ROBERTO DOMINGO, vs. COURT OF APPEALS and DELIA SOLEDAD AVERA represented by her Attorney-in-Fact MOISES R. AVERA.
- G.R. Number: G.R. No. 104818
- Promulgated: 1993-09-17
- Ponente: Romero, J.
Doctrine
For the purpose of remarriage under Article 40, absolute nullity of a prior marriage is invoked only on the basis of a final judgment declaring such previous marriage void.
Although a void marriage lacks the status of a valid marriage even without judicial declaration, certain limited effects (notably concerning children) may still flow; generally spouses' property relations in a void marriage are governed by co-ownership rules rather than conjugal partnership or community property regimes.
Determination whether a marriage is void is reserved to the courts and spouses cannot unilaterally declare a marriage void; a court action is therefore required to adjudicate voidness in many instances.
Facts
Petitioner challenged property claims and sought declaration of nullity of respondent's second marriage; the Court of Appeals dismissed the petition on 7 February 1992.
The parties' dispute involves the status and effects of a second marriage contracted while a prior marriage allegedly remained subsisting.
The issues framed by the Court include whether judicial declaration of a void marriage is necessary and whether the remedy invoked (SP No. 1989-J) is proper to recover claimed properties.
The Court discussed prior authorities holding that a second marriage contracted during a subsisting first marriage is illegal and void, but examined whether judicial declaration is required for various consequences.
Issues
Whether a petition for judicial declaration of a void marriage is necessary.
Whether a petition for judicial declaration of nullity must be filed only for purposes of remarriage.
Whether SP No. 1989-J is the proper remedy for private respondent to recover certain properties alleged to belong exclusively to her.
Ruling
The petition was denied and the Court of Appeals' decision of 7 February 1992 and its 20 March 1992 resolution were affirmed.
The Court held that for purposes of remarriage Article 40 of the Family Code requires a final judgment declaring the previous marriage void; judicial declaration is essential to determine legal freedom to remarry.
A void marriage, even without judicial declaration, does not acquire the status or consequences of a valid marriage except in specific instances (e.g., certain effects on children); generally property relations of spouses in a void marriage are governed by co-ownership rules under Articles 147 or 148 of the Family Code.
Keywords
G.R. No. 104818, declaration of nullity of marriage, separation of property, void ab initio, bigamy, Motion to Dismiss, grave abuse of discretion, certiorari and mandamus, Yap v. Court of Appeals, People v. Aragon, People v. Mendoza, Vda. de Consuegra v. GSIS, Family Code, Article 40 Family Code, judicial declaration of nullity, marriage, nullity, motion, private, declaration