On Article 2 of the civil code on effectivity of laws.

There are only three possible scenarios.

1. The law may not provide for the day of its effectivity.

In other words the law is silent as to its date of effectivity. That is the time that you will
have to apply the 15-day period provided for in Article 2 of the civil code, but take note of
the language of article that the law takes effect after 15 days following the completion of
its Publications either in the official Gazette or in a newspaper of General circulation.

Do not forget the word "following". The law will actually take effect not on the 15th day
but on the 16th day because of the word "following".

So for example, if the last day for the complete publication of the law was July 1 you will
start counting the following day July 2. July 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16, but
take note that the law will not take effect on the 15th day but on the 16th day on the day
following

2. The law already provide for the day of its own effectivity.

If that is the case that law provided for by the law will govern but subject only to the
requirement of publication. Congress may not make a law effective without publication.

Landmark case of Tanada versus Tuvera:

The Supreme Court ruled that because of the requirement of due process in our
constitution. It is not possible for a law whether it is of general application or it is of local
application to take effect in the absence of publication. So publication of the law is
indispensable in order for the law to become effective.

Meaning of the phrase" unless otherwise provided in Article 2'' only mean that congress
may either lengthen it or shorten it but it does not refer to the requirement of publication
because the requirement of publication cannot be dispensed with.

3. The law may provide that it shall take effect immediately.

Upon approval,if the law provides that it shall take effect immediately upon approval. It
should be construed as coming into effect immediately on the day of its own publication.

What is the doctrine of processual presumption?

In the event that a foreign law will become necessary for the resolution of a case pending before
our courts, our courts, may not take cognizance of the existence of a foreign law. The
requirement in our law procedure is that the existence of a foreign law must be duly proven as a
matter of fact. So therefore, it is necessary that the existence of the foreign law must be
especially alleged and proven.

What is the effect if foreign law has not been allege or even if it has been alleged it was not
proven?

That is the time that we will be applying the doctrine of residual presumption under the doctrine
of processual presumption. If the existence of a foreign law has not been especially allege or
even if it was alleged, it was not proven, our courts will simply presume that the foreign law is
the same as our internal or domestic law.

The doctrine of processual presumption has another name. It is also referred to as the doctrine
of presumed identity approach in private international law.

On Article 13
Take note that we have two laws.

On counting of legal periods:

1. Article 13 of the new civil code and the other
2. section 31 of the 1987 administrative code. The provisions of the two laws are basically the
same.

The only difference is with respect to the counting of a year.

In the civil code, when the law speaks of a year it shall be understood as consisting of 365
days. On the other hand, section 31 of the administrative code provides that when the law
speaks of a year it should be understood as 12 calendar months.

Those two laws cover the same subject matter but they are totally repugnant to each other.
They cannot be reconciled. If we are going to follow Article 13 of the civil code the actual
number of days is necessary. In order to arrive at a year, we will apply have to come 365 times.
The result will be different if it is a leap year because of an extra day.

On the other hand under the provisions of the administrative code, the actual number of days is
no longer important because whether it is a leap year or a regular here, the result will be the
same.

In the 2007, the Supreme Court recognized the implied repeal of the provisions of Article 13 of
the new Civil code with respect to the counting of a year that it was impliedly repealed by
section 31 of the administrative code.

Now, when the law speaks of a year it shall now be understood as 12 calendar months. Do not
forget the word ''calendar'' because 12 calendar months is different from 12 months.
For a month, it should be understood as consisting of 30 days except when the law refers to a
specific month, for example, except when the law refers to March, March consist of 31 days but
when the law refers to June, it consists of 30 days.

Since a month should be understood as consisting of 30 days when we talk of 12 months, it

simply means 12 times 30 so that is 360 days which is different from 12 calendar months. So
again, do not forget that under existing laws under the Administrative Code which impliedly
repealed the provisions of Article 13 with respect to the counting of the legal period of a year
shall now be understood as 12 calendar months but the other provisions of Article 13 are still
consistent with the provisions of the administrative code.

Let us go to our basic conflict of law rules. Starting with the nationality principle, which is
embodied in Article 15 of the new civil code. With respect to aspects, status of person's
condition or person's legal capacity of persons and his family rights and duties. Those aspects
are to be governed by the national law of the person concerned pursuant to the principle
embodied in Article 15 of the new civil code.

So for example, if the issue is the determination of sex.

The determination of sex will have to be confirmed by the national law of the person concerned.

For example, in the case of Silverio vs. Republic. Silverio is a Filipino citizen, when he
underwent a sex reassignment surgery.

Silverio filed a petition for correction of entries in various birth certificate to change the entry
from male to female. Applying our own law, Article 15 of the civil code, the sex of a Filipino
citizen is that what he has at the time of his birth and it is determined by the birth attendant and
the birth attendant that simply makes a visual examination of the genital of the infant. That
determination is considered immutable and it cannot be changed or corrected by reason of sex
reassignment surgery because in the Philippines, we do not have any law recognizing the legal
effects of sex reassignment surgery.

On the other hand, Had Silverio been a foreigner, if the national law of Silverio allows him to
correct the entry in Silverio's birth certificate with respect to the sex, then it will also be allowed
here. From the point of view of Philippine law since we are following the nationality principle.
The sex of person who is a foreigner will have to be confirmed by his or her own national law.
She is now a female from the point of view of Philippine law considering that Article 15 is part of
our conflict of laws.

If she would be contracting a marriage to a Filipino citizen who is male, that will not be a same-
sex marriage instead that will be a marriage between a male and a female.
The matter of family rights and duties shall also be governed by the national law of the person
concerned.

For example, legal support from the parents. That question will have to be determined by the
national law of the persons concerned.

If there was a foreigner who fathered a child in the Philippines, an illegitimate child. But, he
refused to give support to the illegitimate minor child. If the Foreigner is residing here in the
Philippine and the Foreigner was charged with violation of Republic 9262, alleging that there
was economic violence because the foreigner had not been supportive to his illegitimate minor
child in the Philippines.

In determining whether or not the Foreigner has the obligation to support the legitimate child in
the Philippines, what law is applicable?
Applying Article 15 of our civil code, since the matter of family rights and duties is governed by
the national law of the person concerned, it is the national law of the Foreigner father who will
govern on the matter of his obligation to support the illegitimate child in the Philippines.

However, if the national law of the Foreigner father provides that he does not have an obligation
to support an illegitimate child. The Forum, our court may refuse to apply that foreign law.

As we have learned in conflicts of law or private international law, there are situations where the
Forum may refuse to apply the applicable law. Some of those situations are the following:
1. When the application of the foreign law will result to injustice to a citizen of the
Forum.

2. When the applicable foreign law is contrary to a sound and well established public
policy of the forum.

In the 2014 case of Del Socorro vs Van Wilsem

Our court made the statement that even if the foreigner father was able to prove that under his
national law, he does not have the obligation to support a minor child; the Philippines being the
Forum May refuse to apply that applicable foreign law. It will work in justice to a citizen of the
Philippines and it will be contrary to our sound and well established public policy, that the
parents including illegitimate parents, who admitted their affiliation over their legitimate child
must have the obligation to support their minor children. That public policy is embodied in our
Republic act 9268, otherwise known as VAWC.

In relation to the nationality principle, if the person involved is a Filipino citizen and he or she is
attempting to apply a foreign law or to apply a foreign judgment with respect to him or her and
the foreign law or foreign judgment is contrary to our public policy then that foreign judgment or
the foreign law cannot be applied here in the Philippines.
Prohibitive laws concerning persons, their acts or property, and those which have for their object
public order, public policy and good customs shall not be rendered ineffective by laws or
judgments promulgated, or by determinations or conventions agreed upon in a foreign country.

A Filipino citizen married a foreigner. If that will be a same-sex marriage, even if that marriage is
recognized as valid abroad it cannot be recognized here in the Philippines because it will affect
the marriage of a Filipino citizen. So following our article 17 paragraph 3 that foreign law cannot
render ineffective our laws which does not recognize the validity of a same sex marriage.

Let us go to article 16 which embodies the principle of Lex Rei Sitae.

If the issue will involve properties whether the property is real or personal the applicable law is
the law of the place where the property is situated.

The principle of Lex Rei Sitae is to be vigorously applied if the property involved is a real
property. As explained by the Supreme Court in the case of Orion Savings bank versus
Suzuki, in all matters concerning real property, in all matters concerning the acquisition and
transfer of real property, those matters shall be governed by Lex Rae Sitae.

The issue of legal capacity to acquire real property will not be governed by the nationality
principle instead it is Lex Rei Sitae that will apply.

For example in the Philippines, there is a provision in our constitution prohibiting foreigners
from acquiring or owning lands in the Philippines except by way of hereditary succession. So if a
foreigner wants to acquire land in the Philippines, his capacity to acquire a real property in the
Philippines will not be governed by his own national law instead the applicable law will be the
law of the place where the land is situated and that is the law of the Philippines. The Foreigner
is not qualified to acquire lands here.

The principle of Lex Rei Sitae does not apply if the issue are the following aspects of
sucession:

1. order of succession
2. amount of successional rights
3. intrinsic validity of the testamentary provisions
4. capacity to succeed

Pursuant to article 16 paragraph 2 and article 1039 of the new civil code with respect to those
four aspects of succession whether the succession be intestate or testamentary and where
there are no properties involved, the applicable law is the national law of the decedent again.

The Foreigner will have to be governed by his own national law with respect to the issue of
whether or not a person is a compulsory heir.
Likewise the issue of preterition will not be governed by the Philippine code, if the decedent is
a foreigner because the issue of preterition will affect the intrinsic validity of the testamentary
provision. So therefore the applicable law on the issue of preparation if the dissident is a
foreigner the applicable law is the national law of the decedent.

Let us go to Article 17 paragraph 1. The forms and solemnities of contracts, wills, and other
public instruments shall be governed by the laws of the country in which they are executed.

Filipino citizen will be executing his will in a foreign country. He may follow the formalities
prescribed in the law of the place where the will is executed.

But there is only one exception to that rule and that exception is provided for In Articles 818 in
relation to article 819 of our civil code. What are those two articles about?
Filipino citizens are not allowed to execute a joint will.

Article 819 of our civil code prohibits Filipino citizens from making a joint will even if the will is to
be executed abroad. A joint will executed by Filipino citizens will not be recognized as valid in
the Philippines by way of exception to Lex Loci celebrationis.

With respect to Wills, if the issue is the intrinsic validity of the testamentary provisions of the
will, The applicable law is the national law of the decedent.

Let us go to contracts.
In contracts if the issue is the validity of a contracts with respect to forms or solemnities, again
the applicable law is the law of the place where the contract was executed following the
principle of Lex Loci celebrationis embodied in article 17 paragraph one of the civil code.
Article 17. The forms and solemnities of contracts, wills, and other public instruments shall be
governed by the laws of the country in which they are executed.

On the other hand, if the issue is the intrinsic validity of the provisions of the contract. What is
the applicable law?
If you will notice our Philippine civil code does not provide for a conflict of law rule with respect
to Intrinsic validity of contracts. Instead we will be following our jurisprudence. In our
jurisprudence on the matter of intrinsic validity of the contracts, the applicable law is the law is
either:
1. the law voluntarily agreed upon by the parties which is known as the principle of Lex
voluntatis
2. In the absence of Express agreement as to the applicable law, it is the law at the time
the contract was made.

Let us go to human relations. Article 19 of the civil code provides four cardinal principles in the
exercise of our rights and in the performance of duties.
A person must always act with Justice. He must give everyone his due and he must always
observe honesty and good faith. The sanctions for violations of those Cardinal principles are to
be found in Article 20 and 21 of the civil code.

Let us compare article 20 from article 21.

1. In article 20, The Act is contrary to law whereas in 21 the act is contrary to good
customs.

2. In article 20 there is liability whether the act is committed willfully or negligently. Again,
take note, if the act is contrary to law and it causes injury to someone else there is
liability whether the act was committed willfully or negligently. However in article 21,
when the act is simply contrary to good customs or morals there will only be liability if the
act was committed willfully.

Now let us compare article 20 from article 2176.

In both, the act that causes injury to someone else may have been committed by reason of
negligence. So if a negligent act causes injury to someone else the recovery of damages may
be based either on article 20 of the civil code or in Article 2176 of the civil code.

When do we apply article 20 and when we apply article 2176?

In the 2017 of Saint Martin Polyclinic vs LWB resources Corporation, the Supreme Court
explained the application of article 20 vs article 2176. In situations where negligence causes
injury or damage to someone else, it is article 20 that will be applicable if that negligent act is in
contravention of an existing law or if that act is a breach of an existing law. On the other hand, If
the negligent act is not a breach of an existing law or a pre-existing contractual relations the
applicable law is article 2176.

Next, the application of the principle of damnum absque injuria from the principle of abusive of
right.

If in the exercise of a right injury will cause injury to other, when is there liability?
If the exercise of a right was done in a legitimate manner or it was a valid exercise of a right --
meaning the exercise of a right was attended with good faith even if the exercise of a right
incidentally cause damage to another that injury is not considered a legal injury that will give rise
to an actionable wrong. In other words there will be no ground for recovery of damages in that
situation.

If the exercise of a right was done in bad faith -- solely for the purpose of causing prejudice or
injury to another person, this time the actor will be liable for the resulting injury under the
principle of abuse of right. The Supreme Court explained that a right ceases when it is abuse.
To paraphrase the last words that were used by the Supreme Court: A right ends when it
disappears and it disappears from the moment that it is subjected to abuse. And that is the
basis of liability under the principle of abuse of right.

In article 22 of the civil code which embodies the concept of In Rem Verso.

If there is delivery or payment but it is without legal or just cause, article 22 of the civil code
allows recovery and such action for recovery is referred to as an action in rem verso. The
purpose is to prevent unjust enrichment.

There is another principle which also has for its purpose the prevention of unjust enrichment in
cases where there was payment or delivery and I am referring to the principle of solutio in
debiti.

Are those two concepts the same?

Let us start with their similarities:

1. In both, the enrichment of the defendant is a case of unjust enrichment because the
delivery or the payment to him was without legal or just cause.
2. The purpose of allowing recovery is to prevent unjust enrichment.

Let us now discuss their differences:

1. The requisites enumerated by the Supreme Court in order for an action in rem verso to
prosper:
A. The plaintiff must have suffered a loss.
B. The defendant must have been correspondingly enriched.
C. The enrichment of the defendant was without legal or just cost or it is a case of
unjust enrichment.
D. Plaintiff must have no other legal remedy under contract, quasi contract or quasi
delict.

If it is a case of solutio in debiti, the first three requisites are the same. However, the essence of
solutio in debiti is that the delivery must be by reason of mistake.

What kind of mistake will give rise to the solutio in the debiti?

The answer lies in article 2155. A reading of article 2155 of the civil code will tell us that the
mistake will be a case of solutio in debiti if it is a case of mistake of fact.

Even if it is a case of mistake of law, but if that mistake of law is in relation to the application or
interpretation of a doubtful or difficult provisions of law may still come within the scope of solutio
in debiti.

So following article 2155 if the mistake that was committed was a mistake of Law and that law is
not doubtful and it is not a difficult provision of law, it is not a case of solutio in debiti instead if
there is unjust enrichment in that situation, the action for recovery must be based on in rem
verso.

Summary:
1. If there is a need to prevent unjust enrichment because the delivery was without legal or
just course, but there was no mistake or even if there was mistake, it is a case of
mistake of law, which is not doubtful or which is not a difficult provision of law, action in
rem verso is proper.
2. On the other hand, if the delivery or payment is by reason of mistake of fact or mistake
in a doubtful or difficult provision of law, that will be a cause of solutio in debiti.

Let us go to art 28 of the civil code which embodies the principle of unfair competition.

Is unfair competition in Article 28 of the civil code different from the concept of unfair competition
in intellectual property law?

WILLAWARE PRODUCTS CORPORATION vs JESICHRIS MANUFACTURING

CORPORATION

The Supreme Court ruled that the concept of unfair competition in the civil code is much
broader than the concept of unfair competitions in intellectual property law. In Intellectual
property law, unfair competition may only be committed if the product or the process is
protected by a patent or a copyright. In the civil code, the concept is much broader. The civil
code does not require a patent in order for unfair competition to be committed. The Supreme
Court simply ruled that so long as the requisites are satisfied then there will be a case of unfair
competition.

What are those two requisites:

1. That that defendant must have committed an act which causes injury or losses to a
competitor or to a trade rival who is the plaintiff.
2. That act of the defendant is contrary to good conscience or you can simply say that the
act is unlawful.

If those two requisites are present then there will be liability for damages by reason of unfair
competition under the provisions of Article 28 of the civil code.

Prejudicial question

In order for a prejudicial question to exist, it will require a pending civil case, which must be filed
ahead of a criminal case and that pending civil case contains an issue which is
similar or intimately related to the issue in the criminal case in such a way that the determination
of such issue in the civil case will be determinative of whether or not the criminal action may
proceed because that issue in the civil case determines the guilt of the accused.
As a general rule in order for prejudicial questions to exist, it must require the pendency of a civil
action and a criminal action.

Can we apply the principle of prejudicial question even if the pending cases are not civil and
criminal?

For example, if the pending cases are civil but the issue in one case is in intrinsically is
intimately connected or related with the issue in another civil action. May the principle of
prejudicial question be applied?

The trend in our recent jurisprudence is to allow the application of the principle of prejudicial
question even if the pending actions are not civil and criminal.

In the case of ALSONS DEVELOPMENT AND INVESTMENT CORPORATION vs. THE HEIRS
OF ROMEO D. CONFESOR decided by the Supreme Court in 2018, The Court applied the rule
even if the pending cases are not civil and criminal.
So in those situations where the two actions will involve an issue, which is intimately related to
each other for the purpose of preventing conflicting decisions it is now allowed or permissible to
apply the prejudicial question.

Let us go to civil personality.

Civil personality is synonymous to juridical capacity.

Capacity is defined in our civil code as the fitness to be the subject of legal relation so civil
personality is simply the aptitude of being a proper subject for acquisition of rights and
incurring of obligations.
On the other hand capacity to act refers to capacity of a person to do acts with legal effects.

Now, let us discuss the concept of civil personality in relation to a natural person.

Civil personality is considered inherent in every natural person.

Article 40. Birth determines personality; but the conceived child shall be considered born for all
purposes that are favorable to it, provided it be born later with the conditions specified in Article
41.

For civil purposes, the foetus is considered born if:

1. it is alive at the time it is completely delivered from the mother's womb.
2. However, if the foetus had an intrauterine life of less than seven months, it is not
deemed born if it dies within twenty-four hours after its complete delivery from the
maternal womb.
If upon the cutting of the umbilical cord, the infant is alive and it had an an intrauterine life of at
least seven months then it is considered in possession of Civil Personality and it is born for all
purposes. However, if the intra uterine life of the infant was for less than seven months, the
requirement of the law is that the infant must survive for at least 24 hours. Otherwise, it is not
considered in possession of civil personality. In other words It is not deemed born if it dies within
24 hours.

Those are the rules for those that have been delivered out of the mother's womb.

But what about those children that are still inside the mother's womb or the unborn child. Do
they have Civil personality?

Our law also provides that with respect to unborn children or conceived children, for purposes
beneficial to them our law recognizes the existence of civil personality on their part, but only
purposes beneficial to the child.

So the recognition of civil personality on the part of a conceived child is only for a limited
purpose at the same time the civil personality of the conceived child is merely provisional.

Civil Personality is still subject later on to compliance with the requirements of article 41 of the
civil code. Meaning, if the infant has intrauterine life of at least seven months upon delivery the
infant must be alive. If the intrauterine life was for less than seven months upon delivery, it must
survive for at least 24 hours. Otherwise, It is never considered to have been in possession of
civil personality and even the provisional personality will be lost.

Having a provisional and limited civil personality the conceived child can acquire rights, but it
cannot incur obligations.

What are those rights to which a conceived child is entitled:

1. Right to be supported by its parents.

While the child is still inside the mother's womb. It is already entitled to legal support
from the parents.
2. The conceived child can be the recipient of a or simple donation

Art. 1025: A child already conceived at the time of the death of the decedent is capable of
succeeding provided it be born later under the conditions prescribed in article 41.

A conceived child is already considered a compulsory heir provided that upon delivery it will
satisfy the conditions which are required in article 41 of the civil code. For that purpose if the
conceived child was omitted from the will of the parents, that will amount to preterition.

A conceived child may also be made a beneficiary in a life insurance policy because the same
is favorable to the conceived child.

In the case of Continental Steel manufacturing corporation vs Montano, the Supreme Court
explained that there is a need to determine the civil personality of a conceived child only if the
issue in the case is the right of the conceived child. If the issue in the case is not the right of the
conceived child, but the right of the parents. Hence, there is no more need to determine th civil
personality.

In this case, the father of the conceived child was a union member. The union had an existing
collective bargaining agreement with the employer and one of the provisions of the CBA was to
the effect that in the event that there was a death of a legitimate dependent of the Union
member the union member is entitled to certain financial assistance. When the wife was six
months pregnant, she was forced to deliver the child, but at the time of delivery, the child was
already dead. In that case the employer refused to pay the financial assistance to the union
member allegedly on the ground that there was no dead on the family of the Union member. It
was the contention of the employer that in order for a person to die, he must have first been in
possession of civil personality. The employer is invoking the provision of article 42 of the civil
code which provides that death extinguishes civil personality.

The Supreme Court ruled that article 42 of the civil code simply means that death extinguishes
civil personality but article 42 does not require possession of civil personality in order for one to
die. According to the code, the possession of civil personality is not a condition sine qua non for
death. Even our constitution recognizes life of the unborn from the moment of conception.

Is the conceived child illegitimate child of the Union member?

Since the union member is validly married and the conception took place inside that valid
marriage, it is is considered a legitimate child of the union member following the provision of
article 64 of the family code which provides the children conceived or born in a valid marriage
are legitimate children and lastly is the OWN Ship Channel in that case independent of the
Union member the answer again is yes. Because one of the rights to which are considered child
is entitled to is the right to be supported by its progenitors. So the provisions of the collective
bargaining agreement in that case became operational because there was that of a legitimate
dependent of the Union number. So therefore being a member is entitled to the financial issue
assistance provided for In the collective bargaining agreement. And in that case, there was no
need to dwell on the issue of the Civil personality of the of the considerable because the issue in
that case is not the right of the offensive child, but the right of the parent of the worship time.

Let us go to our whole scone survivorship.

If

If there will be a case. Where the issue of survivorship Will be the main issue.

Take note that we have two lows that will govern The issue or question of survivorship one is
article 43 of the civil code and the other is the presumption of survivorship and the rule one
three one of those important. When do we apply article 43 of the civil code? And when do we
apply rule one three one of those of coin if the issue
Get the issue in the case if the question of survivorship is for the purpose of successional
Rights. Because the question of survivorship is between two persons who are Heirs of each
other who are called upon to inherit from each other whether it is by reason of will or by reason
of provision of law.

If that is the case that the court below is article 43 of the civil code if the issue is successional,
right? On the other hand if the question of survivorship Is not in relation to successional rights,
but something else for example, the issue of survivorship is between. The insured in a life
insurance policy and the beneficiary in the same life insurance policy because if the beneficiary
died ahead of the ensued upon the death of the beneficiary is sibrel personality is already
extinguish. So therefore the Benicia beneficiary will no longer be entitled. The insurance
proceeds on the other hand if the insured tight ahead of the beneficiary the beneficiary became
entitled to the insurance proceeds and in order to determine who between the beneficiary and
enjoy right ahead. The applicable law is no longer article 43 of the civil code considering that the
issue in that case is no longer a successional right but one arising from the contract of
insurance in the latter situation. The applicable law is the presumption of survivorship under rule
131 of the Russo Corey. The question of survivorship is for the purpose of determining. Whether
one had inherited from the other. In which case the applicable know is article 43 of the civil
code. What are the rules under article 43 of the civil code? First rule The one who alleges the
death of one ahead of the other shall have the burden of proving the same. Number two in the
absence of proof as to who died first. The law deems that both persons died at the same time.
And there shall be no transmission of successional Rights from one to the other.

So for example If the father and the son who are both married to their respective spouses. They
both pointed is ship which cup size and son and both of them died. If the father is Rich and has
properties while the son has no properties of his phone may be possible for the Widow of the
son to inherit properties coming from the father-in-law. Since the Widow of the sun is not a little
are of the father-in-law the only way by which the Widow of the sun may be may be entitled to
some of the properties of the father-in-law is when the sun had inherited from the father. But
applying article 43 of the civil code in the absence of proof as to who died first the load them's
the father and the son who have both died at the same time. So therefore there will be no
transmission of succession rights from the father to the son. So therefore the sun it not inherit
from the other sewing thread nothing will be inherited by the Widow this way.

From the husband

On the other hand, if in that situation the issue is contract of insurance because before boarding
the ship the further you would an insurance policy naming the sun know as beneficiary for 5
million pesos in both of them boarded the ship which we sunk in both of them died. In that
question in that situation will the Sun not be entitled to the insurance post proceeds from the the
insurance of the father that upon his death that insurance proceeds. No will form part of his
estate that can be inherited in print by the surviving spouse. In determining who between the
father and the son died in the latter situation. The applicable law is no longer article 43 of the
civil code or the presumption of survivorship and the rule 131 of Rosa boy. Enroll, 131 of the
civil code. There are two ages that we must take into consideration one is below 15, and the
other is above 60. So if both persons host question of survivorship is the issue if both of them
are below 15 it is the all there who is them to be the Survivor or them Frog die class. On the
other hand if both persons are above 60.

It is the young girl who is still to be the Survivor. One of them is Balochistan and the other is
above 60. It is the younger who is deemed to be the survival. If one of them is either below 15 or
above 60 and the other is between the ages of 15 and 60. It is the latter who is them to be the
Survivor. If both of them be between the ages of 15 and 60. But the Sex has been different one
is male the other is female it is the male who is deemed to be the Survivor so in our locker case
if the age of the father was 65 and the sun was 35 since the father is above 60 and the Sun is
between the ages of 15 and 60 it is the son who is them to have died.

So therefore the beneficiary survive the insured so therefore the PV Cherie became entitled to
the insurance proceeds that upon his death that insurance proceeds will form part of his estate.
From which the surviving spouse? Can inherit

Let us go through the Family Code.

In the Family Code marriage is defined. As a special contract or permanent Union between a
man and a woman entered into in accordance with law for the work for the purpose of
stablishment family and conjugal life.

In our Loom Marriage Is recognized as a union only between a man and a woman.

So if the family code is applicable. Because the parties are Filipino citizens. The family code
does not recognize as Marilyn in a same-sex marriage. So if two Filipino citizens who are
coming from what from the same sex both names or both are females? Even if

10:08 AM
Or both are females. Even if they will contract a marriage abroad in a place where same-sex
marriage is recognized as valid dark marriage. Cannot be recognized as buried in the
Philippines applying or ethical views pain or the civil code because both are Filipino see this
language. But is that a void marriage the answer is no. It is not a void Mary. Why not? Because
our law the family code does not even consider that as a Mary. Because the family code defines
a marriage as a special contract only between a man and a woman.

So a same-sex marriage celebrated abroad even if that is recognized as valid in the place of
Celebration. It cannot be recognized as valid during the Philippines and it will not even be
considered as avoid married.

In our law That is not a marriage.

The implication of the principal Is important purposes of applying the requirement of obtaining a
Judicial Declaration of absolute majority of avoid marriage in article 4 d of the family group. It
was took place is a same-sex marriage celebrated abroad between two Filipino citizens who are
both males. They are not required to follow the requirement of article 4 P of the family code
because that is not even. Considered a void Instead it is not a marriage.

What took place between them is not a marriage under the definition of marriage in article one
of the family.

Marriage in our jurisdiction as a dual nature It is both a contract and a social institution. The
state is very much interested in the contract of marriage because marriage is fundamentally a
social institution. It is the foundation of the family and an environment social institution such that
everything about marriage the nature of marriage the consequences of marriage in the
incidence of marriage are all governed by low. There is only one aspect of Maryland where the
future spouses are allowed to enter into an agreement.

Known as marriage supplement. It is only in the area of property relations that the parties are
allowed to enter into some sort of an agreement known as a marriage settlement. But with
respect to the other aspects of marriage everything about marriage is covered by now.
Remember the through the nature of marriage the consequences of marriage in the incidence of
marriage are all covered by Lou. Let us go to the case of alarm. They are so spinner a 20-17
case decided by the Supreme Court point. In the case of the alarm. We are still on a petition for
Declaration of absolute value was while on the ground of psychological incapacity. But the judge
to whom the case was probably did not one. To take cognizance of the case on the ground
allegedly that the court has no jurisdiction over that kind of marriage that the court has no
jurisdiction.

Forget your name. The validity of a marriage that was celebrated or that was solemnized in a
church following the common law of the Catholic Church. It was the position of the judge. That
the state has no right to inquire into the validity of a marriage that was celebrate that in a trick
following the Armando. The judge is Apparently invoking the principle of separation of church
and state so is the principle of separation of church and state applicable in determining the
validity of a marriage if a certain marriage was celebrated for so 1/2. The condo of the Catholic
church, and it was celebrated in a church in the case of Bernard versus Villa the Supreme Court
ruled that the RTC has jurisdiction over the case, even if it was solemnized for someone to the
hello of the early church, and it was celebrated in HOH.

So apparently the Supreme Court is telling us that the principle of separation of church and
state and state is not applicable if the issue is the validity of a Madman. Why not because the
issue of validity of a marriage shall be governed by law according to Article 1 of the family code
everything about marriage shall be governed by law since marriage is a social institution the
consequence the nature the incidence of barrage are all governed by law including the issue of
the validity of the marriage. And residual has nothing to do with you. So the principle of
separation of church and state is inapplicable. For the purpose of determining the validity of the
marriage. Applying Article 1 of the family code the nature of the marriage the consequences of
marriage in the incidence of marriage are all governed by law and under the law. The RPC
specifically the family coin has jurisdiction or birthday. This one's for Declaration of absolute
reality of immigrants because the issue of absolute nullity of a marriage shall be determined by
our applicable looks specifically the Family Code.

And the beliefs or the religious beliefs of the parties have nothing to do with the issue of the
validity of the marriage of the pilots. That is the case popular versus belong.

Now let us go to the basic principles. In determining the validity of a marriage.

In any question in the bar examination on validity of marriages involving Filipino citizens. What
is the first thing that you must look into? The place of the celebration of the marriage Was it
celebrated abroad or was it celebrated in the Philippines in the marriage of Filipino citizens was
celebrated abroad the applicable law according to article 12 districts for a group. One of the
family code is the law of the place where the marriage was celebrated in determining the validity
of that marriage.

For someone to add your 26 paragraph 1 if that marriage involving Filipino citizens was
celebrated abroad and it is recognized as buried in the place of Celebration. It will also be
recognized as valid in the Philippines. So as a general. For marriages involving citizens of the
Philippines celebrate that abroad in determining the validity of that marriage. The applicable law
is the law of the place where the marriage was celebrated if that marriage celebrated if that
marriage is valid in the place of Celebration, it will also be recognized as valid during the
Philippines. But there are exceptions to that rule.

Article 26 paragraph 1 of The Family Code expressly provides for the following exceptions If the
marriage is void by reason of article 35 paragraph one or it one of the Contracting parties is
below it below below 18. Number one second 35 for if it is a bigamist / polygamous marriages
35 one of the Contracting parties committed a mistake with respect to the physical actual
physical identity of the other Contracting five and thirty five six. If the marriage is void by reason
of failure to comply with the procedural requirements in article 52 of the Family Code.

Article 36 psychological capacity article 37 in such this marriages article 38 marriages which
avoid by reason of public policy. So with respect to the following void marriages 35 195 for at
five five thirty five six article 36 article 37 and article 38, even if the marriage was celebrated
abroad and it is recognized as valid in the place of Celebration. It will remain void in the
Philippines following article 46 paragraph 1 of The Family Code.

Let us go to marriages celebrated here in the pyramids. If the marriage between pilipino citizens
is celebrated here in the Philippines. That is the time to apply the five requisites for a valid man.
But what if the marriage of Filipino sufficient was celebrated here in the Philippines? When was
it celebrated? Was it celebrated before they pick T become the Family Code Orange during the
activity of the civil code or was it celebrated during the effectivity of the Family Code? Because
there is a principle in marriages that the validity of a marriage shall be determined by the law in
Force at the time of its celebration. For example.

If the Contracting parties are if the Contracting parties works that brother and stepsister. If that
marriage was celebrated during the effectivity of the civil code or prior to the effectivity of the
family code or prior to August Lee of 1988 that marriage is moving. Because the civil code
prohibits them that kind of marriage as a matter of public policy. So but if that marriage was
celebrated during the effectivity of the family code the family code no longer prohibits a marriage
between a stepbrother and stepsister. So if the marriage between a stepbrother in the step
system took place after August 3 of 1988 that marriage is perfectly valid. Again, remember the
road If the marriage involving Filipino citizens were celebrated here in the Philippines when I'm
done anything done the day of the celebration of the marriage if the marriage was celebrated
during the effectivity of the civil code apply the civil code Provisions in their prayer meaning the
validity of that narrative if the marriage was celebrated during that activity program the code that
is the time that you will apply the

Of the family code in determining The quality of the matter So for those marriages celebrate that
here in the Philippines and celebrated during the effectivity of the under the code. In order for a
marriage to Ravalli, it must comply with the five requisites for a valid narrow two of those five
requisites are classified as essential and three of those requisites are classified as for my reps.
Essential requisites are the following one legal capacity to Contract Marriage and to concern
that that must be freely given. The three formal requisites are the following first the authority of
the solemnizing abdeslam a valid marriage license and Lastly a marriage surrender Basic rule in
article 4 In case of absence of any of those Prime requisites the marriage is random void
opinion. But if there is only a defect in the concern Defect in any of the essential items
According to article for the marriage is nearly voidable. But I must emphasize. That between the
two essential requisites of legal capacity and concern it is only consent that is susceptible of the
being defective legal capacity is not susceptible of becoming defective in relation to Legal
capacity. The only question is this are the parties capacity that corner if capacity that the
marriage is worried if the parties are not capacity then the marriage is void.

10:26 AM
The bottom are arranged in relation to Legal capacity. But in relation to concerned it is
concerned that Chris's sisters susceptible of becoming defective for reasons enumerated in
article 45 of the Family Code. So as a rule. If consent was given. But the consent that was
driven by one is defective for reasons enumerated in article 45 of the family code. The marriage
is merely voidable. On the other hand

If there is merely an irregularity in a formal recognition Such regularity will not affect the political
of the man in other words. The marriage is still perfectly body. But the person or persons
responsible for the irregularity can be held administratively or civilly or criminally liable.

No, let me clarify the rule in article for that the absence of any of the sensual or foreman right
musics children where the marriage void are in issue. I will have to clarify that statement.
If what is absent is?

It what is absent is authority of the solemnized.

General rule the marriage is void. Exception If the parties if either of the Contracting parties if at
least one of the Contracting parties for both of them believe in good faith that the solemn nicer
had the authority to solemnized the marriage then the marriage becomes perfectly body. But as
a rule the marriage is boy in that case. No, the marriage is void because a marriage was indeed
celebrate that but the solemn nicer the one who solemnized the marriage had no Authority. So
there was a semblance of a maggot in that situation there. That is a void Mare. Number two if
what is absent is marriage license? That is indeed a boy in Marin.

Because in that situation a marriage was celebrated, but that marriage is declared by go to be
void.

And third

The parties are not legally capacity.

If a marriage was celebrated, but the parties are not legally capacity till the marriage is void
because in that case there was a marriage that was celebrated, but the law declares the
marriage to be boiled. In body from the very beginning So in those in those situations the
absence of a requisite shall indeed render, the marriage boy absence of authority of the
solemnized absence of marriage license can absence of legal capacity because in those cases
there was indeed in a marriage that was celebrated except that the marriage is declared very
low to be invalid from the very beginning. However, if what is lacking is concerned if it is a case
of absence of concern? The marriage is not going. Because in fact there was no Mary. Not
because marriage is also a contract. In the absence of concern there is no contract of marriage.
Which is different from a void married in avoid marriage in marriage must have been celebrated,
but for one reason or another the law declares that marriage invalid from the very beginning. But
in case of absence of concern there is in fact, no never For example In the 2014 case of
republic versus Palais bar. In that case, we'll aybar a woman clip in a woman. Was intending to
marry her boyfriend so already bar apply for a certificate of no marriage from the ns4 but there
is Pope refused to issue is random are to labor to for the reason that all a bar was already
married because there is a marriage contract registered in the NS know where the name of
Polly bar. As the wife of a Korean fashion But it turned out however in that cage that It was not
cool neighbor who contracted a marriage to the Korean national. It was the contention of
polymer that someone else has shown her personality. In Contracting a marriage equality and
National. So in that case the personal circumstances of coolibar where he used in Contracting a
marriage to a Korean national so that is a case of identity theft purposes of Contracting email.
So it was not the true labor who gave her consent to the marriage.
In that case the true labor of file a petition for correction in or cancellation of entries in the Civil
registry praying that her name be dropped as the wife of the Korean national. In that petition the
OSG interposed and objection on the ground that allegedly according to the OSD the petition
that was filed by labor was in reality a petition for Declaration of absolute nullity of a marriage.
That was merely this guy's as a petition and their own 108.

But the Supreme Court ruled that in that case since it was not the true labor or contracted a
barrage to the Orion National. There was no marriage to speak o involving the true labor that
can be the subject matter of a petition for the quraysh one of absolute married. So in that case
of Labor the Supreme Court is telling us that if there was no marriage that were celebrated. It is
not a case of avoid marriage that can be the subject matter of the petition for Declaration of
absolute married.

Instead the Supreme Court ruling in that case that the remedy resorted to by you labor was the
correct running. So the remedy in case of a situation where there was in fact no marriage that
was celebrated the remedy provided for in rule 1 0 K is the proper remedy. In other words in a
situation where there was in fact no marriage that was celebrated. The proper remedy is a
petition for correction and for consideration of entries in the Civil registry and roll 108 and not
application for Declaration of absolute and it's precisely because if there is no marriage, there is
no marriage that can be Subject marker of people Sean forget duration of absolute value that
remedy presupposes the existence of a void and in the absence of consent, there is no
marriage. Because marriage is fundamentally is also taken from that in the absence of consent.
There is no contract of marriage.

Second situation absence of marriage ceremony

In the Philippines a marriage is ceremonial in other words a marriage in the Philippines is not
simply a contract between the bride and the groom in the Philippines in order for a marriage in
order for a contract of marriage exists. It is necessary that the state must be made a point D. So
this Oppression of the marriage and the state participates in the celebration of the marriage by
way of a marriage ceremony and the state is represented by an authorized solemnizing apis are
in a marriage ceremony. So in the absence of the participation of the state through an
authorized solemnizing abdeslam in in the celebration of ignorance. That will not be considered
a contract of marriage under our For example in the case of more Eco versus people We're in
the first alleged marriage of Maury go to a certain Lucia more ago in Russia are simply sign a
marriage contract privately. They signed the marriage contract without the presence of
unauthorized solemnizing officer. But for one reason or another that marriage contract was
eventually registered in the sabaean register.

Later on a decree of divorce abroad from her marriage tomorrow. More ago intern contract that
another Mary and more ago was subsequently prosecuted for Vegan It was the depends of
more ago that he was not liable for bigamy because what took place in the prior alleged
marriage was Amir signing of a marriage Mantra privately without the presence of a solemnizing
obviously, but the prosecution counted that even if that was the case no more ego should have
obtained a declaration.

The absolute authority of the prior marriage But in that case the Supreme Court rule. That more
ago was not required to follow the requirements of article 40 of the family code. Meaning more
ago was not required to obtain a Judicial Declaration on of absolute Clarity of the prior marriage
because the prior marriage was not a void married instead. The prior alleged marriage was in
Prague non-existent. It was a case.

A no marriage

It was with respect to the alleged marriage of more ego Indonesia.

It was in fact a case of A new marriage No marriage, in fact existed between more ago in Lucia
that can be the subject matter of a petition for Declaration of absolute value. Bucket belong
there because what took place between more ego in Mesilla was simply a bribing of signing a
marriage contract without the participation of the state without the participation of unauthorized
solemnizing officer.

So In the case of Maria do the Supreme Court is telling us that article 4 p.m. The family Family
Code will only be applicable if The prior marriage is a gaze of a void damage. So if in fact no
marriage took place in the prior arranged marriage, the proper remedy is not a petition for
Declaration of absolute morality As proved by the court. No in Republic person clay bar. Just a
consequence the requirement of article 4 P will not go so be applicable applying the case of
more ago versus people in the case of moral objections people the Supreme Court acquitted
more ago. Because the Supreme Court explained that article 40 does not apply to the case of
Mariko people because it was not a case of avoid marriage instead there was in fact no
marriage took place between more ago in Lucia that can be the subject matter of a petition for
Declaration of absolute that it is.

Let us compare the case of a public place was full a bar with a case of brass Le pursues CT c
will Registrar of the city of Lima. Milan Negros Occidental a 2009 case decided by the Supreme
Court.

In that case the husband contracted a second bigamous marriage with a parable with whom he
had a child upon the celebration of the subsequent bigamous marriage the parties to the
subsequent bigamous marriage executive and a PVR be of legitimate even so the child. Who
has made no illegitimate child in the charge birth certificate. Subsequently the husband died
upon the death of the husband The First Family. The First Family

Discovered the existence of the birth certificate of the child who was reflected as a legitimate a
jug in the Syrian crisis, the legitimate family. No file a petition for correction an orchestration of
entries in the birth certificate of the child and the rule 103. Praying for 231 that the entry with
respect to the status of your child up from legitimate the corrected to legitimate and secondly,
there were speed prayer for the Declaration of the absolute Clarity of the second marriage on
the ground that it is become option.

10:44 AM
With respect to the second prayer for the Declaration of the second marriage as void for being a
bigamous marriage the Supreme Court rule that role 108 is not the proper remedy.

Instead the proper remedy in that case according to the coin is a tradition for Declaration of
absolute value. Explain the case of brazo your CCP civil registrant. What the port is telling us is
that if the marriage took place if a marriage was celebrated, but that marriage turns out to be
void AB initio. It cannot be declared void under rule 108 that is not the proper and instead the
proper remedy is p petition for Declaration of absolutely nothing. So taking into consideration is
three cases the public versus labor more ago versus people and the case of brass up there. So
cpcb register. There is a need to distinguish between avoid marriage.

From a case where in fact no marriage existed no marriage in fact existed. A petition for
Declaration of absolute nullity is not the proper remedy because there is no marriage that can
be the subject matter of a declaration of absolute value instead. The proper remedy is a petition
for correction for consideration of entries in the Civil registry under rule 108. If the proper
remedy is Rule 108 for a petition for correction of consideration of entries in the Civil registry the
requirement of article

4p of the family code will not be applicable because there is no dry or void. On the other hand if
what took place is indeed avoid marriage. This time the whole wants your cake will not be
applicable. Avoid marriage cannot be declared void in a petition for correction and for
conciliation of increase in the Civil registry and the rule 103 instead. The proper remedy is a
petition for Declaration of absolute reality of a marriage. And if the proper remedy is a petition
for Declaration of

And if the proper remedy is a petition for Declaration of absolute nullity of a prior void marriage
can this time the requirement of article 40 of the family code will now be applicable.

Starting with bigger capacity Legal capacity is determined by the national law of the person
concerned article with respect to a penis addition to determine the legal capacity of a pilipino
sufficient to contract a mirage Article 5 of The Family Code Beast applicable law what article 5
of the family code is not applicable to a foreign them before an hour. We will have to be
governed by his or her own National. Oh in determining his or her Capacity to enter into a
contract of marriage for Filipinos officials. The applicable law is Article 5 of the public code in
determining whether it be Rapinoe citizen has legal capacity for Contract Marriage. There are
three requirements first requirement sex. In order for the point is to be capacity that Contract
Marriage the parties must be coming from opposite sex. They must Man and a woman Second
requirement H required. Both parties must be at least 18 if one of the Contracting parties is
below even the parties are not capacity to marry each other. And lastly absence of legal
impediments and their article and those legal impediments are enumerated in Arctic establish
ribbon and therapy in addition to the impediments in numerator interview segment and debate
the existence of a priori or valid neural the subsistence of a priori or where valid knowledge is
also an impediment to a subsequent marriage.

Let us talk of sex. For Filipino citizens in determining the sex of a Filipino citizen as the court
explained in Silverio vs. Republic. The applicable law is the Civil registry law and under the Civil
registry do the sex of a Filipino citizen is determined at the time of birth by the better attendance
who is either a position or a midwife. If and such determination is to be made by the bird at them
then by Amir visual examination of the janitor the of the impact. If the determination of the bread
attendance It's not attended by a palpable error that determination is considered immutable and
it cannot be changed by reason of sex reassignment surgery. In the case of Silverio girls
Republic the Supreme Court explained that sex reassignment surgery is not a valid ground for
correction of entries in relation to sex. Why not because the sex of a Filipino citizen is
determined at the time of the Spirit by the bartender the Emir visual examination of the general
of the child. If no palpable error was committed that determination is immutable it cannot be
changed. But if palpable error was committed there was that graphical errors typos or clerical
error Aragon mail, you know Jennifer and I'm Gonna Mail the gum female in the birth certificate
that can now be corrected by a mere administrative correction and the Republic

1948 amended better public Art 101 71

In addition The entry with respect to sex cannot be corrected by reason of sex reassignment
surgery if the person is a penis efficient because in the Philippines, we do not have any low yet
though recognizing the legal effects of sex reassignment surgery, but take note that the ruling of
the court in Silverio vs. Republic is applicable only to be see this rain of the Philippines.

That ruling does not apply to a foreigner. A foreign a foreigner is governed by his own national
law with respect to the determination of his or her sex. If the national law of the Foreigner allows
take correction of entries in the Civil registry by reason of sex reassignment surgery. That low
will also be applicable to the PDP means with respect to the foreign are following the nationality
principle, which is part of our law Article 15 of our signal code. Let us compare the case of
Silverio personal public with the case of Republic versions of Kandahar. In the case of
Kandahar applied for a correction of the increase in her birth certificate to correct the entry from
female to male. In that case, she was allowed by the Supreme Court to all right, the entry in her
birth certificate from male to female why because in the case of coggan Don kogen Gahan was
suffering from an abnormality in her body where the body of and that abnormality is known as
congenital adrenal hyperplasia. Where the body of Cogan DeHaan was producing. Substantial
amounts of male hormones aside from having female chromosomes. So there was blood in the
genital in the Janet has of Jenny prayer. So the Supreme Court explained if the doub in the
generators was by reason of Nature and the person the Filipinos efficient, simply let nature take
its natural course, then in that situation, the choice of the individual is Paramount and the court
cannot interfere with the choice of the individual. So the court is telling us that that is the liberty
of a person to choose his or her sex. If the doubt with respect to sex is by reason of nature.
Let's go to one side.

If concern is observed there is in fact, no marriage. It is not even avoid mirror but Uncle Sam
Callaghan, so the proper remedy is simply a petition for correction for consideration of ten
threes industry being prejudiced. But if consent was given but that concern now is the effective
for is incinerated in article fortified. The marriage becomes voidable on the other hand if
concerned was even in there was no defect in the concern that was given the marriage is
perfectly worried. Even if the Contracting parties Do not love each other. The court explained in
the cases of republic versus I'll be honest and the case of Republic wear a suit Reggie's
Romero. The second the love is not unimportant Park board for the purpose of determining the
validity of environment the court explained while love is the idea consideration in a marriage. It
is none the On consideration. So the presence or absence of love does not affect the validity of
a marriage likewise if consent was given during the marriage ceremony, by the way. When the
family code talks of consent, no.

The concerned that is being referred to as simply the personal declaration made by the groom
and the bride that they are taking each other as husband and wife during the marriage
ceremony.

If that consent was given and that consent is not defective. The marriage is perfectly valid
regardless of the intention the motive the purpose of the parties in Contracting in Orange. The
code girdle. Oh, sorry, the law is simply interested in the presence or absence of consent and
consent is simply the personal declaration made by the groom and the bride during the marriage
ceremony if that was given and got there was no defect in the consent that was given the our
marriage is perfectly valid because the law is not looking in.

The mental reservations the intention of the parties the purpose of the parties their motive in
entering into a marriage in the case of Republicans versus our viewers. We are a citizen of the
pyramids No contracted a marriage with an American citizen only point of purpose of obtaining
American citizenship. And in fact the Filipino citizen the pain the Americas is Send for that
arrangement. But when the Filipino citizen Now fail to become an American citizen, she filed a
petition for Declaration of absolute majority of our marriage-- good American citizen on the
ground that there was no consent allegedly recklessly when and that narrates was merely a
marriage engines, but our Court rule the oneself was given through consent was given in that
case. Because no concern no purposes of Marie detail pre-marriage is simply the personal
declaration made by the groom in the book The Bride during the marriage ceremony and that
was present in the case of Republic plasma cell goes in there was no became in the concept
that was given. So the Court ruled that the marriage is perfectly valid notwithstanding the
purpose of the parties in poultra team their marriage.

The purpose even if the purpose of the parties is not establish a family in conjugal life that will
not affect the ability to give the matter. Again If consent was given during the marriage
ceremony and that consent is not defective. The marriage is perfectly married regardless of the
intentions of the motive and the purpose of the law is no longer interested in those.
10:59 AM
Reg content by can be entered into for any purposes not contrary to look. So even if the parties
do not have the intention of living together or or they do not have the intention of this publishing
a family or conjugal life together that will not affect the ability of the map.

Let us go to authority of the solemnizing concert. With respect to the authority of the
solemnizing officer take note that

There is an exception even if this organization had no Authority that the solemnization of
marriage but if at least at least one environment requirement the booth at least one of the
Contracting parties believe in good faith that the sorry measure had the legal authority to
solemnize the marriage then the marriage becomes perfectly valid. It is not even voidable. It is
perfectly valid, but the good faith of the parties must be based on mistake of trap. And that
mistake of law because ignorance of the law is not an excuse ignorance of law ignorance of the
law according to article 3. It's not an excuse.

From compliance with the law

In the Family Code, there are five persons given authority to solemnized Maryland's but aside
from the family code. There is another person that was given authority to solemnized a marriage
under the local government code of 1991. So under those two lost the following are authorized
to solemnized digest number one the incumbent members of prejudicial to the religious
organizations three ship cup plain order plain cheap wine load in case of our people over these
carriages for the military commanders mobile unit in case of articulo mortis marriages, please
our Consular officials the also the vice consul. Double should hang around they are cloth with
authority into solemnized marriages and number six. And that the local government code
mayor's are also authorized to solemnized marriages with respect to members of the Judiciary.
They must be incumbent members. I'm starting from the highest court. The Supreme Court up
to the Rover Sport of the MPC all of them were just pieces and we judges they all have no
authority to solemnized marriages so long as they are incumbent numbers.

Must be solemnized the marriage within the Court's Jurisdiction couple Nothin against a bar
examination. If there is a marriage that was celebrated by an MPC judge or an RPC jobs
outside of the board's jurisdiction. Pisanka knows that marriage worried. It's a subordinate then
you obey their deep tune in the case of nabarro. They are so smug boiling perihelion Omaha
behind the controversial and so good. Even if that is Orbiter that is a statement coming from the
corner. So for purposes of the bar is a good thing and then according to the code in rubber
nabarro. We are so smug boy. Even if the MPC judge had solemnized the marriage outside of
the Court's Jurisdiction that is a mere irregularity in a formal requisite which does not affect the
validity of the marriage but they are in charge can be subjected to administrative diabetes. Let
us go to religious organizations.
In order for religious or advisers not to be authorized to solemnized nervous. They must
register. We are Authority with distribute registrar General and the siebel registrar General will
issue a corresponding certification that the religious organizer has no authority to solemnized
marriages. So there are four requirements in order for Gary's religious solid nicer to have the
authority to say. Nice men against number one he You should be written Authority by his church
or sex or religion second.

That written Authority must be registered before the siebel registrar General and the Civil
register handrail must correspondingly issue is application. The tea is in with both her eyes, the
solemnized marriages and number three the solemn nyserda religious solemnized surmise app
within the limits of is written. Sorry.

In case of violation of this prerequisites General rule

Stop it.

Obviously not.

Jonas could make your socks.

What's up?

Actually I do.

This is super hard on it.

Prerequisites General rule that's all advisor has no Authority. So general rule the marriage is
void. But by way of exception keep at least one of the contract employee disbelief a good way
that the solenoids are had authority to solemnized the marriage than the marriage becomes
perfectly valid because in relation to these prerequisites the parties make you make me commit
a mistake of Fire. What requirement? At least one of the Contracting parties must belong to the
same church sex or religion as done of the celebrities now are the solemn nicer is not from the
same religion or sect as that of the Contracting parties either. None of the Contracting parties
belong to the same church or sex or religion or of the solid nicer. The marriage is either way the
Party symbol will fail. That's the question when the parties to move quickly. It will depend on the
kind of mistake that was committed by the points. If the parties were aware that the solved I
share is from a different children sacrilege. Then the marriage is void AB initio because the
solemn nicer had no authority to solemnize the Merit.

Get the participant book would be no because they committed not a mistake over but a mistake
of law. There was no mistake over because they were aware that the sort of nicer is probably
different religion. What they are not aware of is the existence of a law requiring that at least one
of them must belong to the same church sect or religion of the celebration. On the other hand if
the pipe is brought that the sort of nicer was from their own religion, then that that will be a
mistake of ram which can be a basis of good day. So That was the kind of mistake that was
committed by the parties. There are marriage is still perfectly valid by way of exception provided
for in article 35 paragraph 2 of the family go.

Ship company for our plane chip I go only the airplane tip Five Dot has no authority to slowly
rise parents, but the authority of the ship cupcake a ship captain or the RPG Bible is subject to
two requirements one the marriage must be in articulo mortis and to the Contracting parties
must be either passengers of the ship or members of the otherwise.

The ship captain or directly cheap vinyl has no authority to solemnized America.

Next military commanders of Union in order for a military commander of the unit will be growth
in Puerto Rico to solemnization of marriage or requisites must be satisfied first requisite the
military commander of the unit must be a commissioned officer holding a rabbi baby Raichu of
appointment from the president of the Republic of the Philippines second requirement the sign
top plane design. Template is absurd.

The marriage must be article more peace and lastly the marriage must be within the zone of
military operations. Although in that situation the fulcrum point is maybe civilians. Next Consular
officials The consul General the vice Consul and the console they all have the curry people
solemnized marriage has provided their marriage is celebrated abroad in the place where the
Consular official is stationed as a consular official in secondly the Contracting parties must be
both citizens of the pyramids.

The Conch our concerns do not have not the authority to solemnized mixed marriages But if a
mixed marriage was celebrated by our country and in the place of Celebration our Consular
official is recognized as having the authority not to solve a nice even a mixed marriage that kind
of marriage and that marriage is considered as very in the place of Celebration following article
26 paragraph 1 of The Family Code that barrage will likewise be recognized as private here in
the bin. And finally mayor's remember that prior to the effectively no of the local government
code which took effect on January 1 of 1990, boo mayor's is that have the authority to Solemn
disparities. So after the effectivity of the family code on August 3 of 1988 and up to December
31st of 1991 while Authority am embarrassed / solemnized Americans they were told they were
going

Authority beginning with the productivity of the Government code bunch of water one of 1992 so
conversion problems of our examination of a marriage that was celebrated by email During the
period of August of 1988 up to December 31 of 1991. That is a void marriage because met or
spoke that time did that have the authority to solemnized marriages Marriage license the
marriage license must be value now if it should be in a valid marriage license, it must be a to
license. It must indeed be issued by the local civil registry.

And it is appearing in the records of the Civil registry here and there are thousand Adam valid
marriage license. So if the marriage license is true, it was indeed issued by the local civil
registry. And it is appearing in the records of the local civil registry. Even if there was pure
irregularity in the issuance of the marriage license that will not affect the validity of the marriage
of the magnet because an irregularity in a formal requisite shall not affect the validity of the
banat in other words the beverage shall remain to be

Perfectly valid however, if the license is fake experience because it was not issued by any local
SQL register and it is not appearing in the records of any local civil rights. The marriage is void
AB initio because it was celebrated without a valid marriage license. Take note block the
absence of a marriage license may be apparent on the face of the marriage contract itself a
function of in a marriage contract that the marriage was celebrated July 1 of 9091. For example

And the American truck also stated that the marriage got the marriage license was issued only
on July 3 of 1991 or two days after the celebration of the mirror. It is clear from the marriage
contract himself that at the time of the celebration Garage on July 1. Right right one. There was
no license p.m. So the variance can be declared void merely on the basis of the entries
appearing in the marriage contract itself.

11:30 AM
Patient education you should be the local civil registry stating that the license was not issued by
the local by the alleged local civil registry is a proof of the absence of marriage license at the
time of the celebration the man. Go a certification down LCR is that they did not issue that
license. They never issue that license and that license was not appearing in the records. That is
a book that the license is faith.

If the certification of the LCR is for their friends that they they issue that license know that
license is in the records and they issued that license but that license was issued to someone
else not to the Contracting parties. So with respect to the Contracting parties and their license is
fake. The marriage can be declared void. But if the certification to be issued by the local civil
registry is simply took effect the dark marriage license cannot be located in the records of the
local civil registry where it was allegedly issue a subpoena for the suprema in the case of Serbia
there subscribe Dennis. There must be a statement that the same.

That such records it could not be located despite the region airport the perilla You know despite
the region efforts to locate the same in order for the certification to be April of the absence of a
marriage license at the time of the celebration now, let us consider the case of with Uncle
versus people. Where there was a statement coming from just this video then that in a criminal
prosecution for bigamy a certification.

Is presented to the effect that the license could not be located in could not be found in the
records of the local civil registry despite the region efforts and sybilla Justice you are in that
certification should Should not be considered for the purpose of equating the abuse. Now

When is the proper application of that statement of Justice new name?

First The statement of Justice Vernon can only be appreciated in a criminal prosecution for
bigamy. If the certification Is being presented in a civil case for Declaration of absolute value P
of the marriage we will be following the ruling of the court in Selby servilia basis president has
republic versus court of appeals in Carino versus perineum that that certification is a
complicated proof of the absence of a marriage license at the time of the celebration of canary.
What the other hand. That certification is being used as a defense in a criminal prosecution for
bigamy. That is the time that we can apply the the apprehension of just this unit that that
certification should not be considered as competent proof of the absence of a marriage license
at the time of the celebration of the marriage tip. The purpose is blocked milk duct used in a
criminal prosecution for bigger. Callum applicable applicable again It is the second marriage that
is alleged to be void on the ground of absence of a marriage license because if it is the person
average that is alleged to be void on the ground of absence of a marriage license. That is not a
defense in a criminal prosecution for bigamy because in a criminal prosecution for bigamy, even
if the person marriage is void if the Contracting parties to avoid marriage contracted another
marriage without persecuting a Judicial Declaration of the absolute Panic if the prior with
marriage the crime of bigamy is already committed, even if it is proven that the person orig

Is indeed void AB initio on the other hand? Eight that certification is being offered with a purpose
of proving that the second marriage was contracted without a marriage message. That is the
time that that the absence of a marriage license may not be considered a defense in a criminal
prosecution for bigger and in that situation. It is in that situation. We must apply the statement of
Justice your name in the case of become Colby Rasmus people that that's application should
not be should not be allowed should not be appreciated for the purpose of improving the
absence of the marriage license at the time of the celebration.

There are marriages which are exempt from the requirement of a marriage license, but you first
Article about this marriage second A marriage where the Contracting parties reside in a very
remote place where they can there is no means of transportation to go to the office of the Locust
even register for the purpose of obtaining a marriage license. In those two situations the solemn
nature is required instead now to execute a sworn statement to a test. So the fact that the
marriage is an article about peace for the Contracting parties where residents of a very remote
place where there is no means of transportation going to the office of the local civil rights.

The question is what is the effect of the absence of consent statement? Will that affect the
validity of the marriage know that will be a mere irregularity in the exercise of the selling prices
for evening which will not affect the validity of the marriage but we'll only subject the solemnizing
officer to administer beam liability. The exceptional marriage which is exempt from the
requirement of gay marriage license marriages, Tim both being Muslims. Both Contracting
parties are Muslims for members of the ethnic cultural communities. They are exempt from the
requirement of the marriage license solo as the marriage is said solemnized according to their
rights for each one's can put article 34 don't inaudible nothing legal.

Sean of marital habitation in article 34 in order for a marriage to be exempt from the requirement
of a marriage license. There are two requisites that must be complied the lowering number one
the man in the woman must have lived together as husband and wife for a minimum period of I
put the ocean years. That five-year period is counted backwards from the day of the celebration
of the marriage and it must be a continuous unbroken uninterrupted period And it must be a
case of exclusive or habitation second requirement during that five-year minimum period of
cohabitation the parties must not be separating from

Egan Seats are complying than the marriage is already considered exceptional and then article
car before exempt from them marriage license Network. The marriage is still exceptional exempt
from the requirement of the marriage license. Even if the bite is failed to execute unhappy David
of habitation big know what is important purposes of exemption from the requirement of the
marriage medicines under article car before no is compliance with those prerequisites and not
the execution of a nappy David of coral. A bit of computation is merely a statement from the
parties that they have complied with those prerequisites such that even if they contracted the
marriage without the marriage marriage license in the absence of better be diving of
competition. They can prove that they have satisfied those programs in their marriage is still
perfectly body. On the other hand, even if there is a nappy David of cohabitation, but if that
appeared a bit of cohabitation is possible because the two requirements were not in reality
complied by the Contracting parties. The marriage is not exceptional and if the since the
marriage is not exceptional if that marriage was celebrated without a marriage license for
marriage is going

If that marriage was celebrated without a marriage license from marriage is going And the
parties are allowed to prove that their marriage is in deep void AB initio by reason of absence of
a marriage license, even if they were guilty of pacifying their applicability of competition in that
situation, the principle of test as program is not applicable because the Equitable principle of
estoppel does not apply if the issue is the validity of a marriage remember the rule everything.
About marriage should be covered by law the nature of marriage the incidence of marriage and
The consequences of marriage including the issue of validity of marriages that shall be
determined by applying a warm-up decouple blows applying our applicable laws if they marriage
was celebrated without a marriage license and it is not exceptional under article car before
because practices of article 24 the to privacy is of our people can be more were not comply. The
marriage is void in issue, even if the parties were killed. Falsification we cannot apply the
principle of estoppel because if we will be applying the principle as the bell it is the agreement of
the parties that Prevail and that is contrary to the provision of Article 1 of the family longer going
to the consequences in hom the incidence of paranormal governed by

What respect to the simple issue of the marriage of the parties in that situation spoil and the
parties are not prevent them from filing a petition for Declaration of narrative their marriage,
even if they were guilty of pacification because after all there is a remedy for the pacification that
they committed they can be prosecuted criminally for pacification, but with respect Facebook a
simple aspect of the status of their marriage their marriage can be declared void AB initio if the
PW of cohabitation is falsified the Supreme Court emphasized the the paucity of the pwm of
cohabitation is not a mere irregular in a formal practices. In fact, that is a total absence of a
marriage license that will render the marriage. Boy in it Allez, allez Cuisine, which is marriage
ceremony. Remember the rule in relation to marriage ceremony. According to article 6 of The
Family Code. There are no required formalities and there are also no required rights or which
ones. Instead a marriage ceremony will exist provided that the following requirements will be
present. Number one. The contract in point is the bride and the groom appeared in person
before unauthorized solid nicely officer. So the requirement of our lowest person and
appearance by the control volume by PhD for unauthorized So the nice thing obviously so under
existing law and online celebration of the marriage cannot be a valid marriage. If the solemn
divisor is not if the Contracting parties are not appearing in person to before the authorized
solemnizing officer.

11:45 AM
Requirement The Contracting parties are required to make a personal declaration that they are
taking each other as husband and wife. So the photo that the Declaration that they are taking
each other assessment in wife must be made personally by the way, the bride and the groom by
the whole crappy point. So our law does not allow the use of a proxy in a marriage. So a proxy
marriage is not a marriage ceremony under our jurisdiction. And thread it is necessary that such
personal declaration made a groom and the bride that they are taking each other as husband
and wife must be made in the presence of an authorised solemnizing in other words. It is
necessary that the state must participate in the celebration of a marriage to the authorized
solemnizing officer recalled the page again. Jackson's people where the party simply signed a
marriage contract not in the presence of a sort of rising officer. That is not a marriage just be
calm because the steak did not participate in the celebration of linearity on the other hand if that
signing of marriage contract was made in the presence of the solemnizing officer. That is a valid
mapping even if the parties did not make a variable declaration that they that they would take
each other assessment in why because there are no formalities point the personal declaration
can either be in writing or it can be made verbally or it can be make throat signs or signals. So
for example, if the point is already made available because

Patients that they are taking each other as husband and wife there is already a celebration of a
marriage there is already a marriage ceremony, even if the fight is failed to execute a marriage
contract if a marriage ceremony was celebrated. If a marriage ceremony in the took place
because the point is a personal declaration. They were taking each other as husband and wife
in the presence of the authorized solemnizing officer, but they sit beside but they simply feel
beside a marriage Corner the absence of the marriage contract will not affect the validity of a
marriage if a marriage ceremony indeed who plays because Emma.

This contract is only an Evidence of the existence of the marriage but aside from the marriage
contract the existence of the marriage can likewise be proven by this team earning of witnesses,
the testimony of the sanitizer in self-esteem any of the Contracting point this themselves
testimony of the Witnesses are complicated proof of the existence of such Merit. And according
to the or even the entry in the birth certificate of the children stating that the parents were
married on a certain day. When you go to hold power is a competent proof of the existence of
the marriage between the Contracting parties. Let's go to
Absolutely divorces and article 26 paragraph 2 of the fabric. Oh

Let us first summarize the basic principles governing decree of absolute divorce has number
one. If both the per if both parties are four elements meaning A decree of absolute divorce was
obtained by a foreigner who is married to another Port our courts can recognize the validity of
that divorce obtained by a foreigner who is married to another world by applying their respective
National laws.

But they ignored our chords. Michael Knight the validity of that divorce because that is simply no
probing the existence of a foreign judgment. Second principle if both parties are citizens of the
pyramids in other words, if the divorce was obtained by a piripi know who is married to another
Filipino that decree of divorce spoil it cannot be recognized as valid in the Philippines. Even if it
is valid in the place where it was obtained. Applying article 17 paragraph 3 of the civil code in
that situation the existence of a foreign judgment or a foreign law cannot render it ineffective the
Philippine the Declaration of public policy of the Philippines in relation to its citizens. The
principal

If that divorce was found dead in a mixed marriage. By a meaning a Filipino citizens married is
married to a foreigner in any degree of absolutely votes was obtained in that situation
regardless of who may have obtained the decree of absolute divorce. Keep that situation article
26 paragraph 2 of The Family Code provides that if the degree of

Absolute divorce will capacitate The Foreigner to remarry and the decree of divorce is valid for
someone took a national home to Foreigner. The Filipino spouse is likewise considered to have
regained his or her capacity to remarry. So in a mixed marriage of the Filipino see this went to a
foreigner in any degree of absolute divorce passbook trained abroad which have the break of
releasing The Foreigner from the marriage then we have a low and that is article 26 paragraph
2, which authorizes the Filipino citizen to be also released from the narrator.

Investing in determining the validity of a married You will notice the citizenship of the parties is
important for purposes of determining the effect of the decree of absolutely most obtained
approach but in determining the citizenship of the parties for purposes of determining the validity
of a decree absolute divorce obtain a broad direct warning point is the citizenship of the parties
at the time that the valid divorce decree was. State and not their citizenship at the time of birth
nor their citizenship at the time of the celebration of the marriage. So as a consequence in
determining whether the marriage is a mixed marriage governed by article 26 paragraph to run
record. In determining the citizenship of the parties were ripening point is the citizenship of the
parties at the time that the valid divorce decree was obtained and not the citizenship at the
prime of the celebration of the marriage. So even if the parties were both Filipino citizens at the
time of marriage, but if at the time of the issuance of the decree of comfortable divorce because
for every occasion of a mixed marriage can article 26 paragraph two,

Report will be applicable according to the case of the public data source, or busy do this right
now. Let us discuss article for receipts paragraph 2. Is that provision applicable even if it is the
pilipino spouse? Oh then the degree of absolute reports. We now have a landmark ruling
propagated by the Supreme Court in April of 2018 the case of Republic their Sous Bernardo in
the case of republic versus none of the Supreme Court ruled that the provision of article 26
paragraph don't the family code will be applicable regardless of who my obtain the degree of
absolute divorce. So even if the divorce must be obtained by a foreigner

For obtained by the Filipino citizen For obtaining jointly by the spouses article 26 paragraph 2
will be applicable so long as number one that decree of divorce obtained abroad is valid for so
on to the national law of the Foreigner spouse and secondly if that decree of divorce obtain
approval will capacitate the foreignness mouse from contacting another marriage in other words
if that did Three of the worst opening abroad will have the effect of releasing The Foreigner from
the marriage then article 26 are a group 2 will be applicable and it will also release the pilipino
spouse from the marriage regardless of who may have obtained the degree of observables. And
that is the essence of the quarter scoring and republic versus Manilow.

To take a pee break a picture day. In applying article 26 paragraph 2 of the family home in the
1989 cause you know come over and they watch it is not important Anthony thing lengthen the
effect of the divorce that was cooked in a problem if that divorce is palpable pursuant to the
National of the coroner and if that divorce will capacitate The Foreigner to contract another
marriage in other words if that divorce will release the Foreigner.

From the marriage the Filipino spouse is likewise released from the mirror applying article 26
paragraph 2, which is applicable according to the Supreme Court regardless of who may have
put the decree absolute reports next question in relation to article 26 paragraph two. When is
the Filipino citizen considered to have regain his or her capacity to remember? Harry In the 28
in case of republic versus Capote there was an Orbiter big to by the Supreme Court to the effect
that the pilipino spouse does not automatically regain his forehead capacity to remarry upon the
issuance of the decree of absolute divorce instead according to the hold the pilipino spouse
must first file a petition for recognition of the decree of absolute divorce or Approach But take
note that the statement of the Cordillera public versus Cote is Amir obiter dictum. In the same
year 2018 in the case of Servo versus people. In the case of certain short o was married to a
foreigner. The Foreigner obtain a decree of divorce abroad and up there the Foreigner spouse
cooked any degree of absolute divorce decree of divorce abroad serco contracted another
marriage to a Filipino citizen surface is a Filipino Citizen and he contracted another marriage
bed be bearish epistle. He was later on prosecuted for bigamy.

But in the middle McKay's Circle was not able to prove the effect of the divorce that was
obtained by the first spouse. So the Supreme Court convicted circle of the prime of bigger, but
in that case the Supreme Court ruled the Supreme Court, imply impliedly suggested that had
served though been able to prove that the divorce propane by the first spouse was valid.

Pursuant to the national law of Capri spouse and that capacity that the force us to remarried. So
I told that have been convicted of the crime of vegan and the Court ruled in that case that the
recognition no of the foreign decree of divorce need not be made in a separate petition for
recognition of the decree of divorce instead. The recognition of that divorce can be Resolved by
the court in the criminal action or bigamy if that was clean if that was alleged by the accused as
an integral aspect of his depends.

So the Supreme Court is - Sarto versus people that even if the Pilipinas past contracted another
marriage contract every subsequent parrot prior not to a Judicial recognition of that decree of
divorce update abroad the pilipino the Filipino spouse does not necessarily commit the crime of
bigamy because in the criminal prosecution for bigamy

12:00 PM
The Filipino spouse Got the divorce obtained by the forehead by the foreigners pounds. Was
divided divorce pursuant to the National of the foreigners house and that capacity that the
Foreigner spouse Coronet because if that is the case, then the pilipino spouse would be
considered to have been released from the marriage the same time that the Foreigner was
released from the air. And I believe that the sir Puri is the better.