1

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
NATIONAL CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION
BRANCH ___,
PASAY CITY

______________________,
Petitioner,
SPEC. PRO. No. __________
For: Judicial Recognition of
Foreign Divorce and Cancellation
- versus - or Correction of Entry in the Civil
Registry under Rule 108, Revised
Rules of Court

_______________________,
THE LOCAL CIVIL REGISTRAR
OF PASAY CITY, THE CIVIL REGISTRAR
GENERAL, THE PHILIPPINE STATISTICS
AUTHORITY, AND ALL PERSONS WHO
HAVE OR CLAIM ANY INTEREST WHICH
WOULD BE AFFECTED THEREBY
Respondents.
x-------------------------x

PETITION

Petitioner, _______________, by counsel, respectfully states:

Parties

1. Petitioner is of legal age, Filipino citizen, married, with

residence address at _____________, Manila, Philippines. Petitioner
maybe served with the processes of this Honorable Court at her
counsel’s address indicated below. Petitioner is duly represented in
this case by Atty. ____________, as evidenced by a Special Power of
Attorney dated 7 August 2018, a copy of which is attached hereto as
ANNEX “A.”

2. Respondent ______________ is of legal age, Japanese,

married, with foreign address at Saitama Ken Koshigaya Shi Higashi
Osawa, Japan. He may be served with summons and other processes
 2

of the Honorable Court at his local address at _______________,

Laguna, Philippines.

3. The other respondents, namely, the Local Civil Registrar

of Pasay City, Metro Manila, the Civil Registrar General, the
Philippine Statistics Authority, and all persons who have or claim
any interest which would be affected by the outcome of this Petition
are impleaded herein pursuant to Rule 108, Revised Rules of Court.
They may be served with summons and other processes of the
Honorable Court through their respective offices.

Allegations Common to All

Causes of Actions

4. In the year 2005, ________ Promotions, a recruitment

company owned by Mr. Imamura, hired Petitioner as a talent for
deployment to Japan.

5. Petitioner caught the eye of __________. This led to

courtship. Eventually, the two became a couple.

6. On 26 May 2006, Petitioner and _________ wed as

evidenced by a Certificate of Marriage with Registry No. _______, a
copy of which is attached hereto as ANNEX “B.”

7. Thereafter, they moved to Japan. For three (3) years, the

couple lived in harmony until ________’s attitude changed,
especially, when his business declared bankruptcy. He was
depressed and was hooked into gambling. He became nonchalant
and indifferent with his marital responsibilities.

8. Despite their marital problems, Petitioner remained with

_________. Nevertheless, no matter how hard Petitioner tried to keep
her marriage intact, all her efforts failed as _________ altogether left
her.

9. One day, _________ suddenly appeared at Petitioner’s

doorstep bringing with him an array of documents – all in Japanese -
for her to sign. When she asked what those documents were,
__________ got angry and told her to just sign the documents and not
to ask any more questions. Being a good wife yet a complete stranger
in a foreign country, she heeded the instructions of her husband and
signed the documents. Thereafter, _________ immediately left, never
to return.
 3

10. Petitioner never had any idea that the documents she
signed were divorce papers which _________ filed before the Office
of the Mayor of Koshigaya, Saitama Prefecture, Japan, as an official
application for divorce.

11. On 29 August 2012, the application for divorce was

approved.

12. Petitioner only came to know of the divorce after a

common friend informed her that _________ married another person
after he divorced Petitioner.

13. Petitioner confirmed the status of their marriage by

obtaining copies of official documents. She was able to secure the
Certificate of Acceptance and the Family Registry of _________. Both
show the fact of divorce.

14. The Certificate of Acceptance states the fact of acceptance

of the divorce by the Mayor of Koshigaya, Saitama Prefecture, Japan.
Copies of the official Authentication by the Vice Consul of the
Republic of the Philippines in and for Tokyo, Japan, the official
English translation, and the Certificate of Acceptance issued by the
Mayor of Koshigaya, Saitama Prefecture, Japan, are hereto attached
as ANNEXES “C,” “C-1,” and “C-2.”

15. On the other hand, ____________’s Family Registry shows

that the divorce has been officially recorded and registered. Copies of
the Authentication by the Vice Consul of the Republic of the
Philippines in and for Tokyo, Japan, the official English translation,
and the Family Registry of ______________ are hereto attached as
ANNEXES “D,” “D-1,” and “D-2.”

First Cause of Action

16. The 2nd paragraph of Art. 26 of the Family Code, as

amended, states:

“Where a marriage between a Filipino citizen and a

foreigner is validly celebrated and a divorce is thereafter validly
obtained abroad by the alien spouse capacitating him or her to
remarry, the Filipino spouse shall have capacity to remarry under
Philippine law. (As amended by Executive Order 227)”
 4

17. In Gerbert R. Corpuz v. Daisylyn Tirol Sto. Tomas and the

Solicitor General (“Corpuz Case”),1 the Supreme Court reiterated the
rationale of the abovequoted provision in this wise:

“…the same provision was included in the law "to avoid the absurd
situation where the Filipino spouse remains married to the alien spouse
who, after obtaining a divorce, is no longer married to the Filipino
spouse." The legislative intent is for the benefit of the Filipino spouse, by
clarifying his or her marital status, settling the doubts created by the
divorce decree. Essentially, the second paragraph of Article 26 of the
Family Code provided the Filipino spouse a substantive right to have his
or her marriage to the alien spouse considered as dissolved, capacitating
him or her to remarry. Without the second paragraph of Article 26 of the
Family Code, the judicial recognition of the foreign decree of divorce,
whether in a proceeding instituted precisely for that purpose or as a
related issue in another proceeding, would be of no significance to the
Filipino spouse since our laws do not recognize divorce as a mode of
severing the marital bond; Article 17 of the Civil Code provides that the
policy against absolute divorces cannot be subverted by judgments
promulgated in a foreign country. The inclusion of the second paragraph
in Article 26 of the Family Code provides the direct exception to this rule
and serves as basis for recognizing the dissolution of the marriage
between the Filipino spouse and his or her alien spouse.

Additionally, an action based on the second paragraph of Article 26

of the Family Code is not limited to the recognition of the foreign divorce
decree. If the court finds that the decree capacitated the alien spouse to
remarry, the courts can declare that the Filipino spouse is likewise
capacitated to contract another marriage.”

18. Applying the foregoing, Petitioner therefore has the right

to have the divorce obtained by her Japanese husband abroad
recognized in the Philippines.

19. In addition, owing to the divorce that capacitated Mr.

___________to remarry under Japanese law, Petitioner should
likewise be declared capacitated to remarry under Philippine law.

Second Cause of Action

20. Article 412 of the Civil Code declares that "no entry in a
civil register shall be changed or corrected, without judicial order." Rule
108 of the Revised Rules of Court provides for the special remedial
proceeding by which entries in the civil registry may be judicially
cancelled or corrected or for a judgment, authorizing the cancellation
or correction, may be annotated in the civil registry.

1
G.R. No. 186571; August 11, 2010.
 5

21. For the divorce secured by Petitioner’s Japanese spouse in

Japan to be properly recognized in this jurisdiction and for such
recognition be duly annotated in the civil registry and the
corresponding entries as to the civil status of the Petitioner be
accordingly cancelled or corrected and having complied with the
requirements, Petitioner is filing the instant petition under Rule 108,
Revised Rules of Court.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, premises considered, Petitioner respectfully

prays that, after due proceedings, the Honorable Court renders
judgment:

1) recognizing in this jurisdiction the divorce obtained by

___________on 29 August 2012 in Japan;
2) declaring Petitioner to be capacitated to remarry under
Philippine law; and
3) ordering that the aforesaid divorce and declaration be recorded
in the Local Civil Registry of Pasay City, the National Statistics
Office, and other concerned Philippine Government offices.
Petitioner also prays for other just and equitable reliefs.

Cebu City for Pasay City. 14 September 2018.

____________________________

By:

Copies to be furnished to:

OFFICE OF THE SOLICITOR GENERAL

OSG Building,
134 Amorsolo Street, Legazpi Village,
1229 Makati, Metro Manila

OFFICE OF THE CITY PROSECUTOR

Manila, Philippines
 6

VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION

OF NON- FORUM SHOPPING