Scribd
Upload
62 views

Case 100

1) Carlos filed a case against respondents Felicidad Sandoval and Teofilo Carlos II to invalidate the marriage between Felicidad and Carlos' deceased brother Teofilo and declare that Teofilo II was not the biological son of Teofilo. 2) The Court held that grounds for declaring a marriage absolutely null must be proven, and neither judgment on the pleadings nor summary judgment are allowed in such cases. 3) Only a husband or wife may file a petition for declaration of absolute nullity of a void marriage. Compulsory or intestate heirs may question the validity of a marriage upon the death of a spouse in estate settlement proceedings but not a nullity petition.

Uploaded by

RR F
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
62 views

Case 100

1) Carlos filed a case against respondents Felicidad Sandoval and Teofilo Carlos II to invalidate the marriage between Felicidad and Carlos' deceased brother Teofilo and declare that Teofilo II was not the biological son of Teofilo. 2) The Court held that grounds for declaring a marriage absolutely null must be proven, and neither judgment on the pleadings nor summary judgment are allowed in such cases. 3) Only a husband or wife may file a petition for declaration of absolute nullity of a void marriage. Compulsory or intestate heirs may question the validity of a marriage upon the death of a spouse in estate settlement proceedings but not a nullity petition.

Uploaded by

RR F
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4

Carlos v Sandoval

Teofilo Carlos and petitioner Juan De Dios Carlos were brothers who
each have three parcels of land by virtue of inheritance. Later Teofilo
died intestate. He was survived by respondents Felicidad Sandoval and
their son, Teofilo Carlos II. Upon Teofilos death, two parcels of land
were registered in the name of Felicidad and Teofilo II. In August 1995,
Carlos commenced an action against respondents before the court a
quo. In his complaint, Carlos asserted that the marriage between his
late brother and Felicidad was a nullity in view of the absence of the
required marriage license. He likewise maintained that his deceased
brother was neither the natural nor the adoptive father of Teofilo Carlos
II. He argued that the properties covered by such certificates of title,
including the sums received by respondents as proceeds, should be
reconveyed to him.
HELD: The grounds for declaration of absolute nullity of
marriage must be proved. Neither judgment on the pleadings
nor

summary

judgment

is

allowed.

So

is

confession

of

judgment disallowed. Carlos argues that the CA should have applied


Rule 35 of the Rules of Court governing summary judgment, instead of
the rule on judgment on the pleadings. Petitioner is misguided.
Whether it is based on judgment on the pleadings or summary
judgment, the CA was correct in reversing the summary judgment
rendered by the trial court. Both the rules on judgment on the
pleadings and summary judgments have no place in cases of
declaration of absolute nullity of marriage and even in annulment of
marriage.
A petition for declaration of absolute nullity of void marriage
may be filed solely by the husband or wife. Exceptions: (1)

Nullity of marriage cases commenced before the effectivity of


A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC; and (2) Marriages celebrated during the
effectivity of the Civil Code. Under the Rule on Declaration of
Absolute Nullity of Void Marriages and Annulment of Voidable
Marriages, the petition for declaration of absolute nullity of marriage
may not be filed by any party outside of the marriage. A petition for
declaration of absolute nullity of void marriage may be filed solely by
the husband or the wife. Only an aggrieved or injured spouse may file
a petition for annulment of voidable marriages or declaration of
absolute nullity of void marriages. Such petition cannot be filed by
compulsory or intestate heirs of the spouses or by the State. The
Committee is of the belief that they do not have a legal right to file the
petition. Compulsory or intestate heirs have only inchoate rights prior
to the death of their predecessor, and, hence, can only question the
validity of the marriage of the spouses upon the death of a spouse in a
proceeding for the settlement of the estate of the deceased spouse
filed in the regular courts. On the other hand, the concern of the State
is to preserve marriage and not to seek its dissolution. The Rule
extends only to marriages entered into during the effectivity of the
Family Code which took effect on August 3, 1988.
The advent of the Rule on Declaration of Absolute Nullity of Void
Marriages marks the beginning of the end of the right of the heirs of
the deceased spouse to bring a nullity of marriage case against the
surviving spouse. But the Rule never intended to deprive the
compulsory or intestate heirs of their successional rights.
While A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC declares that a petition for declaration of
absolute nullity of marriage may be filed solely by the husband or the
wife, it does not mean that the compulsory or intestate heirs are

without any recourse under the law. They can still protect their
successional right, for, as stated in the Rationale of the Rules on
Annulment of Voidable Marriages and Declaration of Absolute Nullity of
Void Marriages, compulsory or intestate heirs can still question the
validity of the marriage of the spouses, not in a proceeding for
declaration of nullity but upon the death of a spouse in a proceeding
for the settlement of the estate of the deceased spouse filed in the
regular courts.
It is emphasized, however, that the Rule does not apply to cases
already commenced before March 15, 2003 although the marriage
involved is within the coverage of the Family Code. This is so, as the
new Rule which became effective on March 15, 2003 is prospective in
its application.
Petitioner commenced the nullity of marriage case against respondent
Felicidad in 1995. The marriage in controversy was celebrated on May
14, 1962. Which law would govern depends upon when the marriage
took place.
The marriage having been solemnized prior to the effectivity of the
Family Code, the applicable law is the Civil Code which was the law in
effect at the time of its celebration. But the Civil Code is silent as to
who may bring an action to declare the marriage void. Does this mean
that any person can bring an action for the declaration of nullity of
marriage?
True, under the New Civil Code which is the law in force at the time the
respondents were married, or even in the Family Code, there is no
specific provision as to who can file a petition to declare the nullity of
marriage; however, only a party who can demonstrate proper

interest can file the same. A petition to declare the nullity of marriage,
like any other actions, must be prosecuted or defended in the name of
the real party-in-interest and must be based on a cause of action.
Thus, in Nial v. Badayog, the Court held that the children have the
personality to file the petition to declare the nullity of marriage of their
deceased father to their stepmother as it affects their successional
rights.

You might also like