Tuesday, April 26, 2011

What everyone ought to know about Annulment and Divorce


There is a big difference between divorce and annulment.

Following are excerpts from an article on the Philippine Daily Inquirer by former Chief Justice Artemio V. Panganiban posted on  Philippine Daily Inquirer on 10 April 2011. It is a good read.

“This vast difference in attitude stems from the fact that the grounds for (1) annulling “voidable” marriages, and (2) declaring the nullity of a “void” marriage had existed before or at the time of the exchange of marital vows. Hence, no valid marriage existed from the very beginning. On the other hand, the cause for divorce arose after the exchange of “I do’s.” Thus, there was a valid marriage that the divorce decree dissolves.

For this reason, our courts are authorized to annul voidable marriages and/or to declare the nullity of void unions, whether among Filipinos or aliens. However, they have no power to issue divorce decrees, whether to Filipinos or to foreigners. Moreover, a divorce granted by a foreign court to Filipinos is not valid here.

Hence, a divorce obtained by a Filipino couple in Las Vegas, even though valid in Las Vegas, is not valid here. If one of the Filipino spouses should remarry again in this country, he or she would be guilty of bigamy. If the wife cohabits with another man in the Philippines without marrying that man, she could be prosecuted for adultery. If the husband cohabits openly with another woman without marrying her, he could be prosecuted for concubinage.
However, a divorce granted by a foreign court to foreigners, if valid according to the national law of the spouse concerned, shall be valid here. Furthermore, a divorce between a Filipino and a foreigner, obtained abroad by the alien spouse, shall also be valid here.

Here, “the Filipino spouse shall likewise have the capacity to remarry under Philippine law,” says Article 26 of our Family Code. The Supreme Court (Republic v. Orbecido, Oct. 5, 2005) explained that Article 26 aims “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.” This law prevents a scenario where a Filipino is still considered legally married to an alien who is no longer deemed legally wedded to the Pinoy.

When foreign divorce benefits Filipinos. Article 26 is the exception to the general rule that bars Filipinos from enjoying the benefits of divorce decrees obtained abroad. Under this exception, the foreign husband could no longer insist on cohabiting with his Filipina wife. The divorce released the wife from her obligation to cohabit with him. Likewise, the Filipina wife could consider herself capacitated to remarry or to cohabit, without being guilty of bigamy or adultery.

In a recent decision (Corpuz v. Sto. Tomas, Aug. 10, 2010), the Supreme Court ruled that this right given to the Filipino spouse by Article 26 is not available to the foreign spouse. In this case, a Canadian (to be more accurate, a Filipino who was naturalized as a Canadian) who obtained a divorce in Canada from his Filipina wife has no right to ask a Philippine court to recognize the divorce decree so he could remarry another Filipina. Only the former Filipina wife may do so, that is, ask Philippine courts for this recognition.

A Philippine court cannot adjudge the marital status of the Canadian because the capacity to marry is determined by the national law of the person who wants to be married. Aliens who marry in the Philippines are required to present to the solemnizing officer a certificate of capacity to marry issued by their embassy or consulate.”

Hence Article 26 of the Family Code, which capacitates a Filipino citizen to remarry after having been divorced by an alien spouse, can only be invoked by Filipino citizens and not by non-Filipino citizens.








No comments: