Case Digest (G.R. No. 221029)
Facts:
Republic of the Philippines v. Marelyn Tanedo Manalo, G.R. No. 221029, April 24, 2018, Supreme Court En Banc, Peralta, J., writing for the Court.Petitioner: Republic of the Philippines (represented by the Office of the Solicitor General).
Respondent: Marelyn Tanedo Manalo (petitioner below).
On January 10, 2012, Manalo filed in the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 43, Dagupan City, a petition to cancel the entry of her marriage in the Civil Registry of San Juan, Metro Manila on the ground that her marriage to a Japanese national had been dissolved by a Japanese court divorce decree dated December 6, 2011. The RTC found the petition sufficient in form and set an initial hearing; the petition and notice were published in a newspaper for three consecutive weeks. Manalo subsequently filed an Amended Petition captioned also as a petition for recognition and enforcement of a foreign judgment, and she offered documentary evidence (including the Japanese divorce decree and consular authentication) and testified. The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) appeared and questioned whether the petition title was correct, suggesting the proper remedy would be recognition and enforcement of a foreign judgment.
On October 15, 2012, the trial court denied Manalo’s petition for lack of merit, holding that Philippine law (Article 15 of the New Civil Code) does not permit absolute divorce for Filipinos and that Philippine law controls the marital status of Filipinos even when abroad.
Manalo appealed. The Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CV No. 100076 reversed the RTC on September 18, 2014, holding that Paragraph 2 of Article 26 of the Family Code applies and that a Filipino spouse is entitled to capacity to remarry when the alien spouse has obtained a valid foreign divorce capable of enabling remarriage, irrespective of which spouse initiated the foreign proceeding; the CA ordered recognition and cancellation of the marriage entry. The CA denied the OSG’s motion for reconsideration on October 12, 2015.
The Republic filed a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 to the Supreme Court seeking reversal of the CA decision. The Supreme Court heard the case En Banc and, in a decision promulgated...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Does Paragraph 2 of Article 26 of the Family Code permit recognition in the Philippines of a foreign divorce obtained abroad when it was the Filipino spouse who initiated and obtained the decree against an alien spouse capacitated to remarry?
- If recognition is warranted, did Manalo present sufficient proof to obtain judicial recognition and cancellation of the local marriage entry, or must the courts still receive evidence on the relevant foreign l...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)