Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Republic V. Orbecido Iii G.R. No. 154380 October 5, 2005 Facts

    Uploaded by

    Rachel Marbella
    90 views1 page
    This case involved Cipriano Orbecido III seeking permission from the court to remarry under Article 26 of the Family Code after discovering that his wife had obtained American citizenship and divorced him to marry another man. The Supreme Court ruled that for the court to allow Cipriano to remarry, he must provide proof that his wife was naturalized as an American, the foreign divorce decree was valid under the laws where it was issued, and the decree allowed his former wife to remarry. However, Cipriano did not provide sufficient evidence to support his claims, so the court could not declare that he was allowed to remarry based on his allegations alone.

    Original Description:

    CASE

    Original Title

    Obercido Case

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This case involved Cipriano Orbecido III seeking permission from the court to remarry under Article 26 of the Family Code after discovering that his wife had obtained American citizenship and divorced him to marry another man. The Supreme Court ruled that for the court to allow Cipriano to remarry, he must provide proof that his wife was naturalized as an American, the foreign divorce decree was valid under the laws where it was issued, and the decree allowed his former wife to remarry. However, Cipriano did not provide sufficient evidence to support his claims, so the court could not declare that he was allowed to remarry based on his allegations alone.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    90 views1 page

    Republic V. Orbecido Iii G.R. No. 154380 October 5, 2005 Facts

    Uploaded by

    Rachel Marbella
    This case involved Cipriano Orbecido III seeking permission from the court to remarry under Article 26 of the Family Code after discovering that his wife had obtained American citizenship and divorced him to marry another man. The Supreme Court ruled that for the court to allow Cipriano to remarry, he must provide proof that his wife was naturalized as an American, the foreign divorce decree was valid under the laws where it was issued, and the decree allowed his former wife to remarry. However, Cipriano did not provide sufficient evidence to support his claims, so the court could not declare that he was allowed to remarry based on his allegations alone.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    REPUBLIC v.

    ORBECIDO III
    G.R. No. 154380 October 5, 2005

    FACTS:

    On May 24, 1981, Cipriano Orbecido III married Lady Myros M. Villanueva at the United Church
    of Christ in the Philippines in Lam-an, Ozamis City. Their marriage was blessed with a son and a
    daughter, Kristoffer Simbortriz V. Orbecido and Lady Kimberly V. Orbecido. In 1986, Cipriano‘s
    wife left for the United States bringing along their son Kristoffer. A few years later, Cipriano
    discovered that his wife had been naturalized as an American citizen. Sometime in 2000, Cipriano
    learned from his son that his wife had obtained a divorce decree and then married a certain Innocent
    Stanley. Cipriano thereafter filed with the trial court a petition for authority to remarry invoking
    Paragraph 2 of Article 26 of the Family Code. No opposition was filed. Finding merit in the
    petition, the court granted the same. The Republic, herein petitioner, through the Office of the
    Solicitor General (OSG), sought reconsideration but it was denied.

    ISSUE:

    Whether or not Cipriano Orbecido III can remarry under Article 26 of the Family Code?

    RULING:

    The Supreme Court held that for his plea to prosper, respondent herein must prove his allegation
    that his wife was naturalized as an American citizen. Likewise, before a foreign divorce decree
    can be recognized by our own courts, the party pleading it must prove the divorce as a fact and
    demonstrate its conformity to the foreign law allowing it. Such foreign law must also be proved as
    our courts cannot take judicial notice of foreign laws. Like any other fact, such laws must be
    alleged and proved. Furthermore, respondent must also show that the divorce decree allows his
    former wife to remarry as specifically required in Article 26. Otherwise, there would be no
    evidence sufficient to declare that he is capacitated to enter into another marriage. Nevertheless,
    we are unanimous in our holding that Paragraph 2 of Article 26 of the Family Code (E.O. No. 209,
    as amended by E.O. No. 227), should be interpreted to allow a Filipino citizen, who has been
    divorced by a spouse who had acquired foreign citizenship and remarried, also to remarry.
    However, considering that in the present petition there is no sufficient evidence submitted and on
    record, we are unable to declare, based on respondent‘s bare allegations that his wife, who was
    naturalized as an American citizen, had obtained a divorce decree and had remarried an American,
    that respondent is now capacitated to remarry. Such declaration could only be made properly upon
    respondent’s submission of the aforecited evidence in his favor.

    You might also like