Friday, October 14, 2016

Garcia vs. Recio

Case Digest
G.R. No. 138322

Facts:

Respondent, a Filipino, was married to an Australian citizen. They lived together as husband and wife in Australia. Two years later, a decree of divorce, purportedly dissolving the marriage, was issued by an Australian family court.

Sometime later respondent became an Australian citizen and married Petitioner -- a Filipina in Cabanatuan City. In their application for a marriage license, respondent was declared as single and Filipino.

Petitioner and respondent lived separately without prior judicial dissolution of their marriage.  Petitioner then filed a Complaint for Declaration of Nullity of Marriage in the court a quo, on the ground of bigamy -- respondent allegedly had a prior subsisting marriage at the time he married her. She claimed that she learned of respondent’s prior marriage to an Australian citizen only at a later time.

Respondent averred that, he had revealed to petitioner his prior marriage and its subsequent dissolution.  He contended that his first marriage to an Australian citizen had been validly dissolved by a divorce decree obtained in Australia; thus, he was legally capacitated to marry petitioner.
About five years after the couple’s wedding and while the suit for the declaration of nullity was pending -- respondent was able to secure a divorce decree from a family court in Sydney, Australia.

Issue:

Whether or not the divorce decree obtained abroad may be ipso facto admitted as evidence in Philippine courts?

Ruling:

No. Before a foreign judgment is given presumptive evidentiary value, the document must first be presented and admitted in evidence. A divorce obtained abroad is proven by the divorce decree itself. Indeed the best evidence of a judgment is the judgment itself. The decree purports to be a written act or record of an act of an official body or tribunal of a foreign country.


Under Sections 24 and 25 of Rule 132, on the other hand, a writing or document may be proven as a public or official record of a foreign country by either (1) an official publication or (2) a copy thereof attested by the officer having legal custody of the document. If the record is not kept in the Philippines, such copy must be (a) accompanied by a certificate issued by the proper diplomatic or consular officer in the Philippine foreign service stationed in the foreign country in which the record is kept and (b) authenticated by the seal of his office.

No comments:

Great Pacific Life vs. CA

  G.R. No. 113899,  October 13, 1999   FACTS: A contract of group life insurance was executed between petitioner Grepalife) and DBP. G...