Technical decision

Under Article 41 of the Family Code, a married person whose spouse has been absent for four consecutive years can marry again if he/she is able to prove in a summary proceeding filed in court that his/her spouse has been missing for four years and she/he has a well founded belief that the absent spouse is already dead. As to what constitutes a “well founded belief” is answered in this case of Yoly.

In 1991, Yoly met Rolly at an electronics company in Parañaque where they were both working. The two eventually got married on March 3, 1993. Their marriage resulted in the birth of a son.

But sometime in May 1994, the electronics company closed down, forcing Rolly to go to Taiwan to seek employment there. From that time on, Yoly had not received any communication from her husband notwithstanding efforts to locate and get in touch with him.

So after nine years of waiting, Yoly filed a petition in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) to have Rolly declared presumptively dead. In the hearing of the petition, Yoly testified and told the court about Rolly’s leaving them, going to Taiwan and never heard from again. Her brother likewise testified that he had inquired from Rolly’s relatives as to his whereabouts but to no avail.

On February 7, 2005, the RTC rendered a decision declaring Rolly as presumptively dead. This decision was questioned by the Republic of the Philippines, represented by the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) by filing a Notice of Appeal to the Court of Appeals after its motion for reconsideration was denied by the RTC. The OSG contended that Yoly failed to exert earnest efforts to locate Rolly and thus failed to prove her well founded belief that he was already dead. Was the OSG correct?

Yes. The belief of the present spouse must be the result of proper and honest to goodness inquiries and efforts to ascertain the whereabouts of the absent spouse and whether the absent spouse is still alive or already dead. Whether or not the spouse present acted on a well founded belief of death of the absent spouse depends upon the inquiries to be drawn from a great many circumstances occurring before and after the disappearance of the absent spouse and the nature and extent of the inquiries made by the present spouse.

In this case, Yoly did not initiate a diligent search to locate her absent husband. While her brother testified to having inquired from the latter’s relatives, these relatives were not presented to corroborate his testimony. If Yoly were diligent in her search for her husband, she would have sought information from the Taiwanese Consular Office or assistance from other government agencies in Taiwan or the Philippines. She could have also utilized mass media for this end, but she did not. Worse, she failed to explain these omissions.

Nevertheless, since the petition for declaration of presumptive death is a summary proceeding, the decision of the RTC is immediately final and executory, and hence, not subject to ordinary appeal. The attempt to question it through a mere Notice of Appeal is unavailing. The OSG should have filed a Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court for grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction on the part of the RTC.

On technical grounds therefore, Yoly won the case. The RTC decision having become final could no longer be reversed or modified (Republic vs. Granada, G.R. 187512, June 13, 2012).

Note: Books containing compilation of my articles on Labor Law (Vol. I) and Criminal Law Volumes I and II are now available at 403 Sunrise Condominium, 226 Ortigas Ave. Greenhills, tel. 7249445. Our e-mail address: [email protected]