Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 0 views

    Republic vs. Dayot GR No. 175581, March 28, 2008

    Uploaded by

    RR F
    1) Jose Dayot married Felisa Dayot in 1986 with a sworn affidavit in lieu of a marriage license stating they lived together for 5 years, however they only lived together for 5 months. 2) Jose then married Rufina Pascual in 1990 and Felisa filed a case for bigamy against Jose. 3) The Supreme Court ruled Jose and Felisa's marriage was invalid as they did not meet the 5 year cohabitation requirement stated in their affidavit. Falsifying this information invalidated the marriage from the beginning.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    You might also like

    Republic vs. Dayot GR No. 175581, March 28, 2008

    Uploaded by

    RR F
    0 views2 pages
    1) Jose Dayot married Felisa Dayot in 1986 with a sworn affidavit in lieu of a marriage license stating they lived together for 5 years, however they only lived together for 5 months. 2) Jose then married Rufina Pascual in 1990 and Felisa filed a case for bigamy against Jose. 3) The Supreme Court ruled Jose and Felisa's marriage was invalid as they did not meet the 5 year cohabitation requirement stated in their affidavit. Falsifying this information invalidated the marriage from the beginning.

    Original Description:

    gfhj

    Original Title

    case29

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    1) Jose Dayot married Felisa Dayot in 1986 with a sworn affidavit in lieu of a marriage license stating they lived together for 5 years, however they only lived together for 5 months. 2) Jose then married Rufina Pascual in 1990 and Felisa filed a case for bigamy against Jose. 3) The Supreme Court ruled Jose and Felisa's marriage was invalid as they did not meet the 5 year cohabitation requirement stated in their affidavit. Falsifying this information invalidated the marriage from the beginning.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    0 views2 pages

    Republic vs. Dayot GR No. 175581, March 28, 2008

    Uploaded by

    RR F
    1) Jose Dayot married Felisa Dayot in 1986 with a sworn affidavit in lieu of a marriage license stating they lived together for 5 years, however they only lived together for 5 months. 2) Jose then married Rufina Pascual in 1990 and Felisa filed a case for bigamy against Jose. 3) The Supreme Court ruled Jose and Felisa's marriage was invalid as they did not meet the 5 year cohabitation requirement stated in their affidavit. Falsifying this information invalidated the marriage from the beginning.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    RepublicvsDayot

    Republicvs.Dayot
    GRNo.175581,March28,2008

    FACTS:
    JoseandFelisaDayotweremarriedatthePasayCityHallon
    November24,1986.Inlieuofamarriagelicense,theyexecuteda
    swornaffidavitthattheyhadlivedtogetherforatleast5years.On
    August1990,JosecontractedmarriagewithacertainRufinaPascual.
    TheywerebothemployeesoftheNationalStatisticsandCoordinating
    Board.FelisathenfiledonJune1993anactionforbigamyagainst
    JoseandanadministrativecomplaintwiththeOfficeofthe
    Ombudsman.Ontheotherhand,JosefiledacomplaintonJuly1993
    forannulmentand/ordeclarationofnullityofmarriagewherehe
    contendedthathismarriagewithFelisawasashamandhisconsent
    wassecuredthroughfraud.
    ISSUE:WhetherornotJosesmarriagewithFelisaisvalidconsidering
    that they executed a sworn affidavit in lieu of the marriage license
    requirement.
    HELD:
    CAindubitablyestablishedthatJoseandFelisahavenotlivedtogether

    forfiveyearsatthetimetheyexecutedtheirswornaffidavitand
    contractedmarriage.JoseandFelisastartedlivingtogetheronlyin
    June1986,orbarelyfivemonthsbeforethecelebrationoftheir
    marriageonNovember1986.FindingsoffactsoftheCourtofAppeals
    arebindingintheSupremeCourt.
    Thesolemnizationofamarriagewithoutpriorlicenseisaclear
    violationofthelawandinvalidatesamarriage.Furthermore,the
    falsityoftheallegationintheswornaffidavitrelatingtotheperiodof
    JoseandFelisascohabitation,whichwouldhavequalifiedtheir
    marriageasanexceptiontotherequirementforamarriagelicense,
    cannotbeamereirregularity,foritreferstoaquintessentialfactthat
    thelawpreciselyrequiredtobedeposedandattestedtobytheparties
    underoath.Hence,JoseandFelisasmarriageisvoidabinitio.The
    courtalsoruledthatanactionfornullityofmarriageisimprescriptible.
    Therighttoimpugnmarriagedoesnotprescribeandmayberaisedany
    time.

    You might also like