Case Digest (G.R. No. 167746)
Facts:
Restituto M. Alcantara v. Rosita A. Alcantara and Hon. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 167746, promulgated September 1, 2008, the Supreme Court Third Division, Chico‑Nazario, J., writing for the Court.Petitioner Restituto M. Alcantara filed a petition for annulment of marriage (Civil Case No. 97‑1325) in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Makati City, Branch 143, alleging that his marriage to respondent Rosita A. Alcantara was solemnized on 8 December 1982 without a valid marriage license. Petitioner claimed the civil ceremony at Manila City Hall that day was arranged by a “fixer” and officiated by Rev. Aquilino Navarro of the Crusade of the Divine Church of Christ; a subsequent church ceremony occurred on 26 March 1983 at San Jose de Manuguit Church, also allegedly without a license. Petitioner contended the marriage license shown on the marriage contract (said to originate in Carmona, Cavite) was a sham and that neither party was a resident of Carmona.
Respondent denied the petition, producing a certification from the Office of the Civil Registrar of Carmona, Cavite stating that Marriage License No. 7054133 was issued in favor of the parties on December 8, 1982, and asserting that the marriage contract constituted a public record; respondent also noted the parties had two children (born 1985 and 1992) and that petitioner fathered other children with a mistress. The RTC rendered judgment on 14 February 2000 dismissing the petition for lack of merit, ordering petitioner to pay child support (P20,000 per month) and costs.
The Court of Appeals, in CA‑G.R. CV No. 66724, affirmed the RTC in a Decision dated 30 September 2004, and denied petitioner’s motion for reconsideration by resolution dated 6 April 2005. The CA relied on the presumption that the marriage license was regularly issued and on the prima ...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the Court of Appeals commit reversible error in ruling that the petition for annulment had no legal and factual basis despite petitioner’s claim that no marriage license existed at the time of solemnization?
- Did the Court of Appeals err in giving weight to the Carmona marriage‑license certification when petitioner contends the license was not identified or offered at trial and the number on the certification differs from that on the marriage contract?
- Did the Court of Appeals err in failing to apply Sy v. Court of Appeals (G.R. No. 127263, April 12, 2000) to the circumstances of this case?
- Did the Court of Appeals err in not rela...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)