Restituto filed for annulment of his marriage to Rosita, alleging they married without a license twice. Rosita asserts they had a valid marriage license from Carmona, Cavite. The court found the marriage license number on their contract and a certification from Carmona proved a license was issued. Restituto claimed neither were from Carmona, but the court ruled issuance outside a residence or without publication periods were irregularities that did not invalidate the marriage. The presumption is always in favor of a valid marriage. The court upheld the validity of Rosita and Restituto's marriage.
Restituto filed for annulment of his marriage to Rosita, alleging they married without a license twice. Rosita asserts they had a valid marriage license from Carmona, Cavite. The court found the marriage license number on their contract and a certification from Carmona proved a license was issued. Restituto claimed neither were from Carmona, but the court ruled issuance outside a residence or without publication periods were irregularities that did not invalidate the marriage. The presumption is always in favor of a valid marriage. The court upheld the validity of Rosita and Restituto's marriage.
Restituto filed for annulment of his marriage to Rosita, alleging they married without a license twice. Rosita asserts they had a valid marriage license from Carmona, Cavite. The court found the marriage license number on their contract and a certification from Carmona proved a license was issued. Restituto claimed neither were from Carmona, but the court ruled issuance outside a residence or without publication periods were irregularities that did not invalidate the marriage. The presumption is always in favor of a valid marriage. The court upheld the validity of Rosita and Restituto's marriage.
Restituto filed for annulment of his marriage to Rosita, alleging they married without a license twice. Rosita asserts they had a valid marriage license from Carmona, Cavite. The court found the marriage license number on their contract and a certification from Carmona proved a license was issued. Restituto claimed neither were from Carmona, but the court ruled issuance outside a residence or without publication periods were irregularities that did not invalidate the marriage. The presumption is always in favor of a valid marriage. The court upheld the validity of Rosita and Restituto's marriage.
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1/ 2
ALCANTARA VS ALCATARA
531 SCRA 446 Civil Law Family Code Marriage Valid Marriage Semper praesumitur pro matrimonio Restituto Alcantara filed a petition for annulment of marriage against Rosita Alcantara alleging that on December 8, 1982 he and Rosita, without securing the required marriage license, went to the Manila City Hall for the purpose of looking for a fixer who could arrange a marriage for them before a certain Rev. Navarro. They got married on the same day. Restituto and Rosita went through another marriage ceremony in Tondo, Manila, on March 26, 1983. The marriage was again celebrated without the parties securing a marriage license. The alleged marriage license, procured in Carmona, Cavite, appearing on the marriage contract, is a sham, as neither party was a resident of Carmona, and they never went to Carmona to apply for a license with the local civil registrar of the said place. In 1988, they parted ways and lived separate lives. Restituto prayed that after due hearing, judgment be issued declaring their marriage void and ordering the Civil Registrar to cancel the corresponding marriage contract and its entry on file. Rosita however asserts the validity of their marriage and maintains that there was a marriage license issued as evidenced by a certification from the Office of the Civil Registry of Carmona, Cavite; that Restituto has a mistress with whom he has three children; that Restituto only filed the annulment of their marriage to evade prosecution for concubinage. Rosita, in fact, has filed a case for concubinage against Restituto. ISSUE: Whether or not their marriage is valid. HELD: Yes. The requirement and issuance of a marriage license is the States demonstration of its involvement and participation in every marriage, in the maintenance of which the general public is interested. Restituto cannot insist on the absence of a marriage license to impugn the validity of his marriage. The cases where the court considered the absence of a marriage license as a ground for considering the marriage void are clear-cut. In this case, the marriage contract between the parties reflects a marriage license number. A certification to this effect was also issued by the local civil registrar of Carmona, Cavite. The certification moreover is precise in that it specifically identified the parties to whom the marriage license was issued, namely Restituto Alcantara and Rosita Almario, further validating the fact that a license was in fact issued to the parties herein. Restituto, in a faint attempt to demolish the probative value of the marriage license, claims that neither he nor respondent is a resident of Carmona, Cavite. Even then, the Supreme Court still holds that there is no sufficient basis to annul the marriage. Issuance of a marriage license in a city or municipality, not the residence of either of the contracting parties, and issuance of a marriage license despite the absence of publication or prior to the completion of the 10-day period for publication are considered mere irregularities that do not affect the validity of the marriage. An irregularity in any of the formal requisites of marriage does not affect its validity but the party or parties responsible for the irregularity are civilly, criminally and administratively liable. Semper praesumitur pro matrimonio. The presumption is always in favor of the validity of the marriage. Every intendment of the law or fact leans toward the validity of the marriage bonds. The Courts look upon this presumption with great favor. It is not to be lightly repelled; on the contrary, the presumption is of great weight.
