pon tonoes dlnarane brave ABNER 2. Absence of authority fsolemniing officer {Marae slemnzed by jue who haa 2. Marae slernzed by 3. Mariage solemnied bya 4 Marioge solenized by 4 pst rit 0 sleize mate, or whois not ‘registered with the Office of the Ci oemean _ ea aS Absnen of vale marge ense ac lesa under ets 271034 Absence of mame ceremony 4 vnere the parties just live tagether as husband and wife without a marriage - tect ony of essential requisites: Rei not render the mariage voi but merely VOIDABLES) © Adefectin the essential requisites mey be: = 1 defect in thelegal capac of ether party, as when a boy o gel between 18 and 23 years Of age eet: marries eed wet penal cone o 2. _Raetectin the consent of ether party, wherein ugh consent was even under any ofthe circumstances that “witiate consent under Arts. 45 and 46, F consent WOS vhOVed 908s NOL Gtfeck ts valid tec ‘many ofthe formal reuites: ‘ceurty many eal egies morn doesnot aes ay, butte party cartes penal the : eriminaly, and administratively lable. Examples of these irregularities are: 3. Lackoflegal ge of witness 2. Fallur to comply with procedural requlement under At. 12 (5) Eagnseo cARCEe 3. Non-obierance of month prog unger A 25, and fare to comply wth regulement of ratice under a. mea Snel sa (dence exntage fee for 10 Conca cetys) Iethere sucha things asecretmartigs? ‘one. Aseeret mariage i aly non-eatnt pre that oraly apes oa cl mariage sera without the cule of the restive or fends of the pauses aT SCRA vent Judge Falaypayan is charged administratively, among others, fr: Moving solemnsee marries without the requisite marrige eens; 2: Nt fing hislgnatore nthe a mariage contracts 5. Not Furnishing the contracting partes in sald mariges with a copy of ther mariage contact and not sering copies of the marrage certieatesto the Local Cr Restor; Whether or not Respondent Judge Pataypayon should beheld administrate Hable she FC pertinenty provides thatthe formal requstes of marge ar, inter ala, a valld mariage Icens except ease provided ‘or Complementary t cates that he absence of any ofthe essential or formal requisites shall general rene the mariage vcs ape tot, whe ae etal inthe formal reqses shal not affect the valy of the marrige, the party OF partes ible forthe egutrtysbal be chal, erminally and administration Hable, 1s that Respondent Judge had not taken to ear, bu aes fed wth, the law's concern fo he insti af matte and eet owing from estas ‘ee a0 cea 402 er Meaty Mata rae charges tespondentucge Salvador Occ a for having slemnitéa hee vat the late groom Domsnacor Ore i ot Nabua, Camarines Sur whe saute Ns "Tey bred together as husband and wife unt her husband passed away. However, snc the mariage was & J pettoners rght to iohert the vast propertis lft by Orobla vas not recognized. She was Ukewlse depsved of recelving the ot Grob - FRATERNAL ORDER OF ST. THOMASMOREand Fry Relations Tramerfption "mn sy. ya © as 1 solermize the marriage ofthe parties ater heving Been assured onthe date of marrage, ich I located almost 25 klometers from his residence m Nab. Hence, ondent frther avers that before he started the 1 proceeded ta solemriae the marriage the influx of visitors and the delivery of proustons forthe occasion, Bets or ot Responder ge mitral lable for ving sled 9 marge wot the recut marge Beate cones ocaatr tort jouccton 8 ils ~ er 0? 129, the outhoty of he RTC judges and judges of inferior cous to solemnize marriages confine to ther terior hides, who are appoited to specication, may often wedding nl within sad areas and rot beyond. Where |solemnizes marriage outside his court's jurisdictior st ie may not affect the vay of he masse, may subject te ofleatng offical to administrative habit, tn te case at ba, Kors urscievon of respaedert Kgs Imted to the municpalty of Blatar Camarines Sur. His act of slerninng the of pttoner ard Orabia in Nabus, Camarines Sur therefore contrary to aw and subjects hr to administrative Bait ee Se eee | ance of the martage lcerse i void, and thatthe subsequent isuance of a4 ‘xcept in cares proved by law, the marriage license that gves the solemnizing officer the ° BB00d _Woomonovsireone oc 00009 connostetae 08 g Loe Mongo and tucia Barete were boarcmates atthe house of Catalina Tortor at Tagblaran Ciy, Prowance of Bohol, for = fours} years from 1974-1978), After school year 1977-78, Lucio Morigo and Luca Barrete lost contact with each othe. ce nas Wa pi oi ALU art tom Sear Te ome ed ste waar Se ecments in 1985, Lua retuned to the Pippin bute gan for Carace to work hee, When Canad, Intaines constant communication th agreed to got marred, thus September 8, 1990, ucia reported Lucia Alea _pehhon foc aworck gait ch was granted by "3992 and to take effect on February 17, 4, 1992, appelor a pisran chy, Bohol. LUG MHAEd Mara Seceona L ty, ¢ aria Yeceqna LuMeag> yber 22, 1993, accused filed 2 compan fF Jail Beaton of mutt martge in the Reon Tit Gour at Cate at | Br 2200) ncn ed en a ae a parapet e eens | een ae ae . Spek Cag nen cesoing te MA AgE emtin IE tA vad Me Nee a eum Fria Neral ate, eae Wg pee gee Raa UN we Sa We i ere was no marriage ta begin with; an that such declaration of pully retroact tothe date ofthe fst marrage, In ther Tene ems eeckoned irom the é3t of the deceration ofthe fist momige as void ab into tothe date ofthe vt the rest mariage, the acused was, under the eyes ofthe low, ever married. izing offer. instead, "The tral cour ‘be distinguishes from Mezcado v. Tan, the later e266, the Juical decaration of nutty of cas analogous to, but must re was already celebrated. We held therein that: riage was thewise obtained ofter the second marriageand far Reais Transerption = ui deer Sa Sioanevapsareee eeepc ‘aes aces elt oe irae Hryvna wore oe i ete est mage we cua le tt one, at we atte ue here> - ra ten again sit months ltr before a rest in reius ites. Ostensibly, at leat the fst pvocsrstohwetaripee, athe edad voasina Heat es Ones met Pesan oe Nowewey mo manag ceremony aa was pertomes by 2 dl authored solerneng of. Petitioner and Lucia sired a marge contro the own. The mere rote a of ping 2 mage cot eas 0 sence 1 age ane ts, neds no ude dearatn of nul, Such act alone, wehout mre, cannot be deemed to conse an py oh mariage fr whch eon mht be he able fr gay es he it eur aul elation e my Bele cts ubsequent marrige pen printrss retort one rv saree re Tosbates ern marae ee. eyme ons gee eda eee sen p Minster of the Gopal op ape. They got marred on the same day, 8 December 1982. Petitioner and fondo, Mania, 09 26 March 1983. The the annulment tivoner before ‘onl fle yopoitan Trial Court of Mandaluyong Gy, Branch 60. Regpondent prays thatthe | Rost, respondent was with aval marrige eense YS he an respondent ust went tothe Manda iy Halland dealt wth “ue” who ce atthe stn Maro Cty Hall and natin CDCC BR Chapel where Rew. Aauiino He ar respondent ex ot goto Carmen Cavite, to apply for a mariag i ranged everthing for them. The wedding ro whe solermize the marr The certfieation ofthe Municipal Cl Registrar of Cave, cannat be give weight vite scavtotasnd Mes Rosita Almera” but ther mariage contrat Bears the number 7054033 fr their mariage ense ope volved herein ha écrit aly she Cail Code which was he law in effect tthe ime of ts celebration naringe lenge 69 recut of mariage under Artie 52 ofthe Gv Code, the absence of which renders the mariage void jpursuart to Atle 83) n relation to Arte 8 ofthe same Code tof he Ci Cade which wae the aw applicable atthe time of the mariage ofthe parts, state: ‘53, No marrage shal be slemnized unless al these requisites are complied with 1) Legal capacity ofthe contacting parties; {2} Ther onsen, rely ive {5} kuthonty ofthe person performing the marge; and {sj Amornage hense, except ina marrage of exceptional character. Jremen an isuance of mariage teense s the State's demonstration ofits involvement and partpation in every marge in tensnce of which the general publics interested Cee es ee ET EEE STERNAL ORDER OF. THOMAS MORAry aC Gate es where the cou conden the absence of a marriage license to impugn the validity of Nis marfiage: The cas nse as ground for considering the mariage vol are clear-cut. et ede arenas oe ee rh feat Marae cers No. BDGIED was ued tothe pres Te Coot fae ene wooo nee to pda record or erty 25 othe purported marrage ers, ksued by the Gol Rept o Pose eae poke ee i ear cuged un he unt leper ol ret Sars mara ee tae ees oe Curthel that heel sence ofa mariage ens that woud render the marge von obinta mofo be mains Yt was nd on 1 Setambe 14 tt ne usr seen Reco ameter ecireranintcat erences tants daniewatg wre (08s oF REP VGCA 4 OYE. CA or here was clearly an absence ofa marriage license which rendered the mariage vid Ieuan of Municipal Cl Registrar Macrno Dia of Carmona, Cavite, eas: Treeriy that s per the reistry Records of Marriage fed in this fie, Marriage iente No. 7054133 was lesed in favor of Mr ero aartara and Mets Rosita Alario on December 8, 1982. satin beng issued upon the request of Mex. Rosita A Alcantar for whotever legal purpose or intents it may serve nae wr» fut tem to demoih the probative vale ofthe mariage cene, dims that nether he nor respondents 2 nae SCRA 20 : ws 24,200, Assstart City Prosecutor Raymond Jonathan 8, Lede fied an information against Alan, Noto ("Nall") Gerlsna (Geran) forthe -ceusatery portion the information exes: or about the th day of December 2003 in Quezon Cy, Pilppnes the above named accused ATLANO O. NOLLORA, I, blog ly mri to one SUA PINAT NOLLORA, and as sad marriage hasnt ben eal csslved a stil substi i then and flys ond floniusly contract a eubeequent or second mariage wit her (sk) cosccsed ROWENA P. GERALONO, ir consente and agreed toe marred to her co-accsed ATLANO O. NOLLORA,R knowing him tobe a martied man, 897 preci of the ad offered party ESUSA PINAT NOLLORA” conernce, both the prosecution and defense entered the following stipulation of aes 1 The voit ofthe fst martage between Atlono . Noor, and esua Pat Nollor solerized on Api 6, | 28952 Sopang Pay an ose dl Monte; 2-Tho1 suvane 0. Nollors, J eortactd the second marrige with Rowena P,Gealdno on December 8, 200% in 1] laveion ci 43. Tot nthe Counteffidat of Atlane O, Nall Jr, he admited that he contracted the second marriage to Rowen. Geraaino; 4-Thot Sonera Gerling attached to her Counter Aidit the Crtifate of Marriage with Atfano 0, Nola ate Occember 82002; [5 Theft of marge of Rowers P Geran with Atlan O. Nola, tras admitted inher Counter Ai.” ee STERNAL ORDER OF ST. THOMAS MORE Vd= Ay. A a _ ‘oF mirage, he fet wh pate oink Ta Prat rd the sco wth err, He, however cies tate wa Ma convert way Bock on run 1, 1982, even before contracted he ge with the prnate compliant. As 3 Mis convert, he is alegey entitled to mary fur (8) wes 28 alowed under the orm beh at eis 3 Muslim convert even prior tos mariage to the private complainant, Nolora presented a Certificate of Conversion Ags 2, 2004 sued by one Ha) Abdu ajr Madueio and approved by one Khad rai A Alyamin wherein it stated that 0. Nor, alleeay converted 1a Musim since ry 1, 1992 Asise fiom sad certfate, he ao presented 2 Pledge of ate Jnwary 10,1992 issued bythe same Hadi Abd ajar Mado and approved by one Kha Ibrahim A yarn thatthe phate complaint brew thet he was a Musim convert prior to thelr marriage because she tld this fact when he wes 'n Sasi Arabia and the reason why saa prate complainant fad the instant care was due to hatred raving eared of Fis frst marrage that his Marsage Contract with Jesus iat, les indeated that he waka Catholic Pentecosta but that he was not aware 25 Such on sai contract. nhs Nasage Contact with Rowena P-Gealna, the religion ‘Cathol’ was also Indkated vas heePing 25 «sere his being a Musim since the socey does not aporove cf marrying a Musi, Healsoinciated that he despite is test mariage o hee said frst mariage secret For natthe Must Law o the Famly Code shall apply tthe mariage of Nellora put up his Muslim rein 25 his sole defense. He allege that his religion allows Nm to marry mare than once. that Nollora is indeed of Musi faith a the ume of eeebraton of bath marriages, Nollors cannck deny that both ones were not conducted in accordance with the Code of Muslim Personal Laws, or Presidential Decree No. 1083. The Be Arcsin the Code of Muse Personal Laws red Marriage isnot ony cil contract but acl irsttuton. Rs nate, consequences and inedents ae governed by this the Shar'a anc rot subject to stipulation, except thatthe marriage setiements toa certain exter fx the property relations of Requiites.-No mariage contract shal be erected unless the following extent requsites are complied wth (a) Lesa opacity ofthe contacting parties; {) Mutua consent of the partes fey en {e) Ofer (jab) a acceptance (gel dul witnessed by a east two competent persons after the proper guardian in marrage {wall hase his consent ans {4) Stipulation of the customary dower (maby) duly witnessed by two competent persons ety tcontrct marrige (2) ay Muslim meat east fifteen yes of age and any Musi female ofthe age of puberty or not slfering rom any mpeciment under the prowsons ofthis Code may contrat mariage. A female is presumed to Reve 1uponreshing he ago teen Ceremony No particular for of maciage ceremony is requied but the fob and the gobulin marriage shal be ley nthe presence ofthe person solemniing the mariage and the two competent witnesses. The delsation shale set Instrument in tipeste, gned of marked by the contacting pories and sid wtnests, and attested by the person the marrige. One copy shal be ger tothe contracting parties and another sent to the Creu Regletrar by the slemnting po shaleep the th. fo solemnize mariage « Mariage maybe solemnises: er wal bythe woman tobe wesed authority of the proper wal by ary person whos competent under Musi aw to selenite mariage; oF ge of the Shor‘ Ort Court or Shara Creu Court ar any person éesgrated by the jue, should the ptoperwol refuse reas, to authone the solaminzation of solemnizatin - Marriage shal be solemed pully n ay mosque, office ofthe Sha ude, ofc ofthe Circuit ceo the bride or her wal or at anyother suRabe place agreed upon bythe partes. ef dove he anourt oral dower maybe indy te conracingparies moh) eae, ding crag eect hve et hs boro proper dower cio sah, ven swf be cetemredo cont scart saa tonne ote pris RL ORDER OF ST. THOMAS MOREay Reltons ramscrion sy ya ata tice 13(2) of the Code of Muslim Personal Laws states that “In eaxe of@ mariage between a Muslim and 2 non-Mus ot in acorance with Muli wor his Cae, the [Fay Code afte Pipes, or Executive Order No 208, ne of feof the Phillppines} shall apply.” Nollora’s religious afflation Is not an issue here. Neither is the elsim that Nollra's were solemnized according to Musim law, Thus, regardless of his professed religion, Nollora cannot claim exemption from the crine of ban, GRO, 198790 poltan Til Cour, et 22, 2008, ringer, an Amorian ete, and ABS were arid before Judge Ota | cal of the Met $9, Mandaluyong City (MeTC), as evidenced by a Certificate of Marriage with Regster No. 2004-1588." 6, 2006, Aldo fed wth the RTC 3 petlon for eecarton of mult & of her mariage with Feingr, She ategeé that ‘after the mariage, they separated and never ied husband and we because they never realy had any intention of a mare soe or comphing with ary ofthese! marl cblgton She described ther marrage as One made tll and void abit. Simmons was served on Finer but head not fle his answer. At the pre tral only Abs, her counsel and the prosecutor Inger dd not atend the Hearne dese being dy neti of the sche. Aer the pe-ial hearng on the merits Jared the marrage voidsb ino. TC asa th ew atthe parts mare exch athe for convenience ony, Ging eederce tothe testimony af Ab, the corrates Finger to eter into a mage to enable her te aque Atean een, that in consderation there 0 psy him the sim of $2,00000 that ter the ceremony, the partes went thei separate ways that Finger retumed tthe es and never 2 cormuricted wth er and tha, eer, se i ot pay Hn the 20000 beause he never processes lirerahip The RT, ths, rule tht when mariage was entered into for a purpose ther than the extabshment of 2 arte, such wat farce should not be recogni rom ts ncpton. fionerRepublc of the Poppies, repreerted by the Ofer of the Sokeor General (OSG), fd 2 matin for cn. The RIC saved the OrGe,? dated February 5, 202, ening the motion for want of merit 1 explained thatthe declared vost Benue the partes ale tree ve he consent ote mage 2 he hd no intention to be egy seat oiy a means tau American ctenspn consideration of $2000.0- appeal, CAafired the RTC ruling whch found thatthe esentalrequste of arse was ang The CA states that the ht rot understand the nature and consequence of ating mac ne that he case was Si tO a marrage in jest. ned thatthe ports never tended to ener nto the mariage contract nd never tenet ve 2s husband and we or iy conelsced ha ther purpose was par for esol go hat for AS to obtain frig zens, ad fr the consideration of $2,000.00. riage, contracted for the sole purpose of acquiring American etzership in consideration ef $2,000.00, void a nition the lack of coneent? No A MOrelade ROR HO af O YOKE wth seal MOTO’ of Mec ing) Int X } Ito the Sh ISO peteNded Marriage ,Iegal ia Form kA marriage not void x se? fhe amy Cote, onsetisan essen reget marge rie fhe sae Case poe tat te bree of Freee soto sarge wld so tn Under st AG 2, fr tons tbe vale Res be fey en ond Tet rnc ots sen cr Ate er cvsert recurs tt he erring pres wigan bert Mae earansconrn ra berea these tne sed ar edeed elec ya oth et of oat Besse At oie Fly Getcha, ttn and une btvenc, arent mst ao be cons or tr tart vues onto ete of asgeiyindcstanang Ot nanre ond oa fC EEREREN STATO dcr tnor or Tor undertandng Sau ate ected by ent, onan drs orbypatin Cf ane sute ore was et uae Bemeen ABC ed Fer hs ee Be et Be cane yom eee consent Te coset wa a conscov and wliger ey dered the naure ond ncomericonneuener of ema ein wpe el ty fo ooo ener wp te ces nh cos po eta Aetin s Broh mai a l e Mung sna sssrty cenvoceathe marge Tee wor cea toon ers Natal nape soso Fat crcoucnnt fon ppeton for tenn The'e ws» and compete undetanag 6 ees hat Biss teruncn raver wera pedelgl oe wid wastes octets a= HLS © pense avast er tetra can mamerag Peet geen -afherdertirieperaeerty opel reep nts Gell oats Fee ee renee eataea eens pee Fee ener ns tae Tee eee eee nyc easth conn oy mane eoe occa -RRAL ORDER OF SF. THOMAS MORE Se ee pacers 2g TF HT ETE SNE METER,smi RlstonsTanszpon fora complete ase of en The Fe ay for 3 BUpone i ent’s maelge 6 rot at al analogous to » mar ae ery Bon ces ee atG jet. Asad ner fad an nna intern 10 be ound een her or aning andent to acquire American ctzenship, Only a genuine consent to be maried Fo et ee eee hat on ald mariage can pope sport on ppc for irs ee ere ean ete acu mariage saad fo ete ep t,t for # ted POP cam oz cafe by Syed Achar Abbas, pttioner, forthe d ssi fr the declrton of wuity eis mariage wth lola son the around of reco! marae lense apres frm Arie dof the FamyCoge he amage meh Goa coo Sas on Ne Fee eee craant” Qt AUgst 2952. When they are nthe Pippnes on Deceber 1992, 2 ceremony was Fr a eager Rev. Mario au nd winesed by Ay Loreen Sancta Mary A Cer Preset a0 5 its uring the ceremony, he and Glo signed a document. Syed dai that he didnot know the ature ‘een vl late hm that wa arog pe mamage contrat of Sed and loa, state hat Maviage ence No 9969067, sued at Carmans, Cate was proven by the ipneng sues (other couple sub Wether or not the mariage of Syed and Gos va? No. As the marcage of Syed and Gloria was slemnized on January 8, 1992, the Famly Code the applicable lw, particulary Bees, 42nd 353). ewe 3 rowces the formal requistes of marrage, Article & provides the effects of the absence ofthe essential and form requisites. os ttle 35, Paragraph 3 provides that those mamioges which are solemnized without a kense are veld frm the begining tezpoon to those covered by the preceding chapter. Gloria falled to pretat actal mariage lense or copy relied on the morTisBe {ents and testimonies o prove the exstence ofthe sat lcense. Thus, the mamage ef Syed ang Glora vod abn. ere No, 20106, nee oy 15 Mach 2004, Benjamin Bangayan 1, (Benji) fled a petion for decarton ofa non-enstent marrage and/or declaration of sty of mariage ith Azucena Alegre before the Reglnal Tal Curt of Man, Branch 42, Tey ad three chien, namely, Rial, femmin. sn Bram i 1279, eramin developed 2 romantic relationship wth Sly GoBangayan (al) whe was 2 customer inthe auto pats and supplies Rares our by Benjamin's family in December 1881, Acca le for he United States of Americ. n February 1982, Benjamin and filed topetber ae husband and wife. Sls father was aginst the rlatonehip. On ? March 1982, 9 order to appease her father, {ut sought Seramin to an office m Santoln, Pasig Cy where they signed a purported mariage contact. Say, knowing Benjamin's sur stats, assure him that the mariage contract would not be repstere, sesmin an Sal's cohabitaton produced two chin, erie and Bente. The relationship of Benjamin and Sally ended in 1994 tor Sat ef for Canada, bringing Bernice and Bentley wth her. She then fle criminal ation or bigamy and flifation of public focomerts against Benjamin, sing the simulted maage contact 35 evidence. Benjamin In tur, fled a pein for declaration of 2 soneustent matiage andor declaration of nulity of marrage before the tll court onthe ground tat his mariage to Sally wat fipmous and that lacked the formal requisites toa ald marrige. ine tl our gave weight tothe certifstion dated 21 ay 200 rem the Pasig Loca Chil Registrar, which ws confirmed daring tal, ory Morag tcense Series Nos. 6648100 to 648150 were sue forthe month of Februar 1982 and the purported Marige (ho o7568 wns not sued to Bjorn and oly he tal court ruled thatthe mariage Between Benjamin and Saly was not Ino, The tril eau ued thatthe second manage Was Yd ret Because of the enstenceof the fst mariage but because of ther portant, te lack of amotrge lcense. Hence Bgumy wat not committe ia ths ease CA affrmed the edison ofthe RTC. ts Whether or not the marrage betwesn Benjamin and Say i valid? No. vid ab nti the purported marrage of enjomin and Sally, Tees Oliveros (Oliveto), Repstration Officer I ofthe Local Ci Registrar of ested thet tere was no valle mariage hcense sued to Berjamin ana Sally. Olver cnfrmed that only Morroge Licence to 6649350 were aed for te month of Febuary 2982. Mamage Ucense Wo, 07368 cd not match the series sve fr Iaeros fran tests thatthe lal cul registrar of Pasig Cty did not nue Mariage cense No. N-07568 to Benjamin and from the lea vi repistar's adequate to prove the ponssuance ofa marrige leense and absent any suspicious Tatfestion enjoys probitwe value, Being sued bythe offcer charged under the lw to Heep a record ofa dataary. ya Sloe ge contract, the marriage was the saree of a marrage Kerse: Gear the beginning for ack of a marrage leense. om indeed benjamin and Say entered er Atle 35 ofthe Famby Code, Je 34 where 0 . "2 maine solemnzed without a Icese, except those covered by Artie oy "shal be vd rom the beginning” nti case, the marrage between Beramin and Say was soloed witht © fe asohiely simulated the generl rules on void or inenstet contracts under Article 1409 ofthe Ci Cade, contracts which ar ee ae “ineistent ad vid rom the begining” Thus, the Court of Appeals didnot rein sustaining the tia cour beeen Beran ard Sl was nll an od ab at andnon-ensten. GA. No. 187462, ne 02,2016 present petition arose rom a Pettion fr Dedaration of Walt of Mariage fed by herein atiner with the FTC of 12% Aine the pecs of evidence presented by pines 3 Craton sued by the Mca Ct Repirar of Freeh, Samat whch attested tthe fat thatthe Ofc he oe Cit Regia hs mle ecard nor copy of? marge ense toner and respondent wth espet to thee marrage elebratedon lune, 1972 re there i 0 Respondent les her Answer ravi that the petton be ogy darased for ack of eis faction Deca to prove petoe’salegaton thatthe marge wes eebrsed without the requ marrage Kearse 296 that on the bth petorer ard responcetpesoray appeared bere the oe ev regsvar and secured 3 marriage hense whch the belore thee marrage woes “The RTC fours that petitioner's evidence sufflemty established the absence ofthe requisite marrage license when the en petitioner and respondent was celebrated As such the RTC ruled that based on Artes $3), 88and 603) of the Cv Phinbies, the absence ef the sas marae lente rendered the merroge between petitioner and respondent nl an vot ponder then Fed an appeal with the CAI Cebu Cy (A hed that since a marrage was, In fact, solemnlted between the catenin partes, there Is 2 presumption that 2 se Heense was sued for that purpose and that pettoner fed to overcome such presumption. The CA also rule thatthe fof ar nccation inthe marrage certfieat that marrage icense was sod a mere defectin the form) requisites ofthe aw sot nvldte the partes mange ether oF nat the CA ere cettng ase or everting the lower cour’ judgment decbaring the mariage between petitioner > rulityin the abeene ofthe mariage ens ye Court fins forthe pttioner. mariage of petitioner and respondent wa celebrated on une 1, 1972 pir to the effectity ofthe Family Code. Hence de governs the union. Accardinay, Artie 3 of the Cl Code spl out the eset requstes of mariage 252 contrat: tO age salle soled olssal these requis are complied with: 58 othe Cl Code makes expe thet no masage shal be solemrized without aliens fis being sued bythe local Fe the muricpalty where ether contacting party habrualy resides, save marriages of an exceotonal character the Givi code, ut nat hore unde Arie 75, the Cul Coce, mariage of exceptions characte are covered by Chapter 2, Te Ml comprking Arties 72t0 79. These |i) momages in arto morte ort the point of death curing peace or war; 2} marriages in remote places (3) consular a SEot ets er ee (ata of marital oat 1) gas anor ay arcemer reece nt ran a ae aia Mann 0 REP cin hear ra a Sa a ment offical has inuired into ther capscity to contract mariage. Stated eens the State's demonstration of is invaerent and participation in every ts inerested, the requirement and issuance of marrige inthe maintenance of which the general pb ee ce maanae ‘ote consiered void on the round of absence ofa mariage cers, the lw requires thatthe absence crt cutc orm cnt moiod nr cro ee wo pee Indoud, alte evidence cited by the CA to show that a wedeng ceremony was conducted and 2 marrage contract was % ot operat te er the absence fa ald marge eens, A ce ee Anise 63) fhe Cl Cae cary prowdes atiage solemnized without a license Is void from the Se eran dase same Code As earlier stated, pettione' ery the mariogeable age was 14 years fr females and 16 years formals. However, the Fase the marageabe age to 38 i for bath male and female dion tothe age requtement set orth InAs, 1. Soth partes must net suffer from legal impediment of blood relationship as to render the marrage incestuous under Art. 37 oof certain relationships a to render the mariage voi for reasons of publ poy under At. 38 2. Obligate tostilcompy with other esenti and formal requis, form or religious rite forthe solemniaton ofthe marrage required. it hal be necessary, however, fr the ng parties mn the slemnisng ofcer and declare In the presence of not less than two whnesses of that they take each other as husband and wife This delaratin shall be contained Inthe mariage certificate whch shall be the contracting partes and thelr witnesses and attested by the solerinng office, Incase of marrige inartiulo mort, when the pat atthe pin of death unable to sgn the mariage cares, Its fr one ofthe witnesses tothe marioge to write the name of sald party, which fat shal be attested bythe solermizng | a sae * ; aough no parla arm frit needed, k rst be before» duly authorized perso. need rot be wrt: sigs would be sufcer but ino ease would a common mamage between Fpnos be considered as val, for pertormance must be before the prope oer. — Hits ony the appeorance ofthe contacting parts beloe the slemniing ofcer required by tis arte that I 2 formal requis of marge under Arte 33) so hat nthe absence of such appearance thé marriages vid. Tho ther equrements in tisartce wil fot rnder he marrage WO even the re totally an. be: ‘there were no wists tothe mariage 1 thepartes not oraly declare before the soleniting ef that ey tak eachother as husband ad te there wes no martige crate orcotact, race nayeenenaedth eG RODEN] bent member of hein within he outs, MRATEEC VOLCANO | feb Imam, inter of ny enue autor by his church religous sect and eptered ‘estar ener cig within the ens of hewn authority granted by bis chreh o religous stad pone one ofthe cont longs to the solemnizing officer's church or religous sect; ip captain orarplane chief only inthe case mentioned Artie 3 tary commander of unit owiehe ace mentioned in Ate 32; cone or ve-ondiln the ate provided in Artic 10 in assigned, nthe absence of he ater, during military operation Newe pesos authored to sole morige excse "ot ine hiss, no mtr Pow he Bos inthe goverment ae ose, ear ene, Ce onratisemaseramsaes -RNAL ORDER OFF. THOMAS MORE nce Ta {RE rr rE EESTI