Galapon v. Republic of the Philippines (G.R. No.

243772)

Facts:

 Petitioner herein, Cynthia, a Filipina and Park, a Korean got married in the City of Manila.
 Unfortunately, their relationship turned sour and ended with a divorce by mutual agreement in
South Korea.
 A valid divorce decree was obtained and was recognized by the Sto. Domingo, Nueva Ecija RTC.
 The Office of the Solicitor General, not satisfied with the ruling, elevated the case to the Court of
Appeals, contending that divorce cannot be granted because it was obtained through mutual
agreement and not initiated by a foreign spouse.
 The Court of Appeals reversed the RTC ruling.
 Hence, this petition.

Issue:

 Whether or not the divorce decree obtained by Cynthia and her foreign spouse abroad is valid.
Ruling:

 Yes. Relying on Manalo Case, whereas the court removed the distinction as to who initiated the
divorce proceeding. Hence, regardless of whether such proceeding was initiated by foreign or
Filipino spouse, the legal effects are the same.
 Article 15 of the Civil Code in relation to Article 26 par. 2 of the Family Code
 The reckoning point is not the citizenship of the parties at the time of the celebration of
the marriage, but their citizenship at the time a valid divorce is obtained abroad by the
alien spouse capacitating the latter to remarry.
 It intends to avoid the absurd and unjust situation where the Filipino spouse remains
married to an alien spouse, who after obtaining a divorce decree that is effective in his
country where it was rendered, is no longer married to the Filipino spouse.
 Thus, applying a verba legis or strictly literal interpretation of a statute may render it
meaningless and lead to inconvenience, an absurd situation or injustice.