100%(3)3 out of 3 people found this document helpful
This preview shows page 179 - 182 out of 211 pages.
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 Article283 of the Civil Code of the Philippines, the filiation may be proven by "anyevidence or proof that the defendant is his father."
87. REPUBLIC VS. CA 227 SCRA 401Facts: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 tothe 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 toestablish 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 7SANTOS VS. CA 242 SCRA 407FACTS:
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 NegrosOriental, 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.