Case Digest (G.R. No. 234457)
Facts:
The case involves Raemark S. Abel (petitioner) and Mindy P. Rule (respondent), who were married on December 18, 2005, in Los Angeles, California. Abel, a citizen of the United States, and Rule, a Filipino citizen, jointly filed for a summary dissolution of their marriage on November 18, 2008, before the Los Angeles Superior Court. They had no community assets, liabilities, or children during their marriage, and their petition was filed within five years of their marriage. The court granted their request, and on July 31, 2009, the marriage was dissolved. Abel reacquired his Filipino citizenship on December 3, 2008, becoming a dual citizen of the Philippines and the United States. Rule later became a U.S. citizen on September 21, 2012. On January 10, 2017, the California judgment dissolving their marriage was recorded with the City Registry Office of Manila. Abel subsequently filed a petition for judicial recognition of the foreign divorce and correction of civil entry before t...
Case Digest (G.R. No. 234457)
Facts:
Marriage and Divorce Proceedings:
- Raemark S. Abel (Abel), a U.S. citizen, and Mindy P. Rule (Rule), a Filipino citizen, married in Los Angeles, California, on December 18, 2005.
- On November 18, 2008, they jointly filed a petition for the summary dissolution of their marriage in the Los Angeles Superior Court.
- The court granted the dissolution on July 31, 2009, and Abel received the judgment on August 7, 2009.
Citizenship Changes:
- Abel reacquired his Filipino citizenship on December 3, 2008, becoming a dual citizen of the Philippines and the U.S.
- Rule became a U.S. citizen on September 21, 2012.
Petition for Recognition of Foreign Divorce:
- On January 10, 2017, an authenticated California judgment dissolving their marriage was recorded in the City Registry Office of Manila.
- Abel filed a petition for judicial recognition of the foreign divorce and correction of civil entry before the Regional Trial Court (RTC).
Opposition by the Solicitor General:
- The Office of the Solicitor General opposed the petition, arguing that the divorce was not valid under Philippine law because it was jointly filed by Abel and Rule, and Rule, as a Filipino citizen, was prohibited from initiating or participating in divorce proceedings.
RTC Decision:
- The RTC dismissed Abel’s petition, ruling that the joint filing of the divorce decree contravened Article 26(2) of the Family Code, which only allows the alien spouse to obtain a divorce decree.
Appeal to the Supreme Court:
- Abel filed a Petition for Review on Certiorari, arguing that the divorce should be recognized in the Philippines as it was validly obtained abroad and that Article 26(2) does not require the alien spouse to solely obtain the divorce.
Issue:
The sole issue for resolution is whether a divorce decree jointly obtained by a Filipino and their alien spouse can be judicially recognized in the Philippines under Article 26(2) of the Family Code.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Conclusion:
The Supreme Court ruled that a divorce decree jointly obtained by a Filipino and an alien spouse can be recognized in the Philippines under Article 26(2) of the Family Code, provided it is validly obtained abroad. The Court emphasized the importance of equality and the need to avoid absurd or unjust outcomes in mixed marriages.