15. Niñal v. Badayog, G.R. No.

133778, March 14, 2000

FACTS: Pepito was married to Teodulfa Bellones on September 26, 1974. Teodulfa was shot by Pepito
resulting in her death on April 24, 1985. One year and 8 months thereafter, Pepito and respondent
Norma Badayog got married without any marriage license. In lieu thereof, Pepito and Norma executed
an affidavit dated December 11, 1986 stating that they had lived together as husband and wife for at
least five years and were thus exempt from securing a marriage license. Pepito dies in a car accident last
February 19, 1997.

After their father’s death, petitioners filed a petition for declaration of nullity of the marriage of Pepito
to Norma alleging that the said marriage was void for lack of marriage license. The case was filed under
the assumption that the validity or invalidity of the second marriage would affect petitioner's
successional rights.

Norma filed a motion to dismiss on the ground that petitioners have no cause of action since they are
not among the persons who could file an action for "annulment of marriage" under Article 47 of the
Family Code.

RTC of Toledo City Cebu dismissed the petition.

However, upon motion of the petitioners, the Court reconsidered the dismissal and reinstated the
petition for review.

ISSUE: Whether or not the second marriage of Pepito was void

RULING: Yes, a valid marriage license is a requisite of marriage under Article 53 of the Civil Code, the
absence of which renders the marriage void ab initio.

There are several instances recognized by the Civil Code wherein a marriage license is dispensed. One of
which is provided in Article 34 that “No license shall be necessary for the marriage of a man and a
woman who have lived together as husband and wife for at least five years and without any legal
impediment to marry each other. The contracting parties shall state the foregoing facts in an affidavit
before any person authorized by law to administer oaths. The solemnizing officer shall also state under
oath that he ascertained the qualifications of the contracting parties are found no legal impediment to
the marriage.

In this case, they cannot be exempted since only 1year and 8months had elapsed from the time the first
marriage of Pepito is dissolved.

Petition is GRANTED and the decision of the RTC is REVERSED and SET ASIDE. The ad case is ordered
REINSTATED.