Perido vs.

Perido The Court of Appeals found that there was evidence to show that Lucio
Peridos wife Benita Talorong, died during the Spanish regime. This finding is conclusive upon
us and e!ond our power of review. "nder the circumstance, Lucio Perido had no legal
impediment to marr! #arcelina efore the irth of their first child in $%&&.
'ith respect to the civil status of Lucio Perido as stated in the certificates of title issued to him in
$%(), the Court Appeals correctl! held that the statement was not conclusive to show that he
was not actuall! married to #arcelina Baliguat. *urthermore, it is wea+ and insufficient to reut
the presumption that persons living together as husand and wife are married to each other.
The presumption, especiall! where the legitimac! issue is involved, as in this case, ma! e
overcome onl! ! cogent proof on the part of those who allege illegitimac!. Persons dwelling
together in apparent matrimon! are presumed, in the asence of an! counterpresumption or
evidence special to the case, to e in fact married.
People vs. #endo,a
*acts of the Case-
$. .n August /, $%)0 the appellant and 1ovita de Asis were married in #ari+ina, 2i,al.
(. .n #a! $3, $%3$, during the susistence of the first marriage, the appellant was married
to .lga Lema in the Cit! of #anila.
). .n *eruar! (, $%3), 1ovita de Asis died.
3. .n August $%, $%3%, the appellant contracted another marriage with Carmencita Panlilio
in Calama, Laguna. This marriage gave rise to his prosecution for and conviction of the
crime of igam!.
Statutor! provision ma+es a suse4uent marriage contracted ! an! person during the lifetime
of the first spouse illegal and void from its performance, and no 5udicial decree is necessar! to
estalish it invalidit!, as distinguished from annullale marriages. There is here no pretence that
appellants second marriage with .lga Lema was contracted in the elief that the first spouse,
1ovita de Asis, has een asent for seven consecutive !ears or generall! considered as dead,
so as to render said marriage valid until declared null and void ! a competent court.
6efendant appellant was ac4uitted of the charge of igam!.
People vs. Aragon
$. The accused under the name of Proceso 2osima contracted marriage with a certain
#aria 7orrea in the Philippine 8ndependent Church in Ceu.
(. 'hile his marriage with #aria 7orrea was susisting, the accused contracted a
canonical marriage with #aria *aicol.
). #aria 7orrea died in Ceu Cit!. After the latters death, the accused rought #aria
*aicol to Ceu Cit!.
3. #aria *aicol went to 8loilo for the purpose of undergoing treatment of her e!esight.
6uring her asence, accused contracted a third marriage with a certain 1esusa
#agsalang.
/. The fact of the second marriage was estalished.
The Court 9eld- 8t is to e noted that the action was instituted upon complaint of the second
wife, whose marriage with the appellant was not renewed after the death of the first wife and
efore the third marriage was entered into. 9ence, the last marriage was a valid one and
appellants prosecution for contracting this marriage cannot prosper.
Tolentino vs. Paras
There is no etter proof of marriage than the admission ! the accused of the e:istence of such
marriage. The second marriage that he contracted with private respondent during the lifetime of
his first spouse is null and void from the eginning and of no force and effect. ;o 5udicial decree
is necessar! to estalish the invalidit! of a void marriage. 8t can e safel! concluded then,
without need of further proof nor remand to the Court elow, that private respondent is not the
surviving spouse of the deceased Amado, ut petitioner. 2ectification of the erroneous entr! in
the records of the Local Civil 2egistrar, therefore, e validl! made.
8n fine since, there is no 4uestion regarding the invalidit! of Amados second marriage with
private respondent and that of the entr! made in the corresponding local register is here!
rendered false, it ma! e corrected. 'hile documents, such as death and irth certificates, are
pulic and entries therein are presumed to e correct, such presumption is merel! disputale
and will have to !ield to more positive evidence estalishing their inaccurac!.
Serafina 7. Tolentino is here! declared the surviving spouse of deceased Amado Tolentino.
'iegel vs. Sempio<6i!
*acts of the Case-
$. 2espondent 'iegel as+ed for the declaration of ;ullit! of his marriage with herein
petitioner Lilia .liva 'iegel on the ground of Lilias previous e:isting marriage to one
=duardo A. #a:ion.
(. Lilia admitted the e:istence of the prior susisting marriage claimed that it was null and
void for having een allegedl! forced to enter to said marital union.
There is no need for petitioner to prove that her first marriage was vitiated ! force committed
against oth parties ecause assuming this to e so, the marriage will not e void ut merel!
voidale and therefore valid until annulled. Since no annulment has !et een made, it is clear
that when she married respondent she was still validl! married to her first husand,
conse4uentl!, her marriage to respondent is >.86.
6onato vs. Luna
$. A civil case was ased on the ground that private respondent consented to entering into
the marriage, which was petitioner 6onato second one, since she had no previous
+nowledge that petitioner was alread! married to a certain 2osalinda 2. #aluping on
1une )&, $%?@.
(. Petitioner 6onatos answer in the civil case for nullit! interposed the defense that his
second marriage was void since it was solemni,ed without a marriage license and that
force, violence, intimidation, and undue influence were emplo!ed ! private respondent
to otain petitioners consent to the marriage.
). Petitioner filed a motion to suspend the proceedings of the criminal case for igam!
contending that the case for annulment of his second marriage raises a pre5udicial
4uestion which must first e resolved efore the criminal case can proceed.
The re4uisites of a pre5udicial 4uestion do not otain in the case at ar. 8t must e noted that the
issue efore the 1uvenile and 6omestic 2elations Court touching upon the nullit! of the second
marriage is not determinative of 6onatos guilt or innocence in the crime of igam!.
*urthermore, it was petitioners second wife, the herein private respondent Pa, B. Aa!an who
filed the complaint for annulment of the second marriage on the ground that her consent was
otained through deceit.
A pre5udicial 4uestion has een defined to e one which arises in a case, the resolution of which
4uestion is a logical antecedent of the issue involved in said case, and the cogni,ance of which
pertains to another triunal. Aintimatel! connectedB
Terre vs. Terre 2espondent 1ordan Terre, eing a law!er, +new or should have +nown that
such an argument ran counter to the prevailing case law of this Court which holds that for
purposes of determining whether a person is legall! free to contract a second marriage, a
5udicial declaration that the first marriage was null and void a initio is essential. =ven if we
were to assume, arguendo merel!, that 1ordan Terre held that mista+en elief in good faith, the
same result will follow. *or if we are to hold 1ordan Terre to his own argument, his first marriage
to complainant 6oroth! Terre must e deemed valid, with the result that his second marriage to
9elina #alicdem must e regarded as igamous and criminal in character.
1ones vs. 9ortiguela
*acts of the Case-
$. #arcian =scano died intestate. 9er widower was appointed 5udicial administrator of her
entire estate and in an order issued on #a! %, $%)(.
(. Angelita 1oneas, her daughter ! her first marriage, and *eli: 9ortiguela, her widower !
her second marriage, were her onl! heirs.
). 9eiress Angelita 1ones married =rnesto Lardi,aal, filed motion alleging that she was
the onl! heir of her mother, the deceased #arciana =scano, that there was never a valid
marriage etween her mother and *eli: 9ortiguela or that had such marriage e
celerated, it was null and void.
3. #arciana was actuall! married to Arthur 1ones ut in .ctoer $%$% #arciana had her
husand 5udiciall! declared an asentee.
The declaration of asence made in accordance with the provisions of the Civil Code
has for its sole purpose to enale the ta+ing of the necessar! precautions for the
administration of the estate of the asentee. *or the celeration of civil marriage,
however, the law onl! re4uires that the former spouse had een asent for seven
consecutive !ears does not +now his or her former spouse to e living, that such former
spouse is generall! reputed to e dead and the spouse present so elieves at the time
of the celeration of the marriage.
/. 8n accordance with the foregoing legal provision, the asence of #arcianas former
husand should e counted from 1anuar! $&, $%$@, the date on which the last news
concerning Arthur '. 1ones was received, and from said date to #a! 0, $%(?, more than
nine !ears elapsed. Said marriage, is therefore, valid and lawful.
2epulic vs. Court of Appeals (0@ SC2A $%% $) *eruar! $%%?
.n the other hand, in the present case, there is no clear showing to us that the ps!chological
defect spo+en of is an incapacit!. 8t appears to us to e more of a Cdifficult!D, if not outright
CrefusalD or CneglectD in the performance of some marital oligations. #ere showing of
Cirreconcilale differencesD and Cconflicting personalitiesD in no wise and Cconflicting
personalitiesD in no wise constitutes ps!chological incapacit!. 8t is not enough to prove that the
parties failed to meet their responsiilities and duties as married personsE it is essential that the!
must e shown to e incapale of doing so, due to some ps!chological illness.
1ustice >itug wrote that the ps!chological incapacit! must e characteri,ed ! AaB gravit!, AB
5uridical antecedence, AcB incurailit!
The court laid down the guidelines in the interpretation and application of Art. )0 of the *amil!.
See full te:t
Choa vs. Choa
$. Petitioner and respondent were married on #arch $/, $%@$. .ut of this union two
children were orn, Cher!l L!nne and Alr!an.
(. 2espondent filed efore the 2TC of ;egros .ccidental a Complaint for Annulment of his
marriage to petitioner.
Ps!chological incapacit! must e more than 5ust a Cdifficult!D, a CrefusalD or a CneglectD in the
performance of some marital oligations. 'e stressed that a mere showing of irreconcilale
differences and conflicting personalities in no wise constitutes ps!chological incapacit!.
The evidence showed that he and his wife could not get along with each other. There was
asolutel! no showing of the gravit! or 5uridical antecedence or incurailit! of the prolems
esetting their marital union.
Barcelona vs. Court of Appeals
$. Tadeo Beng,on filed a Petition for Annulment of #arriage against 6iana #. Barcelona.
Tadeo filed a #otion to 'ithdraw Petition.
(. 2espondent Tadeo filed anew a Petition for Annulment of #arriage against Petitioner
6iana.
). Petitioner 6iana filed a #otion to 6ismiss the second petition on two grounds. AaB *ailure
to state a cause of action AB forum shopping.
Suse4uent to Santos and #olina The complete facts should allege the ph!sical
manifestations, if an!, as are indicative of ps!chological incapacit! at the time of the
celeration of the marriage ut e:pert opinion need not e alleged.