1.

MERE BREACH OF PROMISE TO MARRY IS NOT AN ACTIONABLE WRONG; BUT TO FORMALLY SET A WEDDING AND GO
FAMILY CODE 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
The Family Code of the Philippines took effect on August 3, 1988. DEFENDANT MUST BE HELD ANSWERABLE IN DAMAGES PURSUANT TO ART. 21 NCC. (WASSMER VS. VELEZ, NO. L-
20089, DECEMBER 26, 1964)
MARRIAGE
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
A special contract of permanent union between a man and a woman entered into in accordance with law for MAY BE AWARDED PURSUANT TO ART. 21 NCC BECAUSE OF THE FRAUD AND DECEIT BEHIND IT AND THE WILLFUL
the establishment of conjugal and family life. It is the foundation of the family and an inviolable social institution INJURY TO HER HONOR AND REPUTATION (BAKSH VS. CA, G.R. NO. 97336, FEBRUARY 19, 1993).
whose nature, consequences and incidents are governed by law and not subject to stipulation (Art. 1).
 Although a marriage contract is considered a primary evidence of marriage, its absence is not always ESSENTIAL REQUISITES OF MARRIAGE: (LC)
proof that no marriage took place. Testimony of one of the parties to the marriage, witnesses or
solemnizing officer is admissible to prove the fact of marriage. (Balogbog v. CA, G.R. No. 83598, March 1. Legal capacity of the contracting parties, who must be a male and a female
7, 1997). a. Eighteen years old or above
 Once the presumption of marriage arises, other evidence may be presented in support thereof. The b. Not under any impediment mentioned in Arts. 37 and 38 (Art. 5)
evidence need not necessarily or directly establish the marriage but must at least be enough to strengthen 2. Consent freely given in the presence of a solemnizing officer (Art. 2)
the presumption of marriage. Every intendment of law leans toward legitimizing marriage (Delgado vda  No particular form required
de De la Rosa v. Heirs of Marciana vda de Damian, GR No 155733, January 27, 2006)  Capable of intelligently understanding the nature and consequences of the act

Marriage and Ordinary Contract Distinguished FORMAL REQUISITES OF MARRIAGE: (ALM)

Marriage Ordinary Contract 1. Authority of the solemnizing officer

Special contract Merely a contract 2. Valid Marriage License
3. Marriage ceremony where the contracting parties appear before the solemnizing officer, with their personal
Social institution Merely a contract declaration that they take each other as husband and wife in the presence of not less than two witnesses
of legal age (Art. 3)
Governed by law on marriage Governed by law on contracts
Effects of: (Art. 4)
Not subject to stipulations except in property relations Generally subject to stipulations
1. ABSENCE of essential or formal requisites: The marriage is VOID AB INITIO (ex: expired marriage
Minors may contract thru their parents or guardians or in license, marriage by way of jest)
Legal capacity is required
some cases by themselves
Exception: Marriage is valid where either or both parties believed in good faith that the solemnizing officer
Contracting parties must only be two persons – one is a had legal authority to do so when he had none at the time of the solemnization of the marriage (Art. 35(2))
Two or more parties regardless of gender
female and the other is a male
2. DEFECT in any of the essential requisites: The marriage is VOIDABLE (ex: consent obtained through
Parties can fix a period for its efficacy to be ineffective force and intimidation)
Permanent Union after a few years

Breach of obligations of husband and wife does not give Breach of ordinary contracts gives rise to an action for 3. IRREGULARITY in any of the formal requisites: Does NOT affect the validity of the marriage BUT will hold
rise to an action for damages. The law provides penal and damages the party responsible for such irregularity civilly, criminally and administratively liable
civil sanctions such as prosecution for adultery or
concubinage and proceedings for legal separation. Exception: Marriage is VOIDABLE where contracting party 18 years old or over but below 21 without the consent of the
Can be dissolved by mutual agreement and by other legal parents
Can be dissolved only by death or annulment, not by causes
mutual agreement AUTHORITY OF SOLEMNIZING OFFICER

Breach of Promise to Marry 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: IT IS NOT BY ITSELF AN ACTIONABLE WRONG (HERMOSISIMA VS. CA L-14628, SEPTEMBER 30, 1960).
ONE CANNOT SEEK SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE TO COMPEL MARRIAGE. GENERAL RULE: THE SOLEMNIZING OFFICER IS NOT DUTY BOUND TO INVESTIGATE WHETHER THE MARRIAGE LICENSE WAS
REGULARLY ISSUED.
EXCEPTIONS: TO BE ACTIONABLE, THERE MUST BE ANOTHER ACT INDEPENDENT OF THE BREACH OF PROMISE TO MARRY
WHICH GIVES RISE TO LIABILITY AS WHERE THERE WAS FINANCIAL DAMAGE, SOCIAL HUMILIATION, AND MORAL SEDUCTION.
 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 Exception: Marriage of both foreign citizens will be solemnized by their country’s consul-general assigned in
PARTIES FULFILLED THE REQUIREMENTS OF LAW (PEOPLE VS. JANSSEN) the Philippines, if their country’s law allows the same

EXCEPTION: IN CASES OF MARRIAGE IN ARTICULO MORTIS, IN REMOTE PLACES, AND BETWEEN A MAN AND A WOMAN LIVING Stateless persons/refugees from other countries shall submit an affidavit stating circumstances to show
TOGETHER AS HUSBAND AND WIFE FOR AT LEAST 5 YEARS WITHOUT LEGAL IMPEDIMENT TO MARRY EACH OTHER capacity to contract marriage before a marriage license can be obtained (Art. 21)

 SOLEMNIZING OFFICER MUST TAKE STEPS TO ASCERTAIN THE AGES, RELATIONSHIP, AND QUALIFICATIONS OF
Marriages Exempt from License Requirement (MOLAR) (Art.27)
CONTRACTING PARTIES (ART. 29)

PERSONS AUTHORIZED TO SOLEMNIZE MARRIAGES (Art. 7): PMJCCC 1. Among Muslims or members of ethnic cultural communities solemnized in accordance with their customs,
rites and practices (Art. 33)
1. Priest, rabbi, imam or ministers of any church or religious sect 2. Solemnized outside the Phil. where no marriage license is required by the country where they were
a. duly authorized by his church or religious sect solemnized
b. registered with the Office of the Civil Registrar General 3. Of a man and a woman who have lived together as husband and wife for at least 5 years and without legal
c. acting within the limits of the written authority granted impediment to marry each other (Art. 34)
d. at least one of the parties belongs to the solemnizing officer’s church or religious sect
Requisites:
2. Municipal and city mayors (Local Government Code, January 1, 1992) a. The man and woman must have been living together as husband and wife for at least five years
before the marriage;
 The term “Mayor” includes a Vice-Mayor who is the “Acting Mayor” or who is merely acting as a Mayor
b. The parties must have no legal impediment to marry each other;
(People vs. Bustamante, citing Laxamana vs. Baltazar)
c. The fact of absence of legal impediment between the parties must be present at the time
of marriage;
3. Incumbent members of the judiciary within the court’s jurisdiction
d. The parties must execute an affidavit stating that they have lived together for at least five years
4. Ship captains or air plane chiefs (Art. 31) (and are without legal impediment to marry each other); and
e. The solemnizing officer must execute a sworn statement that he had ascertained the
 Only in cases of marriages in articulo mortis between passengers or crew members
qualifications of the parties and that he had found no legal impediment to their marriage
 During the voyage, while plane is in flight or ship is at sea and during stopovers at ports of call (Manzano v. Sanchez G.R. No. MTJ–00–1329, March 08, 2001)
 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)  The 5–year period should be computed on the basis of cohabitation as husband and wife where the
 Must be a commissioned officer – rank should start from second lieutenant, ensign and above only missing factor is the marriage contract to validate the union (ex: if both cohabited at the age of
(Webster Dictionary, 1991 edition) 17, counting starts when parties reach 18 years)
 Only in cases of marriage in articulo mortis between members of the armed forces or civilians within
the zone of military operation  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
6. Consul generals, consuls or vice–consuls of the Republic of the Philippines abroad (Art. 10) at any time within the 5 years and CONTINUITY – that is unbroken (Republic v. Dayot, G.R. No.
175581,March 8, 2008)
 Only in cases of marriage between Filipino citizens abroad
 The marriage ceremony is in accordance with the laws of the Philippines (Art. 17, NCC)
4. In articulo mortis
 Also performs the duties of the local civil registrar
 Remains valid even if ailing party subsequently survives (Art. 27)
 Consuls on home assignment in the Philippines cannot solemnize marriage
5. In remote places
Valid Marriage License
 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)
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. MARRIAGE CEREMONY

 Automatically canceled at the expiration of the period if contracting parties have not made use of it (Art. THERE IS NO PARTICULAR FORM PRESCRIBED BY THE FAMILY CODE.
20)
 The requirement that the parties or one of them must reside in the place of the issuance of the license is THE ABSENCE OF TWO WITNESSES OF LEGAL AGE IS MERELY AN IRREGULARITY BUT THE PARTY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE
a mere formal requirement. If there is no compliance with the same, the defect is a mere infirmity that does IRREGULARITY SHALL BE CIVILLY, CRIMINALLY, AND ADMINISTRATIVELY LIABLE.
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)
MARRIAGES BY PROXY 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
1. If it was solemnized in the Philippines, the marriage is VOID because physical appearance is required a foreigner; and (b) a valid divorce according to the national law of the foreigner is obtained abroad by the
under Art. 6. alien spouse capacitating him or her to remarry. Art. 26(2))
2. If performed abroad, whether between Filipinos or foreigners or mixed, the controlling article is Art. 26 of  The Filipino spouse should likewise be allowed to re–marry as if he or she was a foreigner at the time
the Family Code. 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
AUTHORIZED VENUES OF MARRIAGE (Art. 8) 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
General Rule: Must be solemnized publicly, and not elsewhere, in 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).
1. Chambers of the judge or in open court  Article 26 (2) applies where parties were Filipino citizens at the time of celebration of the marriage,
2. Church, chapel or temple but later on, one of them becomes naturalized as a foreign citizen and obtains a divorce decree
3. Office of consul–general, consul or vice–consul 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,
Exceptions: Oct. 5, 2005)
 In Edgar San Luis v. Felicidad Sagalongos (G.R. No. 134029, February 6, 2007), whether a Filipino
1. Marriage in articulo mortis; who had been divorced by his alien spouse abroad may validly remarry in the Philippines considering
2. Marriage in remote places; that the marriage was solemnized before the Family Code, it was held that it need not retroactively
3. Marriage at a house or place designated by the parties in a sworn statement to that effect, with the written apply the provisions of the Family Code, particularly Article 26, par. (2), considering that there is
request of both parties to the solemnizing officer 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
Note: This provision is only directory and the requirement that the marriage be solemnized in a particular or a
because in some jurisdictions, remarriage may be limited or prohibited (Bayot vs. Bayot, G.R. No.
public place is not an essential requisite.
155635 & 163979, November 7, 2008).

FOREIGN MARRIAGE
VOID MARRIAGES (Art. 35)
Validity of Marriage

General Rule: Where one or both parties to the marriage are citizens of the Philippines, the foreign marriage DUE TO ABSENCE OF ANY OF THE ESSENTIAL REQUISITES: (BB–LAPIS)
is valid in this country if solemnized in accordance with the laws of the country of celebration. (Art. 26)
1. Contracted by any party below 18 years of age even with parental consent;
 In case a Filipino contracts a foreign marriage which is null and void in the place where it was solemnized,
2. Solemnized by any person NOT LEGALLY authorized to perform marriages UNLESS one or both of the
the same shall also be null and void in the Philippines even if such was valid if celebrated under Philippine
parties believed in good faith that the solemnizing officer had the legal authority to do so;
laws
 If both are foreigners, lex loci celebrationis applies
3. Solemnized WITHOUT a license except as otherwise provided;
Exceptions: Foreign marriages shall not be recognized in the Philippines if: (B2MA-PIP)
4. Bigamous or polygamous marriages except Art 41;
1. Contracted by a national who is below 18 years of age (Art. 35(1)) 5. Marriages contracted through mistake of one of the parties as to the physical identity of the other
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)) 6. Subsequent marriages that are void under Article 53 of the Family Code
4. Contracted following the annulment or declaration of nullity of a previous marriage but before partition
(Art.35(6)) 7. Contracted by a party who at the time of the marriage was psychologically incapacitated.
5. Void due to psychological incapacity (Art. 36)
6. Incestuous (Art.37) Note: Enumeration in Art 35 is NOT exclusive.
7. Void for reasons of public policy (Art. 38)
PSYCHOLOGICAL INCAPACITY (ART. 36)
Divorce
No less than a mental (not physical) incapacity that causes a party to be truly incognitive of the basic marital
General rule: No divorce is allowed in the Philippines
covenants that concomitantly must be assumed and discharged by the parties to the marriage. Its meaning is
Exceptions: 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 6. Marital obligations refer to Art. 68–71, 220,221 and 225 of the FC;
the marriage is celebrated. (Santos vs. CA, G.R. No. 112019, January 4, 1995) 7. Interpretations of the National Appellate Matrimonial Tribunal of the Catholic Church of the Philippines
while not controlling should be given great respect;
Requisites of Psychological Incapacity: (JIG) 8. Trial court must order the prosecuting attorney or fiscal and the Solicitor General to appear for the state.

1. Gravity – must be grave/serious such that the party would be incapable of carrying out the ordinary duties Note: The SC held in Te vs. Te (G.R. No. 161793, February 13, 200) as decisive the psychological evaluation
required in a marriage; made by the expert witness and thus ruled that the marriage of the parties is null and void on the ground of
2. Juridical Antecedence – Must be rooted in the history of the party antedating the marriage, although the both parties’ psychological incapacity. The clinical psychologist did not personally examine the respondent,
overt manifestations may emerge only after the marriage; and and relied only on the information provided by petitioner. Further, the psychological incapacity was not shown
3. Incurability – Must be incurable or, even if it were otherwise, the cure would be beyond the means of the to be attended by gravity, juridical antecedence, and incurability, deviating from Republic vs. CA and Molina
party involved. (Santos vs. CA, G.R. No. 112019, January 4, 1995) (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
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 generalizations but according to its own facts. Courts should interpret the provision on a case-to-case basis;
Ming Tsoi v. CA, G.R. No. 119190, Jan. 16, 1997) 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
A person who is unable to distinguish between fantasy and reality would be unable to comprehend the legal it. The Court in conveniently applying Molina, has allowed diagnosed sociopaths, schizophrenics,
nature of the marital bond much less its psychic meaning and the obligations attached to the marriage, nymphomaniacs, narcissists and the like, to continuously debase and pervert the sanctity of 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) 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
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 psychological incapacity (Dedel vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 151867, January 29, 2004).
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) 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
Petitioner is not entitled to moral damages based on declaration of psychological incapacity because the award incapacity (Republic vs. Melgar, G.R. No. 139676,March 31, 2006).
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 In Marcos v. Marcos (GR. NO. 136490, October 19, 2000), the SC held that psychological incapacity may be
yet willfully concealed the same. (Noel Buenaventura v. CA, et al., G.R. No. 127358, March 31, 2005) 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
Essential Elements: (MAVFFCCI) the party concerned. (Bernardino S. Zamora vs. CA, G.R. No. 141917, February 7, 2007)

1. Mental condition  The complete facts should allege the physical manifestations, if any, as are indicative of psychological
2. Applies to a person who is maritally contracted to another incapacity at the time of the celebration (Sec. 2(d) A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC, March 15, 2003)
3. Marriage entered into with volition  There is NO REQUIREMENT that the person sought to be declared psychologically incapacitated should
4. Failure to perform or comply with the essential obligations in marriage be personally examined by a physician/ psychologist as a condition sine qua non to arrive at such
5. Failure to perform is chronic declaration. It can be proven by independent means that one is psychologically incapacitated, There is no
6. Cause is psychological in nature reason why the same should not be credited. (Republic of the Philippines vs. Laila Tanyag-San Jose and
7. Cause is serious, with juridical antecedence, and must be incurable Manolito San Jose, G.R. No. 168328, February 28, 2007)
8. Incapacity results in the failure of the marriage.
Psychological incapacity is not meant to comprehend all possible cases of psychoses. The fourth guideline in
Jurisprudential Guidelines (Molina Doctrine) (Republic v. Molina G.R. No. 108763, February 13, 1997): Molina requires that the psychological incapacity as understood under Art. 36 (FC) must be relevant to the
(PROBE PIG) 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).
1. Plaintiff has burden of proof;
2. Root cause of the psychological incapacity must be:
The new Rule promulgated by the SC on 4 March 2003 on Annulment and Declaration of Nullity of Marriage
a. Medically or clinically identified
b. Alleged in the complaint: dispensed with the certification from the Solicitor General, stating therein his reasons for his agreement or
i. Sufficiently proven by experts opposition to the petition. Attachment of expert opinions to the petition is also dispensed with (Tongol vs.
ii. Clearly explained in the decision Tongol, G.R. No. 157610, October 19, 2007).
3. Incapacity proven to be existing at the time of the celebration of marriage;
4. Incapacity must be permanent or incurable; Rule on Declaration of Absolute Nullity of Void Marriages and Annulment of Voidable Marriages (A.M. No. 02-
5. Illness is grave enough to bring about disability to assume essential marital obligations; 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, Incapable of ratification Ratified by free cohabitation
in order to assist the court to arrive at an intelligent and judicious determination of the case.
Can be attacked directly or collaterally Can be attacked directly only
Note: Final judgment denying a petition for nullity on the ground of psychological incapacity bars a subsequent
petition for declaration of nullity on the ground of lack of marriage license. There is res judicata (Mallion vs. Co–ownership of properties through joint actual Generally Conjugal Partnership or Absolute Community
contributions
Alcantara, G.R. No. 141528, October 31, 2006).
Always void Valid until annulled
INCESTUOUS MARRIAGES, WHETHER THE RELATIONSHIP IS LEGITIMATE OR ILLEGITIMATE, BETWEEN (Art. 37):
Action for declaration of nullity does not prescribe Action prescribes
1. Ascendants & Descendants of any degree;
2. Brothers & Sisters whether full or half–blood Only the spouses can have their marriage declared void Those provided under Art. 47
starting March 15, 2003; but before such date, any
THOSE CONTRARY TO PUBLIC POLICY CONTRACTED BETWEEN (ART. 38): (C-KA3PS3) interested party can do so

1. Collateral blood relatives whether legitimate or illegitimate up to the 4th civil degree
2. Step–parents & step children
3. Parents–in–law & children–in–law
JUDICIAL DECLARATION OF NULLITY
4. The adopting parent & the adopted child
5. The surviving spouse of the adopting parent & the adopted child
6. The surviving spouse of the adopted child & the adopter The absolute nullity of a previous marriage may be invoked for purposes of remarriage on the basis solely of
7. Adopted child & a legitimate child of the adopter a final judgment declaring such previous marriage void (Art. 40).
8. Adopted children of the same adopter  Remarriage is not the sole purpose of declaration of nullity of a marriage as it can be declared void for
9. Parties where one, with the intention to marry the other, killed the latter’s spouse, or his/her spouse. other purposes
 There is no need for conviction in a criminal case of the guilty party. The fact of killing committed by
one of the parties to the marriage can be proved in a civil case 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
The following can now marry each other: (LSG-CA)  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
1. Brother–in–law and sister–in–law; question (Landicho vs. Rolova L-22579, February 23, 1968).
2. Stepbrother and stepsister;  One who enters into a subsequent marriage without first obtaining such judicial declaration is guilty of
3. Guardian and ward; bigamy. This principle applies even if the earlier union is characterized by statute as “void.” (Manuel vs.
4. Adopted and illegitimate child, parents and relatives by consanguinity or affinity of the adopter; People, G.R. No. 165842,November 29, 2005)
5. Parties who have been convicted of adultery or concubinage.  Interestingly, in Lucio Morigo vs. People, GR No. 145226, Feb. 6, 2004, the SC ruled that a judicial
6. Collateral relatives by the half blood 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
VOID SUBSEQUENT MARRIAGES without the presence of the solemnizing officer

1. Without judicial declaration of nullity of previous void marriage (Art. 40) For purposes other than remarriage, such as but not limited to determination of heirship, legitimacy or
2. Without judicial declaration of presumptive death of absent spouse (Art. 41) illegitimacy of a child, settlement of estate, dissolution of property regime or criminal case, other evidence is
3. Where the absent spouse was presumed dead, and both the present spouse and would–be spouse were acceptable to show the nullity of the marriage and the court may pass upon the validity of marriage so long as
in bad faith in contracting marriage (Art. 44) it is essential to the determination of the case (Niñal vs. Bayadog, G.R. No. 133778, March 14, 2000).
4. Failure to comply with Art 52 requiring the partition and distribution of properties and delivery of children’s  Collateral attack of marriage is allowed
presumptive legitimes which should be recorded in the appropriate civil registry and registry of property  In a case for concubinage, the accused need not present a final judgment declaring his marriage void, for
after obtaining judgment for declaration of nullity or annulment (Art. 53). 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).
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 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
children’s presumptive legitimes shall not affect third persons (Arts. 52–53).
file a case for declaration of nullity of a bigamous marriage entered into by his daughter and a married man.
Void and Voidable Marriage Distinguished 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
Void Voidable de Dios Carlos vs. Falicidad Sandoval, G.R. No. 179922, December 16, 2008)
Decree of nullity Decree of annulment
Imprescriptibility of Action for Declaration of Nullity  Judgment declaring a spouse presumptively dead is unappealable because the proceedings thereon are
General Rule: The action or defense for the declaration of absolute nullity of a marriage shall not prescribe summary in nature as per Art. 153 FC. The remedy is special civil action for certiorari (Heirs of Maura So
(Art. 39, as amended by R.A. 8533 approved on February 23, 1998). vs. Obliosca, G.R. No. 147082, January 28, 2008).
Declaration of Nullity not a Prejudicial Question See Comparative Chart on Effects of Declaration of Nullity, Annulment and Termination of Marriage in Art. 41
The pendency of the civil action for nullity of marriage does not pose a prejudicial question in a criminal case
and Legal Separation.
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).

VOIDABLE MARRIAGES (Art. 45)

BIGAMOUS MARRIAGES (Art. 41)
Grounds: (UP–FAVS) must exist AT THE TIME of marriage
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) 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, and the marriage was solemnized without the consent of the parents, guardian or person
Exception: Before the celebration of the subsequent marriage, a declaration of presumptive death is obtained exercising substitute parental authority over the party, in that order;
after complying with the following requirements: (JAB)
2. Unsound mind of either party
1. Absence of the other spouse must have been for 4 consecutive years, or 2 years where there was danger
3. Consent of either party obtained by fraudulent means as enumerated in Art. 46: (NPSD)
of death under circumstances laid down in Art. 391 of the NCC
a. Non–disclosure of a previous conviction by final judgment of the other party of a crime involving moral
2. Well-founded belief of the present spouse who wishes to marry that absent spouse is already dead
turpitude;
3. Judicial declaration of presumptive death; present spouse must file a summary proceeding for the
b. Concealment by the wife of the fact that at the time of the marriage, she was pregnant by a man other
declaration of the presumptive death of the absentee without prejudice to the latter’s reappearance
than her husband;
 Must have been done in bad faith. If the woman did not expressly inform the man of her
Note: This is intended to protect the present spouse from criminal prosecution for bigamy under Art 349 of the
pregnancy but such physical condition was readily apparent to the man, he cannot claim lack of
Rev Penal Code. However, if the bigamous marriage was committed abroad, the guilty party cannot be knowledge thereof. (Buccat vs. Buccat, G.R. No. 47101, April 25, 1941)
criminally prosecuted for bigamy in the Philippines as our penal statutes are territorial in nature. c. Concealment of a sexually transmissible disease, regardless of its nature, existing at the time of the
marriage; and
Exception to the exception: If both spouses of the subsequent marriage acted in bad faith, said marriage  Nature or gravity of disease is irrelevant; it is enough that there was concealment at the time of
shall be void ab initio and all donations made by one in favor of the other are revoked by operation of law. (Art. the ceremony
44) d. Concealment of drug addiction, habitual alcoholism, homosexuality or lesbianism existing at the time
of the marriage
Effect of Reappearance of Absent Spouse:
4. Vitiated consent of either party through force, intimidation or undue influence
General Rule: The subsequent bigamous marriage under Article 41 remains valid despite reappearance of  Criminal liability attaches to anyone who uses violence, intimidation and fraud in contracting a
marriage (Art. 350 RPC)
the absentee spouse.
5. Physical incapability of either party to consummate the marriage with the other, and such incapacity
Exception: Subsequent marriage is automatically terminated if the reappearance was recorded in a sworn continues and appears to be incurable (impotency)
statement in the civil registry of the residence of the parties to the subsequent marriage at the instance of any  Permanent inability on the part of one of the spouses to perform the complete act of sexual
interested person with due notice to said spouses, without prejudice to the fact of reappearance being judicially intercourse, arising from physical and other causes, including psychological causes
determined in case such fact is disputed.  Need not be universal; condition may exist only as to the present spouse and not as to others

Exception to the exception: If there was a previous judgment annulling or declaring the first marriage a nullity, Requisites for annulment due to Impotence: (CUPIN)
the subsequent bigamous marriage remains valid.
a. It exists at the time of the celebration of the marriage;
Notes: b. It is permanent;
c. It is incurable;
 If the absentee reappears, but no step is taken to terminate the subsequent marriage either by affidavit or d. It is unknown to the other spouse;
by court action, such absentee’s mere reappearance, even if made known to the spouses in the e. The other spouse must not also be impotent.
subsequent marriage will not terminate such marriage (SSS v. Bailon, G.R. No 165545, March 24, 2006).
 Doctrine of Triennial Cohabitation – Presumption that the husband is impotent should the wife still remain ”No consent “ party W/in 5 years after
a virgin for at least 3 years from time spouses started cohabiting. reaching 21

6. Sexually transmissible disease of either party found to be serious and appears to be incurable.
STD Injured party W/in 5 years after the No ratifica-tion since
Elements: (ESSA) celebration of the defect is perma-nent.
marriage
a. Existing at the time of marriage
b. Sexually transmissible disease
c. It is serious; and
d. Appears incurable Note: Whichever comes first may convalidate the marriage: Cohabitation OR Prescription.

The enumeration in Article 46 is EXCLUSIVE (Anaya vs. Palaroan, GR. No. L–27930, November 26, 1970). Additional Requirements for Annulment or Declaration of Nullity

Prosecuting attorney or fiscal should:

Note: Misrepresentation as to character, health, rank, fortune or chastity is NOT a ground for annulment.
1. Appear on behalf of the state
2. Take steps to prevent collusion between the parties
Prescrip-tive 3. Take care that evidence is not fabricated or suppressed
Grounds (F2I2NS) Persons Who May Sue Ratifi-cation
Period
Force, intimidation, or Injured party W/in 5 years from the time Free cohabita-tion after Collusion
undue influence the force, intimidation, or disap-pearance of force, Public Prosecutor shall be ordered by the court to investigate and to submit a report on whether parties are in
undue influence ceased intimida-tion / undue collusion when:
influence respect-tively
1. No answer is filed or the answer does not tender an issue;
Fraud Injured party W/in 5 years from the Free cohabita-tion even 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-
discovery of fraud with full know-ledge of SC, March 15, 2003)
facts constitu-ting the
fraud
Note: The same also applies to Legal Separation pursuant to Secs. 5(c) and 10(2) of A.M. No. 02-11-11-SC,
Incapabi-lity to consum- Injured party W/in 5 years after the No ratification since defect March 15, 2003.
mate celebration of the is permanent
marriage 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
Insanity Sane spouse who has Anytime before the death Free cohabita-tion after absence of grounds therefor (Ocampo vs. Florenciano, GR. No. L–13553, February 23, 1960).
no know-ledge of the of either party insane regains sanity
insanity 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
Relative, guardian or Anytime before the death assure lack of collusion between the contending parties is not fatal to the validity of the proceedings in the trial
persons having legal of either party court (Tuason vs. CA, G.R. No. 116607, April 10, 1996).
charge of the insane Free cohabita-tion after
insane regains sanity Decision
Insane spouse During lucid interval or
after regaining sanity No judgment on the pleadings, summary judgment, confession of judgment, or judgment by default shall be
allowed.
Parent/ legal guardian Anytime before the “no
Free cohabita-tion after
Non– consent having charge of the consent” party reaches 21 If the defendant spouse fails to answer the complaint, the court CANNOT declare him or her in default. But
reaching age of 21
“no–consent” party
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:
8. Physical violence or moral pressure to compel petitioner to change religious or political affiliation
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 9. Contracting by respondent of a subsequent bigamous marriage; and
proceedings
2. Delivery of the children’s presumptive legitimes 10. Sexual infidelity or perversion.
3. Registration of the entry of judgment granting petition for declaration of absolute nullity or annulment in  Sexual perversion includes engaging in such behavior not only with third persons but also with the
the Civil Registry where the marriage was celebrated and in the Civil Registry of the place where the FC spouse
was located
4. Registration of approved partition and distribution of properties of the spouses in the proper Registry of Cooling–Off Period – 6-month period from the filing of the petition designed to give the parties enough time
Deeds where the real properties are located 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-
Note: The same applies to Legal Separation. compliance makes the decision infirm. (Pacete vs. Carrianga, G.R. No. 53880, March 17, 1994)

In case of annulment or declaration of absolute nullity of marriage, Art.49 of the Family Code grants visitation GROUNDS FOR DENIAL OF PETITION (Art. 56): (C4–MP–DR)
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, 1. Condonation of the offense or act complained of. But failure of the husband to look for his adulterous wife
Gerardo has no demandable right to visit the child of Mario with Theresa (Concepcion vs. CA GR. No. 12345, is NOT condonation to wife's adultery (Ocampo vs. Florenciano, G.R. No. L–13553, February 23, 1960).
August 31, 2005).  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
Rule on Declaration of Absolute Nullity of Void Marriages and Annulment of Voidable Marriages (A.M. 28, 1956)
00–11–01–SC)
 This took effect on March 15, 2003. 2. Consent to commission of offense or act complained of
 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. 3. Connivance between parties of commission of offense or act constituting ground
 The Rules of Court have suppletory application.  Connivance is corrupt consenting

For a more comprehensive discussion on the procedural aspects of the Rule, please refer to the Remedial 4. Collusion between parties
Law Memory Aid.  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
LEGAL SEPARATION 6. Prescription
 An action for legal separation shall be filed within 5 years from time of occurrence of the cause (Art.
EXCLUSIVE GROUNDS: (SAMBA–LIPAD) 57)

1. Repeated physical violence or grossly abusive conduct directed against the petitioner, a common child, 7. Death of either party during the pendency of the case (Lapuz–Sy vs. Eufemio, G.R. No. 113842, August
or a child of the petitioner 3, 1994)

2. Attempt of the respondent to corrupt or induce the petitioner, a common child, or a child of the petitioner, 8. Reconciliation of the spouses during the pendency of the case
to engage in prostitution, or connivance in such corruption or inducement  By filing in the same proceeding a joint manifestation under oath, duly signed by the spouses (Art.
 Refers to prostitution only and irrespective of the age of the child 65)

3. Attempt by the respondent against the life of the petitioner EFFECTS OF FILING PETITION: (LDS)

4. Final judgment sentencing the respondent to imprisonment of more than 6 years even if pardoned 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
5. Drug addiction or habitual alcoholism of the respondent 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.
6. Lesbianism or homosexuality of the respondent
Decision
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 No legal separation may be decreed unless the Court has taken steps toward the reconciliation of the spouses
separation (Partosa-Jo vs. CA, G.R. No. 82606, December 18, 1992). Abandonment implies total
and is fully satisfied, despite such efforts, that reconciliation is highly improbable. (Art. 59)
renunciation of duties.
Note: The wife who has been granted legal separation cannot petition to be allowed to revert to her maiden Subsequent marriage Previous marriage, void ab Valid until annulled or No dissolution of
name. automatically terminated by initio terminated marriage, only separation
affidavit of reappearance of bed-and-board; entitled
Even if the parents are separated de facto, still in the absence of judicial grant of custody to one parent, both to live separately
parents are entitled to the custody of their child. The remedy of habeas corpus may be resorted to by the parent
Status of Children Born/Conceived Before Termination
who has been deprived of the rightful custody of the child (Salientes v. Abanilla, G.R. No. 162734, August 29,
2006). Legitimate Illegitimate except those as Legitimate Legitimate
provided in Art. 36 and 53
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. Custody of Children

Effects of Reconciliation of the Spouses (Art. 66): Custody in case of dispute During Pendency:
shall be decided by the
1. The legal separation proceedings, if still pending, shall thereby be terminated at whatever stage. court in separate 1. Written Agreement
2. The final decree of legal separation shall be set aside, but the separation of property and any forfeiture of proceedings for custody but 2. Absence thereof, court decides based on best interest of child and may award it in
share of the guilty spouse already effected shall subsist, unless the spouses agree to revive their former same considerations as in the following order of preference:
property regime. a. Both parents jointly
Declaration of Nullity
b. Either parent, may consider choice of child over 7 years unless parent chosen
is unfit
Revival of Property Regime (Art. 67) c. Surviving grandparent, if several then choice of child over 7 years unless
grandparent chosen is unfit/ disqualified
Agreement of revival and motion for its approval shall be filed in court in the same proceeding for legal d. Eldest brother/sister over 21unless unfit/ disqualified
separation and shall be executed under oath and shall specify: e. Any other person deemed by court who is suitable
After Decree:
1. Properties to be contributed anew to restored regime;
To the innocent spouse but no child under 7 shall be separated from the mother unless
2. Those to be retained as separated properties of each spouse;
there are compelling reasons
3. Names of all known creditors, addresses, and amounts owing to each
Child Support
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 Support in case of dispute During pendency:
debtor-spouse has sufficient separate properties to satisfy creditor’s claim. shall be decided by the
court in separate 1. Written agreement
proceedings for custody but 2. In the absence thereof, from properties of the absolute community of property (ACP)
Rule on Legal Separation (A.M. 02–11–11–SC) same considerations as in or conjugal partnership (CP)
After Decree:
Declaration of Nullity
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 Either parent/ both may be ordered by court to give an amount necessary for support in
Court shall apply suppletorily. proportion to resources/means of giver and necessities of recipient

Spousal Support
Please refer to the Remedial Law Memory Aid for the procedural provisions of the Rule.
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)
Termination Declaration Of Nullity Annulment Legal Separation Property Relations

(Art.41) (Art. 40) (Art. 45) (Art. 55) 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 dissolved and
Marital Status of net profits earned by ACP or CP liquidated.
3. Net profits shall be forfeited in favor of common children, or if none, children of guilty 2. Offending spouse
spouse by previous marriage, or in default thereof, the innocent spouse has no right to any
4. In all other cases of void marriage, Art. 147 and 148 applies (Valdes vs. RTC) share of net profits as designation of latter as
earned by ACP or CP beneficiary even if
In addition, for marriages under Art. 40 and 45: 3. Net profits shall be stipulated as irrevocable
forfeited in favor of
(Art. 64). Action to revoke
1. All creditors of spouses and of the ACP or CP shall be notified of the proceedings for common children, or
if none, children of donation must be brought
liquidation
guilty spouse by within 5 years from finality
2. Conjugal dwelling and lot on which it is situated shall be adjudicated pursuant to Art.
102 and 129 previous marriage, or of decree
in default thereof, the
innocent spouse Succession
Presumptive Legitime
1. Spouse in bad faith disqualified to inherit from innocent spouse by testate or intestate 1. Offending spouse
1. Delivery of presumptive legitime of all common succession disqualified from
children computed as of date of final judgment without 2. If both spouses of subsequent marriage acted in bad faith, testamentary dispositions inheriting from
prejudice to ultimate successional rights of children made by one in favor of the other are revoked by operation of law (Art. 44) innocent spouse by
accruing upon death of either or both parents intestate succession
2. Shall be considered as advances on common 2. Provisions in favor of
children’s legitime (Art. 51) offending spouse
Donation Propter Nuptias made in the will of
innocent spouse are
1. Shall remain valid, 1. Shall remain valid, unless 1. Shall remain valid, 1. Donor is given option revoked by operation
unless donee donee contracted unless donee to revoke or not, if of law (Art. 63(4))
contracted marriage in marriage in bad faith, in contracted marriage donor decides to
bad faith, in which which case, donation to in bad faith, in which revoke, must do so
case, donation to said said donee shall be case, donation to within 5 years from
donee shall be revoked by operation of said donee shall be finality of decree
revoked by operation law. revoked by 2. But if ground for legal
of law. 2. If both spouses of operation of law. separation is sexual
2. If both spouses of subsequent marriage (Art. 43(3)) infidelity (adultery or
subsequent marriage acted in bad faith, 2. No conflict with Art. concubinage),
acted in bad faith, donations propter nuptias 86(2) as such does donation between
donations propter made by one in favor of not require that persons guilty thereof
nuptias made by one the other are revoked by marriage be at time of donation is
in favor of the other are operation of law (Art. 44) annulled first before void (Art.
revoked by operation 3. If both spouses in good donor may revoke 739(1)NCC)
of law faith, donor after finality of donation – donor
decree may revoke has 5 years from
pursuant to Art. 86(1) time he had
4. If marriage not knowledge of lack of
celebrated: consent; cannot
a. Those stipulated in revoke if had
marriage settlement knowledge thereof
are void (Art. 81) before the marriage
b. Those excluded (Sta. Maria,
from marriage Melencio Jr. S,
settlement or if no Persons and Family
such contract, may Relations Law,
be revoked by donor fourth Edition, 2004)
(Art. 86(1)) 3. Conflict with Art.
86(3) but Art. 43(3)
prevails – more in
harmony with
general
purpose/intent of act
(Ibid.)
Insurance Policy

Innocent spouse may revoke designation of spouse in bad faith as beneficiary even if Innocent spouse may
stipulated as irrevocable (Art. 43(4)) revoke donations made by
him or her in favor of
offending spouse as well