VI. ISSUE
Whether or not the divorce decree between Atty. Luna and Eugenia was valid, which will
decide who among the contending parties were entitled to the properties left behind by
Atty. Luna.
VII. RULING
No, divorce between Atty. Luna and Eugenia was void and ineffectual under the nationality
rule adopted by Philippine law. Hence, any settlement of property between the parties of
the first marriage involving Filipinos submitted as an incident of a divorce obtained in a
foreign country lacks competent judicial approval, and cannot be enforceable against the
assets of the husband who contracts a subsequent marriage.
Given the subsistence of the first marriage between Atty. Luna and Eugenia, the
presumption that Atty. Luna acquired the properties out of his own personal funds and
effort remained. It should then be justly concluded that the properties in litis legally
pertained to their conjugal partnership of gains as of the time of his death. Consequently,
the sole ownership of the 25/100pro indiviso share of Atty. Luna in the condominium unit,
and of the law books pertained to the respondents as the lawful heirs of Atty. Luna.