5/4/2021
E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly
Starting October 22, 1995, petitioner and respondent lived separately without prior
judicial dissolution of their marriage. While the two were still in Australia, their
conjugal assets were divided on May 16, 1996, in accordance with their Statutory
Declarations secured in Australia.[9]
On March 3, 1998, petitioner filed a Complaint for Declaration of Nullity of Marriage[10]
in the court a quo, on the ground of bigamy -- respondent allegedly had a prior
subsisting marriage at the time he married her on January 12, 1994. She claimed that
she learned of respondent's marriage to Editha Samson only in November, 1997.
In his Answer, respondent averred that, as far back as 1993, he had revealed to
petitioner his prior marriage and its subsequent dissolution.[11] He contended that his
first marriage to an Australian citizen had been validly dissolved by a divorce decree
obtained in Australia in 1989;[12] thus, he was legally capacitated to marry petitioner in
1994.
On July 7, 1998 -- or about five years after the couple's wedding and while the suit for
the declaration of nullity was pending -- respondent was able to secure a divorce
decree from a family court in Sydney, Australia because the "marriage ha[d]
irretrievably broken down."[13]
Respondent prayed in his Answer that the Complaint be dismissed on the ground that it
stated no cause of action.[14] The Office of the Solicitor General agreed with
respondent.[15] The court marked and admitted the documentary evidence of both
parties.[16] After they submitted their respective memoranda, the case was submitted
for resolution.[17]
Thereafter, the trial court rendered the assailed Decision and Order.
Ruling of the Trial Court
The trial court declared the marriage dissolved on the ground that the divorce issued in
Australia was valid and recognized in the Philippines. It deemed the marriage ended,
but not on the basis of any defect in an essential element of the marriage; that is,
respondent's alleged lack of legal capacity to remarry. Rather, it based its Decision on
the divorce decree obtained by respondent. The Australian divorce had ended the
marriage; thus, there was no more marital union to nullify or annul.
Hence, this Petition.[18]
Issues
Petitioner submits the following issues for our consideration:
"1
https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/52783
2/13