G.R. No. 243722, January 22, 2020
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Cynthia, a Filipina, and Park, a South Korean national, got married in the City of Manila, Philippines on February 27, 2012. Unfortunately, their relationship turned sour and ended with a divorce by mutual agreement in South Korea. Cynthia filed before the RTC a Petition for the Judicial Recognition of a Foreign Divorce. The RTC granted the petition but the OSG filed a Motion for Reconsideration. The Motion for Reconsideration was denied by the RTC. The OSG appealed to the CA and the CA granted the appeal, hence this petition. The Supreme Court ruled that as confirmed by the ruling in Manalo, the divorce decree obtained by Park, with or without Cynthia’s conformity, falls within the scope of Article 26 (2) and merits recognition in this jurisdiction.
FACTS:
Cynthia, a Filipina, and Park, a South Korean national, got married in the City of Manila, Philippines on February 27, 2012. Unfortunately, their relationship turned sour and ended with a divorce by mutual agreement in South Korea. After the divorce was confirmed on July 16, 2012 by the Cheongju Local Court, Cynthia filed before the RTC a Petition for the Judicial Recognition of a Foreign Divorce. The RTC granted the petition but the OSG filed a Motion for Reconsideration arguing that (1) The Recognition Petition should have been filed in the RTC of Manila because the marriage was celebrated and was recorded in the City Civil Registry of Manila and (2) considering that the divorce was obtained not by the alien spouse alone but by both spouses, Cynthia is not qualified to avail of the benefits provided by [Article] 26 of the Family Code. The Motion for Reconsideration was denied by the RTC. The OSG appealed to the CA and the CA granted the appeal, hence this petition.
ISSUE:
Whether the divorce decree obtained jointly by a Filipina spouse and her foreign spouse can be recognized in the Philippines – YES
RULING AND DOCTRINE:
In the recent case of Manalo, the Court en banc extended the scope of Article 26 (2) to even cover instances where the divorce decree is obtained solely by the Filipino spouse. Pursuant to the majority ruling in Manalo, Article 26 (2) applies to mixed marriages where the divorce decree is: (i) obtained by the foreign spouse; (ii) obtained jointly by the Filipino and foreign spouse; and (iii) obtained solely by the Filipino spouse. Based on the records, Cynthia and Park obtained a divorce decree by mutual agreement under the laws of South Korea. The sufficiency of the evidence presented by Cynthia to prove the issuance of said divorce decree and the governing national law of her husband Park was not put in issue. Thus, the Court ruled that as confirmed by Manalo, the divorce decree obtained by Park, with or without Cynthia’s conformity, falls within the scope of Article 26 (2) and merits recognition in this jurisdiction.