View full case

GRACE J. GARCIA v. REDERICK A. RECIO

FACTS:

Rederick A. Recio, a Filipino, was previously married to Editha Samson, an Australian citizen. They obtained a divorce decree from an Australian family court on May 18, 1989. On June 26, 1992, Respondent became an Australian citizen. On January 12, 1994, Petitioner, a Filipina, married Respondent in Cabanatuan City. However, they started living separately on October 22, 1995, without judicial dissolution of their marriage. On July 7, 1998, Respondent obtained a divorce decree from a family court in Sydney, Australia. Petitioner then filed a Complaint for Declaration of Nullity of Marriage on March 3, 1998, alleging bigamy as Respondent had a prior marriage. Respondent argued that his first marriage had been validly dissolved by the divorce decree obtained in Australia and he was legally capacitated to marry Petitioner. The trial court granted the divorce and declared the marriage dissolved based on the divorce decree obtained by Respondent. Petitioner filed a Petition for Review, questioning the trial court's ruling.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether the divorce between respondent and Editha Samson was proven.

  2. Whether respondent was proven to be legally capacitated to marry petitioner.

RULING:

  1. Proving the Divorce Between Respondent and Editha Samson Respondent failed to comply with the necessary rules on evidence to establish the validity of the Australian divorce decree. However, the trial court admitted the divorce decree because petitioner did not properly object to its admissibility. Nonetheless, the court concluded that respondent did not sufficiently prove the divorce decree's conformity with Australian law.

  2. Respondent’s Legal Capacity to Remarry Respondent did not present adequate proof of his legal capacity to remarry under Australian law. The divorce decree did not absolutely establish his legal capacity to remarry. Hence, there was no basis for the trial court to assume that the divorce ipso facto restored respondent's capacity to remarry.

PRINCIPLES:

  1. A divorce obtained abroad by an alien may be recognized in the Philippines, provided such a decree is valid according to the national law of the foreigner.

  2. Both the divorce decree and the governing personal law of the alien spouse who obtained the divorce must be alleged and proven according to Philippine law on evidence.

  3. Philippine courts do not take judicial notice of foreign laws and judgments.

  4. The burden of proving the foreign law validating a divorce falls upon the party asserting its validity.

  5. Failure to object to the admissibility of a divorce decree presented in evidence renders it admissible.

  6. The legal capacity to contract marriage is determined by the national law of the party concerned, and sufficient proof of this capacity must be presented in court.

  7. Under Article 26 of the Family Code, a Filipino who is divorced by an alien spouse capacitating them to remarry can also remarry.

  8. Compliance with Family Code requirements such as registration of judgments is not necessary for naturalized citizens bound by their new national laws.