Persons HW # 6 Requisites of Marriage; Marriage License

FORMAL REQUISITES that they take each other husband and wife in the presence of
not less than two witnesses of legal age; Formal requisites:
Art 28 FC. If the residence of either party is so located that prescribed by law; external to parties
marriage is no means of transportation to enable such party to a. Absence = void ab initio. Exception: Even if no
appear personally before the local CR, the marriage may be authority, but party/ies were in good faith, valid
solemnized without necessity of a marriage license (72a) (Article 35 Par 2)
b. Defect or irregularity = NO EFFECT, if essential
1. Based on Article 72. Difference:
requisites are present. Party accountable, tho.
a. CC: habitual residence of the female must be at least
3. Example of voidable. When party gives consent, but not
15 km from the municipal building, besides absence
knowingly and voluntarily or freely, or misled, there is a defect.
of means of transportation.
Marriage is NOT void ab initio; just voidable annullable.
b. FF: only want of means of transpo is needed, and this
4. Example of void ab initio. No real consent; under hypnosis;
handicap may be that of male or female.
drugged; under 18; drama or play;
Art 17 CC. The forms and solemnities of contracts, will, and other 5. Example of no effect. Marriage license not obtained properly
public instruments shall be governed by the laws of the country in (e.g. no documentary proof); marriage not solemnized in
which they are executed. designated place by law.

When the acts referred to are executed before the diplomatic or

consular officials of the Republic of the Philippines in a foreign Art 7 FC. Marriage may be solemnized by:
country, the solemnities established by the Philippine laws shall be
(1) any incumbent member of the judiciary within the court’s
observed in their execution.
jurisdiction;
Prohibitive laws concerning persons, their acts or property, and (2) any priest, rabbi, imam, or minister of any church or religious
those which have for their object public order, public policy, and sect duly authorized by his church or religious sect and
good customs shall not be rendered ineffective by laws or registered with the civil registrar general, acting within the
judgments promulgated, or by determinations or conventions limits of the written authority, granted him by his church or
agreed upon in a foreign country. (11a) religious sect and provided that at least one of the contracting
parties belongs to the solemnizing officer’s church or religious
1. Territoriality of contracts. sect;
2. Performance of contracts are regulated by laws of place. (3) any ship captain or airplane chief only in cases mentioned in
Remedies such as suit, admissibility of evidence, statute of Art 31;
limitations depend upon law of the place where the action is (4) any military commander of a unit to which a chaplain is
brought. assigned, in the absence of the latter, during a military
3. Which laws shall apply: operation, likewise only in the cases mentioned in Article 32;
a. Law designated by parties; or
b. If none stipulated, and both are of same nationality, (5) Any consul-general or vice-consul in the case provided in
national law applies Article 10. (56a)
c. Law of place of perfection
d. Law of place of performance 1. Priest or minister. Priest = one consecrated to service of a
e. Law of the domicile of the passive subject divinity and considered as the medium through whom worship,
prayer, sacrifice, or other service is to be offered to the being
FORMAL REQUISITES; AUTHORITY OF SOLEMNIZING OFFICER worshipped, pardon, blessing, deliverance, etc. Minister = all
Art 4 FC. The absence of any of the essential or formal requisites clergymen or every faith. Imam = priest or minister of
shall render the marriage void ab initio, except as stated in Article Mohammedanism; Rabbi = Jewish priest.
35 (a). 2. Requisites for Religious Clergy:
a. He is authorized by his church or religious sect (void –
A defect in any of the essential requisites shall render the marriage absence of authority)
voidable as provided in Article 45. i. To prevent parties who are in a hurry to
marry from approaching alleged ministers
An irregularity in the formal requisites shall not affect the validity of questionable sects… who makes a
of the marriage but the party or parties responsible for the business out of marriages, usually instant
irregularity shall be civilly, criminally, and administratively liable. ones.
(n) b. He is registered with the Office of the Civil Registrar
General (void – absence)
1. Essential requisites. Article 2: (a) Legal capacity of the
i. To keep track of various individuals from
contracting parties who must be a male and a female; and (b)
numerous religious sects who claim
Consent freely given in the presence of the solemnizing officer.
authority.
(53a); Essential requisites: inherent; personal to parties
c. He is acting within the limits of his authority (valid
a. Absence = void ab initio. Exception:
but liable – requirements not of public knowledge
b. Defect or irregularity = voidable
naman)
2. Formal requisites. Article 3: (a) Authority of solemnizing
d. One of the contracting parties belongs to his church
officer; (b) Valid marriage license except in the cases provided
or religious sect (valid but liable – requirement not of
for in chapter 2 of this Title; and (c) A marriage ceremony which
public knowledge naman)
takes place with the appearance of the contracting parties
before the solemnizing officer and their personal declaration
Persons HW # 6 Requisites of Marriage; Marriage License
i. to ensure that parties can ascertain the Art 31 FC. A marriage in articulo mortis between passengers or
authority of clergy; they can consult their crew members may also be solemnized by a ship captain or by an
church on spiritual and civil responsibilities. airplane pilot not only while the ship is at sea or the plane is in
ii. Violation of this does not erode authority of flight, but also during stopovers at ports of call. (74a)
clergy.
3. Ship captains, airplane chiefs, military commanders. Can Art 32 FC. A military commander of a unit, who is commissioned
solemnize ONLY in articulo mortis (at point of death). officer, shall likewise have authority to solemnize marriages in
a. Airplane chief NOT = pilot (Article 31). articulo mortis between persons within the zone of military
b. Military commanders may solemnize marriages of ALL operation, whether members of the armed forces or civilians. (74a)
persons within his military operations zone, military
Art 35 Par 2 FC. [VOID AND VOIDABLE MARRIAGES]. The following
or civilian (Article 32).
marriages shall be void from the beginning.
c. Article 31: does not have to be in transit. OK during
stopovers at ports. (1) Those contracted by any party below 19 yrs. Of age, even
d. Time is of essence. Does not make sense to authorize with the consent of parents or guardians [absence of
commander ONLY in absence of chaplain. Presence or essential or formal requisite Article 4];
absence of chaplain shout NOT have to be established (2) Those solemnized by any person not legally authorized to
anymore. perform marriages, unless such marriages were
4. Consuls-general, consuls, vice consuls. Designated as such in contracted with either or both parties believing in good
foreign post. Ambassadors have NO authority because only faith that the solemnizing officer had the legal authority
consuls take care of matters affecting Filipinos in their area of to do so [absence of essential or formal requisite Article
responsibility. Ambassadors take care of international rel. 4];
a. Generally, Consuls etc. can solemnize marriages of (3) Those solemnized without license, except those covered
Filipinos abroad. But, NOT outside of embassy or by the preceding chapter [absence of essential or formal
consular premises, over which laws of that foreign requisite Article 4];
state will govern. (4) Those bigamous or polygamous marriages not falling
b. Authority of mayors removed from FC. Their desire under Article 41 [impediment of prior subsisting
to please people leads them to violate requisites. marriage];
Their authority is revived in Sections 444 and 445 of (5) Those contracted through mistake of one contracting
Local Government Code. party as to the identity of the other [lack of valid
5. Justices of SC, CA, CTA, and Sandiganbayan can solemnize consent]; and
anywhere in Ph. Those from inferior courts, only within their (6) Those subsequent marriages that are void under Article 3
jurisdiction. [impediment of prior subsisting marriage].
6. Unless parties are deceived and are in good faith violations of
above render marriage VOID (Art 35 Sec 2 FC). Art 3 CC. Art 3. Ignorance of the law excuses no one from
compliance therewith.
Art 8 FC. The marriage shall be solemnized publicly in the chambers
of the judge or in open court, in the church, chapel or temple, or in 1. Presumption of knowledge of Philippine law – unrealistic,
the office of the consul-general, consul or vice-consul, as the case but law is obligatory.
may be, and NOT elsewhere; EXCEPT in cases of marriages 2. NOT FOREIGN LAW
contracted on the point of death or in remote places in accordance a. Mistake of fact vs mistake of law
with Article 29 of this Code, or where both of the parties request b. Applies to domestic (not foreign) laws.
the solemnizing officer in writing in which case the marriage may c. Judge not assumed to know
be solemnized at a house or place designated by them in a sworn 3. For mandatory and prohibitory laws.
statement to that effect. 4. Our duty to know the laws.
5. Injuries suffered by the ignorant [contract-parties] are
1. Public celebrations. That marriage took place on a Sunday, not borne by them – their doing.
necessarily vitiate marriage as ground of violation of the 6. Reasons:
requirement that it shall be solemnized publicly in the office of a. Social life is impossible if laws are only enforced
he judge in open court. due to being unknown (since many do not know
the law)
Art 10 FC. Marriages between Filipino citizens abroad may be
b. Absurd to absolve the ignorant, then increase
solemnized by consul-general, consul, or vice-consul of the
obligation of the knowledgeable.
Republic of the Philippines. The issuance of the marriage license
c. Impossible to prove ignorance to law
and the duties of the local civil registrar and of the solemnizing
d. Conscience; available lawyers
officer with regard to the celebration of marriage shall be
7. Exceptions:
performed by said consular official.
a. Excuse of ignorance should be admitted to show
1. License is required for such marriages, issued by consular good faith – when new provisions enforced.
official. b. Minors treated differently – lack of intelligence
2. Contracting parties need not be permanent residents/ 8. Irrevocability of acts – if you did something, thinking you
immigrants. OK if only temporary. were following an instructional law, then realized you
3. Philippines laws applicable to such marriages; thus must didn’t need to do it anymore, you can’t undo what you did.
comply to FC. 9. Mistake of fact – you can be excused for ignorance of fact,
but not for law.
10. Mistake of difficult legal questions = mistake of fact
Persons HW # 6 Requisites of Marriage; Marriage License
a. Art. 1334 – If you both misunderstood the 1. Article 7 of the Family Code, “Marriage may be solemnized by:
terms, and agreed to them, can vitiate consent. (1) any incumbent member of the judiciary within the court’s
b. Art. 2154 - If you receive something you did not jurisdiction…”
order, return it. a. Not allowing respondent judge to solemnize a
c. Art. 2155 – If you paid/ are paid something in marriage in the municipality of Dapa, Surigao del
confusion of terms, refund it. Norte since his [and the Court’s] jurisdiction only
11. Mistake of lawyer cannot cause disbarment. covers the municipalities of Sta. Monica and Burgos.
2. Article 8. Only three instances provided by Art 8: (1) In the
*NAVARRO V DOMAGTOY (1996) chambers of the judge or in open court; (2) in the church,
chapel or temple; (3) or in the office of the consul-general,
FACTS:
consul or vice-consul as the case EXCEPT in cases of marriages
1. Municipal Mayor of Dapa, Surigao del Norte, Rodolfo Navarro, contracted at the point of death or in remote places in
has submitted evidence for two specific acts committed by the accordance with Article 29; or were both of the parties request
Domagtoy: the solemnizing officer in writing in which case the marriage
a. September 27, 1994. Gaspar Tagahan and Arlyn may be solemnized at a house or place designated by them in
Borga, despite the knowledge that the groom is a sworn statement to that effect”.
merely separated from his first wife (Ida penaranda a. No pretense that Sumaylo or del Rosario was at the
gone for 7 years). point of death or in a remote place.
b. October 27, 1994. Floriano Dador Sumaylo and b. Written request addressed to the respondent judge
Gemma Del Rosario outside of the respondent’s was made by only one party, Gemma del Rosario.
court’s jurisdiction. Solemnized at the Domagtoy’s 3. In this case, the solemnization of the marriage of Sumaylo and
residence in Dapa, which does not fall within Del Rosario was outside the respondent’s court’s jurisdiction.
Domagtoy’s jurisdictional area, Municipal Circuit Trial Judge suspended for six months.
Court of Sta. Monica, Burgos (40-50 km away).
2. Domagtoy, in one of his letter-comment to the Office of the
Court Administrator (OCA), argued: *ARANES V OCCIANO (2002)
a. Solemnizing the marriage between Sumaylo and Del
Rosario did NOT violate Article 7(1) of the Family MERCEDITA MATA ARAÑES, petitioner,
Code, which states that “Marriage may be solemnized vs.
by: (1) Any incumbent member of the judiciary JUDGE SALVADOR M. OCCIANO, respondent.
within the court’s jurisdiction.”;
b. Article 8 thereof applies to the case in question: “The A.M. No. MTJ-02-1390
marriage shall be solemnized publicly in the chambers April 11, 2002
of the judge or in open court, in the church, chapel or
NATURE: Administrative case filed against respondent judge for
temple, or in the office of the consul-general, consul
gross ignorance of the law.
or vice-consul, as the case may be, and NOT
elsewhere; EXCEPT in cases of marriages contracted DOCTRINE: Judges, who are appointed to specific jurisdictions, may
at the point of death or in remote places in officiate in weddings only within said areas and not beyond. Where
accordance with Article 29 of this Code, or where a judge solemnizes a marriage outside his court's jurisdiction, there
both of the parties request the solemnizing officer in is a resultant irregularity in the formal requisite laid down in Article
writing in which case the marriage may be 3, which while it may not affect the validity of the marriage, may
solemnized at a house or place designated by them subject the officiating official to administrative liability. Further,
in a sworn statement to that effect (57a). except in cases provided by law, it is the marriage license that gives
the solemnizing officer the authority to solemnize a marriage.
ISSUE:
FACTS:
Whether or not the solemnization of the marriage of Sumaylo and
Del Rosario was within the respondent’s court’s jurisdiction.
1. Mercedita Arañes charges Judge Occiano (Presiding MTC
HELD: Balatan, Camarines Sur) with Gross Ignorance of the Law.
2. 17 February 2000, Occiano solemnized Aranes’ marriage late
NO. groom Dominador Orobia
a. without a Marriage License
Marriage between Tagadan and Borja was void and bigamous there
b. at Nabua, Camarines Sur which is outside his
being a subsisting marriage between Tagadan and his wife
territorial jurisdiction.
1. Though hubby had a well-founded belief that the absent spouse 3. Marriage null  not recognized Aranes’ right to inherit
was dead, Tagadan did not institute a summary proceeding as Orobia’s “vast properties”
provided in the Civil Code for the declaration of presumptive 4. Prayer:
death of the absentee, without prejudice to the effect of a. Sanctions be imposed upon respondent judge
reappearance of the absent spouse. Occiano for his illegal acts and unethical
misrepresentations that caused her so much
The solemnization of the marriage of Sumaylo and Del Rosario was hardships, embarrassment and sufferings.
NOT within the respondent’s court’s jurisdiction. 5. Judge Occiano:
Persons HW # 6 Requisites of Marriage; Marriage License
a. Upon examination, he discovered that the parties i. no related reports; but there were rumors.
have no requisite Marriage License and refused to ii. Re. Echevarria, no marriage. Recalled a lady
solemnize the marriage. Parties pleaded. He asking her if marriage contract of her child
proceeded to solemnize the marriage out of human is ready for pick up; Echevarria by Omelio,
compassion. Feb 29, 2008. No record of this. Caller got
b. He also said Dom was recovering from heart attack, angry, disappeared.
and could not stand rigors of travel to Balatan. b. MTCC, Island Garden City, Samal. Local CR:
c. Reiterated the necessity for the marriage license. i. Marriage of Julius Echevarria and Khristine
Petitioner and Orobia assured respondent judge that Duo. Was solemnized in IGC by J. Virgilio
they would give the license to him, but they failed to Murcia.
comply. ii. Got copy of marriage contract.
6. Office of the Court Administrator - It found respondent judge c. MTCC Davao. Murcia:
guilty of solemnizing a marriage without a duly issued marriage i. Said cannot remember parties, but
license and for doing so outside his territorial jurisdiction. Thus, signature in contract affirmed.
a fine was imposed on him. ii. Denied he persuaded Omelios to sign
certificate without parties present.
ISSUE: WON Respondent Judge is guilty of solemnizing a marriage d. Echevarria residence:
without a marriage license and for doing so outside his territorial i. Affirmed marriage in his residence by
jurisdiction. Omelio, and showed pictures of wedding
(turns out to be fake) and marriage
HELD: YES. Irregularity in authority did not affect marriage validity; contract.
but absence of license makes it void. ii. Marriage contract says Murcia solemnized
it. Surprise!
7. Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980, or B.P. 129: authority of iii. Tita Echevarria appeared, asked
the RTC judges and judges of inferior courts to solemnize investigators their purpose, read letter of
marriages is confined to their territorial jurisdiction as defined Palma, who she did not know.
by the Supreme Court. iv. Julius Echevarria noticed similarities of his
a. "A priest who is commissioned and allowed by his and Palma. Said his marriage was in his
local ordinance to marry the faithful is authorized to residence, Feb 28, 2008, and Omelio had
do so only within the area or diocese or place no company.
allowed by his Bishop. v. Tita no wanna file complaint, and invests.
b. An appellate court Justice or a Justice of this Court should find another way to catch judges.
has jurisdiction over the entire Philippines to e. J. Omelio:
solemnize marriages, regardless of the venue, as long i. Echevarrias approached him to solemnize a
as the requisites of the law are complied with. beach wedding. He suggested Murcia.
c. However, judges who are appointed to specific ii. Reenacted wedding
jurisdictions, may officiate in weddings only within iii. Email should be ignored – unsigned and un-
said areas and not beyond. Otherwise, there is a oathed, unfounded.
resultant irregularity in the formal requisite laid down iv. Did not demand money from Eches.
in Article 3, which while it may not affect the validity f. CoC Omelio:
of the marriage, may subject the officiating official i. Omelio did no wrong.
to administrative liability." ii. Palma not a party and had no right to
8. Should also be faulted for solemnizing a marriage without the complin.
requisite Marriage License. iii. She had no part.
a. Subsequent issuance of such license cannot render g. Murcia:
valid or even add an iota of validity to the marriage. i. Name not mentioned in complaint,
b. MARRIAGE LICENSE = AUTHORITY ii. Affirmed he solemnized Feb 28 wedding in
c. Respondent judge did not possess such authority his courtroom, with parties and witnesses,
when he solemnized the marriage of petitioner. In with complete papers and receipts.
this respect, respondent judge acted in gross 4. Court raised issue to CA. Investigating J. directed respondent
ignorance of the law. and witnesses to submit affidavits.
a. CoC Omelio: same. she had no part except as
PALMA V JUDGE OMELIO, AM (2017) company in dinner, and receiver of payment to Chief
Accountant.
FACTS: b. Omelio: same. Complaints are harassment suits.
c. Murcia: same. Should focus only on mentioned
1. July 8, 2007. Mercado sent an email to persons in letters.
pio@supremecourt.gov.ph re. marriage scam by MTCC J. 5. Investigating Justice Report:
George Omelio and Rufino Ferraris. Mercado was a “fixer”. a. Omelio Administratively liable.
2. March 17, 2008. Florita Palma email re. dishonorable conduct i. should have declined reenactment:
of Omelio and CoC Omelio (wife, Clerk of Court, Island Garden conducted a sham wedding against public
City) on Echeverria’s marriage. law and policy; trifled with marriage as
3. OCA dispatched investigating team to Davao. Findings: inviolable…(Article 1)…; should be in his
a. MTCC Davao. Atty. Fe Maloloy-on: chambers. Lied about presence of
Persons HW # 6 Requisites of Marriage; Marriage License
godparents are witnesses. Cleared of Sec. 6. Duty of solemnizing officer during the solemnization of the
demanding money. marriage. - The solemnizing officer shall require the contracting
b. Murcia administratively liable parties to personally declare before him and in the presence of not
i. Failure to collect solemnization fees (acc. less than two witnesses of legal age that the said parties take each
CoC Omelio), means he did not carefully other as husband and wife.
examine papers before solemnizing. SC
Admin Circular # 3-2000 Sec. 7. Duties of solemnizing officer after solemnization of the
ii. No proof that Murcia solemnized marriage marriage. - After performing the marriage ceremony, the
violative of FC. solemnizing officer shall:
c. CoC Omelio Administratively liable
i. Lied about collecting P300.00 fee. a. Ensure that the marriage certificate is properly accomplished and
ii. Fine of P5,000.00 SC Admin Circular # 3- has the
2000 and 127-2007. complete entries, x x x;
6. Facts and charges b. See to it that the marriage is properly documented x x xx x x x
a. Both judges solemnized wedding. Murcia’s name in
Cert.; Omelio in pictures. Sec. 9. Recording of marriages solemnized and safekeeping of
b. Murcia: officiated (signed cert) without performing documents. a. The solemnizing officer shall cause to be kept in the
MTCC IGC, Davao, Feb 28, 2008, 5:30 PM. court a record book of all marriages solemnized. x x x
c. Omelio: performed without signing cert. Monte
Maria Village, Catalunan Grande, Davao, Feb 29, 6:00 b. The solemnizing officer shall cause to be filed in the court the
PM. Unsure if he is liable for illegal ceremony for non- quadruplicate copy of the marriage certificate, the original of the
involvement in Cert. (RPC Art 352); Dismissed from marriage license, x x x when applicable, the affidavit of the
service during pendency. contracting parties regarding the request for change in the venue for
d. CoC Omelio failued to collect fee. Passed away during the marriage. All documents pertaining to a marriage shall be kept in
pendency. one file x x x.
7. OCA Recommendations:
a. Complaint against CoC Omelio DISMISSED. Sec. 18. Fees for the Solemnization of Marriage. - For the
b. J. Omelio GUILTY of gross misconduct, and FINED performance of marriage ceremony and issuance of marriage
P40,000.00 from leave credits. certificate and subject to further provisions of AM No. 04-2-04-SC (16
c. MURCIA GUILTY of GC, FINED. August 2004) the legal fees in the following amounts shall be
collected:
RULING: xxxx
AO 125-2007 dated August 9, 2007 provided for the Guidelines on
c. For marriages solemnized by Judges of the Metropolitan Trial
the Solemnization of Marriage by the Members of the Judiciary and
Courts, Municipal Trial Courts in Cities, Municipal Trial Courts,
laid downthe rules "to enable the solemnizing authorities of the
Municipal Circuit Trial Courts and Shari'a Circuit Courts - Three
Judiciary to secure and safeguard the sanctity of marriage as a social
hundred (P300.00) pesos.
institution."[30] The pertinent portions of AO 125-2007 provide as
xxxx
follows:

Sec. 3. Venue of marriage ceremony solemnized by Judges. - As a Sec. 19. Payment of legal fees in Philippine legal tender. - All fees
general rule, a marriage shall be solemnized publicly in the chambers shall be x x x properly officially receipted.
of the judge Records show that Judge Murcia and Judge Omelio both violated AO
or in open court except in the following instances: 1252007. Although both judges were clothed with authority to
xxxx solemnize marriages, in this instance however, they overstepped the
bounds of their authority.
b. A marriage where both parties submit a written request to the
solemnizing officer that the marriage be solemnized at a house or 1. Murcia and Omelio violated AO 125-2007; overstepped
place designated by them in a sworn statement to this effect. authority bounds.
2. Murcia signed without performance. Julius says they married in
Sec. 4. Duties of solemnizing officer before the performance of his house by Omelio. Lied about examining all documents,
marriage ceremony. - Before performing the marriage ceremony, the including fees. He made it look like he solemnized marriage
solemnizing without parties, witnesses and fees.
officer shall: 3. Omelio’s reenactment in request does not justify. He admitted
it was a sham, but said it is not unlawful, since only for pictures,
a. Ensure that the parties appear personally and are the same because they were unable to do so in the chambers. He even
contracting allowed godparents to sign cert. signed by Murcia. Guests
parties to the marriage; thought it was an actual marriage pa.
b. Personally interview the contracting parties and examine the a. Marriage is an inviolable… [M]arriage in this country
documents is an institution in which the community is deeply
submitted to ascertain if there is compliance with the essential and interested. The state has surrounded it with
formal safeguards to maintain its purity, continuity and
requisites of marriage under the Family Code; and permanence. The security and stability of the state
xxxx are largely dependent upon it. It is the interest and
duty of each and every member of the community to
Persons HW # 6 Requisites of Marriage; Marriage License
prevent the bringing about of a condition that would WON Judge Murcia is liable for grave misconduct and conduct
shake its foundation and ultimately lead to its prejudicial to the best interest of the service?
destruction.
b. Omelio mocked marriage. “"A judge should know, or RATIO:
ought to know, his or her role as a solemnizing
1. Grave misconduct (NOT Criminal) and conduct prejudicial to the
officer."
best interest of the service for solemnizing marriage outside of
RULING:
jurisdiction.
Complaint against CoC Florida DISMISSED. Omelio GUILY and FINED.
a. Art 7: marriage may be solemnized by: (1) any
Murcia GUILTY and FINED.
incumbent member of the judiciary within the court’s
jurisdiction.
KEUPPERS V JUDGE MURCIA (2018)
b. Art 8
PONENTE: Bersamin, J. 2. Pity excuse does not diminish liability, but highlighted dismissal
of statute. He demeaned and cheapened marriage. Wrongful
SUMMARY: A municipal trial judge who solemnizes a marriage intention, NOT MERE ERROR OF JUDGMENT.
outside of his territorial jurisdiction violates Article 7 FC, and is guilty 3. This is not his first offense (i.e. Palma v Omelio).
of grave misconduct and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of 4. Dismissal sana pero magreretire na sya.
the service. He should be sanctioned.
RULING:
FACTS:
GUILTY of Grave misconduct (NOT Criminal) and conduct prejudicial
1. Keuppers affidavit: to the best interest of the service; forfeiture of all his retirement
a. May 12, 2008 Keuppers went to local CR Davao for benefits, except accrued leaves, with prejudice to his appointment
marriage license to marry before Peter (husband) in the government service.
leaves for Germany on 22nd. As per employee, that is
virtually impossible because of 10-day license posting
mandate.
FORMAL REQUISITES; MARRIAGE LICENSE
b. In DLS Travel and Tours Corp., Davao, they paid
P15,700.00 (solemnizing fee, certification fee, Art 9 FC. A marriage license shall be issued by the local registrar of
security fee, city hall fee, service fee, passport fee) to the city or municipality where either contracting party habitually
owner Lorna Siega to get copies of original and NSO resides, except in marriages where no license is required in
marriage certs after filling forms (leaving blank accordance with Chapter 2 of this Title. (58a)
address etc.)
c. Murcia solemnized marriage May 19 in DLS TT Davao. 1. OK if license was obtained from “out of town”; just a defect of
They signed the Marriage certs. formal requisite. Solemnizing officer no need to investigate
d. They found erroneous entries in the cert and source of license.
application for marriage license:
i. Place of wedding (IGC) Art 10 FC. Marriages between Filipino citizens abroad may be
ii. Place of Application (Sta. Cruz Davao) solemnized by consul-general, consul, or vice-consul of the
iii. Licensing officer (Maria Tizon of Sta. Cruz Republic of the Philippines. The issuance of the marriage license
CR) and the duties of the local civil registrar and of the solemnizing
2. Murcia: officer with regard to the celebration of marriage shall be
a. denied knowing about the processes such as performed by said consular official.
application and securing of documents. Denied 4. License is required for such marriages, issued by consular
knowing complainants and Siega. official.
b. He was entitled to presumption of regularity. 5. Contracting parties need not be permanent residents/
c. Erroneous contents of Cert were merely copied from immigrants. OK if only temporary.
her Marriage license, which he didn’t even prepare 6. Philippines laws applicable to such marriages; thus must
himself. comply to FC.
d. Denied receiving solemnizing fee. 7. If marriage happened abroad, license depends on laws of
3. Investigating Justice Sempio Dy: country.
a. Though Murcia had no role in processing
b. Murcia solemnized marriage outside of his Art 11 FC. Where a marriage license of required, each of the
jurisdiction (IGC); he admitted this, but says contracting parties shall file separately a sworn application for
proceeded since he wanted to help couple. such license with the proper local registrar which shall specify the
c. Article 8 FC says he should solemnize marriage in his following:
chambers except at point of death or in remote
places.; Article 9 adds, upon request of BOTH parties (1) Full name of the contracting party
in a sworn statement. (2) Place of birth
d. He is GUILTY of solemnizing outside of his juris. FINE (3) Age and date of birth
of P5,000.00, and stern warning. Repetition of (4) Civil status
offense will be dealt with severely. (5) If previously married, how, when, and where the
previous marriage was dissolved or annulled
ISSUES: (6) Present residence and citizenship
(7) Degree of relationship of the contracting parties
Persons HW # 6 Requisites of Marriage; Marriage License
(8) Full name, residence, and citizenship of the father secured, the party shall make an affidavit setting forth this
(9) “ “ “ mother; circumstance and his or her actual civil status and the name and
(10) “ “ “ guardian or person having charge, in case the date of death of deceased spouse.
contracting party has neither father nor mother and is
under the age of 21 year. Art 14 FC. In case either or both of the contracting parties not
having been emancipated by a previous marriage, are between the
The applicants, their parents, or guardians shall not be required to ages of 18 and 21, they shall, in addition to the requirements of the
exhibit their residence certificates in any formality in connection preceding articles, exhibit to the local civil registrar, the consent to
with the securing of the marriage license. their marriage of their father, mother, surviving parent or
guardian, or persons having legal charge of them, in the order
Art 12 FC. [PROOF OF AGE] The local civil registrar, upon receiving mentioned. Such consent shall be manifested in writing by the
such application, shall require the presentation of the original birth interested party, who personally appears before the proper local
certificates or, in default thereof, the baptismal certificates of the CR, or in form of an affidavit made in the presence of two
contracting parties or copies of such documents duly attested by witnesses and attested before any official authorized by law to
the persons having custody of the originals. These certificates or administer oaths. The personal manifestation shall be recorded in
certified copies of the documents by this Article need not be sworn both applications for marriage license, and the affidavit, if one is
to and shall be exempt from the documentary stamp tax. The executed instead, shall be attached to said applications. (61a)
signature and official title of the person issuing the certificate shall
be sufficient proof of its authenticity. 1. Reason for parental consent. Supplement natural incapacity
due to inexperience. Prevent parties to getting into a difficult
If either of the contracting parties is unable to produce his birth or and prejudicial union, and guarantee stable marriage.
baptismal certificate or a certified copy of either because of the 2. Effect of previous marriage. If below 21, then had previous
destruction or loss of the original or if it is shown by an affidavit of marriage, and widowed, no need parental consent, EVEN IF
such party or of any other person that such birth or baptismal STILL < 21.
certificate has not yet been received though the same has been 3. Effect of R.A. 6809. Reducing age of majority 21  18 for
required of the person having custody thereof at least fifteen days emancipation from parental authority and becomes qualified
prior to the date of the application, such party may furnish in lieu and responsible for civil life, DOES NOT CHANGE 21-year-old
thereof his current residence certificate or an instrument drawn up requirement.
and sworn to before the local civil registrar concerned or any a. if orphan, no parental consent needed.
public official authorized to administer oaths. Such instrument 4. Remarriage of widowed mother. She retains parental authority
shall contain the sworn declaration of two witnesses of lawful age, over children, consent still required.
setting forth the full name, residence and citizenship of such 5. Specific consent. Child should benefit from parents’
contracting party and of his or her parents, if known, and the place experience, saving former from possible unwise decisions.
and date of birth of such party. The nearest of kin of the Parent needs to know who the future spouse is.
contracting parties shall be preferred as witnesses, or, in their a. Parents who say “free to marry anyone” do not
default, persons of good reputation in the province or the locality. exercise parental authority to prejudice of child, fam,
society.
The presentation of birth or baptismal certificate shall not be
6. Form of consent. WRITING, in two ways:
required if the parents of the contracting parties appear personally
a. by parent personally appearing before local CR and
before the local civil registrar concerned and swear to the
signing;
correctness of the lawful age of said parties, as stated in the
b. executing an affidavit of consent with 2 witnesses, no
application, or when the local civil registrar shall, by merely looking
need to appear before CR.
at the applicants upon their personally appearing before him, be
7. Revocation of consent. Consent exists until marriage, and until
convinced that either or both of them have the required age. (60a)
then it can be revoked, because it is merely a unilateral will.
1. Documents required. To prove age of parties, following MAY be a. Consent of deceased parent ay be revoked by other
required by local CR: (1) original birth certificates; (2) if no 1, living parent.
original baptismal certificates; (3) if no 1 and 2, residence 8. Want of consent.
certificate or affidavit of two witnesses. a. Old Marriage Law: valid still
2. When proof of age dispensed with. Presentation of above MAY b. Family and civil code: voidable
be dispensed with when: (1) Parents of parties appear i. Parties and solemnizing officer can be
personally before local CR to swear on their ages; (2) Local CR is penalized by Act # 3613 if knowingly
convinced by merely looking at parties; (3) Party is formerly proceed without consent when needed.
married, but is widowed, divorced, or previous marriage ii. If minor thought s/he is of age, not liable.
invalidated (Article 13). iii. If solemnizing officer investigated, but
3. Using residence certificate is NOT REQUIRED. But parties can mistaken, not liable.
voluntarily present if no birth or bap.
Art 15 FC. [PARENTAL ADVICE] Any contracting party between the
Art 13 FC. [PREVIOUS MARRIAGE] In case either of the contracting age of 21 and 25 shall be obliged to ask their parents or guardian
parties has been previously married, the applicant shall be for advice upon intended marriage. If they do not obtain such
required to furnish, instead of the birth or baptismal certificate advice, or if it be unfavorable, the marriage license shall not be
required in the last preceding article, the death certificate of the issued till after three months following the completion of the
deceased spouse or the judicial decree of the absolute divorce, or publication of the application therefore. A sworn statement by the
the judicial degree of annulment or declaration of nullity of his or contracting parties to the effect that such advice has been sought,
her previous marriage. In case the death certificate cannot be together with the written advice given, if any, shall be attached to
the application for marriage license. Should the parents or
Persons HW # 6 Requisites of Marriage; Marriage License
guardian refuse to give any advice, this fact shall be stated in the Art 18 FC. In case of any impediment known to the local civil
sworn statement. (62a) registrar or brought to his attention, he shall note down the
particulars thereof and his findings thereon in the application for
1. Reason. Wisdom and prudence. Recognition of duty of son or marriage license, but shall nonetheless issue said license after the
daughter to honor parents, whose moral authority over completion of the period of publication, unless ordered otherwise
children is forever. by a competent court at his own instance or that of any interested
2. Effect of want of advice. Delays celebration of marriage. party. No filing fee shall be charged for the petition nor a
a. If licensed and married before lapse of 3 months, still corresponding bond required for the issuance of the order. (64a)
valid.
3. If child already emancipated, and 21 – 25 y.o., advice still 1. Civil code: local CR that’s been advised of impediment shall
needed. Parental advice not dependent of parental authority. investigate. If true, license withheld, UNLESS otherwise
4. Parental consent or advice not needed if parents of BOTH ordered by court.
parties appear personally before local CR and swear 2. Family code: mere authorize local CR to note down on
correctness of lawful age of parties or when, by merely looking application for license (not license itself) the particulars of
at applicants upon their personal appearance before him, the impediment and his findings. Issue license anyway, UNLESS
local CR is convinced that they are of required age. restrained by court.
3. Marriage despite impediment. Because findings are written on
Art 16 FC. [COUNSEL IN WANT OF PARENTAL CONSENT OF ADVICE] application, not license itself, solemnizer could be unaware of
In the cases where parental consent or parental advice is needed, impediment. Marriage void; no liability to solemnizer.
the party or parties concerned shall, in addition to the
requirements of the preceding articles, attach a certificate issued Art 19 FC. The local CR shall require the payment of the fees
by a pried, imam, or minister authorized to solemnize marriage prescribed by law or regulations before the issuance of the
under Article 7 of this Code or a marriage counsellor duly marriage license. No other sum shall be collected in the nature of a
accredited by the proper government agency to the effect that the fee of tax of any kind for the issuance of said license. It shall,
contracting parties have undergone marriage counselling. Failure however, be issued free of charge to indigent parties, that is those
to attach said certificate of marriage counselling shall SUSPEND the who have no visible means of income or whose income is
issuance of the marriage license for a period of 3 months from the insufficient for their subsistence, a fact established by their
completion of the publication of the application. Issuance of the affidavit, or by their oath before the local CR.
marriage license within the prohibited period shall subject the
issuing officer to administrative sanctions but shall not affect the Art 20 FC. The license shall be valid in any part of the Philippines
validity of the marriage. for a period of one hundred twenty days from the date of issue,
and shall be deemed automatically canceled at the expiration of
Should only 1 of the contracting parties need parental consent or the said period if the contracting parties have not made use of it.
parental advice, the other party must be present at the counseling The expiry date shall be stamped in bold characters on the face of
referred to in the preceding paragraph. (n) every license issued. (65a)

1. ONLY FOR THOSE WHO NEED PARENTAL ADVICE OF CONSENT. 1. Effect of lapse of period. License automatically cancelled after
2. Marriage counseling required for BOTH, even tho only one of 120-day period following its date. Marriage solemnized after
parties is 18 – 25. Done by priest, minister, or accredited that period is without a license  Absent essentials  void ab
marriage counsellor; to prevent hasty or ill-advised marriages. initio.
3. Lack of counsel does not invalidate marriage, even if license 2. Disallowing widows from getting license 301 days from
was given before the 3 month period. husband’s death UNLESS proven NOT PREGNANT, or she gives
4. Other requirements birth in the mean time.
a. No disease to endanger spouse or children a. Reason: to avoid confusion about child’s father
b. STDs ground for annulment (law does not impose b. Excluded because concealment of pregnancy by man
check ups). is already ground form annulment.
5. Source: RH Law Sec 15. c. Ma’am opinion: over-inclusive because prohibits all
women, including those who cannot bear children
Art 17 FC. [PUBLISHING LICENSE APPLICATION] The local civil anymore or at all (infertile) from marrying within
registrar shall prepare a notice which shall contain the full names given period.
and residences of the applicants for a marriage license and other
data given in the applications. The notice shall be posted for ten Art 21 FC. [ALIEN] When either or both of the contracting parties
consecutive days on a bulletin board outside of the office of the are citizens of a foreign country, it shall be necessary for them
local civil registrar located in a conspicuous place within the before a marriage license can be obtained, to submit a certificate
building and accessible to the general public. This notice shall of legal capacity to contract marriage, issued by their respective
request all persons having knowledge of any impediment to the diplomatic or consular officials.
marriage to advise the local civil registrar thereof. The marriage
license shall be issued after the completion of the period of Stateless persons or refugees from other countries shall, in lieu of
publication. the certificate of legal capacity herein required, submit an affidavit
stating the circumstances showing such capacity to contract
1. Issuance before 10 days does not invalidate marriage; just marriage. (66a)
irregularity.
2. Does not make sense. 1. Legal capacity of foreigner is governed by THEIR laws;
a. People from large cities do not know each other nationality theory.
b. Will be issued anyway (Art 18 FC)
Persons HW # 6 Requisites of Marriage; Marriage License
2. If of proper age to marry abroad, and too young here (e.g. 16 Art 25 FC. The local civil registrar concerned shall enter all
y.o.), certificate of legal capacity from his diplomatic applications for marriage licenses filed with him in a registry book
representative will do to get license. strictly in the order in which the same are received. Heshall record
3. Refugees or stateless persons must furnish his own affidavit in said book the names of the applicants, the date on which the
showing such legal capacity. marriage license was issued, and such other data as may be
a. Legal capacity of stateless persons is determined by necessary. (n)
Ph laws, under which he enjoys protection. FC apply
to stateless. *Art 26 FC. All marriages solemnized outside the Philippines, in
accordance with the laws in force in the country where they were
Art 22 FC. The marriage certificate, in which the parties shall solemnized, and valid there as such, shall also be valid in this
declare that they take each other as husband and wife, shall also country, except those prohibited under Articles 35 (1), (4), (5) and
state: (6), 3637 and 38. (17a)

(1) The full name, sex and age of each contracting party; Where a marriage between a Filipino citizen and a foreigner is
(2) Their citizenship, religion and habitual residence;(3) The date validly celebrated and a divorce is thereafter validly obtained
and precise time of the celebration of the marriage; abroad by the alien spouse capacitating him or her to remarry, the
(4) That the proper marriage license has been issued according to Filipino spouse shall have capacity to remarry under Philippine law.
law, except in marriage provided for in Chapter 2 of this Title; (As amended by Executive Order 227)
(5) That either or both of the contracting parties have secured the
parental consent in appropriate cases;
(6) That either or both of the contracting parties have complied
PD 965 (1976). CREATING AN AGENCY TO BE KNOWN AS NATIONAL
with the legal requirement regarding parental advice in
GAMING COMMISSION TO SUPERVISE AND CONTROL ALL FORMS
appropriate cases; and
OF GAMING AND IMPOSING TAXES THEREON
(7) That the parties have entered into marriage settlement, if any,
attaching a copy thereof. (67a)
WHEREAS, the present system of control and supervision of gaming,
1. Seal not required. Valid regardless of presence of seal of particularly the operations of offshore casino gaming, is found
official, priest, minister performing ceremony. inadequate to cope up with the increasing pace of gaming activities
in the country today;
Art 23 FC. It shall be the duty of the person solemnizing the
marriage to furnish either of the contracting parties the original of WHEREAS, it is necessary to regulate and control all forms of
the marriage certificate referred to in Article 6 and to send the authorized gaming in order to support the tourism program of the
duplicate and triplicate copies of the certificate not later than government, broaden the base for revenue generation and provide
fifteen days after the marriage, to the local civil registrar of the better protection to the betting public;
place where the marriage was solemnized. Proper receipts shall be
issued by the local civil registrar to the solemnizing officer WHEREAS, in order to control and regulate effectively these gaming
transmitting copies of the marriage certificate. The solemnizing activities, it is necessary to centralize as much as possible in one
officer shall retain in his file the quadruplicate copy of the marriage agency, such power and authority of control and regulation and to
certificate, the copy of the marriage certificate, the original of the impose taxes on operators of gaming establishments and on players.
marriage license and, in proper cases, the affidavit of the
contracting party regarding the solemnization of the marriage in
NOW, THEREFORE, I, FERDINAND E. MARCOS, President of the
place other than those mentioned in Article 8. (68a)
Philippines, by virtue of the powers vested in me by the
1. Failure to send certificate does not invalidate marriage. Constitution, do hereby order and decree as follows:
2. Proofs of marriage:
a. Marriage certificate PART I
b. Declaration of one of parties to marriage or of The National Gaming Commission
witnesses.
c. Public and open cohabitation as hubby and wife Section 1. Creation of the National Gaming Commission There is
d. Birth and baptismal certs of children hereby created the National Gaming Commission, hereinafter
e. Statement of such marriage in subsequent referred to as the Commission, which shall be composed of a
documents Chairman and two (2) members, who shall be appointed by the
3. Presumption of marriage is prima facie, because that is the President and shall hold office at his pleasure.
common order of society. If they are not really married, but
living together, then they are in constant violation of decency
and law. Bec The Chairman shall receive a salary of P50,000 per annum, while
each of the two (2) members shall receive P40,000 per annum.
Art 24 FC. It shall be the duty of the local civil registrar to prepare
the documents required by this Title, and to administer oaths to all The Chairman and members shall serve on full-time basis and shall
interested parties without any charge in both cases. The not hold any other public or private office, nor shall they be
documents and affidavits filed in connection with applications for pecuniarily interested in any business or organization conducting
marriage licenses shall be exempt from documentary stamp tax. gaming covered by this Decree.
(n)
Persons HW # 6 Requisites of Marriage; Marriage License
Section 2. Functions and powers of the Commission. The (a) An initial permit fee of P1,000,000 and an annual
Commission shall have the power to: permit fee of not less than P50,000 nor more than P200,00
as may be determined by the Commission; and
(a) Grant permits to persons who under its rules and
regulations may be qualified to operate gaming activities (b) A weekly fixed tax of:
authorized by law;
1. not less than P2,000 nor more than P5,000 for
(b) Revoke the said permit under its rules and regulations, each type of game per table, and
the conduct of the gaming activities justifies such
revocation; 2. not less than P300 nor more than P500 for
each slot machine or similar devices as may be
(c) Supervise and regulate all gaming authorized by law determined by the Commission.
such as casino gambling, horse racing, jai alai and
cockfighting, taking into consideration the protection of Section 6. Taxes on Chips There shall be collected on every sale of
the betting public and the promotion of tourism; chips by the casino operator to a player a tax equivalent to five per
centum of the value thereof. The tax herein imposed shall be in lieu
(d) Authorize the use of gaming equipment, paraphernalia of income tax for which the player may be liable on his winnings.
and such other facilities by gaming establishments;
For this purpose, no bet shall be allowed in the casino except
(e) Prohibit the use of improper devices, drugs, stimulants, through chips purchased from the Cashier's box inside the casino.
and other means as to artificially affect the results of any Under no circumstances shall chips be purchased on the gaming
gambling game; table nor any chips be borrowed from another player inside the
casino.
(f) Suspend or revoke for a reasonable cause a license or
permit issued by it; Section 7. Annual License Fee on Gaming Employee of Casino There
is hereby imposed an annual license fee of P75 on every casino
(g) Prepare its budget, and fix the number and manager and pit boss, and P50 on every dealer and other similar
compensation of its personnel in accordance with law; gaming employee of the casino.

(h) Recruit, appoint, suspend, or terminate the Section 8. Player's Annual License Fee There is hereby imposed a
services of its personnel in accordance with law; player's annual fee of P500 on every person who enters and takes
part in gambling games in the casino.
(i) Delegate its licensing and regulating powers over
cockfighting to any national or local agency; and The Commission shall prescribe the qualifications of persons who
may apply for a player's license: Provided, however, That in no case
shall a player's license be issued to a person whose annual net
(j) Issue rules and regulations necessary to carry out the
taxable income, as shown by his latest income tax returns, be less
provisions of this Decree.
than P50,000: Provided, further, That a tourist from abroad shall be
allowed to enter and play in the casino without having to comply
Section 3. Jurisdiction The jurisdiction of the Commission shall with these requirements other than the presentation of a valid
embrace all forms of authorized gaming; Provided, however, That passport.
sweepstakes races and lotteries shall remain under the jurisdiction
of the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office; and provided, further,
Section 9. Manner, place and time for payment of tax It shall be the
That boxing, wrestling and professional basketball shall remain
duty of the grantee to make a true and complete return of the types
under the jurisdiction of the Games and Amusement Board.
of games per table, slot machines or similar devices under Section
5(b), and pay the tax to the Bureau of Internal Revenue on or before
Section 4. Appropriation. To carry out the purposes of this Decree, the first business day of the following week.
there is hereby appropriated out of the funds in the National
Treasury not otherwise appropriated, the sum of P1,000,000 for the
For purposes of collecting the tax imposed in Section 6, the grantee
initial year of operation of the Commission. Thereafter, such amount
is hereby constituted withholding agent and shall submit a weekly
as may be necessary for its operation shall be included in the annual
return of the amount of chips sold and remit the tax due thereon to
appropriation.
the Bureau of Internal Revenue on or before the first business day of
the following week.
PART II
Tax on Casinos
All taxes and fees imposed under Sections 5(a), 7 and 8 of this
Decree shall be paid to the Bureau of Internal Revenue on or before
Section 5. Taxes on Casino There shall be collected from the grantee the 31st of January.
the following taxes and fees:
If the tax or fee is not paid within the time prescribed therein, the
amount of the tax shall be increased by twenty-five per centum, the
increment to be a part of the tax. In addition thereto, there shall be
Persons HW # 6 Requisites of Marriage; Marriage License
collected an interest of fourteen (14) per centum per annum from PART IV
the original due date. Transitory and Repealing Provisions

In case of willful neglect to file the return within the period Section 14. Transitory Provisions Pending issuance of implementing
prescribed herein, or in case a false or fraudulent return is willfully letters of instructions to effect the smooth turnover to the
made, there shall be added to the tax, or on the basis of such Commission of the appropriate functions of the Games and
returns before the discovery of the falsity or fraud, a surcharge of Amusements Board, the Philippine Racing Commission, and the
fifty per centum of the amount of such tax or deficiency tax. The Agencies which presently regulate cockfighting, said Board,
amount so added to any tax shall be collected at the same time and Commission and Agencies shall continue to perform their respective
in the same manner as part of the tax, unless the tax has been paid functions.
before the discovery of the falsity or fraud, in which case, the
amount so added shall be collected in the same manner as the tax. Section 15. Repealing Clause All Acts, Decrees, Executive Orders,
proclamations, rules and regulations, or parts thereof inconsistent
Section 10. Apportionment of Revenue The proceeds of the taxes, with any of the provisions of this Decree are hereby repealed or
fees and licenses collected under this Decree shall be apportioned as modified accordingly.
follows:
Section 16. Effectivity This Decree shall take effect upon approval.
(a) To the Metropolitan Manila Authority, the taxes under
Section 5 of this Decree.
RA 10354 (RH Law) Sec 15.
(b) To the National Government, the proceeds of the taxes
and fees under Section 6, 7 and 8 of this Decree. Certificate of Compliance. – No marriage license shall be issued by
the Local Civil Registrar unless the applicants present a Certificate of
Compliance issued for free by the local Family Planning Office
Section 11. Importation of Gaming Paraphernalia and Devices The
certifying that they had duly received adequate instructions and
importation of gaming paraphernalia and devices shall not be
information on responsible parenthood, family planning,
allowed, except when the importation is made by the grantee for its
breastfeeding and infant nutrition.
exclusive use in the casino and duly authorized by the Commission.
The paraphernalia and devices so imported shall be subject to a RA 10354 (RH Law) Sec 23 (d).
tariff duty of 100% ad valorem of the dutiable value of such article
and a 70% compensating tax, the provisions of existing laws to the Prohibited Acts. – The following acts are prohibited:
contrary notwithstanding.
(d) Any person who shall falsify a Certificate of Compliance as
required in Section 15 of this Act; and
Section 12. Keeping of books of accounts, invoices and receipts The
grantee shall keep books of accounts and other accounting records *IMBONG V OCHOA (2014) RH LAW
for its daily transactions and issue invoices or receipts for every sale
of chips. The books of accounts, accounting records, invoices or [READ ATTACHED DIGEST]
receipts, which shall be duly registered with the Bureau of Internal
Revenue, in accordance with the pertinent provisions of Sections
334 to 337 of the National Internal Revenue Code and the Probative value of Civil Registrar’s Certification
regulations thereunder, shall be open for inspection and
examination by the Commission and the Bureau of Internal
Revenue. *REPUBLIC V CA and CASTRO (1994)

DOCTRINE: Certificate of Due search and inability to find, when

PART III
unaccompanied by circumstance of suspicions, has probative
Penalties
value. Marriage null and void due to lack of license.

Section 13. Penalties Any person who violates any of the rules and FACTS:
regulations promulgated by the National Gaming Commission
pursuant to this Decree shall, upon conviction, be fined in an 1. Angelina M. Castro and Edwin F. Cardenas married in a civil
amount not less than P2,000 nor more than P5,000, and suffer ceremony without the knowledge of the Edwin’s parents. All
imprisonment for not less than one year nor more than three years. the documents required for the celebration of the marriage
including Marriage license no. 3196182, was attended by
If the offender is a juridical person, the penalties shall be imposed Cardenas.
on its President, or Vice President, or office or officers responsible 2. Cohabitation four (4) months.
for the offense. 3. Castro sought the legal advice for possible annulment of
marriage with Cardenas, before leaving for the States to follow
her daughter who was adopted by her brother with the
If the offender is an alien, he shall, after he has paid the fine and consent of Cardenas.
served the sentence imposed by the Court as hereinabove 4. Civil Registrar of Pasig: issued certification stating that Castro
prescribed, suffer the additional penalty of deportation without the and Cardenas were allegedly married in the Pasay Court on
necessity of further proceedings to be instituted by the Commission June 21, 1970 under marriage license no. 3196182 issued on
on Deportation and Immigration.
Persons HW # 6 Requisites of Marriage; Marriage License
June 20, 1970. Such cannot be located since it does not appear a. 19 May 1969, through machinations, duress and
in their records. intimidation by Carmelita N. Cardenas and retired
a. *She* found that no marriage license issued prior to Colonel Jose Cardenas, he and Carmelita went to the
the celebration of her marriage with Cardenas. City Hall of Manila and they were introduced to one
5. Castro: Petition seeking a judicial declaration of nullity of her Reverend Cirilo D. Gonzales, Minister of the Gospel.
marriage with Cardenas. b. Father caused him and Carmelita to sign a marriage
a. RTC denied her petition. It ruled that “inability to contract before the said Minister of the Gospel.
locate marriage license does not show that there was c. That he never applied for and obtained a marriage
no marriage license issued.” license from any Civil Registry. No marriage license
6. Castro: Appealed sa CA was presented to the solemnizing officer.
a. The certification from the local civil registrar 2. Carmelita refuted:
sufficiently established the absence of a marriage a. Civil marriage 19 May 1969;
license. b. Church ceremony on 31 May 1969 at the Most Holy
b. CA reversed the ruling of the trial court; marriage is Redeemer Parish in Quezon City.
null and void; Civil Registrar of Pasig to cancel the c. Both marriages were registered with the local civil
marriage contract. registry of Manila and the NSO.
7. Republic: Petition for review on certiorari d. He is estopped from invoking the lack of marriage
a. Certification and the uncorroborated testimony of license after having been married to her for 25 years.
Castro are not sufficient to overthrow the legal 3. Perlita Mercader of the local civil registry of San Juan:
*presumption regarding the validity of a marriage. a. “failed to locate the book wherein marriage license
no. 2770792 is registered,” for the reason that “the
ISSUE: employee handling is already retired.“
4. Cannot just presume that the marriage license was not issued.
Whether or not the documentary and testimonial evidence a. Failure of local civil registrar to produce a copy of the
presented by Castro are sufficient to establish that no marriage marriage license is attributed not to the fact that no
license was issued prior to the celebration of marriage. such marriage license was issued but rather, because
it “failed to locate the book wherein marriage license
RULING: no. 2770792 is registered.”
b. If ever Makita yung book, may strong possibility that
YES. license is there.
1. Certification of "due search and inability to find" issued by the
civil registrar of Pasig enjoys probative value, he being the ISSUE:
officer charged under the law to keep a record of all data WON there was a marriage license issued.
relative to marriage license.
2. Section 29, Rule 132 of the Rules of Court, a certificate of "due HELD:
search and inability to find", unaccompanied by any
circumstance of suspicion, sufficiently proved that his office The above Rule authorized the custodian of documents to certify
did not issue marriage license no. 3196182 to the contracting that despite diligent search, a particular document does not exist in
parties. his office or that a particular entry of a specified tenor was not to be
3. The failure to offer any other witness to corroborate her found in a register. As custodians of public documents, civil
testimony registrars are public officers charged with the duty, inter alia, of
a. is mainly due to the secret marriage maintaining a register book where they are required to enter all
b. not a ground to deny her petition. applications for marriage licenses, including the names of the
4. CA decision (null and void for lack of a marriage license) applicants, the date the marriage license was issued and such other
a. does not discount the fact that indeed, a spurious relevant data. (Emphasis supplied.)
marriage license, purporting to be issued by the civil
registrar of Pasig, may have been presented by Thus, the certification to be issued by the Local Civil Registrar must
Cardenas to the solemnizing officer. categorically state that the document does not exist in his office or
b. Documentary and testimonial evidence of Castro the particular entry could not be found in the register despite
sufficiently established the absence of marriage diligent search. Such certification shall be sufficient proof of lack or
license. absence of record as stated in Section 28, Rule 132 of the Rules of
Court:
Therefore, the petition is DENIED there being no showing of any
reversible error committed by respondent appellate court. SEC. 28. Proof of lack of record. – a written statement
signed by an officer having the custody of an official record
or by his deputy that after diligent search, no record or
SEVILLA V CARDENAS (2006) entry of a specified tenor is found to exist in the records of
his office, accompanied by a certificate as above provided,
DOCTRINE: inability to find records without certification of diligent is admissible as evidence that the records of his office
search does not mean records do not exist. They just cannot be contain no such record or entry.
found.
This implication is confirmed in the testimony of the representative
FACTS:
from the Office of the Local Civil Registrar of San Juan, Ms. Perlita
1. Jaime O. Sevilla to RTC complaint:
Mercader, who stated that they cannot locate the logbook due to
Persons HW # 6 Requisites of Marriage; Marriage License
the fact that the person in charge of the said logbook had already Petitioner has three children with mistress, and only filed for this to
retired. Further, the testimony of the said person was not presented evade concubinage charges.
in evidence. It does NOT INDICATE that former custodian of the RTC: The petition for annulment was dismissed by the RTC of Manila
logbook was deceased or missing, or that his testimony could not and was affirmed by the CA.
be secured. This belies the claim that all efforts to locate the
logbook or prove the material contents therein, had been exerted. ISSUE:
WON the marriage is void ab initio on the ground that no valid
Absence of the logbook is not proof of non-issuance of Marriage marriage license existed during the solemnization.
License No. 2770792. Logbook just cannot be found.
HELD:
Presumption in favor of marriage: Law or fact leans toward the
validity of the marriage, the indissolubility of the marriage bonds. Petitioner cannot insist on the absence of a marriage license to
impugn the validity of his marriage.
“The basis of human society throughout the civilized world is x x x 1. Marriage contract between the petitioner and respondent
marriage. Marriage in this jurisdiction is not only a civil contract, but reflects a marriage license number.
it is a new relation, an institution in the maintenance of which the 2. A certification to this effect was also issued by the local civil
public is deeply interested. Consequently, every intendment of the registrar of Carmona, Cavite; it specifically identified the parties
law leans toward legalizing matrimony .Persons dwelling together in to whom the marriage license was issued, namely Restituto
apparent matrimony are presumed, in the absence of any counter Alcantara and Rosita Almario, further validating the fact that a
presumption or evidence special to the case, to be in fact married. license was in fact issued to the parties herein.
The reason is that such is the common order of society, and if the Issuance of a marriage license in a city or municipality, not the
parties were not what they thus hold themselves out as being, they residence of either of the contracting parties, and issuance of a
would be living in the constant violation of decency and of law. A marriage license despite the absence of publication or prior to the
presumption established by our Code of Civil Procedure is `that a completion of the 10-day period for publication are considered mere
man and a woman deporting themselves as husband and wife have irregularities that do not affect the validity of the marriage.
entered into a lawful contract of marriage. Semper praesumitur pro 1. An irregularity in any of the formal requisites of marriage does
matrimonio – Always presume marriage.”30 not affect its validity but the party or parties responsible for the
irregularity are civilly, criminally and administratively liable.
Discrepancy in license numbers mere typos
*ALCANTARA V ALCANTARA (2007) 1. Not job or solemnizer to investigate license.
SUMMARY: 2 MARRIAGES BOTH NO LICENSE VOID.
Semper praesumitur pro matrimonio. The presumption is always in
.
favor of the validity of the marriage. Every intendment of the law or
FACTS:
fact leans toward the validity of the marriage bonds. The Courts
look upon this presumption with great favor. It is not to be lightly
Restituto Alcantara (petitioner) filed a petition for annulment of his
repelled; on the contrary, the presumption is of great weight
marriage with Rosita Alcantara (respondent) before the RTC of
Manila alleging that on December 8, 1982, without securing the
Liability of solemnizing officer.
required marriage license, he and respondent went to the City Hall
of Manila to look for a person who could arrange a marriage for
SEGUISABAL V CABRERA (1981)
them.
DOCTRINE: Performing illegal marriage ceremonies charges you
Marriage 1: They met a “fixer” who arranged their wedding before gross misconduct and ignorance of law.
Rev. Aquilino Navarro, a Minister of the Gospel. They got married on
that same day, December 8, 1982.The wedding took place at the FACTS:
stairs in the Manila City Hall and not in the CDCCBR Chapel where
Rev. Navarro belongs. 1. On April 14, 1978, Jaime Sayson and a three months pregnant
Marlyn Jagonoy, accompanied by the mother of the former,
Marriage 2: They also got married at the San Jose de Manuguit the father of the latter, and several others, appeared before
Church in Tondo, Manila on March 26, 1983. Respondent bringing a marriage contract for them to be
solemnized, saying CR could not issue the marriage license
Both in the absence of a marriage license. because the one in charge was not in his office.
2. Respondent presumed papers were in order because parents
The alleged marriage license, appearing on the marriage contract, present and they already pregnant, but told them to return in
was procured in Carmona, Cavite, neither party was a resident of the afternoon with the Marriage License, but unable to get
Carmona, and they never went to Carmona to apply for a license. license because they have not attended family planning
1988, they parted ways and lived separate lives, but had a child. seminar.
3. On May 1979, Marlyn Jagonoy, now with child, appeared
Restituto: Petitioner prayed for judgment declaring their marriage before respondent asking for papers to claim benefits for
as void and ordering Civil Reg to cancel marriage contract. There is Jaime’s death in action against rebels. Respondent told the
an overlapping of license numbers: 7054133 and 7054033. father of Marlyn to go to the Local Civil Registrar’s Office to get
the Marriage license, though the father returned saying that
Rosita: Asserts validity of marriage, that there was a license issued the couple lacked the Family Planning Seminar.
as evidence by certification from office of Civil Registry, Carmona.
Persons HW # 6 Requisites of Marriage; Marriage License
4. Respondent issued the Marriage Contract believing that it was that the contracting parties were not known to him; and 5) that both
no longer necessary due to Jaime Sayson’s death, in good faith parties, were fully appraised of the effects of a marriage performed
and sympathy to the situation of Marlyn. without the required marriage license.
5. Complainant charged Cabrera for gross misconduct and gross
Ignorance for solemnizing marriage without the requisite ISSUE:
marriage license and for failing to transmit a copy of the signed
married contract to the Office of the Local Civil Registrar of Whether or not respondent be held liable for misconduct for
Toledo City within fifteen days from date of Solemnization; solemnizing a marriage without a marriage license
proved by the marriage contract issued to the contracting
parties. HELD:

ISSUES: Respondent, by his own admission that he solemnized the marriage

between complainant and Marcelo Moreno without the required
Does Respondent’s alleged “good faith” exempt him from the
marriage license, has dismally failed to live up to his commitment to
liability of his actions? NO
be the “embodiment of competence, integrity and independence”
WON the respondent Judge must be held liable for solemnizing and to his promise to be “faithful to the law.”
marriage without requiring a marriage license. YES
Respondent cannot hide behind his claim of good faith and Christian
HELD: motives which, at most, would serve only to mitigate his liability but
1. Violated article 53(4) of the Civil Code. For not requiring not exonerate him completely. Good intentions could
marriage license. never justify violation of the law.
a. No showing that the subject marriage falls under
marriages of an exceptional character wherein a ISSUE 1:
license is not mandatorily required.
2. Failed to transmit a copy of the marriage contract duly signed Is marriage valid?
by him and the contracting parties to the Local Civil Registrar
within 15 days, violating Article 68 of the Civil Code.
No. Art 35 (3) FC marriage would be void if solemnized without
3. His defense of good faith was found by the Court as unavailing.
marriage license. Echoed in Art 3 and 4. It is a formal requisite,
As a judicial officer, he is expected to know the law on the
absence of which makes marriage void. Subsequently getting license
solemnization, and his feeling of sympathy cannot serve as valid
does not make it valid.
reason for him to ignore these legal requisites.
4. Mitigating Circumstance: His 27 years of service, and the fact
that he was retiring due to his heart ailment. Did Bernabe commit grave misconduct and gross ignorance of law?

YES. he failed to live up to his promise to be faithful to the law, as

MORENO V BERNABE (1995) provided in Circular No. 13 of 1987 which enjoins judges “,.. to be
FACTS: the living personification of justice and the Rule of Law...” Moreover,
accdg to Art 3 of CC, ignorance of the law excuses no one from
Marilou Nama Moreno filed this complaint against Judge Jose C. compliance therewith. Therefore, even if the respondent claimed
Bernabe of the Metropolitan Trial Court, Branch 72, Pasig, Metro having good faith in solemnizing the said marriage, this only serves
Manila for grave misconduct and gross ignorance of law. to mitigate his liability but not exonerate him completely. Good
intentions could never justify violation of the law.
Complainant alleges that on October 4, 1993, she and Marcelo *DE CASTRO V ASSIDAO-DE CASTRO (2008)
Moreno were married before respondent Judge Bernabe.
She avers that respondent Judge assured her that the marriage SUMMARY:
contract will be released ten days after October 4, 1993. When she
visited the office of the Judge, she found out that she could not get Fake affidavit of 5 year continuous cohabitation renders marriage
the marriage contract because the Office of the Local Civil Registrar license (falsely obtained via exemption) and marriage itself void ab
failed to issue a marriage license. She claims that respondent Judge initio.
connived with the relatives of Marcelo Moreno to deceive her.
FACTS:

Respondent denies that he conspired with the relatives of Marcelo Petitioner and respondent met and became sweethearts in 1991.
Moreno to solemnize the marriage for the purpose of deceiving the They applied for a marriage license with the Office of the Civil
complainant. Respondent contends that: 1) the Local Civil Registrar Registrar of Pasig City in September 1994. When the couple went
of Pasig actually prepared the marriage license but it was not back to the Office of the Civil Registrar, the marriage license had
released due to the subsequent objection of the father of Marcelo already expired. Thus, in order to push through with the plan, in lieu
Moreno; 2) he, in good faith, solemnized the marriage as he was
of a marriage license, they executed a false affidavit dated 13 March
moved only by a desire to help a begging and pleading complainant
1995 stating that they had been living together as husband and wife
who wanted some kind of assurance or security due to her pregnant
condition; 3) in order to pacify complainant, Marcelo Moreno for at least five years. The couple got married on the same date,
requested him to perform the marriage ceremony with the express with Judge Jose C. Bernabe, presiding judge of the Metropolitan Trial
assurance that the marriage license was definitely forthcoming; 4) Court of Pasig City, administering the civil rites. Nevertheless, after
Persons HW # 6 Requisites of Marriage; Marriage License
the ceremony, petitioner and respondent went back to their marriage license requirement for a man and a woman who have
respective homes and did not live together as husband and wife. lived together and exclusively with each other as husband and wife
for a continuous and unbroken period of at least five years before
On 13 November 1995, respondent gave birth to a child named the marriage. The aim of this provision is to avoid exposing the
Reinna Tricia A. De Castro. On 4 June 1998, respondent filed a parties to humiliation, shame and embarrassment concomitant with
complaint for support against petitioner before the Regional Trial the scandalous cohabitation of persons outside a valid marriage due
Court of Pasig City. In her complaint, respondent alleged that she is to the publication of every applicant’s name for a marriage license.
married to petitioner and that the latter has “reneged on his In the instant case, there was no “scandalous cohabitation” to
responsibility/obligation to financially support her “as his wife and protect; in fact, there was no cohabitation at all. The false affidavit
Reinna Tricia as his child.” Petitioner denied that he is married to which petitioner and respondent executed so they could push
respondent, claiming that their marriage is void ab initio since the through with the marriage has no value whatsoever; it is a mere
marriage was facilitated by a fake affidavit; and that he was merely scrap of paper. They were not exempt from the marriage license
prevailed upon by respondent to sign the marriage contract to save requirement. Their failure to obtain and present a marriage license
her from embarrassment and possible administrative prosecution renders their marriage void ab initio.
due to her pregnant state; and that he was not able to get parental
advice from his parents before he got married. He also averred that OTHER ISSUES:
they never lived together as husband and wife and that he has never
seen nor acknowledged the child. Has the trial court jurisdiction to determine the validity of the
marriage between Reinel and Annabelle even though the case
The trial court ruled that the marriage between petitioner and before it is for support? In other words, may the marriage be
respondent is not valid because it was solemnized without a attacked collaterally?
marriage license. However, it declared petitioner as the natural
Yes. The validity of a void marriage may be collaterally attacked. In
father of the child, and thus obliged to give her support. The Court Nial v. Bayadog, we held:
of Appeals denied the appeal. Prompted by the rule that a marriage However, other than for purposes of remarriage, no judicial action is
is presumed to be subsisting until a judicial declaration of nullity has necessary to declare a marriage an absolute nullity. For other
been made, the appellate court declared that the child was born purposes, such as but not limited to determination of heirship,
during the subsistence and validity of the parties’ marriage. In legitimacy or illegitimacy of a child, settlement of
addition, the Court of Appeals frowned upon petitioner’s refusal to estate, dissolution of property regime, or a criminal case for that
undergo DNA testing to prove the paternity and filiation, as well as matter, the court may pass upon the validity of marriage even in a
his refusal to state with certainty the last time he had carnal suit not directly instituted to question the same so long as it is
knowledge with respondent, saying that petitioner’s “forgetfulness essential to the determination of the case. This is without prejudice
should not be used as a vehicle to relieve him of his obligation and to any issue that may arise in the case. When such need arises, a
final judgment of declaration of nullity is necessary even if the
reward him of his being irresponsible.” Moreover, the Court of
purpose is other than to remarry. The clause on the basis of a final
Appeals noted the affidavit dated 7 April 1998 executed by
judgment declaring such previous marriage void in Article 40 of the
petitioner, wherein he voluntarily admitted that he is the legitimate Family Code connotes that such final judgment need not be
father of the child. The appellate court also ruled that since this case obtained only for purpose of remarriage.
is an action for support, it was improper for the trial court to declare
the marriage of petitioner and respondent as null and void in the Is Reinna Tricia a legitimate child of Reinel?
very same case. There was no participation of the State, through
the prosecuting attorney or fiscal, to see to it that there is no Reianna Tricia is an illegitimate daughter of Reinel, and therefore
collusion between the parties, as required by the Family Code in entitled to support.
actions for declaration of nullity of a marriage. The burden of proof
Illegitimate children may establish their illegitimate filiation in the
to show that the marriage is void rests upon petitioner, but it is a
same way and on the same evidence as legitimate children. Thus,
matter that can be raised in an action for declaration of nullity, and one can prove illegitimate filiation through the record of birth
not in the instant proceedings. appearing in the civil register or a final judgment, an admission of
legitimate filiation in a public document or a private handwritten
ISSUE: Whether or not their marriage is valid.
instrument and signed by the parent concerned, or the open and
continuous possession of the status of a legitimate child, or any
other means allowed by the Rules of Court and special laws.
HELD: Under the Family Code, the absence of any of the essential or
formal requisites shall render the marriage void ab initio, whereas a The Certificate of Live Birth of the child lists petitioner as the father.
defect in any of the essential requisites shall render the marriage In addition, petitioner, in an affidavit waiving additional tax
voidable. In the instant case, it is clear from the evidence presented exemption in favor of respondent, admitted that he is the father of
the child.
that petitioner and respondent did not have a marriage license
when they contracted their marriage. Instead, they presented an
affidavit stating that they had been living together for more than Chapter 2. Marriages Exempted from License Requirement
five years. However, respondent herself in effect admitted the falsity
of the affidavit when she was asked during cross-examination. The EXEMPTIONS:
falsity of the affidavit cannot be considered as a mere irregularity in 1. POINT OF DEATH
the formal requisites of marriage. The law dispenses with the 2. REMOTE PLACES
Persons HW # 6 Requisites of Marriage; Marriage License
3. MUSLIM MARRIAGE the contracting parties are found no legal impediment to the
4. CONCUBINAGE marriage. (76a)

Art 27 FC. [POINT OF DEATH] In case either or both of the 1. Encourages people living in a state of concubinage for 5 years
contracting parties are at the point of death, the marriage may be to marry.
solemnized without necessity of a marriage license and shall 2. Publicity and inconveniences may be too embarrassing, keeping
remain valid even if the ailing party subsequently survives. (72a) them from legalizing their union; hence the exemption from
license.
Art 28 FC. [REMOTE PLACE] If the residence of either party is so 3. Other requirements must be followed.
located that there is no means of transportation to enable such
party to appear personally before the local civil registrar, the
marriage may be solemnized without necessity of a marriage
license. (72a) *BORJA-MANZANO V SANCHEZ (2001)

1. Difference from Art 72 CC: residence of female must be 15 km FACTS:

from municipal building, besides absence of means of transpo.
Complainant avers that she was the lawful wife of the late David
In FC, basta no means of transpo, and handicap could be of
Manzano, having been married to him in San Gabriel Archangel
male or female.
Parish, Araneta Avenue, Caloocan City. Four children were born out
2. Officer should have ensured the proper ages of the parties, and
of that marriage. However, her husband contracted another
that no legal impediment to marriage exists (Art 29 FC).
marriage with one Luzviminda Payao before respondent Judge.
3. Officer must sent affidavit (of above) and copy of marriage
When respondent Judge solemnized said marriage, he knew or
contract to local CR, 30 days after marriage. (Art 30 FC)
ought to know that the same was void and bigamous, as the
Art 29 FC. In the cases provided for in the two preceding articles, marriage contract clearly stated that both contracting parties were
the solemnizing officer shall state in an affidavit executed before "separated."
the local civil registrar or any other person legally authorized to
administer oaths that the marriage was performed in articulo Respondent Judge, on the other hand, claims that when he
mortis or that the residence of either party, specifying the barrio or officiated the marriage between Manzano and Payao he did not
barangay, is so located that there is no means of transportation to know that Manzano was legally married. What he knew was that the
enable such party to appear personally before the local civil two had been living together as husband and wife for seven years
registrar and that the officer took the necessary steps to ascertain already without the benefit of marriage, as manifested in their joint
the ages and relationship of the contracting parties and the affidavit. According to him, had he known that the late Manzano
absence of legal impediment to the marriage. (72a) was married, he would have advised the latter not to marry again;
otherwise, he (Manzano) could be charged with bigamy. He then
Art 30 FC. The original of the affidavit required in the last prayed that the complaint be dismissed for lack of merit and for
preceding article, together with the legible copy of the marriage being designed merely to harass him.
contract, shall be sent by the person solemnizing the marriage to
the local civil registrar of the municipality where it was performed After an evaluation of the Complaint and the Comment, the Court
within the period of thirty days after the performance of the Administrator recommended that respondent Judge be found guilty
marriage. (75a) of gross ignorance of the law and be ordered to pay a fine of P2,000,
with a warning that a repetition of the same or similar act would be
Art 31 FC. A marriage in articulo mortis between passengers or dealt with more severely.
crew members may also be solemnized by a ship captain or by an
airplane pilot not only while the ship is at sea or the plane is in ISSUES:
flight, but also during stopovers at ports of call. (74a)
Whether or not convalidation of the second union of the respondent
Art 32 FC. A military commander of a unit, who is commissioned falls under the purview of Article 34 of the Family Code.
officer, shall likewise have authority to solemnize marriages in
articulo mortis between persons within the zone of military Whether or not Respondent Judge is guilty of gross ignorance of the
operation, whether members of the armed forces or civilians. (74a) law.
1. Difference from CC, is that CC says “during the war”, not
RATIO:
“military operations”.
For this provision on legal ratification of marital cohabitation to
Art 33 FC. [MUSLIM MARRIAGE] Marriages among Muslims or
apply, the following requisites must concur:
among members of the ethnic cultural communities may be
performed validly without the necessity of marriage license,
(1) The man and woman must have been living together as husband
provided they are solemnized in accordance with their customs,
and wife for at least five years before the marriage; (2) The parties
rites or practices. (78a)
must have no legal impediment to marry each other; (3). The fact of
Art 34 FC. [CONCUBINAGE] No license shall be necessary for the absence of legal impediment between the parties must be present at
marriage of a man and a woman who have lived together as the time of marriage; (4) The parties must execute an affidavit
husband and wife for at least five years and without any legal stating that they have lived together for at least five years and are
impediment to marry each other. The contracting parties shall without legal impediment to marry each other; and (5) The
state the foregoing facts in an affidavit before any person solemnizing officer must execute a sworn statement that he had
authorized by law to administer oaths. The solemnizing officer ascertained the qualifications of the parties and that he had found
shall also state underoath that he ascertained the qualifications of no legal impediment to their marriage.
Persons HW # 6 Requisites of Marriage; Marriage License
(3) the right to marry is that it safeguards children and families and
Not all of these requirements are present in the case at bar. It is thus draws meaning from related rights of childrearing,
significant to note that in their separate affidavits executed on 22 procreation, and education.
March 1993 and sworn to before respondent Judge himself, David (4) Marriage is a keystone of the nation’s social order.
Manzano and Luzviminda Payao expressly stated the fact of their
prior existing marriage. Also, in their marriage contract, it was The right of same-sex couples to marry is also derived from the
indicated that both were "separated." Respondent Judge knew or Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection. The Due
ought to know that a subsisting previous marriage is a diriment Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause are connected in a
impediment, which would make the subsequent marriage null and profound way. Rights implicit in liberty and rights secured by equal
void. Neither can respondent Judge take refuge on the Joint Affidavit protection may rest on different precepts and are not always co-
of David Manzano and Luzviminda Payao stating that they had been extensive, yet each may be instructive as to the meaning and reach
cohabiting as husband and wife for seven years. Just like separation,
of the other. Indeed, recognizing that new insights and societal
free and voluntary cohabitation with another person for at least five
under- standings can reveal unjustified inequality within
years does not severe the tie of a subsisting previous marriage.
Clearly, respondent Judge demonstrated gross ignorance of the law fundamental institutions that once passed unnoticed and
when he solemnized a void and bigamous marriage. unchallenged, this Court has invoked equal protection principles to
invalidate laws imposing sex- based inequality on marriage, see, e.g.,
Kirchberg v. Feenstra, 450 U. S. 455, 460–461, and confirmed the
*OBERGEFELL V HODGES relation between liberty and equality, see, e.g., M. L. B. v. S. L. J., 519
U. S. 102, 120–121.
READ ATTACHED CASE SUMMARY (21 PAGES)

FACTS: The Court has acknowledged the interlocking nature of these

constitutional safeguards in the context of the legal treatment of
The petitioners are 14 same-sex couples and two men whose same-
gays and lesbians. See Lawrence, 539 U. S., at 575. This dynamic also
sex partners are deceased. The respondents are state officials
applies to same-sex marriage. The challenged laws burden the
responsible for enforcing the laws in question. The petitioners claim
liberty of same-sex couples, and they abridge central precepts of
that respondents violate the Fourteenth Amendment by denying
equality. The marriage laws at issue are in essence unequal: Same-
them the right to marry or to have their marriages, lawfully
sex couples are denied benefits afforded opposite-sex couples and
performed in another State, given full recognition.
are barred from exercising a fundamental right. Especially against a
ISSUES: long history of disapproval of their relationships, this denial works a
grave and continuing harm, serving to disrespect and subordinate
1. Whether or not the Fourteenth Amendment requires a State to gays and lesbians. Pp. 18–22.
license a marriage between two people of the same sex;
2. Whether the fourteenth amendment requires a state to The right to marry is a fundamental right inherent in the liberty of
recognize the same-sex marriage licensed and performed in a the person, and under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses
state which does not grant that right. of the Fourteenth Amendment couples of the same-sex may not be
deprived of that right and that liberty. Same-sex couples may
RATIO:
exercise the fundamental right to marry.
1. Yes. The fundamental liberties protected by the Fourteenth
Amendment’s Due Process Clause extend to certain personal 2. The Fourteenth Amendment requires States to recognize same-
choices central to individual dignity and autonomy, including sex marriages validly performed out of State. Since same-sex
intimate choices defining personal identity and beliefs. See, couples may now exercise the fundamental right to marry in all
e.g., Eisenstadt v. Baird, 405 U. S. 438, 453; Griswold v. States, there is no lawful basis for a State to refuse to recognize
Connecticut, 381 U. S. 479, 484–486. Courts must exercise a lawful same-sex marriage performed in another State on the
reasoned judgment in identifying interests of the person so ground of its same-sex character. Pp. 27–28.
fundamental that the State must accord them its respect.
History and tradition guide and discipline the inquiry but do not
OBERGEFELL; MY OWN DIGEST
set its outer boundaries. When new insight reveals discord
between the Constitution’s central protections and a received
FACTS:
legal stricture, a claim to liberty must be addressed. THE RIGHT
Four district court cases struck down state law banning same sex
TO MARRY IS PROTECTED BY THE CONSTITUTION.
marriages.
1. Obergefell v Wymyslo.
Four principles and traditions demonstrate that the reasons
a. Ohio Lawmakers, 2004: (1) Any marriage between
marriage is fundamental under the Constitution apply with persons of the same sex is against the strong public
equal force to same-sex couples. policy of this state. Any marriage between persons of
the same sex shall have no legal force or effect in this
(1) The right to personal choice regarding marriage is inherent in state and, if attempted to be entered into in this
the concept of individual autonomy. state, is void ab initio and shall not be recognized by
(2) The right to marry is fundamental because it supports a two- this state; (b) Any marriage entered into by persons of
person union unlike any other in its importance to the the same sex in any other jurisdiction shall be
committed individuals. considered and treated in all respects as having no
Persons HW # 6 Requisites of Marriage; Marriage License
legal force or effect in this state and shall not be 1. that is not a prerequisite for
recognized by this state. marriage
b. Constitutional amendment by Ohio voters: Only a 2. disadvantageous to children of
union between one man and one woman may be a same sex marriages
marriage valid in or recognized by this state and its 3. state does not ban opposite-sex
political subdivisions. This state and its political marriage when children may be
subdivisions shall not create or recognize a legal exposed to other “sub-optimal”
status for relationships of unmarried individuals that dev. Outcomes. No logical
intends to approximate the design, qualities, connection between same sex
significance or effect of marriage. marriage and optimal
c. Plaintiffs were multiple same sex couple whose out of environment.
state marriages were unrecognized + licensed funeral ii. Dismissed “wait and see” claim, since
home director. Shortly after US v Windsor. deprivation of any consti rights called for
d. Grounds: violated due process, equal protection, prompt rectification.
right to travel, Full Faith and Credit Clause. iii. Dismissed preservation of traditional
e. USDC granted permanent injunction for plaintiffs to marriage; since tradition alone cannot meet
be recognized as spouses in their deceased partners’ rational basis review
death certs. iv. Rejected claim that federalism allows states
i. Due process analysis: Established to define marriage; ballot-approved
fundamental right to remain married. measure is not due deference if it raises
ii. Equal protection analysis: heightened consti. Question.
scrutiny applies to sexual orientation 3. Bourke v beshear
classifications because homos have faced a a. Laws at issue: (1) series of statutes by Kentucky
history of severe and pervasive lawmakers making same sex marriage and
discrimination. Sex orient. Does not bear on recognition thereof illegal; (2) constitutional
ability to contribute to society amendment by Kentucky voters saying only marriages
iii. Law cannot survive, since legitimate bet man and woman shall be valid or recognized as
reasons of state were pretexts for marriage in Kentucky.
discrimination. b. Plaintiffs: were 2 same sex couples denied of licenses,
2. DeBoer v Snyder and 4 same sex couples who out-of-state marriages
a. Challenged Michigan laws – (1) new law and (4) are unrecognized.
amended. New law: c. After Windsor, Bourke plaintiffs filed against Gov and
i. Marriage is inherently a unique relationship Attorney General of Kentucky
between a man and a women”… for public d. Grounds: violation of due process and equal
policy, state has special interest in protection clauses (14th amendment).
encouraging, supporting, and protecting e. USDC west: based on rational bases review, laws
this unique relationship to promote, among were unconstitutional; violated Equal protection
others, stability and welfare of society and clause. Listed 3 rationales for potentially applying
children. heightened scrutiny:
ii. Marriage contracted between individuals of i. Right to marry is fundamental right
the same sex is invalid in this state. ii. Ban on same sex marriage demeans one
b. Amendments: group by depriving them of rights provided
i. Define marriage as man – woman for others.
ii. Prohibit recognition of same sex marriages iii. Homo individuals are either suspect or
iii. Add gender-based prohibitions to existing quasi-suspect class
consanguinity limitations iv. Laws failed to meet rational basis scrutiny,
iv. To secure and preserve benefits of marriage so heightened scrutiny not needed.
for society and for future generations… only v. Said holding does not violate federalism
the union of 1 man and 1 woman shall be since fed cannot justify constitutional
recognized violations.
c. Plaintiffs were same sex couple with 3 adopted 4. Tanco v Haslam
children, but no custody over them, since unable to a. Challenged laws: (1) Tennessee statute prohibiting
marry. same sex marriage for historical and traditional def of
i. Initially challenged adoption laws  same marriage; family as building block of society; (2)
sex laws Tennessee voters amendment saying relationship of 1
d. Grounds: unconstitutional: due process, equal man and 1 woman shall be the only legally recognized
protection, federalism grounds. marital contract in this state; otherwise, void in that
e. USDC east: enjoined state from enforcing state.
constitutional amendment and same sex marriage b. Plaintiffs: 3 same sex couples with out-of-state
laws; since they did not meet rational basis scrutiny. marriage licenses, against Gov, commo of the Dep’t of
Plaintiffs’ due process claims not addressed. Finance and Admin, Atty. Gen of Tennessee.
i. Dismissed that same sex marriage impedes c. Grounds: unconstitutional under due process and
optimal child-rearing equal protection clauses; right to travel;
discriminative based on sex and orientation.
Persons HW # 6 Requisites of Marriage; Marriage License
d. USDC middle: granted preliminary injunction; enjoin
state from enforcing same sex marriage law.
i. Plaintiffs claims may prevail based on
thorough and well-reasoned decisions of
other DCs that struck down same sex
marriage bans.

SC REVERSED opinion of 6th circuit, holding that Consti requires

states to issue marriage licenses to same sex couple and to
recognize out of state marriages. Ponente Kennedy, J. Opinion of
the SC are as follows:

1. Importance of marriage throughout course of time.

a. Centrality of marriage to human condition
b. Marriage always promised nobility and dignity to all
persons
c. Petitioners did not seek to demean marriage, but
rather, “respect its privileges and responsibilities”
2. Evolution of institution of marriage.
a. Coinciding with evolution of homosexual rights in
America.
b. American Psychiatric Association declassified homo
as mental disorder.
c. Bowers v Hardwick upheld law criminalizing
homosexual sodomy
d. Romer v Evans struck down consti amendment
preventing state from protecting individual against
sexual orientation disc.
e. Lawrence v Texas overruling Bowers.
f. US v Windsor striking down Defense of Marriage Act.
3. Due process clause
a. Protecting certain personal choices central to
individual identity and autonomy
4. Equal Protection analysis
a. Similar to Griswold v Connecticut.
5. Definition of marriage is always subject to revision, based on
popular opinion.
a. We used to ban interracial and inter-class marriages.
6. Reasons why Constitutional protection of marriage should
apply to same sex couples
a. Decisions on marriage inherent in concept of
individual autonomy
b. Marriage is two-person union unlike any other
c. Marriage helps promote families and protect children
d. Marriage is fundamental to social order