Given the validity and efficacy of divorce secured by Rebecca, the same
shall be given a
res judicata
effect in this jurisdiction. As an obvious result of the
divorce decree obtained, the marital
vinculum
between Rebecca and Vicente is
considered severed; they are both freed from the bond of matrimony. In plain
language, Vicente and Rebecca are no longer husband and wife to each other.
Consequent to the dissolution of the marriage, Vicente could no longer be
subject to a husband's obligation under the Civil Code. He cannot, for instance, be
obliged to live with, observe respect and fidelity, and render support to Rebecca.
In
Republic v. Orbecido III
, we spelled out the twin elements for the
applicability of the second paragraph of Art. 26, thus:
x x x [W]e state the twin elements for the application of Paragraph 2 of
Article 26 as follows:
1.
There is a valid marriage that has been celebrated between a Filipino citizen
and a foreigner; and
2.
A valid divorce is obtained abroad by the alien spouse capacitating him or
her to remarry.
The reckoning point is not the citizenship of the parties at the time of the
celebration of the marriage, but their citizenship
at the time a valid divorce is
obtained abroad
by the alien spouse capacitating the latter to remarry.
The petitioner lacks a cause of action for declaration of nullity of marriage, a
suit which presupposes the existence of a marriage. With the valid foreign divorce
secured by Rebecca, there is no more marital tie binding her to Vicente. There is in
fine no more marriage to be dissolved or nullified.
Remo v. Secretary of Foreign Affairs
Facts:
Maria Virginia V. Remo is a married Filipino citizen whose Philippine passport
was expiring. Her passport stated her name as “Maria Virginia Remo Rallonza” (her
given name, middle name, and husband’s last name). Remo, whose marriage still
subsists, applied for the renewal of her passport with the Department of Foreign
Affairs (DFA) with a request to revert to her maiden name and surname in the
replacement passport.
Page
21
of
51
CIVREV DIGESTS – MIDTERMS (DEAN DEL CASTILLO)
This was denied by the DFA on the ground that the use of one’s maiden
name is allowed in passport applications only if the married name has not been used
in previous application. The Implementing Rules and Regulations for Philippine
Passport Act of 1996 (RA 8239) clearly define the conditions when a woman applicant
may revert to her maiden name, that is, only in cases of annulment of marriage,
divorce and death of the husband.
Remo contends that Art. 370 of the Civil Code states that the use of a
husband’s surname is permissive and thus she should be able to use her maiden
name in her passport. The Office of the President, then the CA, however did not
agree with her.
