Case Summary (G.R. No. 196049)
Facts
- Fujiki and Marinay married in Pasay City on January 23, 2004. The marriage ended in separation when Fujiki could not bring Marinay to Japan.
- Without dissolving her first marriage, Marinay married Maekara on May 15, 2008, in Quezon City. Maekara brought her to Japan.
- Marinay suffered alleged abuse, left Maekara, and reconnected with Fujiki.
- In 2010, Fujiki supported Marinay in a Japanese family court proceeding that declared her second marriage void for bigamy.
Procedural History
- On January 14, 2011, Fujiki filed in the RTC a “Petition for Judicial Recognition of Foreign Judgment (or Decree of Absolute Nullity of Marriage),” praying to:
a. Recognize the Japanese judgment.
b. Declare the Marinay–Maekara marriage void ab initio under Articles 35(4) and 41 of the Family Code.
c. Direct annotation of that judgment on the Philippine civil register. - The RTC dismissed the petition motu proprio for lack of personality to sue (only “the husband or the wife” of the marriage may file under A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC) and improper venue (Section 4 of that rule). Denial of reconsideration followed on March 2, 2011.
- The Solicitor General, representing the Civil Registrars, filed a manifestation supporting Fujiki. Maekara and Marinay filed letters: Maekara denied abuse, Marinay took no position.
Issues
- Whether A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC (Rule on Declaration of Absolute Nullity and Annulment) applies to recognition of a foreign judgment.
- Whether the prior spouse (Fujiki) may file to recognize a foreign judgment nullifying a subsequent marriage on the ground of bigamy.
- Whether an RTC sitting in a Rule 108 special proceeding for cancellation or correction of civil-registry entries may recognize the foreign judgment.
Applicable Law
• Family Code of the Philippines (E.O. 209, as amended)
– Article 35(4): Bigamous marriages are void from the beginning.
– Article 41: Exceptions to voidness in cases of absent spouse.
• A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC (Nullity and Annulment Rule)
– Section 2(a): Only the husband or wife may file for declaration of nullity.
– Section 4: Venue requirements.
– Section 5: Petition form, contents, verification.
• Rules of Court
– Rule 108: Special proceeding for cancellation or correction of entries in the civil registry.
– Rule 39, Section 48(b): Foreign judgments are presumptive evidence of rights, reviewable only on limited extrinsic grounds.
– Rule 132, Sections 24–25: Proof and attestation of foreign records.
• 1987 Constitution
– Article III, Section 1: Due process and property rights.
– Article VIII, Section 5(5): Rules of Court shall not diminish substantive rights.
Ruling and Reasoning
- A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC does not govern petitions for recognition of foreign judgments affecting marriage status. Applying it would force relitigation in the Philippines of issues already decided abroad, defeating the purpose of limited review and comity.
- Under Juliano-Llave v. Republic, bigamy falls outside the ambit of A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC’s restriction that only “the husband or the wife” may seek nullity. The prior spouse is the injured party entitled to legal remedy.
- Recognition of the Japanese judgment requires only proof of the foreign decision as a fact under Rules 132 and 39. Review is limited to jurisdictional or procedural defects (lack of notice, collusion, fraud, clear mistake).
- Rule 108 is the proper special proceeding to correct the civil registry, as it establishes status, rights, or facts recorded therein. Fujiki, having a personal and material interest in preserving the integrity of his m
Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 196049)
Case Background
- Direct petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 from RTC Branch 107, Quezon City
- RTC’s January 31, 2011 Order dismissed petitioner’s Judicial Recognition of Foreign Judgment on venue and personality grounds
- Motion for Reconsideration denied by RTC Resolution dated March 2, 2011
- Supreme Court granted review on pure question of law
Facts
- Minoru Fujiki, a Japanese national, married Maria Paz Galela Marinay in the Philippines on January 23, 2004
- Fujiki’s parents disapproved; couple lost contact after marriage
- Marinay married Shinichi Maekara on May 15, 2008, without dissolving her first marriage
- Marinay suffered alleged abuse by Maekara and fled back to Japan, reconnecting with Fujiki
- In 2010, Japanese Family Court declared Marinay–Maekara marriage void ab initio for bigamy
- On January 14, 2011, Fujiki filed in RTC:
• Recognition of Japanese judgment
• Voidance of subsequent marriage under Family Code Arts. 35(4) & 41
• Annotation of civil registry entries via Local Civil Registrar and NSO
RTC Ruling
- Dismissed petition and withdrew case motu proprio for gross violation of:
• A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC Sec. 2(a) (only husband or wife may sue for nullity)
• A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC Sec. 4 (venue requirements) - Cited Section 5(4) of A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC as ground for immediate dismissal
- Held Fujiki lacked personality (third person) and petition improperly venued
- Denied reconsideration; invoked Braza v. City Civil Registrar (no jurisdiction in Rule 108 to nullify marriage)
- Noted defective verification and certification against forum shopping
Petitioner’s Reconsideration Arguments
- A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC governs domestic nullity/annulment actions, not special proceedings for recognition of foreign judgments
- Recognition petition seeks status or fact, fitting Rule 1(3)(c) special proceedings
- Fujiki h