PERFAM Divorce of a Filipino by alien spouse [Art.

26]
Title DACASIN v. DACASIN GR No. 168785
Date: February 5, 2010
Ponente: CARPIO,J.
Herald Black Dacasin Sharon Del Mundo Dacasin
Nature of the case: Petition for dismissal of a suit to enforce a post-foreign divorce child custody agreement for lack of jurisdiction

Procedural History: Petitioner sued the respondent in the RTC of Makati City to enforce the agreement for the joint custody of their
daughter. The trial court sustained respondent’s motion and dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction. Hence, this petition.
FACTS
Petitioner Herald Black Dacasin, American, and respondent Sharon Del Mundo Dacasin, Filipino, were married in Manila. They have one
daughter, Stephanie. Thereafter, the respondent sought and obtain from the Illinois court a divorce decree. In its ruling, the Illinois court
dissolved the marriage of petitioner and respondent, awarded to respondent sole custody of Stephanie and retained jurisdiction over the case
for enforcement process.
Following that, petitioner and respondent executed in Manila a contract agreement for the joint custody of Stephanie and chose Philippine
courts as exclusive forum to adjudicate disputes arsing from the Agreement.
Respondent undertook to obtain from the Illinois court an order “relinquishing”jurisdiction to Philippine courts.
ISSUE/S
1. Whether or not the divorce decree obtained by the respondent is invalid
2. Whether or not the trial court has jurisdiction to take cognizance of petitioner’s suit and enforce the Agreement on the joint custody of
the parties’ child?
RATIO: NO.
1. If the Filipino spouse obtains the foreign absolute divorce, such divorce will not be recognized here. HOWEVER, insofar as the foreigner is
concerned the divorce will be recognized here because of the Philippine’s adherence to the nationality rule. The Filipino wife is still married to
him under Philippine laws, such foreigner is not considered married to her and therefore, does not have any legal standing related to the
Filipino wife as he was bound by a divorce decree obtained abroad irrespective of who initiated the divorce.
2.Agreement is void but the Supreme Court remand the case for the trial court to settle Stephanie’s custody as she was already almost 15.
RULING
The Supreme Court reverse the orders of the Regional Trial Court of Makati and the case was remanded for further proceedings consistent
with this ruling.
)