LEGAL INTEREST IN ANNULMENT CASE OF NON-LEGAL SPOUSE

Perez vs. CA
G.R. No. 162580, January 27, 2006

DOCTRINE:
Legal interest, which entitles a person to intervene, must be in the matter in
litigation and of such direct and immediate character that the intervenor will
either gain or lose by direct legal operation and effect of judgment. Such
interest must be actual, direct and material, and not simply contingent and
expectant.

FACTS:

Filipino spouses Tristan A. Catindig and Lily Gomez Catindig decided to

separate from each other and upon advice of a friend obtained a divorce
from the Dominican Republic.

Subsequently, Tristan married Elmar Perez in the State of Virginia,

USA. Elmar later on learned that the divorce decree issued by the court in
the Dominican Republic dissolving the marriage of Tristan and Lily was not
recognized in the Philippines and that her marriage to Tristan was void under
Philippine law. When confronted, Tristan assured her that he would obtain an
annulment of his marriage with Lily. In 2001, he filed a petition for
declaration of nullity of his marriage to Lily.

Elmar then filed a motion for leave to file intervention claiming that
she has an interest in the matter in litigation that was granted by the lower
court.

ISSUE:

Do Elmar have legal interest in the annulment case between Tristan

and Lily?

RULING:

NONE. Legal interest, which entitles a person to intervene, must be in

the matter in litigation and of such direct and immediate character that the
intervenor will either gain or lose by direct legal operation and effect of
judgment. Such interest must be actual, direct and material, and not simply
contingent and expectant.
 The claim of petitioner, that her status as the wife and companion of
Tristan for 17 years vests her the requisite legal interest, lacks merit. Under
the law, she was never the legal wife of Tristan hence her claim of legal
interest has no basis. When they got married in 1984, Tristan was still
lawfully married to Lily. The divorce decree obtained by Tristan and Lily from
the Dominican Republic never dissolved the marriage bond between them. It
is basic that laws relating to family rights and duties, or to the status,
condition and legal capacity of persons are binding upon citizens of the
Philippines, even though living abroad. Hence, if a Filipino regardless of
whether he/she was married here or abroad, initiates a petition abroad to
obtain an absolute divorce from spouse and eventually becomes successful
in getting an absolute divorce decree, the Philippines will not recognize such
absolute divorce.

When Tristan and Lily got married in 1968, their marriage was governed
by the provisions of the Civil Code which took effect on August 30, 1950. In
Tenchavez vs. Escano, the Court held that a foreign divorce between Filipino
citizens, sought and decreed after the effectivity of the present Civil Code
(RA No. 386), is not entitled to recognition as valid in this jurisdiction; and
neither is the marriage contracted with another party by the divorced
consort, subsequently to the foreign decree of divorce, entitled to validity in
the country.