67%(3)67% fanden dieses Dokument nützlich (3 Abstimmungen)
2K Ansichten2 Seiten
Juan de Dios Carlos filed a petition to annul the marriage between his late brother Teofilo and Felicidad. He argued the marriage was void due to the lack of a marriage license. Felicidad maintained the marriage was valid. The court ruled that under Rule on Declaration of Absolute Nullity, only a spouse has standing to file for annulment. Since Juan was not a spouse, he did not have the right to bring this petition. The marriage also took place before the Family Code so the applicable Civil Code was silent on who could file, but this could not be construed as allowing anyone to do so. Therefore, the court dismissed the case.
Juan de Dios Carlos filed a petition to annul the marriage between his late brother Teofilo and Felicidad. He argued the marriage was void due to the lack of a marriage license. Felicidad maintained the marriage was valid. The court ruled that under Rule on Declaration of Absolute Nullity, only a spouse has standing to file for annulment. Since Juan was not a spouse, he did not have the right to bring this petition. The marriage also took place before the Family Code so the applicable Civil Code was silent on who could file, but this could not be construed as allowing anyone to do so. Therefore, the court dismissed the case.
Juan de Dios Carlos filed a petition to annul the marriage between his late brother Teofilo and Felicidad. He argued the marriage was void due to the lack of a marriage license. Felicidad maintained the marriage was valid. The court ruled that under Rule on Declaration of Absolute Nullity, only a spouse has standing to file for annulment. Since Juan was not a spouse, he did not have the right to bring this petition. The marriage also took place before the Family Code so the applicable Civil Code was silent on who could file, but this could not be construed as allowing anyone to do so. Therefore, the court dismissed the case.
Felicidad Carlos asserted that the marriage between
Sandoval his late brother and Felicidad was a nullity in GR No. 179922, December 16, 2008 view of the absence of the required marriage license. He likewise maintained that his deceased brother was neither the FACTS: natural nor the adoptive father of Teofilo Carlos II. He argued that the properties Spouses Felix B. Carlos and Felipa Elimia covered by such certificates of title, died intestate. They left six parcels of land including the sums received by respondents to their compulsory heirs Teofilo Carlos and as proceeds, should be reconveyed to him. petitioner Juan de dios Carlos. During the lifetime of Felix Carlos, he agreed to Felicidad contended that the dearth of transfer his estate to Teofilo in order to details regarding requisite marriage license avoid payment of inheritance taxes. Teofilo, did not invalidate Felicidad’s marriage to in turn, undertook to deliver and turn over Teofilo. Felicidad declared that Teofilo II the share to the other legal heir Juan de was the illegitimate child of the deceased dios Carlos. Teofilo Carlos with another woman.
Eventually, the first three (3) parcels of land ISSUE:
were transferred and registered in the name W/N Juan de Dios Carlos has the right to of Teofilo while Parcel No. 4 was registered file petition for annulment against in the name of petitioner. respondent Felipa? On May 13, 1992, Teofilo died intestate. He RULING: was survived by respondents Felicidad and their son, Teofilo Carlos II. Upon Teofilo’s Based on A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC known as death, parcel no. 5 and 6 were registered in “Rule on Declaration of Absolute Nullity of the name of respondent Felicidad and co- Void Marriages and Annulment of Voidable respondent, Teofilo II. Marriages” states that a petition for the declaration of absolute nullity of void In 1994, Petitioner instituted a suit against marriages may be filed solely by a husband respondents before RTC in Muntinlupa City. or wife. Exceptions (1) Nullity of Marriage Both parties submitted and caused the cases commenced before the effectivity of approval of Partial Compromise Agreement A.M No. 02-11-10-SC and (2) Mariages where they acknowledged their shares in celebrated during the effectivity of Civil the proceeds from the sale of a portion of Code the first parcel of land which includes the remaining 6,691 square meters portion of Under the Rule on Declaration of Absolute said land. Nullity and Void Marriage and Annulment of Voidable Marriage, the petition for Juan de dios Carlos and Felicidad entered declaration of absolute nullity of marriage to two more contracts in August 1994 where may not be filed by any party outside they equally divided the third and fourth marriage. This rule is an exclusive right of parcels of land. the spouses as stated by: SEC 2. Petition for declaration of absolute nullity of void marriage:
(a) Who may file – A petition for
declaration of absolute nullity of void marriage may be filed solely by the husband or wife
The records reveal that when Teofilo died
intestate in 1992, his only surviving compulsory heirs are respondent Felicidad and their son, Teofilo II. Under the law on succession, successional rights are transmitted from the moment of the death of the decedent and compulsory heirs are called to succeed by operation of law.
Since A.M No. 02-11-10 is prospective in
application, the rule does not apply to cases already commenced before March 15, 2003. The marriage in controversy is celebrated on May 14, 1962, the marriage is having solemnized prior to the effectivity of the Family Code, the applicable law is the Civil Code which was in effect at the time of its celebration.
The Civil Code is silent as to who may bring
an action to declare the marriage void. The absence of a provision in the civil code cannot be construed as a license for any person to institute a nullity of marriage case.