G.R. No. 221029 - Republic vs. Manalo

On January 10, 2012, Marelyn Tanedo Manalo (respondent), a Filipino citizen, filed before RTC Branch 43, Dagupan City (First Judicial Region) a “Petition for Cancellation of Entry of Marriage” in the Civil Registry of San Juan, Metro Manila, based on a December 6, 2011 divorce decree rendered by a Japanese court dissolving her marriage to a Japanese national, Yoshino Minoro.
The petition was found sufficient in form and substance; the initial hearing was set on April 25, 2012, with notice published weekly for three consecutive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation.

The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) appeared for the Republic of the Philippines, questioning the petition’s caption and suggesting the proper remedy was recognition and enforcement of a foreign judgment. Manalo was allowed to file an Amended Petition entitled “Petition for Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgment” and for cancellation of marriage entry.
Manalo testified in advance and offered as evidence:

RTC Order (Jan. 25, 2012) finding sufficiency in form and substance
Affidavit of Publication and newspaper issues (Northern Journal Feb 21–27, Feb 28–Mar 5 & Mar 6–12, 2012)
Philippine Marriage Certificate between Manalo and Yoshino Minoro
Japanese divorce decree (Dec. 6, 2011)
Authentication by Philippine Consulate General in Osaka of Notification of Divorce
Acceptance of Certificate of Divorce

On October 15, 2012, the RTC denied the petition for lack of merit, holding that under Article 15 of the New Civil Code, Philippine law does not allow divorce for Filipino citizens even if obtained abroad, and Philippine law governs Filipino personal status.
On appeal, the Court of Appeals (CA) granted the petition. Relying on Article 26(2) of the Family Code, the CA held that once the alien spouse validly obtains a foreign divorce capacitating him or her to remarry, the Filipino spouse likewise acquires capacity to remarry under Philippine law—regardless of which party initiated the foreign proceeding. The CA denied the OSG’s motion for reconsideration.
The Republic filed a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 seeking reversal of the CA decision.

Whether Article 26(2) of the Family Code applies to divorce decrees obtained abroad by a Filipino spouse, not merely those obtained by the alien spouse.
Whether the Japanese court’s divorce decree obtained by Manalo can be recognized and enforced in the Philippines, leading to cancellation of her marriage entry and capacity to remarry.