Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 9

VOIDABLE MARRIAGES

GROUNDS FOR ANNULMENT


A45 (Source: A85 CC)
marriage may be annulled for ff causes existing at time
of marriage
1) 18<=x<21, w/o consent parents, UNLESS at 21
cohabited and lived as H&W
2) Unsound mind UNLESS after coming to reason
cohabited as H&W
3) Consent of either party by fraud UNLESS full
knowledge of fraud cohabited as H&W
4) Consent of party by force, intimidation, undue
influence UNLESS disappeared or ceased
cohabited as H&W
5) Physically incapable of consummating marriage
& incurable
6) Sexually-transmitted disease & incurable
TOLENTINO
Action to Annul: action in rem, concerns status of parties;
res is relation bet parties or marriage tie; jurisdiction depends
on nationality or domicile not the place of celebration
Annulment & Legal Separation
ANNULMENT
LEGAL SEPARATION
circumstances existing @
causes after the celeb of
time of marriage
marriage
terminates marital bond
does not terminate MB
once final, cannot set aside marital relations can resume
to restore marital relation
upon reconciliation
Want of Parental Consent: maybe ratified when party of wc
parental consent was not given reaches 21 & cohabited as
H&W; no ratification on part of parent because this would
encourage disregard of reqt of parental consent, go ahead, &
hope of obtaining it in the future; though right for annulment
of parent upon child before 21yo can be waived; PC
immaterial whether given in advance or subsequent
ratification
Party Unsound Mind: incapable of intelligently consenting;
manifested consent that is unreal for lack of intelligence;
understanding to realize what is being done & to consent
hereto; somnambulism same effect as insanity
Weakness of Mind: if it does not deprive the party the
capacity to understand, does not affect the validity; also
insane delusions or impulses eg kleptomaniac, parents of
party both insane does not affect validity
Burden of Proof: presumption is sanity; whoever alleges
insanity has the burden of proof; lucid interval or recovery
alleged, burden of proof on person making allegations; eg
person in hospital w/ insanity, delusional & melancholic &
amoebic infection & tertiary syphilis & still insane when
discharged marriage in hospital invalid
Intoxication: intoxicated that no mental capacity to give
valid consent, a dim recollection of going through marriage
ceremony, etc.. marriage annulled; but if intoxication did not
affect partys reason, annulment refused
Ratification: ratification after regaining reason; no right of
action is given to the sane person (knew insanity & proceeded
with marriage); right of action accdg to A47(2) before death of
insane person (did not know of insanity); A36 may be invoked
if mental condition affects party in complying w/ essential
marital oblig
Marriage through Fraud: General rule of fraud & deception
in marriage care & diligence of parties to ascertain facts for
mutual understanding; enumeration in A46 limits applications
bec it already gives conditions; TF code modifies gen rule that
any serious fraud referring to fact material to marital relation
is sufficient ground for annulment
Force or Intimidation: in order to be ground for annulment,
DURESS or FORCE must PREVENT the party from acting as
FREE AGENT, will destroyed by FEAR or COMPULSION;
GRANTED
by fear of death or bodily harm
threats of imprisonment under void process of false
charge

NOT GRANTED
But if entered to escape punishment for seduction,
NOT ANNULLED eg filing charges against admission
to bar for immorality
Pressure brought upon man to marry girl to repair the
wrong etc
Pressure of man if not revealing indiscretions of girl
Where SUFFICIENT TIME, opportunity for
DELIBERATION & REFLECTION after the time duress
was exerted
Physical Incapacity:
- must have ff circumstances
1) PI exists at time of celeb of marriage
2) PI continues to time case is tried
3) Incurable
4) Known to other contracting party
NOT GRANTED
impotence in OLD AGE
if incapacity removed by proper treatment/operation
PHYSICAL INCAPACITY = IMPOTENCE
coitus w/ normal person of opposite sex IMPOSSIBLE
Italian decision: test is ABILITY TO COPULATE on
waife who is virgin not to others who are not
Lack of power to copulate NOT STERILITY
(pathological condition w/c is negative reproduction;
not ground for annulment bec hard to diasgnose)
EG SARAO VS GUEVARA: large vagina, oozing
purulent matter offensive to the smell; operation to
remove organs; lost all desire; annulment not
granted bec NOT CAPACITY TO REPRODUCE but to
COPULATE
Also when sex impossible bec PAIN INFLICTED, may
constitute PI
Triennial Cohabitation: doctrine of Triennial Cohabitation
(in England & some American courts); if wife VIRGIN, after 3
yrs of cohabitation, husband presumed to be IMPOTENT &
burden upon him to overcome presumption
Action Barred: due to CLEAN HANDS PRINCIPLE if
1) other party has knowledge of incurable impotence
BEFORE marriage meaning he renounces
COPULATION (a personal right)
2) both spouses impotent, exited before marr, incurable
bec COULD NOT HAVE EXPECTED COPULATION
action is barred
Sexually-Transmissible Disease: NEW CAUSE; requisites
are
1) STD exist at time of marr
2) Found to be serious
3) Incurable
4) Unknown to other party when marr solemnized
danger to health of other spouse & offsprings
failure to attain purpose of marriage procreation of
children & raising family
Prejudicial Question: case for annulment under duress,
violence or intimidation is prejudicial to BIGAMY case
Ratification of VOIDABLE marriage: generally through
CONTINUED VOLUNTARY COHABITATION after the cause cease
to exist; law does not fix period of cohabitation
once ratified, cannot be revived for nullity
RATIFICATION> right of action
PRESCRIPTION> refers only to remedy
No more remedy if there is no more RIGHT!
Marriages NOT subject to ratification: three marr
1) incurably impotent
2) incurable STD
since 1 & 2 are incurable physical defects, caused of
nullity will never cease to exist
Ratification cures defect in CONSENT not on physical
defect
As long as prescription has not expired
3) sane spouse marries insane spouse w/ knowledge of
insanity; INSANE CAN RATIFY after recovering but
SANE SPOUSE cannot be barred from asking
annulment even if he continued to cohabit after
learning of insanity (bec might HOPE for CURE
someday)

SEMPIO-DIY
Comparing A85 CC & A45 FC
A85 CC
A45 FC
lack of parental consent
- same existing prior marriage bec
- eliminated bec of A42 FC
of absence, remarries
wc automatically terminates
2nd marriage upon recording
of affidavit of reappearance
insanity
- samefraud vitiating consent
- same violence or intimidation
- undue influence added
that vitiated consent
impotency
- FC makes both absolute &
relative impotency grounds
for annulment
-none- STD serious & incurable
Grounds for Annulment EXPLAINED:
1) Lack of parental consent
18<=x<21 w/o parental consent
Ratified upon free cohabitation upon reaching 21;
mere transient sex inter NOT SUFFICIENT
Parents absent consent may ratify?
o
TOLENTINO: yes, before 21; this right can be
waived
Art 14 comments
o
Emancipated, below 21, no need for PC
o
PC in sworn statement w/ 2 witnesses before
any official adm of oath OR appear before
LCR to accomplish written consent
o
To marry SPECIFIC person, not just anyone
2) Insanity
distinction bet PI of A36 FC
[comments under A36 FC]
PI vs insanity: mental incapacity or insanity or
physical incapacity is a vice of consent; insanity (1) of varying
degrees, (2) curable being an illness, capable of ratification or
convalidation, (3) has lucid intervals, (4) ground only for
annulment in many countries
can be ratified by sane partys cohabitation after
insane is cured
mere mental weakness not ground but if seen grave
enough as in A36 FC, may even be null & void
intoxication, somnambulism (lack of mental capacity)
= insanity
insanity must EXIST AT TIME of marr not prior or
subsequent
law presumes SANITY, burden of proof on party
alleging insanity
CASE
KATIPUNAN V TENORIO [Sept 29, 1937; Imperial]
Facts: Marcos Katipunan & Rita Tenorio married 1919 having
4 offsprings in its 7-year cohabitation. In 1934, CFI Manila for
annulment because of UNSOUND MIND & asked Ursula Paz
(mother of Rita) to be guardian ad litem & DISMISSED this
Issue: WON insanity ground for annulment (existed at time of
marriage)
Held: No annulment, valid marriage. Accdg to GO No 68 Sec
10 unsound mind existing at time of marriage. Accdg to Act
3613 (1929), unsound mind at time of marriage annulled.
Although odd that only 4 days of courtship they married,
Ursula Paz said they cohabited for 2 yrs. Also Faustina dela
Cruz knew RT 1905-1913 (childhood), RT muttering
inconsistent words. RT only insane in 1926 confined in San
Lazaro hospital, etc in 3-4 occasions after giving birth to child.
Every presumption lean towards marriage.
SUNTAY V COJUANGCO-SUNTAY [Dec 29, 1998;
Martinez]
Facts: Isabel Cojuanco married Emilio Aguinaldo-Suntay in
Macao on July 1958 borne them 3 children Isabel, Emilio
Aguinaldo & Maragrita Guadalupe all surnamed Cojuangco-

Suntay. In 1962, wife filed criminal case & in retaliation


husband filed for legal separation for infidelity. In Oct 1967,
CFI gave dispositive w/c indicated MARRIAGE DECLARED NULL
& VOID bec EAS schizophrenic (Dr. Amaril), under trial of
parricide (1967), condition existed during 1955-1965 confined
thru Veterans Memorial Hospital thus declared void under A85
CC (UNSOUND MIND). In June 1979, EAS died. Later, in June
1990, Cristina Aguinaldo-Suntay (EAS mother & ICS
grandmother) died intestate. ICS wishes to be administratix
of said estate of grandmother but Federico Suntay
(grandfather) deems ICS illegitimate bec of dispositive of 1967
declaring marriage null & void.
Issue: WON marriage void/voidable consequently
WON ICS legitimate child
Held: ICS legitimate child because dispositive not written
correctly instead of marriage declared null & void (from the
beginning) SHOULD BE marriage ANNULED (subsisting) bec
clearly ground for it are under VOIDABLE (A85 CC). And
children conceived before decree are legitimate (A89 CC)
3)
4)
-

Fraud
only those enumerated in A46 FC
maybe ratified upon cohabitation after knowledge of
fraud
Force, intimidation, undue influence
definitions are
o
A1335 CC: VIOLENCE when order to wrest
consent, serious or irresistible force is
employed
INTIMIDATION when compelled by
reasonable or well-grounded fear imminent
evil upon the person, property, of the
spouse, descendants, etc, to give his
consent
DEGREE OF INTIMIDATION: age, sex,
condition of person borne in mind
A threat to enforce claim thru competent
authority, lawful or not, does not vitiate
consent
o
A1336 CC: VIOLENCE or INTIMIDATION
annul obligation even if by third person
o
A1337 CC: UNDUE INFLUENCE when
improper advantage of his power over the
will of another, depriving freedom of choice.
EXAMPLE: confidential, family relations,
suffering from mental weakness, in financial
distress
Threat to FILE A CASE OF immorality on bar
candidate where he does not marry a girl who he has
impregnated does not vitiate consent (Ruiz v Atienza)
Threat or intimidation as no to act as FREE AGENT;
threatened of armed demonstrations by brother is
ANNULLABLE (Tiongco v Matig-a)
Man rapes a girl, marries her & has no intention to
live with the girl; marriage is annullable (People v
Santiago)
Committee added undue influence, maybe
compelled to enter out of REVERENTIAL FEAR eg fear
of causing distress to parents, grandparents, etc

CASE
RUIZ V ATIENZA [Mar 18, 1941; Bengzon]
Facts: Jose Ruiz married Pelagia Atienza in Nov 14,1938. Also
this is the date of birth of child of Pelagia impregnated by JR.
On same day, father, cousin & 3 other companions from PAs
camp went to JRs dorm in Manila threatening to marry PA in
Aglipayan church by balisong, charging immorality in
admission to bar, saying he will be safe is he went with them
Issue: WON force as ground for annulment present
Held: No no evidence of bodily harm by balisong (only
found 1 inch knife), had many occasions to escape as they
are in dorm (friends could see even policeman), & threat to
charge immorality in preventing admission to bar NOT force.
In Marriage Law Act 3613, force/violence does not include
INTIMIDATION

5)
-

Impotency
refers to lack of power to COPULATE not mere
sterility
must exist at time of marr, must be continuous, must
be incurable; thus if removable by operation, NOT
ANNULLABLE (Sara v Guevarra, CA)
only potent spouse can file for action for annulment
& clean hands
both spouses impotent, cannot be annulled bec
neither spouse is aggrieved
impotency due to old age cannot be annulled
POTENCY PRESUMED; party who alleges impotency
has burden of proof (Jimenez v Canizares)
Although potency is presumed, there is a doctrine in
England called TRIENNIAL COHABITATION that if wife
remains virgin after 3 yrs, husband presumed
impotent & H has burden to prove otherwise
(Tompkins v Tompkins)
REFUSAL of wife to be examined DOES NOT
PRESUME impotency bec Filipino girls are inherently
shy & bashful; TC must order physical examination
bec w/o proof of impotency, she is presumed potent;
to order her for phys exam does not infringe consti
rights against self-incriminating (Jimenez v Canizares)
NOTE: if continued refusal, can be held for
CONTEMPT & ordered to be confined in jail until she
does so
RELATIVE IMPOTENCY: may now be invoked bec there
are cases where impotent wrt to spouse but not with
other men or women
EXAMPLE: penile erection to other women possible
Unusually large penis can fit with other abnormally
large vagina

CASE
JIMENEZ V CANIZARES [Aug 31, 1960; Padilla]
Facts: Joel Jimenez & Remedios Canizares married August
1950. In CFI Zamboanga (1955) filed for annulment due to
physical incapacity (orifice of vagina too small to allow
penetration of a male organ for copulation) existing at time of
marriage & still continues. JJ left 2 nights & 1 day after
marriage. RC did not file answer. City atty present to prevent
collusion. Court orderd medical examination but she didnt
appear (3 times) & court said if she did not appear, marriage
will be annulled. So on April 11, 1957, marriage annulled. In
April 26, 1957, city atty filed Motion for Reconsideration bec 1)
RTs impotency not established 2) RC should be punished in
CONTEMPT OF COURT not ANNULLING MARRIAGE 3) this would
open doors to couples wanting to annul & collude. Motion
denied (May 13, 1957)
Issue: WON marriage annulled on grounds of impotency
Held: No (remanded to trial court). No evidence is presented
and this is due to women being naturally shy & bashful. JJ is
sole witness to impotency. Marriage is social institution.
Presumption is potency.
SARAO V GUEVARA [May 31, 1940; Reyes]
Facts: B Sarao married Pilar Guevara on March 1936. On
wedding night, PG reluctant & begged to wait for the night.
During coitus, it was seen that orifice of her vagina sufficiently
large for his organ, she complains of pains in private parts &
there is oozing purulent liquid offensive to smell. Coitus that
night NOT SUCCESSFUL. Then, PG always complained of pains
during sex. In August 1936, they consulted a physician in
removing tumors in uterus & ovaries rendering PG incapable
of procreation. Sarao filed for annulment on grounds of
impotency in CFI Laguna and was dismissed.
Issue: WON marriage annulled on grounds of impotency
Held: No, it is still possible to copulate (even if sterile bec of
removal of organs). It is choice of Sarao not to have sex
because of turn off 1st experience. Accdg to Marriage Law
(Sec 30 Act 3613), it should be in existence at time of
marriage. Existence of tumors does not render her incapable
of procreation (at time of marriage). Impotency not ability to
procreate but to COPULATE.

6) Sexually-transmissible disease serious & incurable


- same as incurable impotency
Ratification or Convalidation of Voidable Marriages
by cohabitation or prescription
cannot be ratified or convalidated
a. prior subsisting marriage; would result in
anomalous relationship
b. vitiated by impotency remains as long as
afflicted
c. vitiated by affliction of STD remains as long
as afflicted
B & C prescribed w/in 5 yrs by A47(5)
A46 FC (Source A86 CC)
Following circumstances of FRAUD
1) non-disclosure of previous CONVICTION by final
judgment involving MORAL TURPITUDE
2) concealment by wife pregnancy by other man
3) concealment of STD re nature & existing at
time of marr
4) concealment of drug addiction, habitual
alcoholism, homosexuality, lesbianism existing
at time of marriage
No other misrepresentation or deceit of CHARACTER,
HEALTH, RANK, FORTUNE OR CHASTITY shall constitute
FRAUD
TOLENTINO
Effect of Article: fraud must relate to fact material to the
marital relation; PRINCIPLE OF ENUMERATION; no other cases
of fraud can be ground for annulment; INCLUSIO UNIUS EST
EXCLUSIO ALTERIUS
Conviction of Crime: requisites are
1) moral turpitude
2) conviction
3) penalty at least 2 yrs in prison
Concealment of Pregnancy:
- fraud against very essence of marriage; impt objects of marr
is procreation of children CERTAINTY KNOWN TO PARENTS as
pure offspring of union not ALIEN TO HIS BLOOD LINEAGE
- Husband knew of pregnancy cannot be annulled. After less
than 3 mos a baby is born, SC refused to annul bec of
advanced stage of pregnancy and must be patent to husband
(Buccat v Mangonon)
- coitus before marriage & pregnant at time of marriage
although he may not be the father, marr cannot be annulled
bec man knows wife is unchaste UNCLEAN HANDS!
Deceit as to Paternity: inducing him to believe babe is his,
- MASSACHUSETTS: annulment denied bec of knowledge by
him
of wifes INCONTINENCE & his failure to investigate
- CONNECTICUT: allowing annulment; no graver fraud than this
Chastity of Wife:
some commentaries in Civil Law: quality w/c lies in
the foundation of the contract of marriage
BETTER OPINION: stands on grounds as OTHER
PERSONAL QUALITIES; not resulting from pregnancy,
does not necessarily prevent from being a faithful
wife; as other personal qualities, MUST INQUIRE
BEFOREHAND
Marr cannot be annulled on grounds wife concealed
fact she had been lewd & corrupt and had
illegitimate child (Shrady v Logan)
No intent to Consummate:
AMERICAN COURTS: sexual intercourse not only
marital right but marital obligation TF not engaging
in coitus in marr w/o knowledge of the other is
FRAUD
But this is not cited in our ENUMERATION
Concealment of Disease:
A45(6) FC
A46 (3) FC
- independent cause for
- not independent BUT
annulment
constitutes ELEMENT OF
FRAUD
-serious & incurable
- need not be serious &
incurable; regardless of its
nature

- even if there was not active


concealment, can still annul
-not subject to ratification

- must be concealed
- can be ratified after
knowledge of STD continues
to cohabit

Effect of Cure
Recovery or rehabilitation (in STD, drug addiction, habitual
alcoholism) will NOT BAR ACTION for annulment; defect not
disease but on CONSENT w/c was vitiated thru fraud

contents. These information involved Cesar Aquino, brother of


plaintiff, alleged father of baby borne. Also, CA and CD living
as H&W having 2 more children, pictures of wedding of
natural plumpness of CD.
Issue: WON marriage annulled on grounds of consent vitiated
through fraud by concealment of pregnancy
Held: Case, remanded to new trial. 4-month pregnant cannot
be clearly physically ascertained. Average of 4 mos to 5
mos to be certain of showing of pregnancy. Also concealment
bec of natural plumpness is admissible.

SEMPIO-DIY
Comparing A86 CC & A46 FC
A86 CC
A46 FC
- misrepresentation as to
> under A35FC as ground to
identity
declare marriage void for lack
of valid consent; party guilty
of fraud, criminally liable
- non-disclosure of previous
- removed imprisonment for
conviction (moral turpitude,
two years or more
penalty 2yrs or more
- impt non-disclosure is
imprisonment)
lacking in good moral
character & other party did
not know about it
- concealment by wife of
-samepregnancy by other man
-none- concealment of STD
regardless of nature existing
at time of marriage
-none- concealment of drug
addiction, habitual
alcoholism, homosexuality,
lesbianism existing at time of
marriage
- no other
- added health eg
misprepresentations
concealment of cancer, heart
disease etc NOT ANNULED

BUCCAT V MANGONON DE BUCCAT [1941]


Facts: Manganon gave birth 89 days after marriage.
Husband filed for annulment under non-virginity
Issue: WON marriage annulled on grounds of concealment of
pregnancy
Held: Marriage valid. Pregnancy is already at its advanced
stage and should be noticeable to other party.

Concealment of STD under A46 (3) vs Affliction of STD


under A45(6)
A46(3)
A45(6)
- serious & incurable
- any kind of STD regardless
of nature
- ground for annulment
- constitutes fraud
- does not matter if
- concealment at time of
concealed or not
marriage
- given the right to annul
considering seriousness
eg AIDS, HERPES
eg GONORRHEA, SYPHILIS
w/c are curable

A47 FC (Souce A87 CC)


Action for Annulment must be filed by ff persons
1) A45(1) party w/o PC > 5yrs after 21;
parents of party w/o PC >before 21yo
2) A45(2) sane spouse no knowledge, any
relative/guardian> any time before death of
either party;
Insane > during lucid interval or after
regaining sanity
3) A45(3) injured party > w/in 5 yrs of discovery
of fraud
4) A45(4) injured party > w/in 5 yrs from time of
force, intimidation, or undue influence
disappeared or ceased
5) A45(5) (6) injured party > w/in 5 yrs after
marriage

Concealment of Conviction of Crime as Fraud that may


be Ground for Annulment
FC does not specify penalty
TOLENTINO: wisdom is highly doubtful; no essential
bearing on marital relations; conviction of P10,000
would not constitute fraud under this article
Concealment that Wife is Pregnant by Another Man
TOLENTINO: very serious fraud goes against very
essence of marriage; husband has right to require
wife not to bear to his bed aliens to his blood and
lineage
But if wife at advanced stage of pregnancy, husband
can no longer invoke fraud (Buccat v Mangonon)
Fact that wife is prostitute & delivered child by
another man before her marriage does not constitute
fraud; husband should investigate
CASE
AQUINO V DELIZO [July 27, 1960; Gutierrez David]
Facts: Fernando Aquino married Conchita Delizo on Dec 1954.
After 4 mos, she gave birth (Apr 26, 1955). CFI Rizal (1956)
dismissed case of annulment bec no birth certificate, etc.
Finally, new information through affidavits can be submitted
only if it can be remanded to new trial to ascertain veracity of

ANAYA V PALAROAN [Nov 26, 1970; Reyes]


Facts: Aurora Anaya married Fernando Palaroan in December
1953. FP filed annulment in Jan 1954 at CFI Manila on
grounds of consent vitiated due to force & intimidation and
was DISMISSED. AA filed annulment on grounds of consent
vitiated due to fraud bec FP divulged premarital relation w/
close relative (FP denying this). The situation was FP courted
bec she was 1st available girl to marry in escaping closerelative girl. FP had no intention to perform marital obligations
& duties. 3rd girl cohabited, during time of litigation which he
has several children (9 years). LC fraud insufficient.
Issue: WON non-disclosure of premarital relations ground for
annulment under fraud
Held: No, only those enumerated in A86 CC thus limiting its
application (misrepresentation of identity, conviction,
pregnancy). Other misrepresentations NOT fraud. Although
NON-INTENTION to comply with marital obligations (People v
Santiago) can be ground, cannot be ruled bec not part of
complaint.

TOLENTINO
Principle of Estoppel: sane spouse knew insanity,
knowledge of incurable impotency & knowledge of incurable
STD existing at time of marriage >, estopped to seek
annulment (CLEAN HANDS)
Ratification & Prescription: Ratification cures defect
existing at time of marriage & validates marr; Prescription
bars the remedy bec of lapse of period; after ratification, can
no longer be nullified
SEMPIO-DIY
Ground for
Annulment
Lack of
Parental
Consent

Who can
File Action

Period of
Prescription

(1) party
under age
(2) parent or
guardian

w/in 5 yrs
after 21 yo
before child
reaches 21
yo
before death

(1) sane

Convalidati
on or
Ratification
free
cohabitation
after
reaching 21
yo
free

Insanity of
One Party

spouse

of other
party

(2) guardian
of insane
spouse
(3) insane
spouse

-doduring lucid
interval or
after
regaining
sanity,
before death
of other
party
w/in 5 yrs of
discovery

Fraud

injured party

Force,
Intimidatio
n, or Undue
Influence
Impotence
of one
party

injured party

w/in 5 yrs of
cessation of
cause

potent party

w/in 5 yrs of
marriage

serious STD
of one
party

healthy party

w/in 5 yrs
after
marriage

Prescription under A87 CC


A87 CC
- lack of parental consent
after 4 yrs after reaching 18
for girl, 20 for boy
- fraud, 4 yrs after discovery
-violence or intimidation w/in
4 yrs of cessation of violence
- impotency, 8 yrs from
marriage

cohabitation
after insane
regains
sanity

REYES (1981)
marriage must be entered in GOOD FAITH and w/ the
intent in fulfilling marital duties & obligations (People
v Santiago)
CASE

free
cohabitation
after
knowledge of
fraud
free
cohabitation
after cause
disappeared
cannot be
ratified but
action
prescribes
cannot be
ratified but
action
prescribes

A47 FC
- w/in 5 yrs after reaching
21yo
- w/in 5 years after discovery
- w/in 5 years after cessation
of cause
- w/in 5 yrs from marriage

A48 FC
In all cases of annulment & declaration of absolute
nullity, court shall order pros atty & fiscal to appear on
behalf of the state to take steps to prevent COLLUSION
taking care that evidence not fabricated or
suppressed; no judgment will be based upon
stipulation of facts or confession of judgment
TOLENTINO
Purpose of this Article: prevent collusion; judgment held
for annulment even if only stips of facts as long as collusion is
REMOTE
Policy of the Law: intervention of state emphasizes
imptnce of marr as social institution, etc
Effect of Collusion: A221 CC every collusion to obtain
decree of legal separation or annulment of marriage is VOID
AND NO EFFECT and is OMMITTED BY FC
SEMPIO-DIY
A88 CC to A101(2) CC > when defendant does not
appear, court is required to order fiscal to appear in
behalf of state; under A48, pros atty & fiscal shall
appear even if defendant present or not
Intervention of state bec marr social institution
preserved by State
No judgment based on stipulation of facts to
PREVENT COLLUSION
Even if parties succeed even with safeguards &
annulled through COLLUSION, deemed absolutely
VOID
A344 RPC

Prosecution of crimes of Adultery, concubinage,


seduction, abduction, rape & acts of lasciviousness
(last paragraph)
In seduction, abduction, acts of lasciviousness & rape,
marriage of the offender with offended party shall
extinguish criminal action or remit penalty already
imposed

PEOPLE V SANTIAGO [Oct 31, 1927; Street]


Facts: Felipe Santiago asked niece Felicita Magsilang (by
deceased wife) to accompany him on an errand across the
river to San Leonardo. After crossing river, FS went beside
highway in tall grass to rape FM forcing her against her will.
After the deed, they went to house of Agaton Santiago (uncle
of FS) where a protestant minister married them. After this,
FS gave FM few pesos and went home
Issue: WON marriage valid and conclusive upon A344 RPC
Held: Art344 RPC not done in GOOD FAITH cannot render FS
impugned of rape charge. Marriage is VOID AB INITIO bec
there was lack of consent on part of FS to actually fulfill
marital obligations
MARRIAGE WHEN OBE SPOUSE IS ABSENT
A83 CC
Any subsequent marriage during lifetime of first
spouse other than to the other spouse is ILLEGAL and
VOID UNLESS
1) 1st marriage ANNULED or DISSOLVED OR
2) - 1st spouse ABSENT for 7 CONSEC YEARS at the
time of the 2nd marr, OR
- IF LESS THAN 7 YEARS gen considered DEAD,
OR
- accdg to A390 and 391 CC
these are considered VALID UNTIL declared null
& void
TOLENTINO (1983)
Status of Subsequent Marriage: generally considered
bigamous & void EXCEPT par2 of this article; good faith w/o
falling under par 2 will render marr VOID
When Voidable: must act in GOOD FAITH &
1) absent spouse not heard from 7 consec yrs
2) although absent for less than 7 yrs, generally
considered dead
3) presumed to be dead after 4 yrs when occurrence of
death in A391
Judicial Declaration Unnecessary: purpose of validity of
marriage, missing spouse need not be judicially declared an
absentee, enough required period elapsed from time the
absentee was last heard not from judicial declaration. After 7
years, presumptive death arises w/o need for judicial
declaration
Meaning of Absent Spouse:
-same as A41 FCBurden of Proof
- same as A41FCEffects before Annulment
-same as A42 FC comment on No Action Taken
A85(2) CC
Marriage may be ANNULLED EXISTING at time of
marriage
2) subsequent marr under A83(2) BELIEVED TO BE
DEAD BUT IN FACT LIVING and former marr still in force
TOLENTINO (1983)
Former Subsisting Marriage: only voidable on 3 grounds
stated in A83 CC

A87 (2) CC
PERIOD of commencement of ACTION for annulment by
parties
2) in A85(2) by spouse ABSENT during his/her
LIFETIME; OR by EITHER spouse of the SUBS MARR
during the LIFETIME of the other
A41 FC

MARRIAGE contracted during subsistence of


previous marriage shall be NULL & VOID
UNLESS before the celeb of subs marr, prior
spouse absent for 4 CONSEC YRS & spouse
present WELL-FOUNDED BELIEFE that absent
spouse DEAD
In case of DISAPPEARANCE where DANGER OF
DEATH under A391 CC, absence of 2YRS
SUFFICIENT
PURPOSE OF REMARRIAGE, spouse present
must institute SUMMARY PROCEEDING as
DECLARATION OF PRESUMPTIVE DEATH w/o
prejudice to reappearance

TOLENTINO
Prior Voidable Marr: UNLESS final judgment or dissolved by
death, subsequent marr NULL & VOID
Status of Subs Marr: during subsisting marr, remarriage is
BIGAMOUS & VOID. EXCEPT:
absentee four years or for two under special
circumstances
absence gives rise to presumption of death w/c is
required to be declared in SUMMARY PROCEEDING to
enable to remarry
Period of Absence:
GENERALLY, under CC, 7 years req for decl of
presump death For REMARRIAGE, reduced to 4 years
by FC
EXCEPT in cases, CC 4 years & FC 2 years IF
o
ON BOARD VESSEL lost at sea voyage,
airplane
o
ARMED FORCES in war
o
DANGER OF DEATH under other
circumstances, existence not known
Good Faith: PERIOD of absence for PRESUMPTIVE DEATH is
MANDATORY thus cannot be shortened by good faith and if be
done so will be VOID
Meaning of Absent spouse: American origin.
California CC: presumption of death cannot be predicted if
absence resulted from LEAVING OR DESERTING. Spouse who
has been left or deserted is spouse PRESENT and thus can
validly remarry. In this Article, the REMARRIAGE OF THE
ABANDONED SPOUSE contemplated not DESERTING SPOUSE.
Burden of Proof: two successive marriages, presumption on
validity of 2nd marriage and burden on party ATTACKING
VALIDITY OF 2ND MARR. PRESUMPTION in favor of INNOCENCE
prevails over PRESUMPTION of CONTINUANCE OF LIFE OF 1ST
SPOUSE & MARITAL RELATIONS.
SEMPIO-DIY
Kinds of Bigamous Marr (under this Art)
1) VOID BIGAMOUS MARRIAGE contracted during
SUBSISTENCE of prev marr; good faith immaterial; 2nd
marr stil VOID; person marries in BAD FAITH
criminally liable for BIGAMY
2) VOIDABLE BIGAMOUS MARRIAGE contracted during
ABSENCE of spouse 4 consec years (ordinary) or 2
years (extraordinary absence under A391 CC) having
WELL-FOUNDED BELIEF of death after having
JUDICALLY DECLARED PRESUMPTIVELY DEAD in
summary proceeding
Compared with A83 CC
ORDINARY
ABSENCE
EXTRAORDINA

A83 CC (OLD)
7 consec years

A41 FC (NEW)
4 consec years

4 years (A391 CC)

2 years

RY ABSENCE
* because of better communication & transportation in
country & world
JUDICIAL
no need; enough
must file
DECLARATION
that period had
summary
OF DEATH
passed
proceeding for
eg Jones v
DECLARATION
Horiguela
OF
absence of 7 years
PRESUMPTIVE
enough and judicial
DEATH
declaration only
- protection
needed for proper
against charge of
administration of
bigamy to
estate/property
PRESENT SPOUSE
- also found In Re
bec good faith
Sztraw, Lukban v
established
Rep.
- conflicting with
A349 RPC wc
requires declaration
of presumptive death
to be NOT GUILTY OF
BIGAMY
Meaning of Absent spouse
- Absent for 4 years having well-founded belief of death
- period of 4 years reduced to 2 years in danger of death in
A391 CC where:
- on board vessel lost at sea or airplane
(includes all kinds of watercraft & aircraft)
- armed forces in war
(all military operations involving armed fighting; doe
not apply to nurses, doctors, reporters or cameramen)
- danger of death
(includes earthquakes, fires, explosions, dangerous
expeditions, landslides, volcanic eruptions)
- 2-year period counted from event of death presumed
Recent Jurisprudence:
A) presumption of death must comply with rules
(ordinary or extraordinary) and belief must be WELLFOUNDED
B) REP V NOLASCO: seaman husband FAILED to conduct
search of missing wife with such diligence to have it
well-founded. Search too sketchy
C) A247 FC on judgments on summary judicial
proceedings are IMMEDIATELY FINAL AND EXECUTORY
tf unappealable
D) REP V BERMUDEZ-LORINO: word of caution,
convincing proof must be shown of well-founded
belief. Otherwise, summary proceeding might be
abused by colluding spouses
A42 FC
Subsequent marriage automatically terminated by
RECORDING OF AFFIDAVIT OF REAPPEARANCE OF
ABSENT SPOUSE unless there is a judgment annulling
prev marr or declaring it void ab initio
SWORN STATEMENT of the fact & circumstances of
reappearance shall be recorded in CIVIL REGISTRY of
the residences of parties to the subsequent marriage
TOLENTINO
Status of Subsequent Marriage:
- generally bigamous and null and void but if period of A41 FC,
in good faith & well-founded belief still VALID. In CC,
annullable. Not voidable bec not in A45. So not void or
voidable tf it is VALID IN FC
- But if BOTH parties in BAD FAITH, VOID AB INITIO accdg to
A44 FC
- ONE party acted in BAD FAITH (present spouse),
subsequent marr VOID as bigamous under A35(4)
- ONE party acted in BAD FAITH (other spouse of 2nd marr),
and present spouse acted in good faith & with decl of
presump death, MARR STILL VALID but A43 FC will operate
(revocation of donation, insurance, inheritance)

Termination of Subsequent Marriage:


under CC, voidable so terminated upon final
judgment of annulment
under FC, no judicial proceeding necessary bec mere
recording in civil registry of affidavit attesting to
reappearance by any interested person
Judicial Termination:
- termination by affidavit NOT PRECLUDE filing of an action in
court to prove reappearance & obtain declaration of
dissolution or termination of sub marr (MORE ADVISABLE)
No Action Taken:
mere reappearance even if known to spouses in subs
marr WILL NOT TERMINATE MARR
spouse who reappeared cannot REMARRY
FC & CC doubts on effects on SUBS MARR; since valid
until terminated
o
Children legitimate
o
Property relations same as valid marr
Questions that will arise
1) absentee acquired property, part of conjugal
property?
2) Spouse remarried acquired property, part of
conjugal of 1st or 2nd marr?
3)
Mutual obligation to support present even if 2nd
marr exists?
4) Wife coitus with absentee husband, adultery?
5) And if child born in (4), legal status where both
husbands can access?
law gives legal effect to 2nd marr until terminated
1st marr subsists, personal and property relations
SUSPENDED to avoid anomaly, confusion, immorality,
etc
De facto separation from 1st marr like LEGAL
SEPARATION w/c has marr ties but conjugal
partnership extinguished to be revived in
reconciliation BUT IN THIS CASE, cannot be legally in
effect except 2nd marr terminated
INCORRECT: 1st marr dissolved by 2nd marr
MORE ACCURATE: 2nd marr presump of death
continues despite physical reappearance & by
FICTION OF LAW, still an absentee; SUSPENSION until
2nd marr terminated
SEMPIO-DIY
Rule under Civil Code
Under A83 CC, sibs marr by absence of spouse VALID
UNTIL ANNULLED by competent court by
reappearance by which action for annulment under
A87 by
o
Returning spouse during lifetime OR
o
By either spouse of subs marr during
lifetime of other
But gives rise to anomalous situation where NOBODY
FILES ANNULMENT
CC offers no solution
To solve problem, authorities say PERSONAL &
PROPERTY RELATIONS of 1st marr should be
SUSPENDED as long as 2nd marr subsists; effects
similar to LEGAL SEPARATION where marr subsists
but rights & obligations of the parties to each other,
as well as conjugal partnership, is extinguished tobe
REVIVED ONLY on annulment of 2nd marr
MEANWHILE
absent spouse cannot remarry
present spouse cannot have sexual relations with
BOTH
properties acquired by absent spouse during absence
and after return NOT PART OF CONJUGAL
PARTNERSHIP
if child is born bet present and returning spouse,
child is ILLEGITIMATE
Rule under Family Code
FC solves all problems by
o
Subs marr ref by A41 FC automatically
TERMINATED by recording of affidavit of

reappearance of LCR in residence of parties


of 2nd marr
o
Affidavit may be filed by any INTERESTED
PERSON
o
Due NOTICE of recording must be sent to
parties of SUBS MARR
o
Fact of reappearance be ref to COURT if
disputed
o
Automatic termination NOT APPLY if 1st marr
ANNULLED or declared VOID AB INITIO
OPINION OF COMMITTEE: automatic termination of
2nd marr is better solution
o
If decision left to present spouse, may opt to
keep both
o
Absent spouse cannot remarry if present
spouse chooses 2nd marr
o
Returning spouse can blackmail spouses in
annulling if they do not pay off
o
Reappearance of absent spouse RISK they
took when they married; no reason to
complain

A43 FC
EFFECTS OF TERMINATION OS SUBSEQUENT MARR
1) CHILDREN conceived prior to its termination
are LEGITIMATE. Custody & support to be
determined by COURT
2) ACP/CPP dissolved & liquidated. But if in BAD
FAITH, share in net profits forfeited in favor of
a. Common children
b. Children of guilty spouse
c. Innocent spouse
3) DONATION by marriage VALID except in BAD
FAITH, revoked by ops of law
4) REVOCATION of designation as beneficiary in
INSURANCE of SPOUSE in BAD FAITH
5) DISQUALIFICATION to INHERIT if in BAD FAITH
SEMPIO-DIY
unlike CC wc does not provide effects after
termination of SUBS MARR, FC provided effects of
automatic termination in A43
A44 FC
BOTH spouses in BAD FAITH, marriage VOID AB INITIO.
All DONATIONS by marriage & TESTAMENTARY
DISPOSITIONS made in favor of the other REVOKED by
ops of law
TOLENTINO
Dissolution by Death: terminated not by recording of
affidavit of reappearance but by DEATH, effects of dissolution
of VALID MARR will arise bec annullable/voidable can only be
assailed DIRECTLY. But if BOTH in BAD FAITH VOID AB
INITIO can be attacked collaterally at any time even if
dissolution is by death of one of parties.
SEMPIO-DIY
both acting in bad faith MEANS both spouses KNEW
absent spouse still alive
both bad faith, VOID AB INITIO; may even be
prosecuted for BIGAMY
effects of both in bad faith as if NULL & VOID not
voidable
donations, testamentary dispositions, revoked by ops
of law
A349 RPC
BIGAMY penalty of prison mayor persons contracting
subsequent marr before former legally dissolved or
before absent spouse DECLARED PRESUMPTIVELY DEAD
by means of judgment
REYES (1981 consult newer version)
Elements
offender legally married

marriage no legally dissolved or absent spouse NOT


presumed dead accdg to CC
contracts 2nd or subsequent marriage
2nd marr has all essential requisites for validity
Before absent spouse declared presumptively dead
need for judicial declaration should be DISREGARDED
bec under A83(2) CC, enough that period elapses - 7
yrs (ordinary), less than 7 years generally considered
dead, & A390, 391 CC 4 years (extraordinary) if
presumed dead TF no conviction of BIGAMY if in
GOOD FAITH
o
eg Jones v Hortiguela
judicial declaration of absent spouse presumed to be
dead not legally possible, not authorized by law
o
eg Nicolai Szatraw cited in Lukban v
Republic
Good Faith defense for bigamy
US v Enriquez: mistake of fact not of law
Subsequent marr before expiration of 7 yrs is bigamy
CASE
JONES HORTIGUELA [March 6, 1937; J Concepcion]
CFI Cebu
Facts: Marciana Escano married Arthur Jones (Dec 1914). In
Jan 1918, AJ went abroad and never went back. Oct 1919, in
CFI Leyte ME proceeded to be judicially declared absentee
taking effect after 6 months of publication. May 1927 ME
married Felix Hortiguela. As ME died intestate, in May 1932,
Angelita Jones (daughter by 1st marriage) & FH (husband by
2nd marriage) declared her only heirs.
AJ, being a minor in these proceedings, only took action when
she got married to Lardizabal. She contested
1) administratorship of step father (her husband new
administrator)
2) declaration of heirs (AJ only heir)
3) unwarranted to discuss what is paraphernal or
conjugal
4) administrator fees of P10,000 (P4/day)
5) project partition & final account ( ordering a new one)
6) FH not husband TF not entitled to usufructuary right
7) She a minor, not assisted by counsel
8) Errors & inaccuracies impairing her rights
Issue: WON ME & FH valid marriage (consequently affecting
other payers)
Held: Marriage valid bec secIII par2 of Gen Orders No 68
only requires spouse to be absent 7 consecutive years
for CELEBRATION OF CIVIL MARRIAGE not knowing spouse
to be alive or reputed to be dead. Judicial declaration of such
not necessary for remarriage AND SOLE PURPOSE for
administration of estate of absentee. It should be counted
from date of last news/abandonment (Jan 1918) not Oct
1919 (judicial declaration) or Apr 1921 (date of effectivity)
and is actually absent MORE THAN 9 YEARS.
Even if marriage not in record, failure to transmit copy of
certificate does not INVALIDATE marriage (Madridejo v de
leon) and other proof of marriage are admissible (US v de
Vera)
Furthermore, Sec 334 No 24 of Code of Civil Procedure:
person not heard from in 7 years is presumed to be
dead.
Petition dismissed
EFFECTS OF PENDING ACTION/DECREE
A49 FC
DURING PENDENCY OF ACTION in absence of written
document, court decides CUSTODY & SUPPORT giving
importance to MORAL & MATERIAL WELFARE & CHOICE
OF THE CHILDREN. Will also provide VISITATION rights
TOLENTINO
Written Agreement bet spouses: this is given first
opportunity; court examines this is ADEQUATE; if
INSUFFICIENT court supplements; children over 7 yo due
consideration to choice parent unless seen unfit

SEMPIO-DIY
court decides custody & support unless there is a
written agreement
support of spouses & children comes from ACP/CPP
after annulment, spouses support CEASE (no longer
H&W) but continues support to CHILDREN
custody of children accdg to best interests and, if
over 7, considers CHOICE unless seen unfit (A213 FC)
under 7 yo w/ mother unless unfit (A213 FC); this
provision amends A17 of PD 603 (Child & Youth
Welfare Code) w/c states below 5 yo
appropriate visitation rights
A50 FC
1) effects accdg to A43
(2) absolute community of property or the conjugal
partnership dissolved and liquidated but if spouse in
bad faith, his share to common children or children of
guilty spouse from prev marriage or innocent spouse
(3) donations valid except in when bad faith wc is
revoked by operation of law
(4) innocent spouse may revoke, if in bad faith,
beneficiary to insurance even if irrevocable
(5) in bad faith, disqualified to inherit from innocent
spouse
Effects accdg to A44
Both spouses in bad faith, all donations and
testamentary dispositions revoked by operation of
law
If nullity accdg to A40 (declaration of previous marriage
void) and A45 (1]18-21 w/o consent 2] unsound mind 3]
consent of either party thru fraud 4] consent by force or
intimidation 5] physically incapable of consummating
marriage 6] sexually-transmitted disease)
2) final judgment must contain
- liquidation, partition and distribution of properties
- custody & support of children
- delivery of presumptive legitimes
3) creditors informed of liquidation
4) conjugal dwelling in accdce to A102, 129)
Art51 FC
Value of presumptive legitime delivered in cash, properties or
sound securities unless judicially approved arrangement;
children, guardian or trustee may enforce judgment; dec of
pres legitimes no prejudice to succ rights upon death of
parents but value already received as part of legitime shall be
considered advances
Art52 FC
-judgment of annulment or absolute nullity of marriage
- partition and distribution of property
- Delivery of childrens presumptive legitimes
RECORDED in civil registry and registries of property;
otherwise, this will not affect third persons
Art53 FC
After compliance with reqts in prev article, may marry again,
otherwise subsequent marriage null and void
Art54 FC
Children born or conceived before judgment is legitimate;
children in subsequent marriage also legitimate
Tolentino:
Uniformity of Judgment
1) Liquidation inventory of properties and payment of
obligations; after payment to creditors, remaining is assets of
spouses
Partition remaining properties divided to capital of spouses
and net profits of marriage depends if absolute community
[AC] (A102) or conjugal partnership [CP] (A129)
AC inc in value from celeb of marr to termination
CP all fruits of separate properties and products of
labor and industry

Distribution delivery of shares of properties


2) donated in bad faith, revoked and part of innocent spouses
distributable properties
3) children conceived or born before judgment legitimate;
judgment will contain custody and support; presumptive
legitimes delivered in cash, properties or securities; accdg to
FC, legitime of legitimate children half of estate of parent;
received legitimes considered advances
4) bad faith, as beneficiary to insurance can be revoked
5) bad faith, disqualified to inherit
6) conjugal dwelling and lot, to spouse w/ common children
7) if both spouses in bad faith, donations revoked
8) judgment, partition & distribution of property, delivery if
presumptive legitime recorded in civil registry
9) after all of the above, spouses free to marry; otherwise,
subsequent marriages null and void
Effect of Bad Faith
- Net profits forfeited to
-common children
-children of guilty spouse
-innocent spouse
- donations revoked by ops of law
- nothing is left to spouse in bad faith
- in this case, common children not limited to presumptive
legitime but to parents assets and properties
Liability for Damages
- did not retain A91 of CC bec Art 20 (contrary to law, causes
damage shall indemnify) and 21 (causes loss or injury wc
contrary to morals shall pay damages) will suffice as defense
- BAD FAITH basis for damages
- damages from third person (causes invalidation), priest(w/o
authority), father of bride (consent thru intimidation)
Sempio-Diy:
(A50)
marriage VOID AB INITIO not absolute community or
conjugal partnership but accdg to Art 147 & 148 on
PROPERTY REGIME OF UNIONS WITHOUT MARRIAGE
conjugal dwelling and lot to (A102, 129)
o
spouse w/ majority of common children
o
children below 7 yo to mother unless court
says ow
o
no majority, court shall decide in best
interest of children
(A52)
judgment, P&D of props, delivery of PL shall be
recorded in
o
appropriate civil registry
o
registries of properties
third parties not affected by judgment
(A54)
children conceived or born on void subsequent
marriage still legitimate; committee does not want
children to suffer on parents faults (A36, A53)
children conceived or born before judgment of
annulment legitimate bec voidable marr valid until
annulled
children of marr judicially declared null and void or
void ab initio are illegitimate (A165)
no more natural children of legal fiction under FC;
either legitimate or illegitimate (A164, 165)
Moral Damages to annulment or declaration of nullity
or legal separation? No, bec guilty spouse has to pay from
conjugal fund; absurd and illogical; there are other remedies
[Ty v CA]
A371 CC
In case of Annulment, wife is GUILTY party, SHALL
resume maiden name & surname. wife is INNOCENT
party, MAY resume her maiden name & surname.
However she MAY CHOOSE to continue former
husbands surname UNLESS
1) court decrees otherwise
2) she/former husband married to another person

A369 CC
Children conceived before decree annulling a
VOIDABLE MARRIAGE principally use SURNAME OF
FATHER
TOLENTINO
Use of Mothers Surname: children conceived before
decree are LEGITIMATE & may use MOTHERS SURNAME
JURISDICTION
CASE
TAMANO V ORTIZ [JUNE 29, 1998; J Bellosillo]
Facts: May 1958, Senator Mamintal Tamano married Zorayda
Tamano in civil rites remaining valid and subsisting until
Tamanos death May 1994. In June 1993, Tamano (as
divorced) married Estrellita Tamano (as single while waiting
for decision of annulment to Llave to be final & executory) in
civil rites in Lanao del Sur. On Nov 1994, Zorayda & son filed
Complaint for Declaration of Nullity of Marriage against
Estrellita bec bigamous.
Estrellita filed MOTION TO DISMISS that RTC no jurisdiction
since both Muslims vested on sharia courts accdg to A155 of
Code of Muslim Personal Laws & Zorayda canno file an action
for annulment since only a party to the marriage can file.
Since ET and SMT married accdg to Civil Code, not in accdnce
to PD 1083 or Code of Muslim Personal Laws, RTC has
jurisdiction.
CA ruled that it fell under exclusive jurisdiction of Sharia
courts if there are sharia courts. But in QC, where no sharia
court is found, RTC can be proper forum.
Issue: WON this case falls under jurisdiction of RTC
Held: Yes, Accdg to The Judiciary Reorganization Act of
1980, RTC has jurisdiction over all actions involving marriage
& marital relations. Also, never was it mentioned that ET &
SMT married under Muslim laws (this fact only seen in Motion
for Reconsideration not the Motion to Dismiss). PD 1083 silent
when married both in civil & Muslim rites. Sharia courts not
vested ORIGINAL & EXCLUSIVE jurisdiction when it comes to
marriages celebrated in both. RTC not divested of their
general original jurisdiction (Sec 19 par 6 BP Blg 129)