Article 15 of the Civil Code of the Philippines


Article 15. Laws relating to family rights and duties, or to the status, condition and legal capacity of persons are binding upon citizens of the Philippines, even though living abroad. (9a)


Art. 15 stresses the Nationality principle. Regardless where a Filipino citizen is residing abroad, he or she still govern with Philippine law with respect to his or her family rights and duties (includes parental authority, marital authority and support), status (includes personal qualities and relation), condition and legal capacity.


In the Case of: ALICE REYES VAN DORN, petitioner vs. HON. MANUEL V. ROMILLO, JR., as presiding judge and Richard Upton respondents.


FACTS: 

Petitioner Alice Reyes Van Dorn, a citizen of the Philippines and Richard Upton a private respondent  citizen of the United States were married in Hongkong in 1972 and after their  marriage they decided to reside here in the Philippines. On 1982, the parties got divorced in Nevada, United States. After the divorce the petitioner married again in Nevada but this time to Theodore Van Dorn.
On June 8, 1983, private respondent filed a suit against the petitioner, stating that the business in Ermita, Manila is a conjugal property and asking the petitioner to render an accounting for that business and that private respondent be declared with the right to managed the said conjugal property. Petitioner moved to dismiss the case on the ground that the cause of action is barred by previous judgment in the divorce proceedings before the Nevada Court wherein respondent had acknowledged that he and petitioner had "no community property". The private respondent avers that the divorce decree issued by the Nevada Court prevail over the prohibitive laws of the Philippines and its declared national policy.
ISSUE: 

 Is the divorce case filed between the private respondent Richard Upton and the petitioner in Nevada is binding in the Philippines wherein the petitioner is a Filipino Citizen.
HELD:

Yes, the divorce is binding as to the private respondent as an American citizen. That under Art. 15 of the Civil code of the Philippines, only Philippine nationals are covered by the policy against absolute divorce the same being considered contrary to our concept of public policy and morality. Though aliens may obtain divorces abroad which may be recognized in the Philippines, provided that they are valid to their national law. In this case, the divorce is also valid as to the petitioner. 

 Therefore, pursuant to his national law, private respondent is no longer the husband of petitioner. He would have no standing to sue in the case below as petitioner's husband entitled to exercise control over conjugal assets. He is bound by the Decision of his own country's Court, which validly exercised jurisdiction over him, and whose decision he does not repudiate, he is estopped by his own representation before said Court from asserting his right over the alleged conjugal property.
source://https://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1985/oct1985/gr_l68470_1985.html






Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Article 218 and 219 of the Family Code of the Philippines

Art. 218. The school, its administrators and teachers, or the individual, entity or institution engaged in child care shall have special parental authority and responsibility over the minor child while under their supervision, instruction or custody.   Authority and responsibility shall apply to all authorized activities whether inside or outside the premises of the school , entity or institution. (349a) Article 218 provides that, the persons and entities given by law special parental authority are the school, its administrators an teachers, or the individual,entity or institution engaged in child care. They are civilly liable for acts and omissions of unemancipated minor. However, the liabilities shall not apply if they proved that they exercised the proper diligence required under a particular circumstances. The liability is still attache while the minor child is under their supervision, instruction and custody and also to all authorized activities inside the premises of ...
Read more

Article 174 of the Family Code of the Philippines

Article 174. Legitimate children shall have the right: (1) To bear the surnames of the father and the mother, in conformity with the provisions of the Civil Code on Surnames; (2) To receive support from their parents, their ascendants, and in proper cases, their brothers and sisters, in conformity with the provisions of this Code on Support; and (3) To be entitled to the legitime and other successional rights granted to them by the Civil Code. (264a) Under paragraph 1 of article 174 provides that in the law of surname , it is provided that "legitimate and legitimated shall principally use the surname of the father" (Art.364). But the mother's surname may also be used (Art 174, Family code) Support is everything that is indispensable for sustenance, dwelling, clothing, and medical attendance, according to the social position of the family. The right to receive support cannot be renounced, nor can it be transmitted to a third person. Neither...
Read more