Ty Vs CA PDF

submitted in evidence.
Petitioner also
Ty vs CA submitted the decision of the Juvenile and
Domestic Relations Court of Quezon City
G.R. No. 127406. dated August 4, 1980, which declared null
and void his civil marriage to Anna Maria
November 27, 2000 Regina Villanueva celebrated on March 29,
1977, and his church marriage to said Anna
Maria on August 27, 1977. These documents
Facts:
were submitted as evidence during trial and,
according to petitioner, are therefore deemed
private respondent Edgardo M. Reyes sufficient proof of the facts therein. The fact
married Anna Maria Regina Villanueva in a that the civil marriage of private respondent
civil ceremony on March 29, 1977, in Manila. and petitioner took place on April 4, 1979,
Then they had a church wedding on August before the judgment declaring his prior
27, 1977. However, on August 4, 1980, the marriage as null and void is undisputed. It
Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court of also appears indisputable that private
Quezon City declared their marriage null and respondent and petitioner had a church
void ab initio for lack of a valid marriage wedding ceremony on April 4, 1982.
license. The church wedding on August 27,

1977, was also declared null and void ab
initio for lack of consent of the parties.
RTC= Private respondent, Nullified marriage
with petitioner for lacking marriage license
Even before the decree was issued CA= affirmed
nullifying his marriage to Anna Maria,

private respondent wed Ofelia P. Ty, herein Issue:
petitioner, on April 4, 1979, in ceremonies W/n the decree of nullity of the first marriage
officiated by the judge of the City Court of is required before a subsequent marriage
Pasay. On April 4, 1982, they also had a can be entered into validly
church wedding in Makati, Metro Manila.
Ruling:
On January 3, 1991, private respondent filed No.
a Civil Case 1853-J with the RTC of Pasig, In the present case, the second marriage of
Branch 160, praying that his marriage to private respondent was entered into in 1979,
petitioner be declared null and void. He before Wiegel. At that time, the prevailing
alleged that they had no marriage license rule was found in Odayat, Mendoza and
when they got married. He also averred that Aragon. The first marriage of private
at the time he married petitioner, he was still respondent being void for lack of license and
married to Anna Maria. He stated that at the consent, there was no need for judicial
time he married petitioner the decree of declaration of its nullity before he could
nullity of his marriage to Anna Maria had not contract a second marriage. In this case,
been issued. The decree of nullity of his therefore, we conclude that private
marriage to Anna Maria was rendered only respondent’s second marriage to petitioner is
on August 4, 1980, while his civil marriage to valid.
petitioner took place on April 4, 1979.
Where the second marriage of a person was

Petitioner, in defending her marriage to entered into in 1979, before Wiegel v.
private respondent, pointed out that his Sempio-Diy, 143 SCRA 499 (1986), during
claim that their marriage was contracted which time the prevailing rule was found in
without a valid license is untrue. She Odayat v. Amante, 77 SCRA 338 (1977),
submitted their Marriage License No. People v. Mendoza, 95 Phil. 845 (1954) and
5739990 issued at Rosario, Cavite on April 3, People v. Aragon, 100 Phil. 1033 (1957),
1979, as Exhs. 11, 12 and 12-A. He did not there was no need for a judicial
question this document when it was declaration of nullity of a marriage for lack
of license and consent, before such VALID AND SUBSISTING; and the award of
person may contract a second marriage. the amount of P15,000.00 is RATIFIED and
—A recent case applied the old rule because MAINTAINED as monthly support to their two
of the peculiar circumstances of the case.
children, Faye Eloise Reyes and Rachel Anne
Reyes, for as long as they are of minor age
In Apiag v. Cantero, (1997) the first wife or otherwise legally entitled thereto. Costs
charged a municipal trial judge of immorality against private respondent.
for entering into a second marriage. The

judge claimed that his first marriage was void
since he was merely forced into marrying his
first wife whom he got pregnant. On the
issue of nullity of the first marriage, we
applied Odayat, Mendoza and Aragon. We
held that since the second marriage took
place and all the children thereunder were
born before the promulgation of Wiegel
and the effectivity of the Family Code,
there is no need for a judicial declaration of
nullity of the first marriage pursuant to
prevailing jurisprudence at that time.
Similarly, in the present case, the second
marriage of private respondent was entered
into in 1979, before Wiegel. At that time, the
prevailing rule was found in Odayat,
Mendoza and Aragon. The first marriage of
private respondent being void for lack of
license and consent, there was no need for
judicial declaration of its nullity before he
could contract a second marriage. In this
case, therefore, we conclude that private
respondent’s second marriage to petitioner is
valid.
the provisions of the Family Code cannot be

retroactively applied where to do so would
prejudice the vested rights of a party and of
her children.—We find that the provisions of
the Family Code cannot be retroactively
applied to the present case, for to do so
would prejudice the vested rights of
petitioner and of her children. As held in
Jison v. Court of Appeals, the Family Code
has retroactive effect unless there be
impairment of vested rights.
Dispositive portion: WHEREFORE, the

petition is GRANTED. The assailed Decision
of the Court of Appeals dated July 24, 1996
and its Resolution dated November 7, 1996,
are reversed partially, so that the marriage of
petitioner Ofelia P. Ty and private respondent
Edgardo M. Reyes is hereby DECLARED

Ty Vs CA PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ty Vs CA PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ty Vs CA PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

submitted in evidence.

license. The church wedding on August 27,

Even before the decree was issued CA= aﬃrmed

nullifying his marriage to Anna Maria,

church wedding in Makati, Metro Manila.

On January 3, 1991, private respondent filed No.

petitioner took place on April 4, 1979.

Where the second marriage of a person was

for entering into a second marriage. The

the provisions of the Family Code cannot be

Dispositive portion: WHEREFORE, the

You might also like