WEEK 3 #7 Llorente v CA
G.R. No. 124371| 24 Nov 2000 RULING: Yes, the divorce decree is valid and could be recognized in the
By: DEL CASTILLO
Topic: Foreign Marriages and Foreign Divorces
Petitioner: Paula T. Llorente
Respondent: Court of Appeals and Alicia F. Llorente
Ponente: Pardo , J.
FACTS:
In 1937,, Lorenzo Llorente (Lorenzo) married petitioner Paula Llorente
(Paula). Subsequently, before the outbreak of the Pacific War, Lorenzo
departed for the US and Paula stayed in the conjugal home in Camarines
Sur.
In 1943, Lorenzo was admitted to US citizenship.
Upon the liberation of the Philippines by the American Forces in 1945,
Lorenzo returned to the Philippines and therein discovered that Paula
was pregnant and “living in” and having an adulterous relationship with
his brother, Ceferino.
Lorenzo refused to forgive Paula and in fact filed for divorce upon his
return to the US. Finding all factual allegations to be true, the Superior
Court of California issue the divorce decree, and such became final in
1952.
In the meantime, Lorenzo returned to the Philippines and married
respondent Alicia Llorente (Alicia). They lived together as husband and
wife for 25 years and begot three children. Upon Lorenzo’s death, in his
will, he instituted Alicia to be the sole executor of his will. Paula then
filed a petition for letters of administration over Lorenzo’s estate
contending that she was the surviving spouse of Lorenzo. The RTC
issued a decision declaring that the divorce decree is void and that
therefore, Lorenzo’s marriage to Alicia was also void. Thus, the letters of
administration were granted to Paula.
ISSUE: Was the foreign divorce decree obtained by Lorenzo valid and
could be recognized in the Philippines?
Philippines as a matter of comity.
In so ruling, the court considered the applicable facts, that Lorenzo
became an American citizen long before his divorce from Paula and his
marriage to Alicia. Thus, as a rule, issues arising from these incidents
are necessarily governed by foreign law.
The Court applied art 15 and 16 which states:
Art 15: Laws relating to family rights and duties, or to the status,
condition and legal capacity of persosns are binding upon citizens of
the Philippines, even though living.
Art 16. Real property as well as personal property is subect ot the law of
the country where it is situated.
However, intestate and testamentary succession, both with respect to
the order of succession and to the amount of successional rights and to
the intrinsic validity of testamentary provisions, shall be regulated by
the national law of the person whose succession is under
consideration, whatever may be the nature of the property and
regardless of the country wherein said property may be found.
The Court further held, in upholding the validity of the divorce decree,
cited jurisprudence that the divorce obtained by the foreigner can be
recognized and its legal effects may be recognized in the Philippines
insofar as respondent is concerned in view of the nationality principle in
our civil law on the status of persons.
Thus, with Lorenzo being a US citizen at the time of the divorce, and such
was allowed in California law, the divorce decree was valid.