Case Digest (G.R. No. 154380)
Facts:
Republic of the Philippines v. Cipriano Orbecido III, G.R. No. 154380, October 05, 2005, the Supreme Court First Division, Quisumbing, J., writing for the Court.Petitioner is the Republic of the Philippines, represented by the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG); respondent is Cipriano Orbecido III, who sought judicial declaration that he is capacitated to remarry. On May 24, 1981, respondent married Lady Myros M. Villanueva in Ozamis City; the marriage produced two children. In 1986 the wife left for the United States with one child and was later naturalized as an American citizen. Around 2000 respondent learned his wife had obtained a U.S. divorce decree and remarried there.
Respondent filed in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Molave, Zamboanga del Sur, Branch 23, a petition for authority to remarry invoking Paragraph 2 of Article 26 of the Family Code (E.O. No. 209, as amended by E.O. No. 227). No opposition was filed; the RTC granted the petition by Decision dated May 15, 2002, holding that respondent was capacitated to remarry. The OSG sought reconsideration which the RTC denied by Resolution dated July 4, 2002.
The OSG brought a petition for review to the Supreme Court assailing the RTC rulings. The OSG argued Paragraph 2 of Article 26 applies only to marriages that were mixed at the time of celebration (Filipino and foreigner) and that the proper remedies for a Filipino in respondent’s position are annulment or legal separation. Respondent conceded Article 26 was not directly applicable but argued that, by reason of his spouse’s naturalization and foreign divorce, he is capacitated to remarry under the Constitution. The Court treated respondent’s RTC filing as a petition for declaratory relief under Rule 63 and procee...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Is the petition for authority to remarry a proper petition for declaratory relief (i.e., are the Rule 63 requisites satisfied)?
- Does Paragraph 2 of Article 26 of the Family Code apply where the spouses were Filipino at marriage but one spouse later became a naturalized foreign citizen and obtained a foreign divorce capacitating the latter to remarry?
- Did respondent present sufficient proof of his wife’s naturalization and the foreign divorce to warrant a decl...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)