Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 55 views

    Garcia Vs Receio, G.R No. 138322

    Uploaded by

    AJ Cresmundo
    This case involved two petitions for declaration of nullity of marriage. In the first case, the respondent obtained a divorce in Australia which dissolved his prior marriage. However, the Supreme Court remanded the case back to the trial court to determine if under Australian law, the divorce decree allowed the respondent to remarry. In the second case, the respondent sought authority to remarry by claiming his wife obtained a divorce and remarried in the US. However, the Supreme Court ruled there was insufficient evidence submitted to prove the foreign divorce or that it allowed the wife to remarry as required by Philippine law. The petition of the Republic of the Philippines was granted and the trial court decision was set aside.

    Copyright:

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

    Garcia Vs Receio, G.R No. 138322

    Uploaded by

    AJ Cresmundo
    55 views2 pages
    This case involved two petitions for declaration of nullity of marriage. In the first case, the respondent obtained a divorce in Australia which dissolved his prior marriage. However, the Supreme Court remanded the case back to the trial court to determine if under Australian law, the divorce decree allowed the respondent to remarry. In the second case, the respondent sought authority to remarry by claiming his wife obtained a divorce and remarried in the US. However, the Supreme Court ruled there was insufficient evidence submitted to prove the foreign divorce or that it allowed the wife to remarry as required by Philippine law. The petition of the Republic of the Philippines was granted and the trial court decision was set aside.

    Original Title

    13 etc

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case involved two petitions for declaration of nullity of marriage. In the first case, the respondent obtained a divorce in Australia which dissolved his prior marriage. However, the Supreme Court remanded the case back to the trial court to determine if under Australian law, the divorce decree allowed the respondent to remarry. In the second case, the respondent sought authority to remarry by claiming his wife obtained a divorce and remarried in the US. However, the Supreme Court ruled there was insufficient evidence submitted to prove the foreign divorce or that it allowed the wife to remarry as required by Philippine law. The petition of the Republic of the Philippines was granted and the trial court decision was set aside.

    Copyright:

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

    Garcia Vs Receio, G.R No. 138322

    Uploaded by

    AJ Cresmundo
    This case involved two petitions for declaration of nullity of marriage. In the first case, the respondent obtained a divorce in Australia which dissolved his prior marriage. However, the Supreme Court remanded the case back to the trial court to determine if under Australian law, the divorce decree allowed the respondent to remarry. In the second case, the respondent sought authority to remarry by claiming his wife obtained a divorce and remarried in the US. However, the Supreme Court ruled there was insufficient evidence submitted to prove the foreign divorce or that it allowed the wife to remarry as required by Philippine law. The petition of the Republic of the Philippines was granted and the trial court decision was set aside.

    Copyright:

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

    Garcia vs Receio, G.R No.

    138322

    Facts:
    Roderick Recio, a filipino citizen is married to Editha Samson (an Australian citizen) in Malabon
    Rizal. On March 18, 1989, a decree of divorce dissolving the marriage was issued by the
    Australian Family Court. On June 26, 1992, Recio became an Australian citizen issued by the
    Australian government.
    On January 12, 1994, the petitioner and the respondent got married in Our Lady of Perpetual
    Help church in Cabanutan City. On October 22, 1995, the petitioner and respondent lived
    separately without prior judicial dissolution of their marriage. On March 3, 1998, the petitioner
    filed a complaint for Declaration of Nullity of Marriage in the court on the ground of bigamy. The
    respondent allegedly had a prior subsisting marriage at the time he married Garcia. She claimed
    that she learned of respondents marriage to Editha Samson only in November 1997. The
    respondent contended that his prior marriage had been validly dissolved by a decree of divorce
    obtained in Australia. Thus, he is legally capacitated to marry the petitioner. Respondent prayed
    in his answer that the complained be dismissed on the ground that is stated no cause of action.
    The Office of the Solicitor General agreed with respondent. The court marked and admitted the
    documentary evidence of both parties. After they submitted their respective memoranda, the
    case was submitted for resolution.
    The trial court rendered the decision declaring the marriage between petitioner and respondent
    dissolved and both parties can now remarry.

    Issue:
    WON, the divorce obtained by respondent in Australia ipso facto capacitated him to remarry.

    Held:
    The SC remanded the case to the trial court to receive evidence. Based ok the records, the court
    cannot conclude that respondent who was then naturalized Australian citizen was legally
    capacitated to marry the petitioner. Neither can the court grant petitioner’s 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 petition is
    partly meritorious.

    Republic of the Philippines VS Cipriano Orbecido III, G.R No. 154380 (October 5,
    2005)

    Facts:
    On May 24, 1981, Cipriano Orbecido III married Lady Myros M. Villanueva at the United Church
    of Christ in the Philippines in Lam-an, Ozamis City. Their marriage was blessed with a son and a
    daughter, Kristoffer Simbortriz V. Orbecido and Lady Kimberly V. Orbecido.
    In 1986, Cipriano’s wife left for the United States bringing along their son Kristoffer. A few years
    later, Cipriano discovered that his wife had been naturalized as an American citizen.
    Sometime in 2000, Cipriano learned from his son that his wife had obtained a divorce decree and
    then married a certain Innocent Stanley. She, Stanley and her child by him currently live at 5566
    A. Walnut Grove Avenue, San Gabriel, California.
    Cipriano thereafter filed with the trial court a petition for authority to remarry invoking
    Paragraph 2 of Article 26 of the Family Code. No opposition was filed. Finding merit in the
    petition, the court granted the same. The Republic, herein petitioner, through the Office of the
    Solicitor General (OSG), sought reconsideration but it was denied.

    Issue:
    WON, the allegations of the respondent was proven as a fact according to the rules of evidence.

    Held:
    Before a foreign divorce decree can be recognized by our own courts, the party pleading it must
    prove the divorce as a fact and demonstrate its conformity to the foreign
    law allowing it. Such foreign law must also be proved as our courts cannot take judicial
    notice of foreign laws. Like any other fact, such laws must be alleged and proved.
    Furthermore, respondent must also show that the divorce decree allows his former wife to
    remarry as specifically required in Article 26. Otherwise, there would be no evidence
    sufficient to declare that he is capacitated to enter into another marriage.
    However, in the present petition there is no sufficient evidence submitted and on
    record, we are unable to declare, based on respondent’s bare allegations that his wife,
    who was naturalized as an American citizen, had obtained a divorce decree and had
    remarried an American, that respondent is now capacitated to remarry. Such declaration
    could only be made properly upon respondent’s submission of the aforecited evidence in his
    favor.
    ACCORDINGLY, the petition by the Republic of the Philippines is GRANTED.
    The assailed Decision dated May 15, 2002, and Resolution dated July 4, 2002, of the
    Regional Trial Court of Molave, Zamboanga del Sur, Branch 23, are hereby SET ASIDE.

    You might also like