Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Module 2
Module 2
Salubo-Domugan, Sheena E.
CHOSEN TOPIC:
“(3) That the consent of either party was obtained by fraud, unless such
party afterwards, with full knowledge of the facts constituting the fraud, freely
Article 46 of the Family Code provides the kinds of fraud that constitute
The kinds of fraud that will give ground for annulment are as follows:
2. Concealment by the wife of the fact that at the time of the marriage, she
FACTS:
claiming that his consent thereto was obtained through force and intimidation
employed by said appellee, her two brothers and other relatives. The Juvenile
and Domestic Relations Court, after due trial, dismissed the complaint and
from said decision, appellee filed a motion for the issuance of a writ of
execution, which the lower court granted. Instead of appealing from the order
granting the motion for execution, appellant filed a complaint with the Court of
First.
ISSUE:
RULING:
decision. He could and should have appealed therefrom or from the order
granting the writ of execution and denying his motion for reconsideration.
1
Palaroan vs. Anaya, G.R. No. L-19193. November 29, 1965
Moreover, the fraud relied upon by appellant as ground for the annulment of
the decision is not the fraud — extrinsic — that would constitute a ground for
the annulment of the proceedings had before the Juvenile and Domestic
Relations Court, but the fraud that, if proven, would be a ground for the
consent to the marriage contract was not given voluntarily, he should have
FACTS:
it being alleged that at the date of their marriage, defendant Delizo concealed
from petitioner that fact that she was pregnant by another man. Defendant
claimed that the child was conceived out of lawful wedlock between her and
the plaintiff. Noting that no birth certificate was presented to show that the
child was born within 180 days after the marriage between the parties, and
appeal to the Court of Appeals, that court held that there has been excusable
neglect in plaintiff's inability to present the proof of the child's birth. On the
theory, it was not impossible for plaintiff and defendant to have had sexual
intercourse during their engagement so the child could be their own, and
2
Aquino vs. Delizo, G.R. No. L-15853; July 27, 1960
finding unbelievable plaintiff's claim that he did not even suspect that
ISSUE:
RULING:
Yes. After going over the record of the case, the court find that the
Code, concealment by the wife of the fact that at the time of the marriage, she
was pregnant by a man other than her husband constitutes fraud and is
ground for annulment of marriage. In the case at bar, the defendant wife was
alleged to be only more than four months pregnant at the time of her marriage
to plaintiff. At that stage, we are not prepared to say that her pregnancy was
readily apparent, especially since she was "naturally plump" or fat as alleged
pregnancy, the enlargement is limited to the lower part of the abdomen so that
the lower part of the abdomen. If, defendant is "naturally plump", it would be
difficult to know by looking, whether or not she was pregnant at the time of
their marriage more so because she must have attempted to conceal the true
state of affairs.
The appellate court also said that it was not impossible for plaintiff and
defendant to have had sexual intercourse before they got married and
therefore the child could be their own. This statement, however, is purely
(Sheena E. Salubo-Domugan)
FACTS:
January 1954 on the ground that his consent was obtained through force and
and granting Aurora's counterclaim. While the amount of the counterclaim was
being negotiated "to settle the judgment," Fernando had divulged to Aurora
that several months prior to their marriage he had pre-marital relationship with
pre-marital secret constituted fraud in obtaining her consent. She prayed for
the annulment of her marriage with Fernando on such ground and ask for
moral damages.
ISSUE:
marriage.
3
Anaya vs. Palaroan, G.R. No. L-27930 November 26, 197
HELD:
No. Fraud as a vice of consent in marriage, which may be a cause for its
annulment, comes under Article 85, No. 4, of the Civil Code, which provides:
ART. 85. A marriage may be annulled for any of the following causes,
(4) That the consent of either party was obtained by fraud, unless such party
afterwards, with full knowledge of the facts constituting the fraud, freely
cohabited with the other as her husband or his wife, as the case may be; This
ART. 86. Any of the following circumstances shall constitute fraud referred to
involving moral turpitude, and the penalty imposed was imprisonment for two
years or more;
(3) Concealment by the wife of the fact that at the time of the marriage, she
shall constitute such fraud as will give grounds for action for the annulment of
marriage.
(Sheena E. Salubo-Domugan)
FACTS:
Villanueva, alleging that his consent was obtained through fraud because
pregnant despite the fact that he had no sexual relations with her prior to the
marriage ceremony; and that they did not live as husband and wife as
immediately after the marriage celebration, Villanueva left his house and until
Despite the fact that she was served with summons and copy of the
private respondent in default, but, pursuant to the provision of the Civil Code
of the Philippines, referred the case to the City Fiscal of Manila for
the complaint in view of the fact that petitioner is not willing to submit himself
for interrogation by the City Fiscal pursuant to the provisions of the New Civil
Code.
His motions for the reconsideration of the aforesaid order having been
denied, petitioner now files his petition to annul said order of July 29, 1963
ISSUE:
4
Romulo Tolentino vs. Helen Villanueva, GR NO. L-23264, Mar 15, 1974
Whether the annulment of marriage be pursued?
RULING:
No. Articles 88 and 101 of the Civil Code of the Philippines expressly
prohibit the rendition of a decision in suits for annulment of marriage and legal
direct that in case of non-appearance of defendant, the court shall order the
exists, and if none, said prosecuting attorney shall intervene for the State to
the aforecited laws and rules is predicated on the fact that the institutions of
marriage and of the family are sacred and therefore are as much the concern
of the State as of the spouses; because the State and the public have vital
defendant stresses the fact that marriage is more than a mere contract
between the parties and for this reason, when the defendant fails to appear,
the law enjoins the court to direct the prosecuting officer to intervene for the
State in order to preserve the integrity and sanctity of the marital bonds.
"In case of non-appearance of the defendant, the court shall order the
exists. If there is no collusion, the prosecuting attorney shall intervene for the
State in order to take care that the evidence for the plaintiff is not fabricated."
1980-1989
FACTS:
entered into marriage with petitioner Donato, without knowledge that petitioner
was already married to certain Rosalinda. Petitioner answered that his second
marriage was void since it was solemnized without a marriage license and
solemnization of the second marriage, the parties had lived together and
deported themselves as husband and wife without the benefit of wedlock for a
bigamy contending that the civil case seeking the annulment of his second
marriage raises a prejudicial question which must first be decided before the
criminal case can proceed. Hon. Luna denied the motion to suspend the
5
Donato vs. Hon. Luna, G.R. No. 53642; April 15, 1988
proceedings for bigamy as well as the motion for reconsideration. Hence, the
ISSUE:
Whether a criminal case for bigamy pending before the Court of First
Instance should be suspended in view of the pending civil case for annulment
RULING:
at bar. It must be noted that the issue before the Juvenile and Domestic
Relations Court touching upon the nullity of the second marriage is not
Furthermore, it was petitioner's second wife, the private respondent, who filed
the complaint for annulment of the second marriage on the ground that her
consent was obtained through deceit. The doctrine in Landicho vs. Relova
states that: The mere fact that there are actions to annul the marriages
entered into by the accused in a bigamy case does not mean that "prejudicial
must be shown that the petitioner's consent to such marriage must be the one
that was obtained by means of duress, force and intimidation to show that his
act in the second marriage must be involuntary and cannot be the basis of his
consent to the second marriage has been obtained by the use of threats,
(Sheena E. Salubo-Domugan)
FACTS:
apparently covers almost all of his properties, including his one-third (1/3)
share in the estate of his wife. Petitioner Moises Jocson assails these
documents and prays that they be declared null and void and the properties
subject matter therein be partitioned between him and Agustina as the only
which the former, therefore, cannot validly sell. It is the position of petitioner
the certificate of title he presented as evidence (Exhibits "E", to "J", pp. 4-9,
Records) were enough proof to show that the properties covered therein were
6
Jocson vs. CA, GR No. 55322, Feb 16, 1989
acquired during the marriage of their parents, and, therefore, under Article
other hand, the Court of Appeals reversed the decision. Hence, this appeal.
ISSUE:
RULING:
No. Article 160 of the Civil Code provides that: "All property of the
proved that it pertains exclusively to the husband or to the wife." Article 160
he must first present proof that the disputed properties were acquired during
the marriage of Emilio Jocson and Alejandra Poblete. The certificates of title,
however, upon which petitioner rests his claim is insufficient. The fact that the
Poblete" is no proof that the properties were acquired during the spouses'
coverture. Acquisition of title and registration thereof are two different acts. It
is well settled that registration does not confer title but merely confirms one
already existing (See Torela vs. Torela, supra). It may be that the properties
under dispute were acquired by Emilio Jocson when he was still a bachelor
but were registered only after his marriage to Alejandra Poblete, which
latter.
1990-1999
LUCITA ESTRELLA HERNANDEZ vs. COURT OF APPEALS and MARIO
C. HERNANDEZ
(Sheena E. Salubo-Domugan)
FACTS:
alleged that from the time of their marriage up to the time of the filing of the
suit, private respondent failed to perform his obligation to support the family
and contribute to the management of the household, devoting most of his time
engaging in drinking sprees with his friends. That after they were married, he
cohabited with another woman with whom he had an illegitimate child, while
having affairs with different women, and that, because of his promiscuity,
In her prayer, she asked that respondent be ordered to give support to their
children, that she be awarded the custody, that she be adjudged as the sole
well as the jeep which private respondent took with him when he left the
conjugal home. The trial court rendered a decision dismissing the petition for
which petitioner anchors her petition were grounds for legal separation, and
7
Hernandez vs, CA, G.R. 126010, December 8, 1999
not for annulment. The Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the trial
nullity of marriage, must exist at the time of the celebration of the marriage.
ISSUE:
RULING:
to the marriage. The intendment of the law has been to confine the meaning
may be physical. The evidence must convince the court that the parties, or
one of them, was mentally or physically ill to such an extent that the
obligations he was assuming, or knowing them, could not have given valid
to show the nullity of the marriage rests upon rests petitioner. Thus, any doubt
Facts:
because her husband was a spendthrift and had other women, petitioner's
business suffered. Private respondent often had smoking and drinking sprees
with his friends and betted on fighting cocks. Private respondent was able to
get a job and availed himself of the early retirement plan offered by the
company but private respondent consumed the entire amount for himself
child. When petitioner confronted private respondent about his extra marital
but did not reply. Private respondent left for Middle East abandoning the
petitioner and their children. The trial court dismissed the petition for
8
Hernandez vs. CA, G.R. No. 126010; December 8, 1999#
incapacitated" are among the grounds cited by the law as valid reasons for
the grant of legal separation and not as grounds for a declaration of nullity of
ISSUE:
RULING:
refer to no less than a mental (not physical) incapacity that causes a party to
live together, observe love, respect and fidelity and render help and support.
There is hardly any doubt that the intendment of the law has been to confine
must exist at the time the marriage is celebrated. The law does not evidently
envision, upon the other hand, an inability of the spouses to have sexual
relations with the other. This conclusion is implicit under Article 54 of the
become mere grounds for legal separation under Article 55 of the Family
circumstance that may have some bearing on the degree, extent, and other
desirable.
2000-2020
Facts:
Leonida filed a petition to annul their marriage on the ground that Manuel was
she saw Manuel kissed another man on the lips. Manuel countered that the
9
Almelor vs. Hon. Regional Trial Court, G.R. No. 179620. August 26, 2008
true cause of Leonida's hostility against him was their professional rivalry. To
further testified that he was with his brother on the day Leonida allegedly saw
Manuel kissed another man. He denied that such an incident occurred. The
RTC granted the petition for annulment. Manuel filed a notice of appeal which
was, however, denied due course. etitioner Manuel takes the present
ISSUE:
Whether the CA erred in its decision declaring the marriage as null and void?
RULING:
Leonida at the time of their marriage. The lower court considered the public
concealed this to Leonida at the time of their marriage. The lower court
court cannot appreciate it as a ground to annul his marriage with Leonida. The
law is clear - a marriage may be annulled when the consent of either party
was a homosexual at the onset of his marriage and that he deliberately hid
homosexuality per se, that vitiates the consent of the innocent party. Such
concealment presupposes bad faith and intent to defraud the other party in
Villanueva vs CA
(Sheena E. Salubo-Domugan)
Facts:
Orlando filed with the trial court a petition for annulment of his marriage with
Lilia alleging that threats of violence and duress forced him into marrying her
who was already pregnant. He cited several incidents that created on his
to his life and safety, to wit: the harassing phone calls from Lilia and strangers
as well as the unwanted visits by three men at the premises of the University
of the East after his classes thereat, and the threatening presence of a certain
Ka Celso, a supposed member of the New People’s Army whom appellant
claimed to have been hired by Lilia and who accompanied him in going to her
home province of Palawan to marry her. Orlando also alleged that he never
Lilia prayed for the dismissal of the petition, arguing that petitioner freely and
voluntarily married her; that petitioner stayed with her in Palawan for almost a
month after their marriage; that petitioner wrote letters to her after he returned
to Manila, during which private respondent visited him personally; and that
petitioner knew about the progress of her pregnancy, which ended in their son
Issues:
RULING:
No. Orlando’s allegation of fear was not concretely established. The Court is
marriage. It is not disputed that at the time he was allegedly being harassed,
self-defense, or, at the very least, the proper way to keep himself out of
harm’s way. For sure, it is even doubtful if threats were indeed made to bear
upon appellant, what with the fact that he never sought the assistance of the
security personnel of his school nor the police regarding the activities of those
who were threatening him. And neither did he inform the judge about his
FINDINGS:
Palaroan The fraud relied upon by appellant as ground for the annulment
vs. Anaya of the decision is not the fraud (extrinsic) that would constitute a
Aquino vs. The concealment by the wife of the fact that at the time of the
Delizo marriage, she was pregnant by a man other than her husband
vs. of the defendant stresses the fact that marriage is more than a
Villanueva mere contract between the parties; and for this reason, when
the defendant fails to appear, the law enjoins the court to direct
Donato vs. The requisites of a prejudicial question do not obtain in the case
Hon. Luna at bar. It must be noted that the issue before the Juvenile and
vs. CA are among the grounds cited by the law as valid reasons for the
Article 46, (3) should be taken in conjunction with Article 45, (3)
of the same code, and a careful reading of the two provisions
by the Court.
and not homosexuality per se, that vitiates the consent of the
marriage.
vs. CA to believe by appellee that the latter was pregnant with his child
the lower court that his client had a sexual relationship with the
and the appellee went to a hotel where "the sexual act was
FURTHER EXPLANATION:
Are there changes in how the Supreme Court decided the cases?
Answer: No
because they are very keen and capable to construe the laws provided in the
Family Code of the Philippines. The Supreme Court follows the strict
implementation of the laws provided. Article 45, paragraph (3) and Article 46
of The Family Code provides the causes and circumstances which shall
(3) of the Family Code clearly indicates the word “consent of either party”.
marriage involving fraud, without which, the other party would not have
inappropriate grounds of fraud that constitute the ground for annulment can
be the reason for the dismissal of the case. In Hernandez vs. CA, the Court
cited by the law as valid reasons for the grant of legal separation and not as
because of lack of evidence. The court dismisses any action when there is no
enough evidence to prove the claim of the petitioner. In Donato vs. Hon. Luna,
the Supreme Court dismissed the case since the petitioner has not even
sufficiently shown that his consent to the second marriage has been obtained
In cases when the grounds used for the action are misinterpreted, it will
also result in the dismissal of the case. AURORA A. ANAYA vs. FERNANDO
another woman does not constitute a ground for annulment; and it is further
excluded by the last paragraph of the article that "no other misrepresentation
other words, they are very vigilant and kin in interpreting and applying the law
to cases.
REFERENCES:
https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/1987/07/06/executive-order-no-209-s-1
987/
http://www.gtalawphil.com/Philippine%20Annulment%20101_1.htm
www.lawphil.com
www.cdasia.com