G.R. No. 166854 - Semirara Coal Corp. vs. HGL Development Corp.

Petitioner Celerina J. Santos (Celerina) and respondent Ricardo T. Santos (Ricardo) married on June 18, 1980 in San Juan, Metro Manila, later moving to Tarlac City to engage in a buy-and-sell business that proved unprofitable.
Ricardo alleged that in February 1995 Celerina applied through an Ermita employment agency to work as a domestic helper in Hong Kong, left two months later, and was never heard from again.

On June 15, 2007 Ricardo filed before the Regional Trial Court of Tarlac City a petition to declare Celerina presumptively dead, alleging diligent but futile efforts to locate her over nearly 12 years.
On July 27, 2007 the trial court granted the petition; Ricardo contracted a second marriage on September 17, 2008.

Celerina learned of the RTC’s decision in October 2008 and, on November 17, 2008, filed with the Court of Appeals a petition to annul the presumptive-death judgment for extrinsic fraud and lack of jurisdiction.
She contended that Ricardo misrepresented her residence as Tarlac City (when in fact it was in Quezon City), falsely alleged a 12-year absence, never left for Hong Kong, and that statutory notice and publication requirements were not complied with.

On November 28, 2008, the Court of Appeals dismissed the annulment petition as the wrong remedy, directing Celerina to file an affidavit of reappearance under Article 42 of the Family Code.
A motion for reconsideration was denied on March 5, 2009, prompting Celerina’s petition for review on certiorari before the Supreme Court.

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in dismissing Celerina’s petition for annulment of judgment on the ground that an affidavit of reappearance under Article 42 of the Family Code is the exclusive remedy.
Whether extrinsic fraud and lack of jurisdiction in procuring a judgment declaring presumptive death justify an action to annul that judgment rather than the filing of an affidavit of reappearance.