You are on page 1of 1

Navarro vs Domagtoy

FACTS:
Rodolfo G. Navarro, Municipal Mayor of Dapa, Surigao del
Norte, submitted evidence in relation to two specific acts committed by
respondent Municipal Circuit Trial Court udge !ernando Domagtoy,
w"ic", "e contends, e#"ibits gross misconduct as well as inefficiency in
office and ignorance of t"e law.
First issue: $n September %&, '((), respondent *udge
solemni+ed t"e wedding between Gaspar ,. Tagadan and ,rlyn -.
.orga, despite t"e /nowledge t"at t"e groom is merely separated from
"is first wife. Respondent relied on t"e ,ffidavit issued by t"e
Municipal Trial udge of .asey, Samar, confirming t"e fact t"at Mr.
Tagadan and "is first wife "ave not seen eac" ot"er for almost seven
years, but, t"e said affidavit was not issued by t"e latter *udge, as
claimed by respondent *udge, but merely ac/nowledged before "im.
Second issue: T"e second issue involves t"e solemni+ation of a
marriage ceremony outside t"e court0s *urisdiction, covered by ,rticles
& and 1 of t"e -amily Code. 2t is alleged t"at t"e respondent performed
a marriage ceremony between -loriano Dador Sumaylo and Gemma G.
del Rosario outside "is court0s *urisdiction on $ctober %&,
'((). Respondent *udge "olds office and "as *urisdiction in t"e
Municipal Circuit Trial Court of Sta. Monica3.urgos, Surigao del
Norte. T"e wedding was solemni+ed at t"e respondent *udge0s
residence in t"e municipality of Dapa, w"ic" does not fall wit"in "is
*urisdictional area of t"e municipalities of Sta. Monica and .urgos,
located some )4 to )5 /ilometers away from t"e municipality of Dapa,
Surigao del Norte. Respondent *udge points to ,rticle 1 and its
e#ceptions as t"e *ustifications for "is "aving solemni+ed t"e marriage
between -loriano Sumaylo and Gemma del Rosario outside of "is
court0s *urisdiction.
ISSUE:
6$N t"e respondent *udge proficient in t"e law "e sworn to
apply, to wit7 t"e application of provisions under ,rticles &, 1 and )' of
-amily Code.
RULING:
Gaspar Tagadan did not institute a summary proceeding for t"e
declaration of "is first wife0s presumptive deat". ,bsent t"is *udicial
declaration, "e remains married to 2da 8e9aranda. 6"et"er wittingly, or
unwittingly, it was manifest error on t"e part of respondent *udge to "ave
accepted t"e *oint affidavit submitted by t"e groom. Suc" neglect or
ignorance of t"e law "as resulted in a bigamous, and t"erefore void,
marriage. :nder ,rticle ;5 of t"e -amily Code, <T"e following marriage
s"all be void from t"e beginning7 =)> T"ose bigamous # # # marriages
not falling under ,rticle )'.
8rovided by ,rticle 1, a marriage can be "eld outside of t"e
*udge0s c"ambers or courtroom only in t"e following instances7 ='> at t"e
point of deat", =%> in remote places in accordance wit" ,rticle %( or =;>
upon re?uest of bot" parties in writing in a sworn statement to t"is
effect. T"ere is no pretense t"at eit"er Sumaylo or del Rosario was at t"e
point of deat" or in a remote place. Moreover, t"e written re?uest
presented addressed to t"e respondent *udge was made by only one party,
Gemma del Rosario.
T"erefore, t"e Court finds respondent to "ave acted in gross
ignorance of t"e law. T"e legal principles applicable in t"e cases broug"t
to our attention are elementary and uncomplicated, prompting us to
conclude t"at respondent0s failure to apply t"em is due to a lac/ of
compre"ension of t"e law.
Respondent udge !ernando C. Domagtoy is "ereby
S:S8@ND@D for a period of si# =A> mont"s and given a ST@RN
6,RN2NG t"at a repetition of t"e same or similar acts will be dealt wit"
more severely.

You might also like