G.R. No.

83598 March 7, 1997

LEONCIA BALOGBOG and GAUDIOSO BALOGBOG, Petitioners,
v.
HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS, RAMONITO BALOGBOG and GENEROSO
BALOGBOG, Respondents.
Case Principles:
1.) Presumption of Marriage - Under the Rules of Court, the presumption is that a man and a woman
conducting themselves as husband and wife are legally married. This presumption may be rebutted only by
cogent proof to the contrary.
2.) Although a marriage contract is considered as a primary evidence of marriage, the failure to present it is
not proof that no marriage took place. Other evidence may be presented to prove marriage.
FACTS: Leoncia and Gaudioso Balogbog are the children of Basilio Balogbog and Geneveva Arnibal who
died in 1951 and 1961 respectively. They had an older brother Gavino but he died in 1935 pre-deceasing
their parents. In 1968, Ramonito and Generoso Balogbog filed an action for partition and accounting
against Leoncia and Gaudioso claiming that they were the legitimate children of Gavino by Catalina Ubas
and that, as such they were entitled to the one-third share in the estate of their grandparents.
Leoncia and Gaudioso claim they dont know Ramonito and Generoso and proceeded to question
the validity of the marriage between their brother Gavino and Catalina.
To prove the validity of their parents marriage, Ramonito and Generoso presented Priscilo Trazo,
81 years old, then mayor of Asturias from 1928 to 1934 and Matias Pogoy who both testified that he knew
Gavino and Catalina to be husband and wife and that they have three children. Catalina herself testified that
she was handed a receipt presumably the marriage certificate by Fr. Jomao-as but it was burned during
the war.
Leoncia for her part, claimed that her brother Gavino died single at the family residence in Asturias.
She obtained a certificate from the local Civil Registrar of Asturias to the effect that the office did not have
a record of the names of Gavino and Catalina. The certificate was prepared by Assistant Municipal
Treasurer Juan Maranga who testified that there was no record of marriage of Gavino and Catalina in the
Book of Marriages between 1925 to 1935.
ISSUE:
1.) WON the marriage between Gavino and Catalina is valid even in the absence of marriage certificate.
2.) WON Ramonito and Generoso were legitimate children of Gavino
HELD: The SC affirmed the decision of the CA in rendering Gavino and Catalinas marriage as valid and
thus entitle Ramonito and Generoso a third of their grandparents estate.
1.) Petitioner contends that the marriage of Gavino and Catalina should be proven in accordance of Arts. 53
and 54 of the Civil Code of 1889 (only by a certified copy of the memorandum in the Civil Registry) since
the marriage was celebrated when such law was in effect.
The SC held that Arts. 42 to 107 of the Civil Code of 1889 of Spain did not take effect, having been
suspended by the Governor General of the Philippines shortly after the extension of that code to this
country. Consequently, Arts. 53 and 54 never came into force. Since this case was brought in the lower
court in 1968, the existence of the marriage must be determined in accordance with the present Civil Code,
which repealed the provisions of the former Civil Code, except as they related to vested rights, and the rules
on evidence.
Under the Rules of Court, the presumption is that a man and a woman conducting themselves as
husband and wife are legally married. This presumption may be rebutted only by cogent proof to the
contrary. Evidence consisting of the testimonies of witnesses was held competent to prove the marriage.
Indeed, although a marriage contract is considered primary evidence of marriage, the failure to present it is
not proof that no marriage took place. Other evidence may be presented to prove marriage.

2.) Legitimacy of Children

The SC held that the fact that there was no record of birth in the Civil Registry does not mean that
Ramonito and Generoso were not legitimate children. Their legitimacy was proved by testimony of
witnesses, including Catalina, the mother herself. Moreover, although made in another case, Gaudioso
admitted that Ramonito is his nephew. This admission of relationship is admissible against Gaudioso as a
reliable declaration against interest.