Title
Supreme Court
Basa-Egami vs. Bersales
Case
G.R. No. 249410
Decision Date
Jul 6, 2022
Filipina petitioner seeks recognition of Japanese divorce decree under Philippine law; Supreme Court remands case for proof of Japanese divorce law.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 249410)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Background of Parties and Marriage
    • Petitioner Maria Teresa Dino Basa-Egami, a Filipina, married respondent Hiroshi Egami, a Japanese national, on May 18, 1994.
    • The couple separated in October 2006.
  • Divorce Proceedings and Foreign Divorce Decree
    • Egami fathered a child with another woman and requested a divorce from petitioner.
    • Initially opposed, petitioner eventually consented to sign the divorce papers due to Egami's persistence.
    • On April 3, 2008, they obtained a Japanese Divorce Decree, recorded in the Family Register at Nakagawa-ku, Nagoya City.
    • A Certificate of Receiving, issued by the Head of Nakagawa-ku, confirmed the divorce was duly reported on April 3, 2008.
  • Filing for Recognition of Foreign Divorce
    • Petitioner filed a Petition for Recognition of Foreign Judgment/Final Order before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) to enable her to remarry.
    • During trial, petitioner submitted the following evidence:
1) Certified Notification of Divorce/Report of Divorce, authenticated by Philippine Consulate officials in Japan. 2) Family Register of Egami indicating divorce status, certified and authenticated by relevant Japanese and Philippine officials. 3) Certificate of Acceptance of Divorce, also duly certified and authenticated. 4) Excerpts from "The Civil Code of Japan," certified and notarized by a Japanese notary and authenticated by the Philippine Consul.
  • Position of the Republic of the Philippines (Office of the Solicitor General, OSG)
    • OSG moved to dismiss the petition, arguing that:
1) Article 26(2) of the Philippine Family Code does not recognize consensual or mutual divorces obtained abroad. 2) Only divorces obtained through judicial process or adversarial proceeding by the alien spouse should be recognized.
  • RTC Ruling
    • On December 7, 2016, the RTC granted the petition, recognizing the divorce decree and nullifying the marital bond.
    • The court directed the Local Civil Registrar to annotate the divorce on the Certificate of Marriage.
    • The RTC found petitioner complied with Article 26(2) requirements and credited the authenticity of submitted documents.
    • It held that the divorce restored petitioner to a state of being unmarried and allowed her to remarry.
    • The court rejected the OSG’s argument that the divorce was mutual and thus not recognizable, stating petitioner was forced into agreement.
  • Court of Appeals (CA) Ruling
    • On March 25, 2019, the CA reversed and set aside the RTC decision, dismissing the petition for recognition of foreign divorce.
    • Petitioner’s motion for reconsideration was denied on July 22, 2019.
  • Petition for Certiorari to the Supreme Court
    • Petitioner filed the present petition under Rule 65 seeking to nullify the CA's decision and resolution.

Issues:

  • Whether the Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 is an available and proper remedy to assail the CA's final ruling.
  • Whether Philippine courts should recognize a foreign divorce obtained by mutual consent between a Filipino and an alien spouse.
  • Whether petitioner sufficiently proved the fact of divorce and compliance with the national law on divorce of her foreign spouse as required by Philippine Rules of Court.
  • Whether the petition is meritorious and should be granted based on the evidence and applicable law.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)
Unlock Full Case Digest

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.

About Privacy Terms