Garcia vs Recio (G.R. No.

138322)

Posted: August 8, 2011 in Civil Law

Tags: Divorce
0

Foreign Law Divorce

FACTS: Rederick Recio, a Filipino, was married to Editha Samson an

Australian citizen, on March 1, 1987. On May 18, 1989 a decree of divorce
dissolving the marriage was issued by the Australian Family Court. On June
26, 1992, respondent became an Australian citizen. Subsequently, respondent
entered into marriage with petitioner a Filipina on January 12, 1994. Starting
October 22, 1995, petitioner and respondent lived separately without prior
judicial dissolution of their marriage. On March 3, 1998, petitioner filed a
complaint for Declaration of Nullity of Marriage on the ground of bigamy.
Responded contended that his prior marriage had been validly dissolved by a
decree of divorce obtained in Australia thus he is legally capacitated to marry
petitioner. The trial court rendered the decision declaring the marriage between
petitioner and respondent dissolved and both parties can now remarry. Hence,
this petition.

ISSUE: Whether or not the divorce obtained by respondent in Australia ipso

facto capacitated him to remarry.

HELD: The SC remanded the case to the court a quo to receive evidence. Based
on the records, the court cannot conclude that respondent who was then a
naturalized Australian citizen was legally capacitated to marry petitioner.
Neither can the court grant petitioners prayer to declare her marriage null and
void on the ground of bigamy. After all it may turn out that under Australian
law he was really capacitated to marry petitioner as result of the divorce
decree. The SC laid down the following basic legal principles; a marriage
between two Filipino cannot be dissolved even by a divorce decree obtained
abroad because of Articles 15 and 17 of the Civil Code.