G.R. No. 94053 March 17, 1993 immediately asked permission to leave his ship to return home.

ssion to leave his ship to return home. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision, holding
He arrived in Antique in November 1983. that respondent had sufficiently established a basis to form a
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, petitioner, belief that his absent spouse had already died.
vs. Respondent further testified that his efforts to look for her
GREGORIO NOLASCO, respondent. himself whenever his ship docked in England proved fruitless. The Republic, through the Solicitor-General, is now before this
He also stated that all the letters he had sent to his missing Court on a Petition for Review where the following allegations
The Solicitor General for plaintiff-appellee. spouse at No. 38 Ravena Road, Allerton, Liverpool, England, are made:
the address of the bar where he and Janet Monica first met, were
Warloo G. Cardenal for respondent. 1. The Court of Appeals erred in affirming the trial court's
all returned to him. He also claimed that he inquired from
among friends but they too had no news of Janet Monica. finding that there existed a well-founded belief on the part of
RESOLUTION
Nolasco that Janet Monica Parker was already dead; and
FELICIANO, J.: On cross-examination, respondent stated that he had lived with
and later married Janet Monica Parker despite his lack of 2. The Court of Appeals erred in affirming the trial Court's
On 5 August 1988, respondent Gregorio Nolasco filed before knowledge as to her family background. He insisted that his declaration that the petition was a proper case of the declaration
the Regional Trial Court of Antique, Branch 10, a petition for wife continued to refuse to give him such information even after of presumptive death under Article 41, Family Code.5
the declaration of presumptive death of his wife Janet Monica they were married. He also testified that he did not report the
The issue before this Court, as formulated by petitioner is
Parker, invoking Article 41 of the Family Code. The petition matter of Janet Monica's disappearance to the Philippine
"[w]hether or not Nolasco has a well-founded belief that his
prayed that respondent's wife be declared presumptively dead government authorities.
wife is already dead."6
or, in the alternative, that the marriage be declared null and
void.1 Respondent Nolasco presented his mother, Alicia Nolasco, as
The present case was filed before the trial court pursuant to
his witness. She testified that her daughter-in-law Janet Monica
Article 41 of the Family Code which provides that:
The Republic of the Philippines opposed the petition through had expressed a desire to return to England even before she had
the Provincial Prosecutor of Antique who had been deputized to given birth to Gerry Nolasco on 7 December 1982. When asked Art. 41. A marriage contracted by any person during the
assist the Solicitor-General in the instant case. The Republic why her daughter-in-law might have wished to leave Antique, subsistence of a previous marriage shall be null and void, unless
argued, first, that Nolasco did not possess a "well-founded respondent's mother replied that Janet Monica never got used to before the celebration of the subsequent marriage, the prior
belief that the absent spouse was already dead,"2 and second, the rural way of life in San Jose, Antique. Alicia Nolasco also spouse had been absent for four consecutive years and
Nolasco's attempt to have his marriage annulled in the same said that she had tried to dissuade Janet Monica from leaving as the spouse present had a well-founded belief that the absent
proceeding was a "cunning attempt" to circumvent the law on she had given birth to her son just fifteen days before, but when spouse was already dead. In case of disappearance where there
marriage.3 she (Alicia) failed to do so, she gave Janet Monica P22,000.00 is danger of death under the circumstances set forth in the
for her expenses before she left on 22 December 1982 for provision of Article 391 of the Civil Code, an absence of only
During trial, respondent Nolasco testified that he was a seaman
England. She further claimed that she had no information as to two years shall be sufficient.
and that he had first met Janet Monica Parker, a British subject,
the missing person's present whereabouts.
in a bar in England during one of his ship's port calls. From that For the purpose of contracting the subsequent marriage under
chance meeting onwards, Janet Monica Parker lived with The trial court granted Nolasco's petition in a Judgment dated the preceding paragraph, the spouse present must institute a
respondent Nolasco on his ship for six (6) months until they 12 October 1988 the dispositive portion of which reads: summary proceeding as provided in this Code for the
returned to respondent's hometown of San Jose, Antique on 19 declaration of presumptive death of the absentee, without
November 1980 after his seaman's contract expired. On 15 Wherefore, under Article 41, paragraph 2 of the Family Code of
prejudice to the effect of reappearance of the absent spouse.
January 1982, respondent married Janet Monica Parker in San the Philippines (Executive Order No. 209, July 6, 1987, as
(Emphasis supplied).
Jose, Antique, in Catholic rites officiated by Fr. Henry van amended by Executive Order No. 227, July 17, 1987) this Court
Tilborg in the Cathedral of San Jose. hereby declares as presumptively dead Janet Monica Parker When Article 41 is compared with the old provision of the Civil
Nolasco, without prejudice to her reappearance.4 Code, which it superseded,7 the following crucial differences
Respondent Nolasco further testified that after the marriage emerge. Under Article 41, the time required for the presumption
celebration, he obtained another employment contract as a The Republic appealed to the Court of Appeals contending that
to arise has been shortened to four (4) years; however, there is
seaman and left his wife with his parents in San Jose, Antique. the trial court erred in declaring Janet Monica Parker
need for a judicial declaration of presumptive death to enable
Sometime in January 1983, while working overseas, respondent presumptively dead because respondent Nolasco had failed to
the spouse present to remarry.8 Also, Article 41 of the Family
received a letter from his mother informing him that Janet show that there existed a well founded belief for such
Code imposes a stricter standard than the Civil Code: Article 83
Monica had given birth to his son. The same letter informed him declaration.
of the Civil Code merely requires either that there be no news
that Janet Monica had left Antique. Respondent claimed he then that such absentee is still alive; or the absentee is generally
considered to be dead and believed to be so by the spouse first wife was dead. He admits that the only basis of his The Court also views respondent's claim that Janet Monica
present, or is presumed dead under Article 390 and 391 of the suspicion was the fact that she had been absent. . . . 13 declined to give any information as to her personal background
Civil Code.9 The Family Code, upon the other hand, prescribes even after she had married respondent 17 too convenient an
as "well founded belief" that the absentee is already dead before In the case at bar, the Court considers that the investigation excuse to justify his failure to locate her. The same can be said
a petition for declaration of presumptive death can be granted. allegedly conducted by respondent in his attempt to ascertain of the loss of the alleged letters respondent had sent to his wife
Janet Monica Parker's whereabouts is too sketchy to form the which respondent claims were all returned to him. Respondent
As pointed out by the Solicitor-General, there are four (4) basis of a reasonable or well-founded belief that she was already said he had lost these returned letters, under unspecified
requisites for the declaration of presumptive death under Article dead. When he arrived in San Jose, Antique after learning of circumstances.
41 of the Family Code: Janet Monica's departure, instead of seeking the help of local
authorities or of the British Embassy, 14 he secured another Neither can this Court give much credence to respondent's bare
1. That the absent spouse has been missing for four consecutive seaman's contract and went to London, a vast city of many assertion that he had inquired from their friends of her
years, or two consecutive years if the disappearance occurred millions of inhabitants, to look for her there. whereabouts, considering that respondent did not identify those
where there is danger of death under the circumstances laid friends in his testimony. The Court of Appeals ruled that since
down in Article 391, Civil Code; Q After arriving here in San Jose, Antique, did you exert efforts the prosecutor failed to rebut this evidence during trial, it is
to inquire the whereabouts of your wife? good evidence. But this kind of evidence cannot, by its nature,
2. That the present spouse wishes to remarry;
be rebutted. In any case, admissibility is not synonymous with
A Yes, Sir.
3. That the present spouse has a well-founded belief that the credibility. 18 As noted before, there are serious doubts to
absentee is dead; and Court: respondent's credibility. Moreover, even if admitted as
evidence, said testimony merely tended to show that the missing
4. That the present spouse files a summary proceeding for the How did you do that? spouse had chosen not to communicate with their common
declaration of presumptive death of the absentee. 10 acquaintances, and not that she was dead.
A I secured another contract with the ship and we had a trip to
Respondent naturally asserts that he had complied with all these London and I went to London to look for her I could not find Respondent testified that immediately after receiving his
requirements.11 her (sic). 15 (Emphasis supplied) mother's letter sometime in January 1983, he cut short his
employment contract to return to San Jose, Antique. However,
Petitioner's argument, upon the other hand, boils down to this: Respondent's testimony, however, showed that he confused
he did not explain the delay of nine (9) months from January
that respondent failed to prove that he had complied with the London for Liverpool and this casts doubt on his supposed
1983, when he allegedly asked leave from his captain, to
third requirement, i.e., the existence of a "well-founded belief" efforts to locate his wife in England. The Court of Appeal's
November 1983 when be finally reached San Jose. Respondent,
that the absent spouse is already dead. justification of the mistake, to wit:
moreover, claimed he married Janet Monica Parker without
The Court believes that respondent Nolasco failed to conduct a . . . Well, while the cognoscente (sic) would readily know the inquiring about her parents and their place of residence. 19 Also,
search for his missing wife with such diligence as to give rise to geographical difference between London and Liverpool, for a respondent failed to explain why he did not even try to get the
a "well-founded belief" that she is dead. humble seaman like Gregorio the two places could mean one — help of the police or other authorities in London and Liverpool
place in England, the port where his ship docked and where he in his effort to find his wife. The circumstances of Janet
United States v. Biasbas, 12 is instructive as to degree of found Janet. Our own provincial folks, every time they leave Monica's departure and respondent's subsequent behavior make
diligence required in searching for a missing spouse. In that home to visit relatives in Pasay City, Kalookan City, or it very difficult to regard the claimed belief that Janet Monica
case, defendant Macario Biasbas was charged with the crime of Parañaque, would announce to friends and relatives, "We're was dead a well-founded one.
bigamy. He set-up the defense of a good faith belief that his first going to Manila." This apparent error in naming of places of
wife had already died. The Court held that defendant had not In Goitia v. Campos-Rueda, 20 the Court stressed that:
destination does not appear to be fatal. 16
exercised due diligence to ascertain the whereabouts of his first
. . . Marriage is an institution, the maintenance of which in its
wife, noting that: is not well taken. There is no analogy between Manila and its
purity the public is deeply interested. It is a relationship for life
neighboring cities, on one hand, and London and Liverpool, on
While the defendant testified that he had made inquiries and the parties cannot terminate it at any shorter period by
the other, which, as pointed out by the Solicitor-General, are
concerning the whereabouts of his wife, he fails to state of virtue of any contract they make. . . . . 21 (Emphasis supplied)
around three hundred fifty (350) kilometers apart. We do not
whom he made such inquiries. He did not even write to the consider that walking into a major city like Liverpool or London By the same token, the spouses should not be allowed, by the
parents of his first wife, who lived in the Province of Pampanga, with a simple hope of somehow bumping into one particular simple expedient of agreeing that one of them leave the
for the purpose of securing information concerning her person there — which is in effect what Nolasco says he did — conjugal abode and never to return again, to circumvent the
whereabouts. He admits that he had a suspicion only that his can be regarded as a reasonably diligent search. policy of the laws on marriage. The Court notes that respondent
even tried to have his marriage annulled before the trial court in dead that would sustain the issuance of a court order declaring
the same proceeding. Janet Monica Parker presumptively dead.

In In Re Szatraw, 22 the Court warned against such collusion WHEREFORE, the Decision of the Court of Appeals dated 23
between the parties when they find it impossible to dissolve the February 1990, affirming the trial court's decision declaring
marital bonds through existing legal means. Janet Monica Parker presumptively dead is hereby REVERSED
and both Decisions are hereby NULLIFIED and SET ASIDE.
While the Court understands the need of respondent's young Costs against respondent.
son, Gerry Nolasco, for maternal care, still the requirements of
the law must prevail. Since respondent failed to satisfy the clear Bidin, Davide, Jr., Romero and Melo, JJ., concur.
requirements of the law, his petition for a judicial declaration of
presumptive death must be denied. The law does not view Gutierrez, Jr. J., is on leave.
marriage like an ordinary contract. Article 1 of the Family Code
emphasizes that.

. . . Marriage is a special contract of permanent union between

a man and a woman entered into in accordance with law for the
establishment of conjugal and family life. It is the foundation of
the familyand an inviolable social institution whose nature,
consequences, and incidents are governed by law and not
subject to stipulation, except that marriage settlements may fix
the property relations during the marriage within the limits
provided by this Code. (Emphasis supplied)

In Arroyo, Jr. v. Court of Appeals, 23 the Court stressed strongly

the need to protect.

. . . the basic social institutions of marriage and the family in the

preservation of which the State bas the strongest interest; the
public policy here involved is of the most fundamental kind. In
Article II, Section 12 of the Constitution there is set forth the
following basic state policy:

The State recognizes the sanctity of family life and shall protect
and strengthen the family as a basic autonomous social
institution. . . .

The same sentiment bas been expressed in the Family Code of

the Philippines in Article 149:

The family, being the foundation of the nation, is a basic social

institution which public policy cherishes and protects.
Consequently, family relations are governed by law and no
custom, practice or agreement destructive of the family shall be
recognized or given effect. 24

In fine, respondent failed to establish that he had the well-

founded belief required by law that his absent wife was already