GARCIA v. RECIO (Marriages Dissolved by a Foreign Judgment)

TOPIC: Marriages

dissolved by a foreign judgment

GRACE J. GARCIA, a.k.a. GRACE J. GARCIA-RECI, !etitioner, vs. RE"ERIC# A. RECI, res!ondent. CASE TITLE:

GR No.: $%&%'' PONENTE:  Justi(e

)anganiban

Rederi(k Rederi(k A. Re(io, a *ili!ino, +as married to Edita amson, amson, an Australia Australian n (itien, (itien, in Malabon, Rial, on Mar( $, $/&0. 1ey lived togeter as usband and +ife in Australia. n May $&, $/&/, a de(ree of divor(e, !ur!ortedly dissolving te marriage, +as issued by an Australian family (ourt. FACTS:

n June '2, $//', res!ondent be(ame an Australian (itien, as so+n by a Certifi(ate of   Australian Citiensi! issued by te Australian government. )etitioner -- a *ili!ina -- and res!on res!onden dentt +ere +ere mar marrie ried d on Januar January y $', $//3 in ur 4ady of )er!et )er!etual ual 5el! Cur( in Cabanatuan City. In teir a!!li(ation for a marriage li(ense, res!ondent +as de(lared as single and *ili!ino. tarting (tober '', $//6, !etitioner and res!ondent lived se!arately +itout !rior judi(ial dissolution of teir marriage. 7ile te t+o +ere still in Australia, teir (onjugal assets +ere divided on May $2, $//2, in a((ordan(e +it teir tatutory "e(larations se(ured in Australia. n Mar( %, $//&, !etitioner filed a Com!laint for "e(laration of 8ullity of Marriage in te (ourt a 9uo, on te ground of bigamy -- res!ondent allegedly ad a !rior subsisting marriage at te time time e mar marrie ried d er on Janua January ry $', $//3. e (laime (laimed d tat tat se learned learned of res!on res!onden dents ts marriage to Edita amson only in 8ovember, $//0. In is Ans+er, res!ondent averred tat, as far ba(k as $//%, e ad revealed to !etitioner is !rior marriage and its subse9uent dissolution. 5e (ontended tat is first marriage to an  Australian (itien ad been validly dissolved by a divor(e de(ree obtained in Australia in $/&/: tus, e +as legally (a!a(itated to marry !etitioner in $//3. n July 0, $//& -- or about five years after te (ou!le;s +edding and +ile te suit for te de(laration of nullity +as !ending -- res!ondent +as able to se(ure a divor(e de(ree from a family (ourt in ydney, Australia be(ause te marriage ad irretrievably broken do+n. Res!ondent !rayed in is Ans+er tat te Com!laint be dismissed on te ground tat it stated no (ause of a(tion. 1e ffi(e of te oli(itor General agreed +it res!ondent. 1e (ourt marked and admitted te do(umentary eviden(e of bot !arties. After tey submitted teir res!e(tive memoranda, te (ase +as submitted for resolution.

1ereafter, te trial (ourt rendered te assailed "e(ision and rder. ISSUE: 7eter

te de(ree of divor(e submitted by Rederi(k Re(io is admissible as eviden(e to !rove is legal (a!a(ity to marry !etitioner and absolved im of bigamy. HELD: 1e

)ili!!ine la+ does not !rovide for absolute divor(e: en(e, our (ourts (annot grant it. In mi. A divor(e obtained abroad by t+o aliens, may be re(ognied in te )ili!!ines, !rovided it is (onsistent +it teir res!e(tive la+s. 1erefore, before our (ourts (an re(ognie a foreign divor(e, te !arty !leading it must !rove te divor(e as a fa(t and demonstrate its (onformity to te foreign la+ allo+ing it. In tis (ase, te divor(e de(ree bet+een te res!ondent and amson a!!ears to be autenti(, issued by an Australian family (ourt. Altoug, a!!earan(e is not suffi(ient: and (om!lian(e +it te rules on eviden(e regarding alleged foreign la+s must be demonstrated, te de(ree +as admitted on a((ount of !etitioner;s failure to obje(t !ro!erly be(ause e obje(ted to te fa(t tat it +as not registered in te 4o(al Civil Registry of Cabanatuan City, not to its admissibility. Res!ondent (laims tat te Australian divor(e de(ree, +i( +as validly admitted as eviden(e, ade9uately establised is legal (a!a(ity to marry under Australian la+. 5o+ever, tere are t+o ty!es of divor(e, absolute divor(e terminating te marriage and limited divor(e merely sus!ending te marriage. In tis (ase, it is not kno+n +i( ty!e of divor(e te res!ondent !ro(ured. Even after te divor(e be(omes absolute, te (ourt may under some foreign statutes, still restri(t remarriage. ?nder te Australian divor(e de(ree =a !arty to a marriage +o marries again before tis de(ree be(omes absolute (ommits te offense of bigamy>. 1is so+s tat te divor(e obtained by te res!ondent migt ave been restri(ted. Res!ondent also failed to !rodu(e suffi(ient eviden(e so+ing te foreign la+ governing is status. 1ogeter +it oter eviden(es submitted, tey don;t absolutely establis is legal (a!a(ity to remarry a((ording to te alleged foreign la+. Case remanded to te (ourt a 9uo. 1e marriage bet+een te !etitioner and res!ondent (annot be de(lared null and void based on la(k of eviden(e (on(lusively so+ing te res!ondent;s legal (a!a(ity to marry !etitioner. 7it te la(k of su( eviden(e, te (ourt a 9uo may de(lare nullity of te !arties; marriage based on t+o e