13. Avenido v. Avenido, G.R. No.

173540, January 22, 2014

FACTS: This case involves a contest between two women both claiming to have been validly married to
the same man, now deceased.

Tecla Hoybia Avenido instituted on November 11, 1998 a complaint for Declaration of Nullity of
Marriage against Peregrina Macua Vda. de Avenido on the grounds that she is the lawful wife of
Eustaquio Avenido. In her complaint, Tecla alleged that her marriage was solemnized in September in
September 30, 1942 as evidenced by a marriage contract recorded with the Office of the Local Civil
Registrar (LCR) of Talibon, Bohol. However, records were destroyed due to the World War II. Thus, only
a Certification was issued by the LCR. They begot 4 children during their marriage.

Sometime in 1954, Estaquio left his family and in 1958, Tecla was informed that Estaquio was in Davao
City living with another woman by the name of Buenaventyra Sayson who later died in 1977 without any
issue.

In 1979, Tecla learned that Estaquio got married to Peregrina, which marriage she claims must be
declared null and void for being bigamous.

On April 12, 1999, Peregrina filed her answer to the complaint with counterclaim, that she is the legal
surviving spouse of Eustaquio who died on 22 September 1989 in Davao City. According to her, their
marriage was celebrated on March 30, 1979 in Davao City. She also contended that the case was
instituted to deprive her of the properties she owns in her own right and as an heir of Eustaquio.

RTC rendered a Decision denying Tecla’s petition, as well as Peregrina’s counter-claim on March 25,
2003.

Tecla appealed to the CA raising as error the trial court’s alleged disregard of the evidence on the
existence of her marriage to Eustaquio

Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Tecla. Hence this Petition for Review on Certiorari.

ISSUE: Whether or not the marriage of Tecla and deceased Estaquio is valid

RULING: Yes. The marriage of Tecla and Estaquio was valid. While the marriage certificate is considered
the primary evidence of a marital union, it is not regarded as the sole and exclusive evidence of
marriage. Jurisprudence teaches that the fact of marriage may be proven relevant evidence other than
the marriage certificate. Hence, even a person’s birth certificate may be recognized as competent
evidence of the marriage between his parents.

The Petition is DENIED and the assailed Decision of the Court of Appeals is AFFIRMED. The marriage
between Peregrina and deceased Estaquio is hereby declared null and void.