PUBLICATIONS ! GALLERY !
SEARCH …
De#ciencies of
the Family Code
of the
Philippines (II): SUBSCRIBE
TO
Void and FAITHWATC
H
Voidable
Marriages?
Time and again, I have been baffled by the distinction made in the
Philippine Family Code between the so called “void” and “voidable”
marriages. In Canon Law, that distinction would not make any
sense, since in the first place, a valid marriage cannot be voided—
which would be tantamount to the breaking of the marriage bond
(divorce). In the second place, a close reading of the factors
typifying one and the other defective marriage in civil law does not
really result in an essential difference. What is the rationale behind
such distinction?
N.B. In Family
Code this falls
N.B. In Family
Code this falls
under voidable
marriage.
Art.38, (1):
Between collateral
blood relatives up
to 4th civil degree.
In CIC this
results in void
marriage.
One might ask: What makes these three cases any different
from the others, which the Family Code classifies as void from
the start? Why should they be considered valid until set aside
by a competent court? For that matter, are not all marriages—
duly celebrated/solemnized—really considered valid until set
aside by a competent court?
* + , -
. PREVIOUS NEXT /
RELATED POSTS