Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 234 views

    GR No. 196049 (2013) - Fujiki v. Marinay, Et Al

    Uploaded by

    Nikki Estores Gonzales
    Minoru Fujiki, a Japanese national, filed a petition for the recognition of a Japanese family court judgment declaring the marriage between his first wife Maria Paz Galela Marinay and Shinichi Maekara void due to bigamy. Marinay had married Maekara in the Philippines in 2008 without dissolving her first marriage to Fujiki. The Regional Trial Court recognized the foreign judgment. Philippine courts exercise limited review of foreign judgments under the Rules of Court and are not allowed to delve into the merits of a foreign judgment. Once proven, a foreign judgment can only be repelled on grounds of want of jurisdiction, notice, collusion, fraud, or clear mistake of law or fact.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    GR No. 196049 (2013) - Fujiki v. Marinay, Et Al

    Uploaded by

    Nikki Estores Gonzales
    234 views2 pages
    Minoru Fujiki, a Japanese national, filed a petition for the recognition of a Japanese family court judgment declaring the marriage between his first wife Maria Paz Galela Marinay and Shinichi Maekara void due to bigamy. Marinay had married Maekara in the Philippines in 2008 without dissolving her first marriage to Fujiki. The Regional Trial Court recognized the foreign judgment. Philippine courts exercise limited review of foreign judgments under the Rules of Court and are not allowed to delve into the merits of a foreign judgment. Once proven, a foreign judgment can only be repelled on grounds of want of jurisdiction, notice, collusion, fraud, or clear mistake of law or fact.

    Original Title

    1. GR No. 196049 (2013) - Fujiki v. Marinay, et al.docx

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Minoru Fujiki, a Japanese national, filed a petition for the recognition of a Japanese family court judgment declaring the marriage between his first wife Maria Paz Galela Marinay and Shinichi Maekara void due to bigamy. Marinay had married Maekara in the Philippines in 2008 without dissolving her first marriage to Fujiki. The Regional Trial Court recognized the foreign judgment. Philippine courts exercise limited review of foreign judgments under the Rules of Court and are not allowed to delve into the merits of a foreign judgment. Once proven, a foreign judgment can only be repelled on grounds of want of jurisdiction, notice, collusion, fraud, or clear mistake of law or fact.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    234 views2 pages

    GR No. 196049 (2013) - Fujiki v. Marinay, Et Al

    Uploaded by

    Nikki Estores Gonzales
    Minoru Fujiki, a Japanese national, filed a petition for the recognition of a Japanese family court judgment declaring the marriage between his first wife Maria Paz Galela Marinay and Shinichi Maekara void due to bigamy. Marinay had married Maekara in the Philippines in 2008 without dissolving her first marriage to Fujiki. The Regional Trial Court recognized the foreign judgment. Philippine courts exercise limited review of foreign judgments under the Rules of Court and are not allowed to delve into the merits of a foreign judgment. Once proven, a foreign judgment can only be repelled on grounds of want of jurisdiction, notice, collusion, fraud, or clear mistake of law or fact.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    MINORU FUJIKI

    v.
    MARIA PAZ GALELA MARINAY, SHINICHI MAEKARA, LOCAL
    CIVIL REGISTRAR OF QUEZON CITY, AND THE
    ADMINISTRATOR AND CIVIL REGISTRAR GENERAL OF THE
    NATIONAL STATISTICS OFFICE

    G.R. No. 196049, June 26, 2013


    PONENTE: CARPIO, J.:

    FACTS:

    Petitioner Minoru Fujiki (Fujiki) is a Japanese national who


    married respondent Maria Paz Galela Marinay (Marinay) in the
    Philippines2 on 23 January 2004. The marriage did not sit well with
    petitioner’s parents. Thus, Fujiki could not bring his wife to Japan
    where he resides. Eventually, they lost contact with each other.

    In 2008, Marinay met another Japanese, Shinichi Maekara


    (Maekara). Without the first marriage being dissolved, Marinay and
    Maekara were married on 15 May 2008 in Quezon City, Philippines.
    Maekara brought Marinay to Japan. However, Marinay allegedly
    suffered physical abuse from Maekara. She left Maekara and started
    to contact Fujiki.

    Fujiki and Marinay met in Japan and they were able to


    reestablish their relationship. In 2010, Fujiki helped Marinay obtain a
    judgment from a family court in Japan which declared the marriage
    between Marinay and Maekara void on the ground of bigamy.4 On 14
    January 2011, Fujiki filed a petition in the RTC entitled: “Judicial
    Recognition of Foreign Judgment (or Decree of Absolute Nullity of
    Marriage).” Fujiki prayed that (1) the Japanese Family Court judgment
    be recognized; (2) that the bigamous marriage between Marinay and
    Maekara be declared void ab initio under Articles 35(4) and 41 of the
    Family Code of the Philippines;5 and (3) for the RTC to direct the Local
    Civil Registrar of Quezon City to annotate the Japanese Family Court
    judgment on the Certificate of Marriage between Marinay and
    Maekara and to endorse such annotation to the Office of
    the Administrator and Civil Registrar General in the National Statistics
    Office (NSO).
    ISSUE:

    Whether the Regional Trial Court can recognize the


    foreign judgment in a proceeding for cancellation or correction of
    entries in the Civil Registry under Rule 108 of the Rules of Court.

    RULING:

    The petition is granted. Section 48(b), Rule 39 of the Rules of


    Court provides that a foreign judgment or final order against a person
    creates a “presumptive evidence of a right as between the parties and
    their successors in interest by a subsequent title.” Moreover, Section
    48 of the Rules of Court states that “the judgment or final order may
    be repelled by evidence of a want of jurisdiction, want of notice to the
    party, collusion, fraud, or clear mistake of law or fact.” Thus, Philippine
    courts exercise limited review on foreign judgments. Courts are not
    allowed to delve into the merits of a foreign judgment. Once a
    foreign judgment is admitted and proven in a Philippine court, it can
    only be repelled on grounds external to its merits, i.e., “want of
    jurisdiction, want of notice to the party, collusion, fraud, or clear
    mistake of law or fact.” The rule on limited review embodies the policy
    of efficiency and the protection of party expectations, as well as
    respecting the jurisdiction of other states.

    You might also like