Case Digest (G.R. No. L-15853)
Facts:
In the petition Fernando Aquino vs. Conchita Delizo (109 Phil. 21, decided July 27, 1960), petitioner Fernando Aquino sought annulment of his marriage to respondent Conchita Delizo in the Court of First Instance of Rizal, alleging that on their wedding day, December 27, 1954, Delizo concealed her pregnancy by another man and subsequently gave birth in April 1955, only four months after the union. The complaint, filed on September 6, 1955, maintained that this concealment constituted fraud vitiating consent. At trial, petitioner alone testified and introduced their marriage contract; respondent failed to appear or present evidence despite her counsel’s reservation. On June 16, 1956, the trial court dismissed the case for absence of a birth certificate proving the child’s birth within 180 days of marriage and held that concealment of pregnancy did not amount to fraud invalidating marriage. Petitioner’s motion to reopen for additional evidence (the child’s birth and delivery certifCase Digest (G.R. No. L-15853)
Facts:
- Procedural Background
- Petitioner Fernando Aquino filed a complaint for annulment of marriage on September 6, 1955 against respondent Conchita Delizo.
- Ground alleged: Delizo concealed that she was pregnant by another man at the time of marriage on December 27, 1954; the child was born April 26, 1955.
- Trial Proceedings
- At trial, only petitioner testified; no birth certificate was offered. Counsel for respondent reserved presentation of evidence but respondent did not appear or present proof.
- The Court of First Instance of Rizal dismissed the complaint for lack of proof that the child was born within 180 days after marriage and held that the alleged concealment did not constitute actionable fraud.
- Motions for Additional Evidence and Appeal
- Petitioner filed a verified “petition to reopen for reception of additional evidence” (birth and delivery certificates), which was denied by the trial court.
- On appeal, the Court of Appeals found excusable neglect and erred in denying the reception of additional evidence but, on the merits, affirmed the dismissal, accepting the possibility of premarital intercourse and deeming petitioner’s disbelief of pregnancy unreasonable.
- Further Proceedings and Petition to the Supreme Court
- Petitioner moved for reconsideration in the Court of Appeals, attaching affidavits (including an admission of paternity by Cesar Aquino, birth certificates of three children, respondent’s affidavit, and photos).
- The Court of Appeals denied the motion for reconsideration for lack of answer and doubting annexes’ veracity.
- Petitioner filed a petition for certiorari with the Supreme Court to review and set aside the Court of Appeals’ order.
Issues:
- Whether concealment by the wife, at the time of marriage, of her pregnancy by another man constitutes actionable fraud under Articles 85(4) and 86(3) of the Civil Code.
- Whether the trial court erred in dismissing the complaint for annulment for lack of documentary proof and for holding that such concealment did not vitiate consent.
- Whether the Court of Appeals should have granted the motion to reopen the case for additional evidence and ordered a new trial upon a showing of excusable neglect.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)