Case Summary (G.R. No. 45100)
Relevant Dates and Procedural Posture
- The alleged marriage between Tecla and Eustaquio was solemnized on September 30, 1942, in Talibon, Bohol.
- Eustaquio is said to have married Peregrina on March 3, 1979, in Davao City.
- Eustaquio died on September 22, 1989.
- Respondent initiated the complaint for declaration of nullity of Peregrina’s marriage on November 11, 1998.
- The Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 8 of Davao City, rendered its decision on March 25, 2003, denying both the petition and counterclaim.
- The Court of Appeals (CA) reversed this ruling on August 31, 2005.
- The Supreme Court rendered the final decision on January 22, 2014.
Applicable Law
The case was adjudicated under the 1987 Philippine Constitution as the decision date is well after 1990. Key procedural rules invoked include Rule 45 of the Rules of Court (Petition for Review on Certiorari) and Rules 130 on the proof of marriage. The substantive law concerns the family code provisions on marriage, legitimacy, and the effect of bigamous marriages.
Facts of the Case
Tecla claimed she lawfully married Eustaquio in 1942 and bore him four children. Eustaquio left Tecla and the children in 1954, and later, they learned of his subsequent marriage to Peregrina in 1979, which Tecla alleged was bigamous and therefore null. Peregrina countered asserting that her marriage to Eustaquio was valid, emphasizing that Tecla was never his legal wife but only a common-law partner. The crux of the dispute hinged on the proof of Tecla’s marriage and whether the second marriage to Peregrina was therefore void.
Evidence Presented
Tecla supported her claim through testimonial evidence (including her own and witnesses present at the ceremony) and documentary evidence such as certifications issued by the Local Civil Registrar and National Statistics Office attesting to the destruction of marriage records during World War II. Certifications of her children's births, baptismal certificates, and a certification from the parish priest were also presented. Peregrina presented a marriage certificate dated March 3, 1979, an affidavit by the deceased declaring himself single at the time of her marriage, and other documents to negate Tecla’s claim and support her counterclaim for damages and attorney’s fees due to bad faith litigation.
RTC’s Findings and Ruling
The trial court denied the petition for declaration of nullity of marriage filed by Tecla, ruling that Tecla failed to prove the existence of her prior valid marriage with Eustaquio. It gave little credence to the testimonies and relied heavily on the absence of the original marriage certificate, finding secondary evidence insufficient without conclusive proof of the document’s execution and loss.
Court of Appeals’ Reversal
The CA reversed the RTC, ruling that the presumption of a valid marriage existed because Tecla and Eustaquio cohabited as husband and wife and had four children. The CA gave weight to the testimonies of witnesses and the documentary evidence, holding that the due execution and loss of the marriage contract — conditions necessary for the admissibility of secondary evidence — were sufficiently established.
Issues Raised by the Solicitor General
The legal questions included:
- Whether the presumption of marriage could invalidate a subsequent marriage.
- Whether secondary evidence could be admitted without the original document or proof thereof.
- The probative value of a church-issued certificate of marriage without the testimony of the priest who issued it.
Supreme Court’s Analysis on Proof of Marriage
The Supreme Court held that while a marriage certificate is primary evidence, it is not exclusive. The fact of marriage can be proven by secondary evidence such as testimonials from parties and witnesses, especially when original records were destroyed or lost, as was the case here due to World War II. The Court emphasized that evidence proving the execution of the marriage document and its subsequent loss must be shown before secondary evidence is admissible, which in this case was established by the testimonies of the witnesses and certifications from civil registrars.
The Court highlighted the principle that a marriage is presumed valid when the parties have cohabited as husband and wife and presented children, and these facts were unrebutted in this case. The Court further clarified common misconceptions in the Rules of Court concerning secondary evidence, noting that failure to produce an origin
Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 45100)
Nature of the Case and Parties Involved
- This is a Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court, contesting a Court of Appeals (CA) decision that reversed the Regional Trial Court (RTC) ruling.
- The petitioners and respondents are two women, Peregrina Macua Vda. de Avenido (petitioner) and Tecla Hoybia Avenido (respondent), both claiming to have been validly married to the same deceased man, Eustaquio Avenido.
- The legal dispute centers on a Complaint for Declaration of Absolute Nullity of Marriage instituted by Tecla against Peregrina on the ground that the latter's marriage to Eustaquio was bigamous.
- Peregrina counterclaimed, asserting that her marriage to Eustaquio was legal and sought dismissal of Tecla’s complaint.
Factual Background
- Tecla alleged marriage to Eustaquio on 30 September 1942 in Talibon, Bohol, officiated by the Parish Priest and evidenced by a marriage certificate now lost due to destruction of records during World War II.
- Tecla and Eustaquio lived as husband and wife and had four children.
- Eustaquio allegedly abandoned Tecla and their children in 1954, and was later discovered living with another woman, Buenaventura Sayson, who died in 1977 without issue.
- Peregrina claimed to have married Eustaquio on 30 March 1979 in Davao City and filed an answer to Tecla’s complaint denying bigamy and contending that the suit was intended to deprive her of property rights.
- The RTC dismissed both Tecla’s complaint and Peregrina’s counterclaim.
- The CA reversed the RTC ruling, finding Tecla’s marriage valid and declaring the marriage between Peregrina and Eustaquio bigamous and void.
Issues Raised
- Whether Tecla’s marriage to Eustaquio was valid despite the absence of a marriage certificate due to the loss of records.
- Whether the CA erred in declaring Peregrina’s marriage to Eustaquio bigamous.
- Whether the presumption of marriage between Tecla and Eustaquio can overturn the validity of a subsequent marriage.
- The propriety of admitting secondary evidence, including testimonies and certifications, to prove marriage in the absence of original documents.
- The evidentiary value of a church-issued marriage certificate without the priest who issued it being presented as a witness.
Testimonial and Documentary Evidence Presented
- Tecla’s side presented:
- Testimonies of Adelina Avenido-Ceno (Eustaquio’s sister and eyewitness to the 1942 marriage), Climaco Avenido (eldest son), and Tecla herself.
- Documentary evidence including multiple certifications attesting the destruction of marriage and civil registry records from 1900 to 1944 due to World War II.
- Certifications of births of the couple’s children.
- Certification of marriage issued by the Parish Priest of Talibon.
- C