Under Article 172 of the Family Code, filiation of legitimate children is by
any of the following:
"The filiation of legitimate children is established by any of the following:
'(1) The record of birth appearing in the Civil Register or a final judgment;
or
'(2) An admission of legitimate filiation in a public document or a private
handwritten instrument and signed by the parent concerned.'
"In the absence of the foregoing evidence the legitimate filiation shall be
proved by:
'(1) The open and continuous possession of the status of a legitimate child;
or
'(2) Any other means allowed by the Rules of Court and special laws. (265a,
266a, 267a)'"
Of interest is that Article 172 of the Family Code adopts the rule in Article
283 of the Civil Code of the Philippines, the filiation may be proven by "any
evidence or proof that the defendant is his father."
87. REPUBLIC VS. CA
227 SCRA 401
Facts:
Woman (Castro) seeks judicial declaration of nullity of her marriage (civil)
to Cardenas on the ground that no marriage license was issued to them prior to
the solemnization of the marriage. Allegedly Cardenas personally attended to
the procurement of the license, and in fact, the marriage contract itself has
reference to a license number. But upon requesting the Civil Registrar’s
Office for a copy, said office could not find the license in question. RTC
Quezon City, however, ruled against Castro stating “inability of the
certifying official to locate the marriage license is not conclusive to show
that there was no marriage license issued. She appealed to the CA which
consequently declared the marriage null and void. Petitioner RP petitions the
SC for review on certiorari.
Issue:
WON documentary and testimonial evidence presented are sufficient to
establish that no marriage license was issued by the Civil Registrar prior to
the marriage.
Held/Ratio:
Yes. Section 29, Rule 132 of the Rules of Court provides that if a diligent
search is made and no record is found in the office in question, it can be
considered admissible evidence that there exists no record or entry in that
office. CA’s decision is affirmed. Marriage of the parties is considered null
and void.
LUNA VS. IAC
137 SCRA 7
SANTOS VS. CA
242 SCRA 407
FACTS:
Plaintiff Leouel Santos married defendant Julia Bedia on September 20, 1986.
On May 18 1988, Julia left for the U.S. She did not communicate with Leouel
and did not return to the country. In 1991, Leoul filed with the RTC of Negros
Oriental, a complaint for voiding the marriage under Article 36 of the Family
Code of the Philippines. The RTC dismissed the complaint and the CA affirmed
the dismissal.
ISSUE
:
Does the failure of Julia to return home, or at the very least to communicate
with him, for more than five years constitute psychological incapacity?
RULING:
No, the failure of Julia to return home or to communicate with her husband
Leouel for more than five years does not constitute psychological incapacity.
