Republic of the Philippines v Crasus L.

Iyoy
Petitioner: Republic of the Philippines
Respondent: Crasus Iyoy

Doctrine: The Solicitor general takes over when the case for annulment or declaration of nullity
of marriage is elevated to the Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court.

Recit Ready: Crasus Iyoy filed a complaint for declaration of nullity of marriage against his
wife Fely, on the ground of psychological incapacity. He argued that Fely was hot-tempered, a
nagger and extravagant. He also stated that she left for US, leaving the family behind. There, she
sent him divorce papers and subsequently married an American and bore a child. The RTC ruled
in favor of Crasus, finding Fely psychologically incapable of complying with the essential
marital obligations. The Republic appealed with the CA, which affirmed the decision of the
RTC. The Republic filed for a motion of reconsideration, but was denied. The republic then
raised the issue before the Supreme Court. In his comment, Crasus questioned the personality of
the petitioner Republic, represented by the Office of the Solicitor General, to institute the instant
petition because Article 48 of the Family Code authorizes the prosecuting attorney or fiscal
assigned to the trial court, not the Solicitor General. The issue in this case is whether the
Solicitor General is authorized to intervene on behalf of the Republic in proceedings for
annulment and declaration of nullity of marriages. The Court held that the Solicitor General is
authorized to bring or defend actions of the People or the Republic once the case is bought
before the CA or SC. The intent of Article 48 is not to exclude the Solicitor General in
representing the Republic, but to ensure the interest of the State in proceedings for annulment
and declaration of nullity of marriages. Also, the Rule on Delcaration of Absolute Nullity of
Void Marriages and Annulment of Voidable Marriages, expressly grant the authority to the
Solicitor General to intervene in such proceedings before the RTC and on appeal to higher
courts. Therefore, the Solicitor General has authority to intervene in this case.

Facts:
On March 25, 1997, Crasus filed before the RTC a complaint for declaration of nullity of
marriage against Fely on the basis of Article 36 of the Family Code.
Crasus based Felys psychological incapacity on the following
o She is hot-tempered, a nagger, and extravagant
o Fely left for the United States, leaving all of their five children, the youngest then
being only six years old, to the care of Crasus
o She filed for divorce
o She married another and bore his child
The Regional Trial Court granted the petition and declared the marriage null and void
Republic filed an appeal with the Court of Appeals, which affirmed the decision of the
RTC
Republic raised the case to the Supreme Court
Respondent Crasus questioned the personality of petitioner Republic, represented by the
Office of the Solicitor Genneral, to institute the instant petitioner, because Article 48 of
 the Family Code authorizes the prosecuting attorney or fiscal assigned to the trail court,
not the Solicitor general, to intervene on behalf of the State, in proceedings for annulment
and declaration of nullity of marriages.

Issue: WN the Solicitor General is authorized to intervene on behalf of the Republic in

proceedings for annulment and declaration of nullity of marriages.

Held: YES
The general rule is that only the Solicitor general is authorized to bring or defend actions
on behalf of the People or the Republic of the Philippines once the case is brought before
the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court.
Also, Article 48 of the Family Code does not expressly bar the Solicitor General from
intervening in proceedings for annulment or declarations of nullity. The intent of Article
48 is to ensure that the interest of the State is represented and protected in such
proceedings. Bearing in mind that the Solicitor General is the principal law officer and
legal defender of the land, then his intervention is vital.
The Rule on Declaration of Absolute Nullity of Void Marriages and Annulment of
Voidable Marriages expressly granted the authority to the Solicitor General to intervene
and take part in the proceedings for annulment and declaration of nullity of marriages
before the RTC and on appeal to higher courts.
The Court also reversed the decision of the lower courts, stating that abandonment and
sexual infidelity of respondents wife do not per se constitute psychological incapacity.