Annulment 101

[swami]

I am posting hereunder the pertinent provisions of the Family Code.

 

ARTICLE 35. The following marriages shall be void from the beginning:

(1) Those contracted by any party below eighteen years of age even with the consent of parents or guardians;

(2) Those solemnized by any person not legally authorized to perform marriages unless such marriages were contracted with either or both parties believing in good faith that the solemnizing officer had the legal authority to do so;

(3) Those solemnized without license, except those covered the preceding Chapter;

(4) Those bigamous or polygamous marriages not falling under Article 41;

(5) Those contracted through mistake of one contracting party as to the identity of the other; and cdasia

(6) Those subsequent marriages that are void under Article 53.

 

ARTICLE 36. A marriage contracted by any party who, at the time of the celebration, was psychologically incapacitated to comply with the essential marital obligations of marriage, shall likewise be void even if such incapacity becomes manifest only after its solemnization. (n) (As amended by Executive Order No. 227, dated July 17, 1987)

 

ARTICLE 37. Marriages between the following are incestuous and void from the beginning, whether the relationship between the parties be legitimate or illegitimate:

(1) Between ascendants and descendants of any degree; and

(2) Between brothers and sisters, whether of the full or half blood.

 

ARTICLE 38. The following marriages shall be void from the beginning for reasons of public policy:

(1) Between collateral blood relatives, whether legitimate or illegitimate, up to the fourth civil degree;

(2) Between step-parents and step-children; cdt

(3) Between parents-in-law and children-in-law;

(4) Between the adopting parent and the adopted child;

(5) Between the surviving spouse of the adopting parent and the adopted child;

(6) Between the surviving spouse of the adopted child and the adopter;

(7) Between an adopted child and a legitimate child of the adopter;

(8) Between adopted children of the same adopter; and

(9) Between parties where one, with the intention to marry the other, killed that other person's spouse or his or her own spouse.

[lomex32]

You can fool NSO but you cant fool those who signed on the Marriage Contract including the Local Civil Registry .....

 

 

Marriage nullified meaning children are children of wedlock ...(absence of marriage)

 

mga sirs, how bout ung inaalok sa brother ko na huhugutin daw sa NSO ung orig na marriage cert nla at idedelete sa computer records? so pag ngkahanapan wala na? how will this affect his chance to marry again?

:goatee:

 

if the marriage was nullified, would that make the children bastards? since it is assumed that there was no marriage...

:goatee:

 

thanks!

[moed]

Art. 54 of the Family Code provides: "Children conceived or born before the judgment of annulment or absolute nullity of the marriage under Art. 36 has become final and executory, shall be considered legitimate."

[paolonaz]

Yes, the marriage is void if no prior marriage license was secured.

 

A marriage contract is technically a tripartite (3-party) contract among the husband, the wife and the State sanctioning it. Without the "consent" of the State first being secured through the obtention of a marriage license, the marriage is void.

 

sir so pano po procedure to get it void? thanks.

[SoundWave]

sir, tanong ko lang, yung naging anak sa bagong kinakasama pero kasal sa iba at nai-acknowlege naman sa birth certificate, ano po magiging status nya, legitimate or illegitimate?

[swami]

sir so pano po procedure to get it void? thanks.

 

You have to file a Petition for Declaration of Nullity of Marriage with the RTC. You will the services of counsel for this.

[swami]

sir, tanong ko lang, yung naging anak sa bagong kinakasama pero kasal sa iba at nai-acknowlege naman sa birth certificate, ano po magiging status nya, legitimate or illegitimate?

 

Dude, the status of the children will be illegitimate.

[moed]

Illegitimate yan dahil hinde kayo kasal sa isa't isa. Kung yung babae pa ang kasal sa iba delikado pa yung dalawa sa adultery.

[paolonaz]

You have to file a Petition for Declaration of Nullity of Marriage with the RTC. You will the services of counsel for this.

 

 

sir can you give me referrals? it says on my marriage certificate we where married under article 34.

whats that? thanks...

Edited August 9, 2009 by paolonaz

[swami]

sir can you give me referrals? it says on my marriage certificate we where married under article 34.

whats that? thanks...

 

Oh, now I get it. The reason why there was no marriage license was because you executed an affidavit stating that you two (2) had been living together as husband and wife (live in) for at least five years prior to the date of marriage. That's one of the exceptions provided by law. I think that's what ARt. 34 states. If parties have been living together as husband and wife for at least 5 years, they're exempt from securing a marriage license. They ccould get married right away. The solemnizing officer usually requires the parties to simply execute an affidavit to that effect.

 

I'm afraid you'll have to secure your annulment the hard way. PM me if you wish to discuss this privately.

[lomex32]

Atty swami

 

Some twists on Article 34

My wife and I executed this affidavit her age 22 mine 24

 

Can the undertaking of the exemption be challenged stating that she was a minor (22 yrs -5 = 17) then ?

 

 

Oh, now I get it. The reason why there was no marriage license was because you executed an affidavit stating that you two (2) had been living together as husband and wife (live in) for at least five years prior to the date of marriage. That's one of the exceptions provided by law. I think that's what ARt. 34 states. If parties have been living together as husband and wife for at least 5 years, they're exempt from securing a marriage license. They ccould get married right away. The solemnizing officer usually requires the parties to simply execute an affidavit to that effect.

 

I'm afraid you'll have to secure your annulment the hard way. PM me if you wish to discuss this privately.

[swami]

Atty swami

 

Some twists on Article 34

My wife and I executed this affidavit her age 22 mine 24

 

Can the undertaking of the exemption be challenged stating that she was a minor (22 yrs -5 = 17) then ?

 

Hmm. If I remember it correctly, there are 2 schools of thought here.

 

1. The first view states that during the said five-year cohabitation period, both parties must not be suffering from any impediment to marry each other (e.g., prior marriage, minority, etc)

 

2. The second view, however, maintains that it is not necessary that during the said five-year period, both parties must not be suffering from any impediment to marry each other. It is sufficient that they had been living with each other as husband and wife for five years and that on the day of the intended marriage, they are no longer suffering from said impediment.

 

I think majority of the legal scholars adhere to the first view.

[lomex32]

If such undertaking becomes void will the marriage be likewise?

 

What is your view on this then?

 

What can be the Sol Gen's defense on this argument?

 

 

I think majority of the legal scholars adhere to the first view.

[The_Blade]

how about if peke yung marriage lisence. for example kinuha sa cavite... eh sa qc city hall naman kinasal. pwede bang i pa void toh?

[swami]

If such undertaking becomes void will the marriage be likewise?

 

What is your view on this then?

 

What can be the Sol Gen's defense on this argument?

 

If we were to follow the first view, then the marriage is void. If the second, the marriage is valid.

I personally adhere to the first view. It will be nice to bring this matter for resolution by the courts.

 

In cases like this where the legal issues are not clear cut, the SolGen will almost always take the contrary view, if only to give the Supreme Court the opportunity to finally rule on the matter.