In this case there is no pretense that either Beso or his fianc\u00e9 Yman was at

In this case there is no pretense that either beso or

This preview shows page 14 - 16 out of 51 pages.

In this case, there is no pretense that either Beso or his fiancé Yman was at the point of death or in a remote place. Neither was there a sworn written request made by the contracting parties to the Judge that the marriage be solemnized outside his chambers or at a place other than his sala. What, in fact appears on record is that respondent Judge was prompted more by urgency to solemnize the marriage because Beso was an overseas worker. Judges who are appointed to specific jurisdiction may officiate in weddings only within said areas and not beyond. Where a judge solemnizes a marriage outside his court’s jurisdiction, there is a resultant irregularity in the formal requisites laid down in Article 3, which while it may not affect the validity of the marriage, may subject the officiating official to administrative liability. 27 Aranes v Occiano Facts: Merceditas Aranes charged Judge Occiano with gross ignorance of the law in a letter complaint because said judge solemnized her marriage (Feb. 17, 2000) with Dominador Orobia outside of his territorial jurisdiction and without the requisite marriage license. She and Orobia relying on the ‘marriage’ lived together as husband and wife for many years but on his death she was deprived of inheriting from him because their marriage was a nullity. She was likewise deprived of receiving Orobia’s pension from the navy. Page 14 of 51
Image of page 14
CIVREV DIGESTS – MIDTERMS (DEAN DEL CASTILLO) In his comment, the Judge said that on Feb. 15, 2000, a Juan Arroyo asked him to solemnize the marriage between the parties on the assurance that all the necessary documents were complete.He agreed to conduct the wedding at Nabua because Orobia suffered from a stroke and couldn’t travel to Balatan. On the day of the wedding, he noticed that no marriage license was presented and he informed the parties that their marriage will be a nullity and had wanted to move the date of the wedding but out of human compassion decided to continue because the visitors were already coming in, the delivery of provisions for the reception, the possibility of further aggravating Orobia’s condition (nastroke) and the parties assured him that they will give him the license the afternoon of the same day. No license was ever delivered. Aranes later desisted upon realization that it was her fault BUT the Office of the Court Administrator still found the judge guilty of solemnizing a marriage without a duly issued marriage license and for doing so outside his territorial jurisdiction and was fined 5K. ISSUE: Whether the decision is correct? HELD: Tama! Under the Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980, or B.P.129, the authority of the regional trial court judges and judges of inferior courts to solemnize marriages is confined to their territorial jurisdiction as defined by the Supreme Court. Judge Occiano only had jurisdiction to solemnize marriages in Balatan and not Nabua and he should be held administratively liable for violating the law on marriage. He should also be faulted for solemnizing a marriage without the
Image of page 15
Image of page 16

You've reached the end of your free preview.

Want to read all 51 pages?

  • Fall '16
  • Law, Supreme Court of the United States, Appellate court, DEAN DEL CASTILLO

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture