960).
However, petitioner’s vehement opposition to the annulment
proceedings negates the conclusion that collusion existed
between the parties. Under these circumstances, the non–
intervention of a prosecuting attorney to assure lack of
collusion between the contending parties is not fatal to the
validity of the proceedings in the trial court (Tuason vs. CA,
G.R. No. 116607, April 10, 1996).
Decision
No judgment on the pleadings, summary judgment,
confession of judgment, or judgment by default shall be
allowed.
If the defendant spouse fails to answer the complaint, the
court CANNOT declare him or her in default. But instead,
should order the public prosecutor to determine if collusion
exists between the parties.
Note: The same also applies to Legal Separation
After court grants petition, it shall issue the decree of
absolute nullity or annulment only after compliance with the
following:
1. Must proceed with the liquidation, partition, and
distribution of the properties of the spouses including
custody and support of the common children unless such
matters had been adjudicated in previous judicial
proceedings
2. Delivery of the children’s presumptive legitimes
3. Registration of the entry of judgment granting petition for
declaration of absolute nullity or annulment in the Civil
Registry where the marriage was celebrated and in the
Civil Registry of the place where the FC was located
4. Registration of approved partition and distribution of
properties of the spouses in the proper Registry of Deeds
where the real properties are located
Note: The same applies to Legal Separation.
In case of annulment or declaration of absolute nullity of
marriage, Art.49 of the Family Code grants visitation rights to
a parent who is deprived of the custody of the children. Such
visitation rights flow from the natural right of both parents to
each other’s company. There being no such parent– child
relationship between them, Gerardo has no demandable
right to visit the child of Mario with Theresa (Concepcion vs.
CA GR. No. 12345, August 31, 2005).
Rule on Declaration of Absolute Nullity of Void
Marriages and Annulment of Voidable Marriages (A.M.
00–11–01–SC)
 This took effect on March 15, 2003.
 This Rule shall govern petitions for declaration of
absolute nullity of void marriages and annulment of
voidable marriages under the Family Code of the
Philippines.
 The Rules of Court have suppletory application.
For a more comprehensive discussion on the procedural
aspects of the Rule, please refer to the Remedial Law
Memory Aid.
LEGAL SEPARATION
Exclusive Grounds: (SAMBA–LIPAD)
1. Repeated physical violence or grossly abusive conduct
directed against the petitioner, a common child, or a child
of the petitioner
2. Attempt of the respondent to corrupt or induce the
petitioner, a common child, or a child of the petitioner, to
engage in prostitution, or connivance in such corruption
or inducement
 Refers to prostitution only and irrespective of the age
of the child
3. Attempt by the respondent against the life of the
petitioner
4. Final judgment sentencing the respondent to
imprisonment of more than 6 years even if pardoned
5. Drug addiction or habitual alcoholism of the respondent
6. Lesbianism or homosexuality of the respondent
7. Abandonment of the petitioner by the respondent without
 justifiable cause for more than 1 year
 There must be absolute cessation of marital
relations, duties, and rights, with the intention of
perpetual separation (Partosa-Jo vs. CA, G.R. No.
82606, December 18, 1992). Abandonment implies
total renunciation of duties.
8. Physical violence or moral pressure to compel petitioner
to change religious or political affiliation
9. Contracting by respondent of a subsequent bigamous
marriage; and
10. Sexual infidelity or perversion.
 Sexual perversion includes engaging in such
behavior not only with third persons but also with the
spouse
Cooling–Off Period – 6-month period from the filing of the
petition designed to give the parties enough time to further
contemplate their positions with the end in view of attaining
reconciliation between them. No action for Legal Separation
shall be tried during such period (Art. 58). It is a mandatory
requirement and its non-compliance makes the decision
infirm. (Pacete vs. Carrianga, G.R. No. 53880, March 17,
1994)
Grounds for Denial of Petition (Art. 56):
(C4–MP–DR)
1. Condonation of the offense or act complained of. But
failure of the husband to look for his adulterous wife is
NOT condonation to wife's adultery (Ocampo vs.
Florenciano, G.R. No. L–13553, February 23, 1960).
 The act of the husband in having sexual intercourse
with his wife in spite of his knowledge of the latter’s
infidelity is an act of implied condonation. (Ginez v.
Bugayong, G.R. No. L-10033, December 28, 1956)
2. Consent to commission of offense or act complained of
3. Connivance between parties of commission of offense or
act constituting ground
 Connivance is corrupt consenting
4. Collusion between parties
 Collusion is corrupt agreement between the spouses
to procure divorce or legal separation
5. Mutual Guilt or where both parties have given ground for
legal separation
6. Prescription
 An action for legal separation shall be filed within 5
years from time of occurrence of the cause (Art. 57)
7. Death of either party during the pendency of the case
(Lapuz–Sy vs. Eufemio, G.R. No. 113842, August 3,
1994)
8. Reconciliation of the spouses during the pendency of the
case
 By filing in the same proceeding a joint manifestation
under oath, duly signed by the spouses (Art. 65)
Effects of Filing Petition: (LDS)
1. The spouses shall be entitled to live separately from
each other
2. In the absence of an agreement between the parties, the
court shall designate the husband, the wife, or a third
person to manage the absolute community or conjugal
partnership property (Art. 61)
3. The husband shall have no more right to have sexual
intercourse with his wife.
Decision
No legal separation may be decreed unless the Court has
taken steps toward the reconciliation of the spouses and is
fully satisfied, despite such efforts, that reconciliation is
highly improbable. (Art. 59)
Note: The wife who has been granted legal separation
cannot petition to be allowed to revert to her maiden name.
Even if the parents are separated de facto, still in the
absence of judicial grant of custody to one parent, both
parents are entitled to the custody of their child. The remedy
of habeas corpus may be resorted to by the parent who has
been deprived of the rightful custody of the child (Salientes v.
Abanilla, G.R. No. 162734, August 29, 2006).
Note: A decree of legal separation, on the ground of
concubinage, may issue upon proof of preponderance of
evidence in the action for legal separation. No criminal
proceedings or conviction is necessary.
Effects of Reconciliation of the Spouses (Art. 66):
1. The legal separation proceedings, if still pending, shall
thereby be terminated at whatever stage.
2. The final decree of legal separation shall be set aside,
but the separation of property and any forfeiture of share
of the guilty spouse already effected shall subsist, unless
the spouses agree to revive their former property regime.
Revival of Property Regime (Art. 67)
Agreement of revival and motion for its approval shall be filed
in court in the same proceeding for legal separation and shall
be executed under oath and shall specify:
1. Properties to be contributed anew to restored regime;
2. Those to be retained as separated properties of each
spouse;
3. Names of all known creditors, addresses, and amounts
owing to each
After due hearing, court shall take measures to protect
interest of creditors and such order shall be recorded in the
proper registries of properties but the same shall not
prejudice creditors not listed or notified, unless debtor-
spouse has sufficient separate properties to satisfy creditor’s
claim.
Rule on Legal Separation (A.M. 02–11–11–SC)
This took effect on March 15, 2003.
This Rule shall govern petitions for legal separation under
the Family Code in the Philippines; the Rules of Court shall
apply suppletorily.
Please refer to the Remedial Law Memory Aid for the
procedural provisions of the Rule.
 Termination Declaration Of Nullity Annulment Legal Separation (Art. 55)

(Art.41) (Art. 40) (Art. 45)

Marital Status

Subsequent marriage Previous marriage, void ab initio Valid until annulled or No dissolution of marriage,
automatically terminated by terminated only separation of bed-and-
affidavit of reappearance board; entitled to live
separately

Status of Children Born/Conceived Before Termination

Legitimate Illegitimate except those as Legitimate Legitimate

provided in Art. 36 and 53

Custody of Children

Custody in case of dispute shall During Pendency:

be decided by the court in
separate proceedings for 1. Written Agreement
custody but same 2. Absence thereof, court decides based on best interest of child and may award it in the following
order of preference:
considerations as in Declaration
a. Both parents jointly
of Nullity
b. Either parent, may consider choice of child over 7 years unless parent chosen is unfit
c. Surviving grandparent, if several then choice of child over 7 years unless grandparent
chosen is unfit/ disqualified
d. Eldest brother/sister over 21unless unfit/ disqualified
e. Any other person deemed by court who is suitable
After Decree:

To the innocent spouse but no child under 7 shall be separated from the mother unless there are
compelling reasons

Child Support

Support in case of dispute shall During pendency:

be decided by the court in
separate proceedings for 1. Written agreement
custody but same 2. In the absence thereof, from properties of the absolute community of property (ACP) or conjugal
partnership (CP)
considerations as in Declaration
After Decree:
of Nullity
Either parent/ both may be ordered by court to give an amount necessary for support in proportion to
resources/means of giver and necessities of recipient

Spousal Support

During pendency:

1. Written agreement
2. In the absence thereof, from properties of the ACP or CP, considered as advance to be deducted
from share during liquidation
3. Restitution if after final judgment court finds that persons providing support pendent lite is not
liable therefor (Sec. 7, Rule 61, ROC)
Property Relations

1. ACP or CP shall be dissolved and liquidated 1. ACP or CP shall be

2. If either spouse contracted marriage in bad faith, he or she has no right to any share of net profits dissolved and liquidated.
earned by ACP or CP 2. Offending spouse has no
3. Net profits shall be forfeited in favor of common children, or if none, children of guilty spouse by right to any share of net
previous marriage, or in default thereof, the innocent spouse profits earned by ACP or
4. In all other cases of void marriage, Art. 147 and 148 applies (Valdes vs. RTC) CP
3. Net profits shall be
In addition, for marriages under Art. 40 and 45: forfeited in favor of
common children, or if
1. All creditors of spouses and of the ACP or CP shall be notified of the proceedings for liquidation none, children of guilty
2. Conjugal dwelling and lot on which it is situated shall be adjudicated pursuant to Art. 102 and 129 spouse by previous
marriage, or in default
thereof, the innocent
spouse

1. Shall remain valid, unless
donee contracted marriage
in bad faith, in which case,
donation to said donee
shall be revoked by
operation of law.
2. If both spouses of
subsequent marriage acted
in bad faith, donations
propter nuptias made by
one in favor of the other are
revoked by operation of law
Innocent spouse may revoke designation of spouse in bad faith as beneficiary even if stipulated as
irrevocable (Art. 43(4))
1. Spouse in bad faith disqualified to inherit from innocent spouse by testate or intestate succession
2. If both spouses of subsequent marriage acted in bad faith, testamentary dispositions made by one
in favor of the other are revoked by operation of law (Art. 44)
Presumptive Legitime
1. Delivery of presumptive legitime of all common children
computed as of date of final judgment without prejudice to
ultimate successional rights of children accruing upon death of
either or both parents
2. Shall be considered as advances on common children’s
legitime (Art. 51)
Donation Propter Nuptias
1. Shall remain valid, unless 1.
donee contracted marriage in
bad faith, in which case,
donation to said donee shall be
revoked by operation of law.
2. If both spouses of subsequent
marriage acted in bad faith,
donations propter nuptias 2.
made by one in favor of the
other are revoked by operation
of law (Art. 44)
3. If both spouses in good faith,
donor after finality of decree
may revoke pursuant to Art.
86(1)
4. If marriage not celebrated:
a. Those stipulated in
marriage settlement are
void (Art. 81)
b. Those excluded from
marriage settlement or if
no such contract, may be 3.
revoked by donor (Art.
86(1))
Insurance Policy
Succession
Shall remain valid, unless
donee contracted
marriage in bad faith, in
which case, donation to
said donee shall be
revoked by operation of
law. (Art. 43(3))
No conflict with Art. 86(2)
as such does not require
that marriage be annulled
first before donor may
revoke donation – donor
has 5 years from time he
had knowledge of lack of
consent; cannot revoke if
had knowledge thereof
before the marriage (Sta.
Maria, Melencio Jr. S,
Persons and Family
Relations Law, fourth
Edition, 2004)
Conflict with Art. 86(3)
but Art. 43(3) prevails –
more in harmony with
general purpose/intent of
act (Ibid.)
1. Donor is given option to
revoke or not, if donor
decides to revoke, must
do so within 5 years from
finality of decree
2. But if ground for legal
separation is sexual
infidelity (adultery or
concubinage), donation
between persons guilty
thereof at time of donation
is void (Art. 739(1)NCC)
Innocent spouse may revoke
donations made by him or her
in favor of offending spouse as
well as designation of latter as
beneficiary even if stipulated
as irrevocable (Art. 64). Action
to revoke donation must be
brought within 5 years from
finality of decree
1. Offending spouse
disqualified from
inheriting from innocent
spouse by intestate
succession
2. Provisions in favor of
offending spouse made in
the will of innocent
spouse are revoked by
operation of law (Art.
63(4))