100%(1)1 out of 1 people found this document helpful
This preview shows page 15 - 17 out of 51 pages.
Marriage LicenseFilipina Y. Sy v. CAFacts: Filipina Sy and Fernando Sy got married on 1973. They were blessed with 2children. Filipina filed a petition for the declaration of absolute nullity of marriage onthe ground of psychological incapacity. The RTC denied the petition, which was lateron affirmed by the CA. MR was denied as well. Hence, this appeal by certiorari.Petitioner, for the first time, is raising the issue that there is an absence of a marriagelicense at the time of the ceremony. The date of issue of the marriage license andmarriage certificate is September 14, 1974, while the date of the celebration of themarriage is on November 15, 1973. Issue: Whether or not the marriage between the parties is void from the beginning forlack of a marriage license at the time of the ceremonyHeld: Yes. The marriage license was issued almost one year after the ceremony tookplace. Therefore, the marriage was indeed contracted without a marriage license.Article 80 of the Civil Code is applicable in this case. There being no claim of anexceptional character, he purported marriage between petitioner and privaterespondent could not be classified among those enumerated in Article 72-79 of theCivil Code. Under Article 80 of the Civil Code, the marriage between petitioner andprivate respondent is VOID from the beginning. Page 15of51
CIVREV DIGESTS – MIDTERMS (DEAN DEL CASTILLO)The issue on psychological incapacity is mooted by the conclusion that the marriageis void ab initio for lack of a marriage license at the time the marriage wassolemnized. REINEL ANTHONY B. DE CASTRO, Petitioner, vs. ANNABELLE ASSIDAO-DECASTRO, Respondent.Petitioner and respondent met and became sweethearts in 1991. They planned to getmarried, thus they applied for a marriage license with the Office of the Civil Registrarof Pasig City in September 1994. They had their first sexual relation sometime inOctober 1994, and had regularly engaged in sex thereafter. When the couple wentback to the Office of the Civil Registrar, the marriage license had already expired.Thus, in order to push through with the plan, in lieu of a marriage license, theyexecuted an affidavit dated 13 March 1995 stating that they had been living togetheras husband and wife for at least five years. The couple got married on the same date,with Judge Jose C. Bernabe, presiding judge of the Metropolitan Trial Court of PasigCity, administering the civil rites. Nevertheless, after the ceremony, petitioner andrespondent went back to their respective homes and did not live together as husbandand wife. Respondent filed a complaint for support against petitioner before theRegional Trial Court. In her complaint, respondent alleged that she is married topetitioner and that the latter has failed on his responsibility/obligation to financiallysupport her as his wife and Reinna Tricia as his child.
You've reached the end of your free preview.
Want to read all 51 pages?
Law, Supreme Court of the United States, Appellate court, DEAN DEL CASTILLO