Who may file petition for declaration of nullity or annulment of marriage?

Juan de Dios Carlos vs Felicidad Sandoval - SC said: Under the Family Code meaning marriage took place during the effectivity of the code only the husband and wife may file the petition for declaration of nullity of the marriage. This is because marriage is a personal relationship between the husband and the wife. - Marriage took place before effectivity of Family Code and the brother filed the petition before effectivity of the circular therefore the administrative circular doesnt apply - SC applied the provisions of the Civil Code and jurisprudence existing at the time stated that any interested party can file for the petition. So now is Juan, the brother, an interested party who can then file this petition? Yes. - If no surviving wife, no surviving wife then will go to Juan, the brother. - Indeed, only the presence of descendants, ascendants or illegitimate children excludes collateral relatives from succeeding to the estate of the decedent. The presence of legitimate, illegitimate, or adopted child or children of the deceased precludes succession by collateral relatives. Conversely, if there are no descendants, ascendants, illegitimate children, or a surviving spouse, the collateral relatives shall succeed to the entire estate of the decedent. A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC - Took effect on March 15, 2003 - Prospective in nature - Marriages solemnize before the effectivity of this will not apply - 2 situation in which this circular wont apply: (1) If marriage solemnize before effectivity governed by Civil Code (2) Even if solemnize during the effectivity of Family Code which was on August 3, 1988 if petition was filed before March 15, 2003 the circular wont apply - Marriages that took effect on/after August 3, 1988 and March 15, 2003 will follow this administrative circular as regard to who can file the petition - If not covered under these situations then any interested party can file

How about the children? How can they protect or exercise their right in case the marriage of their parents are declared void and only the two parties could actually file a petition? - Remedy: o file their claim or question legality of marriage of the parents o if one of the parties dies the procedure there is that estate will be settled o it is in this settlement proceedings that children may question the legality of the deceased and surviving parent o their successional right can be protected o they cannot do this for a direct action because only husband and wife can file Can the validity of marriage be collaterally attacked? De Castro vs De Castro SC said: A void marriage can be collaterally attacked even in action for support their marriage then is void for absence of a marriage license. Settlement of estate (e.g. wife dies then a stranger filed action to settle estate of your wife saying that he is the real husband and that your marriage is bigamous and void) Action to compel recognition of filiation/recognize the status Dissolution/liquidation of conjugal or common properties Death benefits If void can be collaterally attacked, voidable only through direct action Procedure in petitions for declaration of nullity of marriage (A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC) (1) File a petition Sec. 5. Contents and form of petition. - (1) The petition shall allege the complete facts constituting the cause of action A petition or complaint for nullity of void marriages, you have to allege to them the facts of your marriage and the basis or the grounds you relied upon in asking the court for a declaration of nullity of your marriage, so depending on your ground you alleged that grounds for your petition, if you rely on article 36 then you have to allege the requisites for the application of article 36. If your grounds is lack of marriage license then you allege that there was

no valid license so on and so forth, so the allegation, the body in your petition will depend on the specific ground relied upon in asking the court for a declaration of nullity in your marriage, common ground for the declaration of nullity in a marriage is psychological incapacity, the much abused, provision in the law, in the rules, in the Family Code. (2) Where to file? Sec. 4. Venue. - The petition shall be filed in the Family Court of the province or city where the petitioner or the respondent has been residing for at least six months prior to the date of filing, or in the case of a non-resident respondent, where he may be found in the Philippines at the election of the petitioner. Under the rules, a petition may be filed in any regional trial court (RTC) designated as a family court and not MTC. Take note, not all RTC's have jurisdiction over petitions for declaration of nullity of marriage but only RTC's designated as the so called family courts, in Cebu there are courts specifically designated as family courts. But which RTC? So it may be filed in the place, in the RTC of the place where the petitioner resides or in the place where the respondent resides, under the option of the petitioner. So it depends on the option of the petitioner, the choice lies with the petitioner, the party filing the petition so you may file it in the RTC of your place or in the place where the spouse/respondent resides. - What is the minimum requirement for residency? It should be the place deemed to be the residence of either the plaintiff or the respondent when the plaintiff or respondent has been presiding in that place for at least 6 months, before the filing of the petition. o if you used to be a resident of Lapu-lapu and you transfer to Cebu city 2 months thereafter you file a petition in Cebu that may not be the proper venue, because for residency purposes the petitioner or the respondent must be a resident in that place where the petition is filed for a period of at least 6 months. o Or to ensure that your petition does not get dismissed, it is advisable, although it is not in the rules, that your petition should be accompanied by certification issued by the barangay captain in the place where you reside

for at least a period of 6 months so the court will no longer entertain any doubt as to the venue of the action Sec. 6. Summons. - The service of summons shall be governed by Rule 14 of the Rules of Court and by the following rules: (1) Where the respondent cannot be located at his given address or his whereabouts are unknown and cannot be ascertained by diligent inquiry, service of summons may, by leave of court, be effected upon him by publication once a week for two consecutive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation in the Philippines and in such places as the court may order In addition, a copy of the summons shall be served on the respondent at his last known address by registered mail or any other means the court may deem sufficient If the respondent is a non-resident respondent like a foreigner, who is not residing in the Philippines, it may be filed in the place where that respondent may be found, he is not the resident in the place but he can be found in Shangrila, taking a vacation there, the summons may be served there for that purpose, if he cannot be served with summons personally under the rules summons by publication may be resorted to, so you will realize in some newspapers there are petitions for declaration of nullity of marriage published, this is for the purpose of acquiring jurisdiction over the respondent who is not a resident, that summons by publication. So he must be served with summons, either personally or publication, now after the summons is served on the respondent, the respondent is given 15 days within which to file his or her answer. So the petition for the complaint must be responded to by the respondent or the defendant, within a period of 15 days. Sec. 8. Answer. - (1) The respondent shall file his answer within fifteen days from service of summons, or within thirty days from the last issue of publication in case of service of summons by publication. The answer must be verified by the respondent himself and not by counsel or attorney-in-fact (2) If the respondent fails to file an answer, the court shall not declare him or her in default.

(3) Where no answer is filed or if the answer does not tender an issue, the court shall order the public prosecutor to investigate whether collusion exists between the parties. What happens if the defendant fails to file the answer, because it is possible that the defendant doesn't care. That if the defendant is as interested in having the marriage declared as a nullity, so the defendant wouldn't care at all if the plaintiff files for nullity, in fact that would be favorable to the defendant because he is spared from the expenses and he gets the same result, that if the defendant is also interested in having it annulled, but there are defendants who may be out of love or sure stupidity, even if the plaintiff declares in the petition that the plaintiff is no longer in love with the defendant and therefor he wants out of the marriage, the defendant would leave no stone un-turned to oppose the petition and cling to the marriage, so in your practice you will realize there are people like that, maybe they just wanted to cling on to the marriage that doesn't work anymore, or simply they just want to outright fight, they just don't want the other to be happy, so it's possible that the defendant doesn't care to file an answer, so 15 days lapse, no answer is filed. Sec. 9. Investigation report of public prosecutor. - (1) Within one month after receipt of the court order mentioned in paragraph (3) of Section 8 above, the public prosecutor shall submit a report to the court stating whether the parties are in collusion and serve copies thereof on the parties and their respective counsels, if any. (2) If the public prosecutor finds that collusion exists, he shall state the on the finding of collusion within ten days from receipt of a copy of a report The court shall set the report for hearing and If convinced that the parties are in collusion, it shall dismiss the petition. (3) If the public prosecutor reports that no collusion exists, the court shall set the case for pre-trial. It shall be the duty of the public prosecutor to appear for the State at the pre-trial. So what happens now? The court now knowing that the defendant doesn't care to file the answer will direct the public

prosecutor/fiscal to investigate if there is collusion in the parties, collusion means the parties agreed among themselves to get a favorable decision, declaring the marriage void. So consistent with collusion, the other party would not bother to file an answer, so that the proceedings would be shortened, and the proceedings would go on smoothly without the opposition of the respondent, so it would be easier to get the favorable judgement when the defendant doesn't care to file an answer, because it would be a one way show, only the plaintiff would be presenting his evidence there, testifying, presenting his witnesses, and the other party will not present his own evidence, so it will cut the proceedings up, cut short the proceedings by half, now this could be a result of collusion, the non-participation of the defendant, so under the rules, in order that the filing of the petition is really legitimately resulted to, not the product of collusion, the rules require that the court order the prosecutor to conduct an investigation. So the prosecutor there will summon the petitioner and the respondent to come to his office and determine if there is collusion. If there is collusion the prosecutor will render his report, that after his investigation that he conducted he discovered there is collusion between the parties, in this case the court will dismiss the petition, because collusion is a ground for dismissal of a petition. More often than not, the prosecutor will render a report stating that he has no basis to conclude that there is collusion, one reason or another, the prosecutor cannot categorically declare in his report that there is basis, there is collusion, or that there is no collusion. So most likely they will just say that the other side finds no basis to conclude if there is collusion or there was no collusion. In that respect, the case will proceed to pre-trial and then trial will commence, take note unlike an ordinary civil action, action for collection of sum of money, action for recover of title of possession of property, in a petition for nullity of marriage, the non-filing of the answer on the part of the respondent does not give rise to default judgements, now ordinarily in an ordinary action for example, a collection of sum of money, if the defendant, despite service of summons fails to answer to the complaint in 15 days, he will be declared in the motion of the plaintiff in default.

Now what is the result if a party is declared in default, that party is now precluded from participating in the proceedings, so the plaintiff will only be the party involved participating in that proceeding without the involvement of the other party. So the other party who has been declared in default, cannot anymore present his evidence that is the procedure in case of ordinary civil action. But in a petition for nullity of marriage, even if the defendant does not file an answer, the court cannot declare the defendant or respondent in default, so at any time if the defendant cares to participate, he can always come in, he can always participate in the proceedings, present his evidence, because declaration of default is prohibited under the rules Now another situation is the defendant might file an answer after being served with a summons, he might file an answer, the defendant, but in the answer the defendant admits all the allegations in the petition, so in the petition the defendant has been demonized by the plaintiff, he is irresponsible, immature, spineless, pervert, and so on and so forth, the defendant, maybe to expedite also the favorable decision or to expedite the decision in the case declaring the marriage void, would admit all the allegations in the petition, meaning all the allegations are true, i am psychologically incapacitated. o Now, in ordinary cases like actions for collection of money, recovery of property, if the defendant in his answer admits the allegations in the complaints or the petition the result there is the allegation in the complaint or petitions are deemed established as a fact, because it is not disputed by the other party, so whatever allegations in the complaint are deemed establish as true, and when the allegations in the complaint are already established as true then there is no need for trial, there is no need for presentation of evidence because the other party already admitted the truth of the allegations, evidence is only required if the allegations in the complaint are denied by the defendant, so there will be 2 conflicting versions of the same story, like example in an action for collection of sum of money plaintiff says the defendant owes him one million, but in his answer the defendant, the

allegation is denied, the truth being that i never owed him a cent. So there are now 2 versions of 1 issue, the issue there is whether or not there was obligation, the plaintiff says there was the defendant says there wasn't, because the allegations in the complaint are denied by the defendant this gives rise to the existence of a factual issue, the factual issue is, who of the two parties is telling the truth? So this now requires the presentation of evidence, because what would be the basis of the court in deciding who of the two parties is telling the truth. So that is the purpose of evidence, the parties now will be required to present their respective evidence to convince the court that his or her version of the story is the truthful one, that's the effect if it is disputed, but if it is admitted the allegations in the complaints are admitted by the defendant then there is no factual issue, so if the allegation that the defendant owes the plaintiff one million is admitted by the defendant so the fact that defendant owes plaintiff one million is deemed established as true. In which case there is no need for trial and therefor the court will just render judgement on the basis of the fact that defendant owes plaintiff one million, that is the result if the allegations in the complaint or petition are admitted by the respondent or defendant in an ordinary civil action. This rule does not apply in cases of petition for nullity of marriage, because even if the allegations in the complaint or petition are admitted by the respondent the court cannot render a judgement based on the admission of the parties, so judgement based on the admission, judgement based on stipulation, judgement based on confession, not applicable to petitions for nullity of marriage, so what happens if the allegations in the petition or complaint are admitted by the respondent in the answer. Under the rules, even if it is admitted by the defendant or respondent in the answer the plaintiff upon whom the burden of proof lies, should prove the allegations. So this is an instance, where the admission of the

defendant is disregarded, no effect at all as to the burden of the plaintiff to prove the allegations in the complaint or petition, so trial will still proceed, and the plaintiff who alleges must prove the allegations. So it is his burden to introduce evidence in court, to prove the truth in the allegations in the complaint or petition. This and understanding the fact that these allegations, the same allegations are already admitted by the defendant. Now what is the obvious reason behind this law, obvious reason is this is consistent with our policy against dissolution of marriage, it manifests the policy of our courts and in our jurisdiction that dissolution of marriage is really discouraged. So it requires sufficient quantum of evidence, a legitimate truthful evidence to support a decision dissolving a marriage. Now it is also required under the rules that during presentation of evidence the office of the solicitorgeneral or the office of the city or provincial prosecutor if delegated by the office of the solicitor-general should participate in the trial to represent the interest of the state, so what will happen there? so even if the defendant does not answer, he does not file his answer and therefor does not engage in lawyer to represent him in the hearings the prosecutor will always be there. The lawyers appearing there will be the lawyers of the petitioner and the prosecutor if delegated by the OSG, or a representative of the OSG (Office of SolicitorGeneral) Normally because of lack of manpower in the OSG they would delegate these authority to the office of the public or city or provincial prosecutor, so that provincial prosecutors will appear in the case representing the interest of the state. Now what is the purpose of the involvement or participation of the OSG or the office of the provincial prosecutor, the purpose there is to ensure that no evidence will be fabricated and no evidence will be suppressed by the parties, so again this is consistent with out policy against dissolution of marriage. So that's the purpose of the prosecutor there because people

desperate to get out of the marriage doesn't work already would be constrained to fabricate evidence just to ensure a favorable outcome in the petition. So to avoid this situation the prosecutor is precisely required to be a part of the entire proceeding, but in the case of Ancheta, take note of this case, Facts: This case involves a petition for nullity of marriage where the, it was alleged that the decision of the court to declare the marriage void is void because the prosecutor did not participate in the proceedings to make sure that the evidence of the parties were not fabricated or suppressed Issue: So the issue there is whether or not the presence of a public prosecutor or the OSG during the proceedings is indispensable. Such that absence of the prosecutor will render the decision void, Ruling: Supreme Court said, while the rules require the presence of the OSG or public prosecutor, in a situation where the petition is hardly contested by the parties, such that the witnesses presented by the petitioners were extensively cross-examined by the lawyer representing the respondent, the absence of the public prosecutor during the trail will not render the decision void. The reason there being, the purpose of the prosecutor, the purpose of the requirement of the prosecutor to participate in the hearings is to ensure that the evidence of the parties are not fabricated or that the evidence are not suppressed. Now this the evil sought to be avoided by the rule is already substantially served when the petition is hardly contested by the parties, as in fact the witnesses presented by the plaintiff or petitioner were extensively cross-examined by the defendant or by the lawyer of the defendant, so because of the manner by which the petition was contested by the parties, the likelihood that evidence

was fabricated or suppressed nil, it was not likely that evidence can be suppressed or fabricated. Take note of that case, exception to the requirement that a prosecutor should be present during the hearing.
Questions? Sir, what if it is just a normal dispute? Is it okay if the petition is hardly contested, there was answer, there was free trial..If the petition is not hardly contested, or when the defendant does not care to answer and does not participate in the proceedings, then it is a one man show there, only the petitioner is actively involved there, the attendance or presence of the public prosecutor is mandatory. Otherwise the decision would be void. The Ancheta case comes only as an exception because of the peculiar circumstances of that case.

Art. 40. The absolute nullity of a previous marriage may be invoked for purposes of remarriage on the basis solely of a final judgment declaring such previous marriage void. Conflicting views: - Traditional view is that if a marriage is void then it is as if no marriage existed in the first place. So it is void from the very beginning so it is nothing, it is totally non-existent, so there is no need for a court order to declare such marriage void, because from the very beginning it never attained existence - It is not for the party to presume that this marriage is void, because the duty or the authority to declare a marriage void lies latched with the court History Tracing this history, Santa Maria in his book ruled that the issue of whether or not a prior declaration of nullity of a previous marriage necessary, depends on the prevailing jurisprudence which took effect at the time the subsequent marriage is contracted, in other words because of this flip-flopping decisions of the supreme court, one decision says no need, the other decision says there is a need. Questions as to whether there is a need or there is no need should be decided on the basis of the prevailing jurisprudence then existing at the time of the solemnization of the subsequent marriage so if the subsequent marriage is solemnized on this particular period and during this period the one jurisprudence existing is the jurisprudence which says there is a need, then that issue of whether that subsequent marriage is void should be determined on the basis of that jurisprudence then existing.

People vs Mendoza People vs Aragon (no need) September 28, 1954 February 28, 1957 - Gomez vs Lipana Conseguera vs Conseguera (need) June 30, 1970 January 30, 1971 - Odayat vs Amante Tolentino vs Paras (no need) June 2, 1977 May 30, 1983 - Wiegel vs Sempio Diy (need) August 19, 1986 - Yap vs Court of Appeals (no need) October 28, 1986 As it is now for purposes of remarriage there is a need to obtain a judicial declaration before contracting a subsequent marriage otherwise it would render the latter void - Reason for this: (1) It is not for the parties to presume that their marriage is void because only the court can do so (2) In order to do away with uncertainty of the status Failure to comply, will there be bigamy? - Article 40 states only one purpose for remarriage to make sure subsequent marriage is valid - Nothing about bigamy - Article 349 of RPC defines bigamy and what constitutes it (1) Existing valid marriage (2) Subsequent existing valid marriage - Sta Maria: if previous void then contracts subsequent, no bigamy even without court declaration of the previous because void from the beginning - Carino vs Carino The SC while acknowledging the previous marriage was void for having been solemnized without a marriage license, nevertheless stated that the subsequent marriage of one of the parties was bigamous because the first marriage, though void, was still presumed to be valid considering that there was no judicial declaration of nullity of the previous marriage. - Mercado vs Tan The SC didnt find it material to focus on the nullity of the first marriage but instead merely reasoned that, for as long as Article 40 of the Family Code was not complied with, the subsequent marriage will always be criminally bigamous. Hence, the ruling, in effect, states, that criminal bigamy is

determined not by the fact that the first marriage is really legally void but by the fact that no judicial declaration of nullity of the first marriage was obtained prior to the subsequent marriage. Abunado vs People of the Philippines The subsequent judicial declaration of the nullity of the first marriage was immaterial because prior to the declaration of nullity, the crime had already been consummated. Moreover, petitioners assertion would only delay the prosecution of bigamy cases considering that an accused could simply file a petition to declare his previous marriage void and invoke the pendency of that action as a prejudicial question in the criminal case. We cannot allow that. The outcome of the civil case for annulment of petitioners marriage to Narcisa had no bearing upon the determination of petitioners innocence or guilt in the criminal case for bigamy, because all that is required for the charge of bigamy to prosper is that the first marriage be subsisting at the time the second marriage is contracted. Salvador vs Noel and Serafico In a catena of cases,[43] the Court has consistently held that a judicial declaration of nullity is required before a valid subsequent marriage can be contracted; or else, what transpires is a bigamous marriage, reprehensible and immoral. Antone vs Beronilla this Court, concluded, in essence, that under the Family Code a subsequent judicial declaration of the nullity of the first marriage is immaterial in a bigamy case because, by then, the crime had already been consummated. Otherwise stated, this Court declared that a person, who contracts a subsequent marriage absent a prior judicial declaration of nullity of a previous one, is guilty of bigamy. Morigo vs People It bears stressing though that in Mercado, the first marriage was actually solemnized not just once, but twice: first before a judge where a marriage certificate was duly issued and then again six months later before a priest in religious rites. Ostensibly, at least, the first marriage appeared to have transpired, although later declared void ab initio.

In the instant case, however, no marriage ceremony at all was performed by a duly authorized solemnizing officer. Petitioner and Lucia Barrete merely signed a marriage contract on their own. The mere private act of signing a marriage contract bears no semblance to a valid marriage and thus, needs no judicial declaration of nullity. Such act alone, without more, cannot be deemed to constitute an ostensibly valid marriage for which petitioner might be held liable for bigamy unless he first secures a judicial declaration of nullity before he contracts a subsequent marriage. - Morigo case is an exception because there was actually no valid marriage What if it is the subsequent marriage that is void, will there be bigamy? - Tenebro vs Court of Appeals Although the judicial declaration of the nullity of a marriage on the ground of psychological incapacity retroacts to the date of the celebration of the marriage insofar as the vinculum between the spouses is concerned, it is significant to note that said marriage is not without legal effects. Among these effects is that children conceived or born before the judgment of absolute nullity of the marriage shall be considered legitimate.28 There is therefore a recognition written into the law itself that such a marriage, although void ab initio, may still produce legal consequences. Among these legal consequences is incurring criminal liability for bigamy. To hold otherwise would render the States penal laws on bigamy completely nugatory, and allow individuals to deliberately ensure that each marital contract be flawed in some manner, and to thus escape the consequences of contracting multiple marriages, while beguiling throngs of hapless women with the promise of futurity and commitment. Since a marriage contracted during the subsistence of a valid marriage is automatically void, the nullity of this second marriage is not per se an argument for the avoidance of criminal liability for bigamy. Pertinently, Article 349 of the Revised Penal Code criminalizes "any person who shall contract a second or subsequent marriage before the former

marriage has been legally dissolved, or before the absent spouse has been declared presumptively dead by means of a judgment rendered in the proper proceedings". A plain reading of the law, therefore, would indicate that the provision penalizes the mere act of contracting a second or a subsequent marriage during the subsistence of a valid marriage.

Art. 41. A marriage contracted by any person during subsistence of a previous marriage shall be null and void, unless before the celebration of the subsequent marriage, the prior spouse had been absent for four consecutive years and the spouse present has a well-founded belief that the absent spouse was already dead. In case of disappearance where there is danger of death under the circumstances set forth in the provisions of Article 391 of the Civil Code, an absence of only two years shall be sufficient. For the purpose of contracting the subsequent marriage under the preceding paragraph the spouse present must institute a summary proceeding as provided in this Code for the declaration of presumptive death of the absentee, without prejudice to the effect of reappearance of the absent spouse. Previous marriage is valid and during existence party contracts subsequent result is bigamy under Article 349 except if before contracting subsequent obtains a declaration of presumption of death Effect: marriage is dissolved and may contract subsequent marriage There must be evidence that spouse executed due diligence that he looked and searched for the missing spouse If acted in good faith subsequent marriage is valid If one acted in bad faith (knew that absent spouse alive) subsequent marriage is valid Only when both acted in bad faith void

A sworn statement of the fact and circumstances of reappearance shall be recorded in the civil registry of the residence of the parties to the subsequent marriage at the instance of any interested person, with due notice to the spouses of the subsequent marriage and without prejudice to the fact of reappearance being judicially determined in case such fact is disputed. Subsequent marriage automatically dissolved Status of previous marriage resolved Recorded (affidavit): LCR where party of subsequent marriage resides absent spouse = reappearance (absent spouse is the one reappearing) Affidavit can be filed by any instant party according to Sta. Maria Natures, effects and consequences are governed by law if in case reappearing spouse doesnt want to reunite

Art. 42. The subsequent marriage referred to in the preceding Article shall be automatically terminated by the recording of the affidavit of reappearance of the absent spouse, unless there is a judgment annulling the previous marriage or declaring it void ab initio.

Art. 43. The termination of the subsequent marriage referred to in the preceding Article shall produce the following effects: (1) The children of the subsequent marriage conceived prior to its termination shall be considered legitimate; (2) The absolute community of property or the conjugal partnership, as the case may be, shall be dissolved and liquidated, but if either spouse contracted said marriage in bad faith, his or her share of the net profits of the community property or conjugal partnership property shall be forfeited in favor of the common children or, if there are none, the children of the guilty spouse by a previous marriage or in default of children, the innocent spouse; Refers only to a valid marriage due to the property regime Net profits difference of value from solemnization of marriage to the dissolution of marriage (3) Donations by reason of marriage shall remain valid, except that if the donee contracted the marriage in bad faith, such donations made to said donee are revoked by operation of law; (4) The innocent spouse may revoke the designation of the other spouse who acted in bad faith as beneficiary in any insurance policy, even if such designation be stipulated as irrevocable; and Revocable if acted in bad faith not automatic not by operation of law, if the other doesnt want to revoke then the other can still benefit from the insurance policy

(5) The spouse who contracted the subsequent marriage in bad faith shall be disqualified to inherit from the innocent spouse by testate and intestate succession.

Art. 44. If both spouses of the subsequent marriage acted in bad faith, said marriage shall be void ab initio and all donations by reason of marriage and testamentary dispositions made by one in favor of the other are revoked by operation of law. (1) Marriage is void, child conceived during void marriage, legitimate (2) All donations by reason of marriage, revoked by operation of law, if both acted in bad faith (3) Testamentary provisions revoked by operation of law if both acted in faith (4) Cant inherit by intestate succession

(3) Concealment of sexually transmissible disease, regardless of its nature, existing at the time of the marriage; or (gravity not considered but if grave then can still avail of this) (4) Concealment of drug addiction, habitual alcoholism or homosexuality or lesbianism existing at the time of the marriage. No other misrepresentation or deceit as to character, health, rank, fortune or chastity shall constitute such fraud as will give grounds for action for the annulment of marriage. (4) That the consent of either party was obtained by force, intimidation or undue influence, unless the same having disappeared or ceased, such party thereafter freely cohabited with the other as husband and wife; (5) That either party was physically incapable of consummating the marriage with the other, and such incapacity continues and appears to be incurable; or (6) That either party was afflicted with a sexually-transmissible disease found to be serious and appears to be incurable.

Art. 45. A marriage may be annulled for any of the following causes, existing at the time of the marriage: (1) That the party in whose behalf it is sought to have the marriage annulled was eighteen years of age or over but below twenty-one, and the marriage was solemnized without the consent of the parents, guardian or person having substitute parental authority over the party, in that order, unless after attaining the age of twenty-one, such party freely cohabited with the other and both lived together as husband and wife; (2) That either party was of unsound mind, unless such party after coming to reason, freely cohabited with the other as husband and wife; (3) That the consent of either party was obtained by fraud, unless such party afterwards, with full knowledge of the facts constituting the fraud, freely cohabited with the other as husband and wife; Art. 46. Any of the following circumstances shall constitute fraud referred to in Number 3 of the preceding Article: (1) Non-disclosure of a previous conviction by final judgment of the other party of a crime involving moral turpitude; (except: husband didnt disclose that he impregnated another and when wife misrepresented that she was pregnant when she was actually wasnt (2) Concealment by the wife of the fact that at the time of the marriage, she was pregnant by a man other than her husband; (doesnt include those that are mala in se)

Art. 47. The action for annulment of marriage must be filed by the following persons and within the periods indicated herein: (1) For causes mentioned in number 1 of Article 45 by the party whose parent or guardian did not give his or her consent, within five years after attaining the age of twenty-one, or by the parent or guardian or person having legal charge of the minor, at any time before such party has reached the age of twenty-one; (2) For causes mentioned in number 2 of Article 45, by the same spouse, who had no knowledge of the other's insanity; or by any relative or guardian or person having legal charge of the insane, at any time before the death of either party, or by the insane spouse during a lucid interval or after regaining sanity; (3) For causes mentioned in number 3 of Article 45, by the injured party, within five years after the discovery of the fraud; (4) For causes mentioned in number 4 of Article 45, by the injured party, within five years from the time the force, intimidation or undue influence disappeared or ceased; (5) For causes mentioned in number 5 and 6 of Article 45, by the injured party, within five years after the marriage.

Art. 50. The effects provided for by paragraphs (2), (3), (4) and (5) of Article 43 and by Article 44 shall also apply in the proper cases to marriages which are declared ab initio or annulled by final judgment under Articles 40 and 45. The final judgment in such cases shall provide for the liquidation, partition and distribution of the properties of the spouses, the custody and support of the common children, and the delivery of third presumptive legitimes, unless such matters had been adjudicated in previous judicial proceedings. All creditors of the spouses as well as of the absolute community or the conjugal partnership shall be notified of the proceedings for liquidation. In the partition, the conjugal dwelling and the lot on which it is situated, shall be adjudicated in accordance with the provisions of Articles 102 and 129. If marriage annulled under Article 45 then produces the effects under paragraphs 2, 3, 4 and 5 of Article 43 and 44, same goes for failure to comply under Article 40 Valdes vs RTC - Insofar as void marriages are concerned paragraphs 2,3,4 and 5 of Article 43 exceptionally apply only to void subsequent marriages that occur as a result to the non-observance of Article 40. Specifically, they apply only to the subsequent void marriage contracted by a spouse of a prior void marriage before the latter is judicially declared void. - In this case, though the subsequent marriage is void, the property shall be liquidated as if there is a conjugal partnership of gains or an absolute community of property. In all other cases of a void marriage other than the void subsequent marriage that occurs as a result of the nonobservance of Article 40, the property regime shall be governed by the rule on co-ownership provided for in Articles 147 and 148 as the case may be and not the conjugal partnership of gains or absolute community of property. Hence, in these cases where Article 147 or 148 will apply, the property regime shall be liquidated pursuant to the ordinary rules on co-ownership pursuant to the Civil Code provided they are not contrary to the Family Code. Carino vs Carino - The SC ruled that a subsequent marriage celebrated in violation of Article 40 is void because it is bigamous and therefore the property regime in the said subsequent void

marriage is co-ownership under Article 148 of the Family Code. If this is the case, then the presumptive legitime need not be delivered as it is now follows the general rule. This is inaccurate. The legal rationale of the SC in the Valdez ruling must still be followed considering that it is a clear application of what Article 50 provides. Second marriage applied Article 148 but first marriage applied Article 147 Art. 147. When a man and a woman who are capacitated to marry each other, live exclusively with each other as husband and wife without the benefit of marriage or under a void marriage, their wages and salaries shall be owned by them in equal shares and the property acquired by both of them through their work or industry shall be governed by the rules on co-ownership. In the absence of proof to the contrary, properties acquired while they lived together shall be presumed to have been obtained by their joint efforts, work or industry, and shall be owned by them in equal shares. For purposes of this Article, a party who did not participate in the acquisition by the other party of any property shall be deemed to have contributed jointly in the acquisition thereof if the former's efforts consisted in the care and maintenance of the family and of the household. Neither party can encumber or dispose by acts inter vivos of his or her share in the property acquired during cohabitation and owned in common, without the consent of the other, until after the termination of their cohabitation. When only one of the parties to a void marriage is in good faith, the share of the party in bad faith in the co-ownership shall be forfeited in favor of their common children. In case of default of or waiver by any or all of the common children or their descendants, each vacant share shall belong to the respective surviving descendants. In the absence of descendants, such share shall belong to the innocent party. In all cases, the forfeiture shall take place upon termination of the cohabitation. (144a) Art. 148. In cases of cohabitation not falling under the preceding Article, only the properties acquired by both of the

parties through their actual joint contribution of money, property, or industry shall be owned by them in common in proportion to their respective contributions. In the absence of proof to the contrary, their contributions and corresponding shares are presumed to be equal. The same rule and presumption shall apply to joint deposits of money and evidences of credit. If one of the parties is validly married to another, his or her share in the co-ownership shall accrue to the absolute community or conjugal partnership existing in such valid marriage. If the party who acted in bad faith is not validly married to another, his or her shall be forfeited in the manner provided in the last paragraph of the preceding Article. The foregoing rules on forfeiture shall likewise apply even if both parties are in bad faith. (144a)