Anda di halaman 1dari 6


Mom cannot vest custody in maternal grandma instead

5. Follows parents.
Art 211 FC. [DE FACTO SEP; RELATIONS WITH CHILDREN] The father a. Exercise of rights of parental authority is governed by
and the mother shall jointly exercise parental authority over the national law; parent exercising it, although residing
persons of their common children. In case of disagreement, the abroad with children, does not lose such right, but
father's decision shall prevail, unless there is a judicial order to the carried it wherever.
contrary. 6. Duties of children.
a. To obey parents as long as they are under parental
Children shall always observe respect and reverence towards their authority  temporary.
parents and are obliged to obey them as long as the children are b. To respect and honor them at all times  forever.
under parental authority. (311a) i. Mother: should always be held sacred, honored,
venerated, because of sacrifices. All the more
1. Joint parental authority. reason to if she is illiterate, unfortunate, etc.
a. But mom’s authority is sub to that of dad in case of ii. Duty does not mean child is barred from fulfilling
conflict; since latter is head of family legal/ moral/ social obligations as expense of
b. Art 225: in case of disagreement, dad is preferred in said reverence.
administration of property of children. c. Sanction of duties:
c. Art 14: right to give or deny consent to marriage of i. Criminal liability upon complaint of parents (Act
child is dad’s first. No. 402).
d. Art 2180 CC: responsibility of quasi-delicts of child is ii. Art 223 FC: remedy provided to enforce parental
vested in dad authority.
i. Only in case of death or incapacity of dad shall iii. Duty of children after emancipation does not
these be given to mom. have civil/criminal sanction, EXCEPT when
e. If spouses fail to come up with an agreement, Court disrespect amount to physical maltreatment or
shall decide who shall have custody and who shall have grossly insulting language (ground for
visitation rights (based on Art 213 FC1). disinheritance).
f. Tender Years Presumption – that only mother can 7. Santos, Sr. v CA: Only when the parent present is shown to be
provide love and other basic needs of child of tender unfit or unsuitable may the grandparents exercise substitute
years (7 y.o.) parental authority.
g. Whether the child is below or above (7) years, Court 8. Sy v CA & Perez v CA: The foremost consideration in
decides whether there are compelling reasons for
determining which parent will have custody of child is always
custody to be given to dad (if below 7), or to parent
welfare and best interest of the child; foremost consideration
not chosen.
2. Adopted children. is the physical, educational, social and moral welfare of the
a. if adopted by only (1) parent  authority of that child.
parent only.
b. If both adopted  joint authority DE FACTO SEPARATION; EFFECT ON PROPERTY
3. Illegitimate children.
Art 127 FC. The separation in fact between husband and wife shall
a. Authority of mother (Art 176)
not affect the regime of conjugal partnership, except that:
b. But if mom marries other than dad of such child 
Court may appoint guardian, if better for child. (1) The spouse who leaves the conjugal home or refuses to live
4. Authority limited to parents. therein, without just cause, shall not have the right to be
a. As long as alive and have not lost authority. supported;
i. Otherwise, other relatives take over as provided
by law. (2) When the consent of one spouse to any transaction of the other
ii. If not relative, appointed guardian. is required by law, judicial authorization shall be obtained in a
iii. Or asylum, or orphanage, person (adoption) etc. summary proceeding;
iv. Aunt of minors, by virtue of relationship per se,
is not entitled to such legal custody. (3) In the absence of sufficient conjugal partnership property, the
b. Even if parents are minors. separate property of both spouses shall be solidarily liable for the

1 parent so chosen be unfit to take charge of the child by reason of moral

Art 213 FC. In case of separation of the parents, parental authority shall be
exercised by the parent designated by the Court. The Court shall take into depravity, habitual drunkenness, incapacity, or poverty. If upon such hearing,
account all relevant considerations, especially the choice of the child over (7) it appears that both parents are improper persons to have the care, custody,
years of age, unless the parent chosen is unfit: and control of the child, the court may either designate the paternal or
- Poverty maternal grandparent of the child, or his oldest brother or sister, or some
- Moral depravity reputable and discreet person to take charge of such child, or commit it to
- Habitual drunkenness any suitable asylum, childrens home, or benevolent society. The court may in
SEC. 6. Proceedings as to child whose parents are separated. Appeal. When conformity with the provisions of the Civil Code order either or both parents
husband and wife are divorced or living separately and apart from each to support or help support said child, irrespective of who may be its
other, and the question as to the care, custody and control of a child or custodian, and may make any order that is just and reasonable permitting
children of their marriage is brought before a Regional Trial Court by petition the parent who is deprived of its care and custody to visit the child or have
or as an incident to any other proceeding, the court, upon hearing the temporary custody thereof. Either parent may appeal from an order made in
testimony as may be pertinent, shall award the care, custody and control of accordance with the provisions of this section. No child under seven years of
each such child as will be for its best interest, permitting the child to choose age shall be separated from its mother, unless the court finds there are
which parent it prefers to live with if it be over ten years of age, unless the compelling reasons therefor.
support of the family. The spouse present shall, upon petition in a dwelling, or failed to give info as to his/her whereabouts, shall prima
summary proceeding, be given judicial authority to administer or facie be presumed to have no intention of returning to conjugal
encumber any specific separate property of the other spouse and dwelling; that spouse did not at least provide for one’s family
use the fruits or proceeds thereof to satisfy the latter's although able to.
share. (178a)
1. Art 178(3) CC4:
1. [Comments same as article 100.] a. This has already been superseded by Art 128 FC: “If a
spouse w/o just cause abandons the other or fails to
DE FACTO SEPARATION; EFFECT ON PROPERTY; comply with his or her obligations to the family, the
CONSENT TO TRANSACTIONS aggrieved spouse may petition the court for
receivership, for judicial separation of property, or for
1. Admin and enjoyment of properties belonging to ACP or CPG authority to be the sole administrator of the conjugal
belong to both spouses jointly2. partnership property, subject to such precautionary
2. Acts of ownership such as sale, mortgage of props require conditions as the court may impose.
written authority of both spouses without which disposition or b. Obligations to fam refer to marital, parental or
encumbrance shall be void. property relations.
3. Spouse may not donate any property w/o consent of other, c. As early as 1942, Jo already rejected Partosa when he
except for moderate gifts during times of happiness or grief.3 refused to accept her sa home  shows lack of
4. Unavailability of such requires judicial authorization (but only intention to resume conjugal relationship.
subsidiary) to be able to sustain family. d. Partosa may also invoke that Jo failed, w/o just cause,
to comply with his obligations to the fam  he had
Art 239 FC. When a husband and wife are separated in fact, or one other women and children!
has abandoned the other and one of them seeks judicial e. (SIDENOTE: although the original case used the Civil
authorization for a transaction where the consent of the other Code as legal basis, the decision of the SC used the FC
spouse is required by law, but such consent is withheld or cannot because courts, upon the appeal of a previous
be obtained, a verified petition may be filed in court alleging the decision, will abide by intermediate changes in the
foregoing facts. law which may render previous decisions erroneous),
The petition shall attach the proposed deed, if any, embodying the 2. Art 135 FC(6)5
transaction, and, if none, shall describe in detail the said a. Can assert that after (1) year, reconciliation is highly
transaction and state the reason why the required consent thereto improbable.
cannot be secured. In any case, the final deed duly executed by the
parties shall be submitted to and approved by the court. (n)
Art 242 FC. Upon the filing of the petition, the court shall notify the JUDICIAL DECLARATION OF PROPERTY
other spouse, whose consent to the transaction is required, of said
petition, ordering said spouse to show cause why the petition 1. Art 135(4) FC: a person whose spouse had abandoned him or
should not be granted, on or before the date set in said notice for her or failed to comply with his/her obligations to fam may ask
the initial conference. The notice shall be accompanied by a copy for a judicial separation of property.
of the petition and shall be served at the last known address of the 2. Spouse is deemed to have abandoned other when s/he left
spouse concerned. (n) conjugal home w/o intention of returning.
3. Spouse who left conjugal dwelling for (3) mos or failed within
Art 246 FC. If the petition is not resolved at the initial conference, same period to give any info as to his/her whereabouts shall be
said petition shall be decided in a summary hearing on the basis of prima facie presumed to have no intention of returning to the
affidavits, documentary evidence or oral testimonies at the sound conjugal home.
discretion of the court. If testimony is needed, the court shall 4. Each spouse may own exclusively all his own earnings and fruits
specify the witnesses to be heard and the subject-matter of their of his separate property.
testimonies, directing the parties to present said witnesses. (n) 5. Obligation to support children continues.
a. Contribution is proportionate to income or property.
Art 247 FC. The judgment of the court shall be immediately final
6. Mutual obligation to support one another continues, unlike in
and executory. (n)
LS where property and personal relations cease.
*Abandonment – a departure by one spouse with the avowed intent 1. Additional remedy for spouse left behind: law allows him/her
never to return  Spouse, within (3) mos) who has left conjugal to obtain court approval to administer exclusive property of

2 Art 124 FC 5Art 135(6): Any of the ff shall be considered sufficient cause for judicial
3 Art 125 FC separation of property:
4 (6) That at the time of the petition, the spouses have been separated in fact
Article 178(3). The separation in fact between husband and wife without
judicial approval, shall not affect the conjugal partnership, except that: for at least (1) year and reconciliation is highly improbable.
(3) If the husband has abandoned the wife without just cause for at least
one year, she may petition the court for a receivership, or administration by
her of the conjugal partnership property, or separation of property. (n)
other spouse who has been judicially declared absentee (Art ii.
Transaction entered by a spouse during de
142(2). facto separation, if law requires consent,
2. Also allowed when one spouse becomes a fugitive from justice judicial authorization shall be obtained in a
or is in hiding as an accused in a criminal case. summary proceeding (Art 100 & 127 FC).
iii. In terms of support of fam, if community or
OTHER REMEDIES conjugal partnership is insufficient, spouse’s
separate property shall be solidarily liable,
1. RA 9262 Anti-VAWC Act: If husband abandoned wife, she may via judicial authority to administer/
resort to application of protection order. encumber any specific property to satisfy
a. Depriving/threatening to deprive woman or her latter’s share.
children of financial support legally due her or her 2. ANNULMENT AND NULLITY
fam. a. Divorce: Grounds emerge only during marriage.
b. Deliberately providing insufficient financial support b. Annulment: grounds already existent during
for woman’s children. With purpose of controlling or celebration; marriage is considered valid until
restricting woman or children’s movement/conduct. annulled; but there is prescription (typically 5 years)
c. Causing mental or emotional anguish, public ridicule that upon lapse, shall validate marriage forever via
or humiliation to woman or children. ratification.
d. Denying financial support/custody of minor children. c. Nullity: Grounds in Art 35-38 must have already
2. Protection order – purpose of “safeguarding victim from existed during celebration, EXCEPT for Art 36, which is
further harm, minimizing any disruption in victim’s daily life, dubbed as PH-style-divorce, because of
facilitating opportunity and ability of victim to independently misconception that it allows for grounds that emerge
regain control over her life” during marriage and after celeb.
a. May compel hubby to provide support for wife and i. Source of misconception: committee; when
children. it intended Judicial declaration of nullity to
b. By ordering appropriate % of income or salary of resolve the church’s opposition to divorce,
respondent to be withheld regularly by respondent’s deriving from Canon Law its grounds for
employer, and automatically remitted to woman. annulment.
c. Failure to remit/withhold or delay of such w/o ii. This misconception also tends to support
justification shall render respondent and employer those who argue that there is not need for
liable for indirect contempt. such since Art 36 already exists.
d. Types: iii. Marcos v Marcos: Article 36 FC is not to be
i. Barangay Protection Order (BPO) confused with divorce law that cuts the
ii. Temporary Protection Order (TPO) marital bond at the time the causes
iii. Permanent Protection Order (PPO) therefor manifest themselves. It refers to a
serious psychological illness afflicting a
DIVORCE party even before the celebration of the
marriage. It must be grave, incurable,
DIVORCE; BRIEF HISTORY antecedent, that prevents persons from
[JUST READ MA’AM BOOK, IT’S SO LONG] understanding/fulfilling duties and
responsibilities of matrimonial bond under


a. Legal separation is relative divorce (Art 55 FC).
b. LS: (separation of bed and board) does not result in DIVORCE; FOREIGN DIVORCES; FIL CITIZEN
dissolution of marital ties but modifies incidents of
marriage relationship by relieving spouses of duty of ***Art 15 CC. Laws relating to family rights and duties, or to the
living with each other. It does not necessarily affect status, condition and legal capacity of persons are binding upon
their economic rights and duties, since the Court may citizens of the Philippines, even though living abroad. (9a)
order the spouse who gave cause for separation to 1. Two theories on personal law
provide for support of the innocent spouse and a. Domiciliary theory – necessary connection between
common children (Art 62 FC) individual and State is sourced from fact that indiv is
c. Absolute divorce: (divorce a vincula matrimonii) domiciled in that State.
termination of legal marriage after which the i. Followed in US.
marriage vows are permanently severed. Spouses b. Nationality theory – nationality or citizenship is basis
have no rights or obligs unto each other. It is for determining personal laws of indiv.
therefore essential that court has personal 2. Nationality theory.
jurisdiction over the respondent spouse and the a. Started in the Napoleon Code.
spouses’ ACP/CPG that it seeks to affect by its decree. b. That the person’s rights should be determined by
d. De facto separation: In case of such separation, political allegiance owing to the awareness during the
regimes are unaffected. FC enumerates qualifications French revolution.
for this rule. 3. Application of Article.
i. Spouse who leaves home or refuses to live a. Purely personal relations, and status and capacity for
there, w/o justifiable cause, shall lose right juristic acts.
to be supported (Art 100 & 127)
b. All questions on marriage, legal separation, divorce, immediately preceding Article; otherwise, the
conjugal partnership, support between members of subsequent marriage shall be null and void
fam, marital authority are governed exclusively by PH b. Art. 52. The judgment of annulment or of absolute
laws, when Filipinos are involved. nullity of the marriage, the partition and distribution
c. Capacity to contract – If under the law of the State of of the properties of the spouses and the delivery of
which the party to a contract is a citizen, he is already the children's presumptive legitimes shall be
of age, he cannot set such contract aside on the recorded in the appropriate civil registry and
ground of minority in the PH. registries of property; otherwise, the same shall not
d. Renunciation of allegiance – process of ridding self of affect third persons. (n)
current citizenship concerns his national law. 5. Art. 36. A marriage contracted by any party who, at the time of
e. Foreign adoption – Private International Law: status the celebration, was psychologically incapacitated to comply
of adoption, created by law of State having jurisdiction with the essential marital obligations of marriage, shall likewise
over it, is given the same effect in another state as is be void even if such incapacity becomes manifest only after its
given by the latter to the status of adoption when solemnization.
created by its own law. 6. Art. 37. Marriages between the following are incestuous and
i. This principle is recognized in PH, EXCEPT when void from the beginning, whether relationship between the
public policy or interests of its inhabitants forbid parties be legitimate or illegitimate:
its enforcement and demand the substitution of a. Between ascendants and descendants of any degree;
the. and
4. This article apples to all Filipinos wherever they are residing. It b. Between brothers and sisters, whether of the full or
does not matter that Fil spouses have long domiciled in a half blood.
country which allows divorce. 7. Art. 38. The following marriages shall be void from the
5. Tho courts of competent jurisdiction in the place of domicile beginning for reasons of public policy:
grant divorce, such will not be recognized in PH  we have no a. Between collateral blood relatives whether legitimate
divorce decree  we do not have legal capacity to obtain or illegitimate, up to the fourth civil degree;
divorce  we cannot enter into a subsequent marriage after b. Between step-parents and step-children;
divroce. c. Between parents-in-law and children-in-law;
d. Between the adopting parent and the adopted child;
Art 25 FC. The local civil registrar concerned shall enter all e. Between the surviving spouse of the adopting parent
applications for marriage licenses filed with him in a registry book and the adopted child;
strictly in the order in which the same are received. He shall record f. Between the surviving spouse of the adopted child
in said book the names of the applicants, the date on which the and the adopter;
marriage license was issued, and such other data as may be g. Between an adopted child and a legitimate child of
necessary. (n) the adopter;
h. Between adopted children of the same adopter; and
Art 26 FC. All marriages solemnized outside the PH in accordance
i. Between parties where one, with the intention to
with the laws in force in the country there were solemnized, and
marry the other, killed that other person's spouse, or
valid there as such, shall also be valid in this country, except those
his or her own spouse. (82)
prohibited under Art 35(1), (4), (5), (6), 36, 37, and 38.

Where a marriage between a Filipino citizen and a foreigner is DIVORCE; FOREIGN DIVORCES; BETWEEN TWO FILS
validly celebrated and a divorce is thereafter validly obtained
***Art 15 CC. Laws relating to family rights and duties, or to the
abroad by the alien spouse capacitating him or her to remarry, the
status, condition and legal capacity of persons are binding upon
Filipino spouse shall have capacity to remarry under Philippine law.
citizens of the Philippines, even though living abroad. (9a)
1. Art 35(1): Those contracted by any party below eighteen years
SOME RULES ON FOREIGN DIVORCES (Tenchavez v Escano 1965):
of age even with the consent of parents or guardians;
2. Art 35(4): Those bigamous or polygamous marriages not failing 1. That a foreign divorce between Fil citizens, sought and
under Article 41 decreed after the effectivity of present CC (RA 386) is not
a. Art. 41. A marriage contracted by any person during entitled to recognition as valid in this jurisdiction; and neither
subsistence of a previous marriage shall be null and is the marriage contracted with another party by the divorced
void, unless before the celebration of the subsequent consort, subsequently to the foreign decree of divorce,
marriage, the prior spouse had been absent for four entitled to validity in the country.
consecutive years and the spouse present has a well- 2. That the marriage of divorces wife and her cohabitation with a
founded belief that the absent spouse was already person other than the lawful husband entitle the latter to a
dead. In case of disappearance where there is danger decree of LS conformably to PH law.
of death under the circumstances set forth in the 3. That the desertion and securing of an invalid divorce decree
provisions of Article 391 CC, an absence of only two by one consort entitles the other to recover damages.
years shall be sufficient. 4. That the action for alienation of affections against the parents
3. Art 35(5): Those contracted through mistake of one contracting of one consort does not lie in the absence of proof of malice
party as to the identity of the other; and or unworthy motives on their part.
4. Art 35(6): Those subsequent marriages that are void under
a. Art. 53. Either of the former spouses may marry again MARRIAGE BETWEEN A FIL AND ALIEN
after compliance with the requirements of the
After the case of Tenchacez and Escano, before amendment of Art longer married because of a divorce obtained abroad that is
26, SC decided the landmark case of Van Dorn Romillo, Jr. which recognized by his or her national law.
gave recognition to foreign divorce decree obtained by an alien a. The main opinion cites the following SC decisions
spouse married to a Filipino. Court ruled that dissolution of marriage where it recognized foreign divorce and extended its
brought bout by a foreign divorce decree should bind not only the legal effects:
alien, but also the Fil spouse. This was designed to put an end to the 12. Repulic v. Obercido III: Art 26(2), allowing former spouses of
bizzare situation of a Filipino still being married to a foreigner who, aliens, who obtained divorce abroad, to remarry under PH laws,
by the latter’s own law, is no longer married to the Fil. includes those whose spouse were naturalized at the time the
divorce was obtained. Citizenship at time of divorce decree was
JURISPRUDENCE obtained is considered, NOT at time of marriage.
De Facto Separation: 13. Van Dorn v. Romillo: Gave recognition to foreign divorce
decree obtained by an alien spouse married to a Filipino
1. Lacson v San Jose: The law allows the separation of property of 14. Fujiki v. Marinay: Prior foreign spouse can petition to nullify
the spouses and the dissolution of their conjugal partnership bigamous marriage in a foreign court.
provided judicial sanction is secured beforehand.
a. “In the absence of an express declaration in the A foreign judgment relating to the status of a marriage affects
the civil status, condition and legal capacity of its parties.
marriage settlements, the separation of property
However, the effect of a foreign judgment is not automatic. To
between the spouses during the marriage shall not
extend the effect of a foreign judgment in the Philippines,
take place save in virtue of a judicial order” (Art 190, Philippine courts must... determine if the foreign judgment is
CC). consistent with domestic public policy and other mandatory
b. “The husband and the wife may agree upon the laws.[60] Art 15 CC provides that "[l]aws relating to family
dissolution of the conjugal partnership during the rights and duties, or to the status, condition and legal capacity
marriage, subject to judicial approval…” (Art 191, CC) of persons are... binding upon citizens of the Philippines, even
2. Estrada v Escritor: Entering into illicit relationships with a 3rd though living abroad." This is the rule of lex nationalii in private
persons constitute civil, criminal liability for adultery/ international law. Thus, the Philippine State may require, for
concubinage, or administrative liability for immoral conduct. effectivity in the Philippines, recognition by Philippine courts of
3. Banaag v Espeleta: Extra-marital cohabitation as a ground for a foreign judgment... affecting its citizen, over whom it
immoral conduct, civil and criminal liability. exercises personal jurisdiction relating to the status, condition
4. Santos Sr. v CA: Only when the parent present is shown to be and legal capacity of such citizen.
unfit or unsuitable may the grandparents exercise substitute A petition to recognize a foreign judgment declaring a marriage
parental authority. void does not require relitigation under a Philippine court of the
5. Perez v CA: The foremost consideration in determining which case as if it were a new petition for declaration of nullity of
parent will have custody of child is always welfare and best marriage. Philippine courts cannot presume to know the foreign
interest of the child. laws under which the... foreign judgment was rendered. They
6. Salientes v Abanilla: In absence of judicial grant of custody cannot substitute their judgment on the status, condition and
(because de facto separated only), both parents are still legal capacity of the foreign citizen who is under the jurisdiction
entitled to custody of the child. of another state. Thus, Philippine courts can only recognize the
7. Davidas v Villanueva: In order to entitle a wife to maintain a foreign judgment as a fact according to... the rules of evidence.
separate home and to require separate maintenance from her 15. Medina v. Koike: The Filipina and her foreign husband jointly
husband, it is not necessary that the husband should bring a files for a divorce. It must be proven as a fact according to the
concubine into the marital domicile. Repeated illicit relations Rules on Evidence.
with women outside of the marital establishment are enough. 16. Pilapil v Ibay-Somera: Where a foreign court has granted
The law is not so unreasonable as to require a wife to live in divorce between the alien spouse and Filipino, the divorce
marital relations with a husband whose propensity towards decree binds the Filipino spouse as well.
other women makes common habitation with him unbearable. 17. Llorente v CA: Aliens, (In this case, Lorenzo became an alien by
8. Chua Ching Beng compared with Del Rosario v Del Rosario: virtue of his naturalization in the US) meanwhile, may obtain
Relationship problems with in-laws MAY justify de facto absolute divorces abroad, provided they are valid according to
separation. law.
9. Partosa-Jo v CA: Abandonment – a departure by one spouse 18. Corpuz v Sto Tomas: 26(2) is meant to benefit the Filipino
with the avowed intent never to return Spouse, within (3) spouse ONLY. In this case though, foreign spouse was granted
mos) who has left conjugal dwelling, or failed to give info as to recognition of foreign judgment since it will also benefit his Fil
his/her whereabouts, shall prima facie be presumed to have no spouse.
intention of returning to conjugal dwelling; that spouse did not 19. Manalo: Ma’am says she did not like the ruling here, not
at least provide for one’s family although able to. because it was unpleasant, but because it was legally wrong. PH
may only recognize divorce decrees from abroad if it is
Divorce: OBTAINED (versus initiated) by the foreign spouse. Not the
10. Tenchavez v Escano: Divorce obtained abroad by Fil against Fil Filipino. (NOTE: Please correct me if I’m wrong)
spouse is unrecognized in PH. 20. Quita v CA: The Court therein hinted, by way of obiter dictum,
11. Judge Sempio-Diy: Article 26 par. 2 of the Family Code was that a Filipino (Obrecido) divorced by his naturalized foreign
enacted to avoid the absurd situation of a Filipino still being spouse (Villanueva) is no longer married under Phil law and can
married to his or her alien spouse, although the latter is no thus remarry.
Sections 24 and 25 of Rule 132
Garcia v Recio:

1. Before a foreign divorce decree can be recognized by our

courts, the party pleading it must prove the divorce as a fact
and demonstrate its conformity to the foreign law allowing it.
a. It is insufficient to just present the divorce decree.
2. Under Sections 246 and 257 of Rule 132, a writing or document
may be proven as a public or official record of a foreign country
by either:
a. an official publication
b. a copy thereof attested by the officer having legal
custody of the document.
3. If the document isn’t kept in the Philippines, the copy must be
a. accompanied by a certificate issued by the proper
diplomatic or consular officer in the Philippine
Foreign Service stationed in that foreign country in
which the record is kept
b. authenticated by the seal of his office

CONCLUSION BY MA’AM (after discussing Fujiki):

From these cases, we can observe the restrictive substantive and

procedural rules that attend the recognition of foreign divorce
decrees involving Filipinos. To simplify these convoluted laws and
avoid the unjust results of an unrecognized foreign judgment, our
laws should give legal effect to a divorce decree obtained abroad,
regardless of whether it was the alien or Filipino spouse who filed
the petition, for as long as their marital domicile was in that
foreign State.

Section 24. Proof of official record. — The record of public documents
referred to in paragraph (a) of Section 19, when admissible for any purpose, 7Section 25. What attestation of copy must state. — Whenever a copy of a
may be evidenced by an official publication thereof or by a copy attested by document or record is attested for the purpose of evidence, the attestation
the officer having the legal custody of the record, or by his deputy, and must state, in substance, that the copy is a correct copy of the original, or a
accompanied, if the record is not kept in the Philippines, with a certificate specific part thereof, as the case may be. The attestation must be under the
that such officer has the custody. If the office in which the record is kept is in official seal of the attesting officer, if there be any, or if he be the clerk of a
foreign country, the certificate may be made by a secretary of the embassy court having a seal, under the seal of such court. (26a)
or legation, consul general, consul, vice consul, or consular agent or by any
officer in the foreign service of the Philippines stationed in the foreign
country in which the record is kept, and authenticated by the seal of his
office. (25a)