PERSONS

Llorente vs. CA
November 23, 2000
PARDO, J.:
FACTS:
Lorenzo Llorente served in the United States Navy from 1927 to 1957.
On 22 February 1937 Lorenzo and petitioner Paula Llorente were married in
Nabua, Camarines Sur. Before the outbreak of the Second World War,
Lorenzo departed for the United States and Paula stayed in the conjugal
home in Nabua, Camarines Sur. On 30 November 1943, Lorenzo was granted
US citizenship and Certificate of Naturalization No. 5579816 was issued in his
favor by the US Court.
Upon Philippine liberation by American forces in 1945, Lorenzo was
granted leave by the US Navy to visit his wife. It was then he discovered that
his wife Paula was pregnant and was having an adulterous affair with his
brother, Ceferino Llorente. Lorenzo refused to forgive Paula and Lorenzo filed
for divorce with the Superior Court of California upon his return to the United
States in 1951. The Divorce decree became final on December 2, 1952.
Lorenzo returned to the Philippines and married Alicia Fortuno on
January 16, 1958. Alicia had no knowledge of Lorenzos prior marriage with
Paula even though they were from the same town and Paula did not oppose
the said marriage. Lorenzo and Alicia lived together as husband and wife
from 1958-1985 and their union produced three children.
In 1981, Lorenzo executed a Last Will and Testament bequeathing all
his properties to Alicia and their three children. Lorenzo died in 1985.
However, Paula contended said will alleging that she was Lorenzos surviving
spouse, the various property were acquired during their marriage and
Lorenzos will encroached her legitime and share in the conjugal property.

Issue:
Whether the divorce obtained by Lorenzo Llorente from Paula Titular Llorente is
valid abnd therefore capacitates them to remarry.
Held:
Yes. Citing the landmark case of Quita v. CA, that once proven that respondent was
no longer a Filipino citizen when he obtained the divorce from petitioner the ruling

Van Dorn v. Romillo, Jr. would become applicable that owing to the nationality
principle embodied in Article 15 of the Civil Code, only Philippine nationals are
covered by the policy against absolute divorces, the same being considered
contrary to our concept of public policy and morality; that aliens may obtain
divorces abroad, provided they are valid according to their national law.
Wherefore, the court ruled that the divorce obtained by Lorenzo from his first wife
Paula was valid and recognized in this jurisdiction as a matter of comity.
Note: The fact that private respondent obtained a valid divorce in his country is
admitted and its legal effects may be recognized in the Philippines.