G.R. No. L-27758 - People vs. Nabual

Angelina L. Gue filed a petition in the Court of First Instance of Manila (Civil Case No. 34303) on November 20, 1957.
The petition sought a judicial declaration of the presumption of death of her husband, William Gue, pursuant to Article 390 of the New Civil Code.
The petition detailed that the couple married on October 11, 1944 in Manila and had children, including a child named Anthony L. Gue.

William Gue, a Chinese citizen, left Manila for Shanghai on January 5, 1946.
Angelina joined him in Shanghai in August 1946, but the husband never returned to the Philippines.
Despite her continuous efforts, including sending letters and making inquiries with the Bureau of Immigration in 1955 and 1958, no information concerning his whereabouts was obtained.

Testimonies established the facts of the marriage, including presentation of the marriage contract (Exhibit B) and other documentary evidence.
It was confirmed that no property was acquired during the marriage, and the couple had two children: Eugenio and Anthony Gue.
Documents (Exhibit D and Exhibit E) from the Bureau of Immigration further corroborated the absence of any information regarding the husband’s return.

The petition cited the rule for presumption of death under Article 390 of the New Civil Code, which provides that after an absence of seven years, an absentee is presumed dead (with exceptions for matters of succession).
The petitioner also raised issues based on Article 191 of the Old Civil Code, which had been repealed by the Code of Civil Procedure and further by the Rules of Court.
The petition referenced the earlier case of “Petition for the Presumption of Death of Nicolai Szatraw” to draw parallels, emphasizing that similar petitions did not result in judicial declarations of death.

The trial court, after due publication and hearing, dismissed the petition.
The court noted that no legal right had been established upon which a judicial decree declaring the husband presumptively dead could rest.
The dismissal was based on the understanding that a mere judicial declaration based solely on an absence of communication (for seven years) is a prima facie presumption only and remains disputable.

Appellant Angelina argued that, with the enactment of the New Civil Code, courts were now authorized to declare persons presumptively dead.
She cited Article 390 of the New Civil Code to assert that a judicial declaration was now a valid remedy.
The Solicitor General, however, maintained the stance based on previous Supreme Court rulings, particularly the decision in Lourdes G. Lukban vs. Republic of the Philippines, which reaffirmed the doctrine in Nicolai Szatraw.

Whether a petition for a declaration of presumption of death is authorized under Article 390 of the New Civil Code.
Whether the judicial declaration merely confirms a preexisting presumption that is disputable and does not culminate in finality.

Whether declaring a person presumptively dead (based solely on a seven-year absence) constitutes an action that can definitively settle the marital status or other legal rights of the petitioner.
Whether such a declaration could inadvertently serve as an indirect means to secure a divorce, which is otherwise unattainable under the Divorce Law (Act No. 2710).

The applicability and relevance of the rule established in Nicolai Szatraw regarding declarations based on presumption.
Whether the case at hand, similar to Nicolai Szatraw and Lourdes G. Lukban, should be dismissed due to its inability to produce a final determination of death.