Case Digest (G.R. No. 234457) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
In Raemark S. Abel vs. Mindy P. Rule, G.R. No. 234457, decided on May 12, 2021 under the 1987 Constitution, petitioner Raemark S. Abel, a dual Filipino-American citizen, and respondent Mindy P. Rule, a Filipino citizen, were married on December 18, 2005 in Los Angeles, California. They jointly filed for a summary dissolution of marriage before the Los Angeles Superior Court on November 18, 2008, alleging no community property or children and waiving appeal rights, spousal support, and new trial motions. The California court granted their divorce on July 31, 2009, and Abel received the judgment seven days later. Abel reacquired Philippine citizenship on December 3, 2008, while Rule became a U.S. citizen on September 21, 2012. An authenticated copy of the foreign divorce decree was recorded in Manila on January 10, 2017. Abel then filed before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) a petition for judicial recognition of the foreign divorce and correction of civil entries. The RTC found th Case Digest (G.R. No. 234457) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Background of marriage and divorce
- Petitioner Raemark S. Abel (then a U.S. citizen) and respondent Mindy P. Rule (Filipino citizen) married on December 18, 2005 in Los Angeles, California; they acquired no community assets or liabilities and had no children.
- On November 18, 2008, both spouses jointly filed a Petition for Summary Dissolution of Marriage in the Superior Court of California; they timely filed within five years of marriage, waived appeal rights, new‐trial motions, and spousal support; the court dissolved their marriage on July 31, 2009, and Abel received the judgment seven days later.
- Citizenship developments and recordation
- Abel reacquired Philippine citizenship on December 3, 2008, becoming a dual Filipino–U.S. citizen; Rule naturalized as a U.S. citizen on September 21, 2012.
- On January 10, 2017, the authenticated California divorce decree was recorded with the City Civil Registry Office of Manila.
- Regional Trial Court proceedings
- Abel filed a Petition for Recognition of Foreign Divorce and Correction of Civil Entry before the Manila RTC; the court required publication in a newspaper for three consecutive weeks.
- The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) opposed, arguing the divorce was jointly obtained (not “by the alien spouse” alone) in violation of Article 26(2) of the Family Code and Philippine public policy; on July 5, 2017, the RTC dismissed the petition and on September 6, 2017, denied Abel’s motion for reconsideration.
- Supreme Court petition
- Abel filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45, contending Article 26(2) does not require sole initiation by the alien spouse and that legislative intent and comity support recognition; Rule submitted a Letter‐Explanation expressing no objection.
- The Republic (through the OSG) reiterated that Philippine policy bars recognition of absolute divorce except where “obtained by the alien spouse,” and that joint petitions offend public policy and equality principles.
Issues:
- Whether a divorce decree jointly obtained by a Filipino spouse and their alien spouse abroad can be judicially recognized in the Philippines under Article 26(2) of the Family Code.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)