Research Paper.docx

Research paper in Marriage 1. That Reykjavik in Ice land which allows divorce and the issuance of said decree is in conformity with their existing law. Law in Respect of Marriage No. 31 of April 14th, 1993.See attached Annex C. 2. That in the said law, Article 41 of the Marriage Law No. 31/1993 permits a Petition for separation or divorce under other provisions may be submitted to a magistrate if the spouses are agree mutually to do so; if not, such petition must be submitted in court. xxx. 3. Further, under paragraph 2 of Art. 26 of the Family Code it was stated that: ”xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Where a marriage between a Filipino citizen and a foreigner is validly celebrated and a divorce is thereafter validly obtained abroad by the alien spouse capacitating him or her to remarry, the Filipino spouse shall have capacity to remarry under Philippine law. (Emphasis supplied)” In other words, for the divorce to be recognized in the Philippines, the following conditions must exist: (1) the marriage was between a Filipino and a foreigner; (2) the marriage was dissolved by a foreign divorce decree; and (3) the divorce was obtained by the non-Filipino spouse. 4. In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court in the case of Corpuz v. Tirol Sto.Tomas (GR 186571, August 11, 2010) ruled that: “The legislative intent is for the benefit of the Filipino spouse, by clarifying his or her marital status, settling the doubts created by the divorce decree. Essentialy, the second paragraph of Article 26 of the Family Code provided the Filipino spouse a substantive right to have his or her marriage to the alien spouse considered as dissolved, capacitating him or her to remarry.” 5. Anent the same, Supreme Court held that “the starting point in any recognition of a foreign divorce judgment is the acknowledgment that our courts do not take judicial notice of foreign judgments and laws. This means that the foreign judgment and its authenticity must be proven as facts under our rules on evidence, together with the alien’s applicable national law to show the effect of the judgment on the alien himself or herself;(Corpuz vs. Sto. Tomas, GR 186571 August 11, 2010)] 6. In Garcia v. Recio, we ruled that a divorce obtained abroad by an alien may be recognized in our jurisdiction, provided the decree is valid according to the national law of the foreigner. The presentation solely of the divorce decree is insufficient; both the divorce decree and the governing personal law of the alien spouse who obtained the divorce must be proven. Because our courts do not take judicial notice of foreign laws and judgment, our law on evidence requires that both the divorce decree and the national law of the alien must be alleged and proven and like any other fact. xxx 7. Nonetheless, it must be emphasized that, in our jurisdiction, the decree of divorce alone does not automatically capacitate the Filipino spouse to remarry. It is essential for the

Filipino spouse to file first before the court a petition for the recognition of such foreign decree of divorce, (Ando vs. Department of Foreign Affairs) 8. Perforce, the Petitioner is constrained to file the instant Petition in order to prove the existence of the foreign judgment, its legal effect and validity, the fact that the Foreign National spouse has been capacitated to remarry, to declare that the marriage between the parties is now considered void ab initio, and to declare that the Petitioner Filipino Spouse is now with legal capacity to remarry under Philippine Laws.

That it is but just and fair for the Philippine government to recognize and enforce the divorce secured by the petitioner so as not to create a legal anomaly by allowing the foreign husband to remarry but the Filipina wife to continue to be bound in the marriage