FILIPINA Y. SY, petitioner, v. THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS, respondent.
G.R. No. 127263. April 12, 2000.
Facts:
On November 15, 1973 Filipina Sy and Fernando Sy got married at the Church of Our Lady of Lourdes in Quezon City. After some time, Fernando left their conjugal dwelling. Two children were born out of the marriage. Frederick, their son went to his father’s residence. Filipina filed for legal separation.
The Trial Court dissolved their conjugal partnership of gains and granted the custody of their children to her.
Later on, Filipina was punched at the different parts of her body and was even choked by him when she started spanking their son when the latter ignored her while she was talking to him.
The Trial Court convicted him for slight physical injuries only. A new action for legal separation was granted by repeated physical violence and sexual infidelity. Filipina then filed for the declaration of absolute nullity of their marriage citing psychological incapacity.
The Trial Court and Appellate Court denied her petition. On her petition to this Court, she assailed for the first time that there was no marriage license during their marriage.
Issues:
1) Whether or not the marriage between petitioner and private respondent is void from the beginning for lack of a marriage license at the time of the ceremony; and
2) Whether or not private respondent is psychologically incapacitated at the time of said marriage celebration to warrant a declaration of its absolute nullity.
Ruling:
The date of celebration of their marriage on November 15, 1973, is admitted both by petitioner and private respondent. The pieces of evidence on record showed that on the day of the marriage ceremony, there was no marriage license. A marriage license is a formal requirement; its absence renders the marriage void ab initio. In addition, the marriage contract shows that the marriage license, numbered 6237519, was issued in Carmona, Cavite, yet, neither petitioner nor private respondent ever resided in Carmona.
The marriage license was issued on September 17,1974, almost one year after the ceremony took place on November 15, 1973. The ineluctable conclusion is that the marriage was indeed contracted without a marriage license. Under Article 80 of the Civil Code. those solemnized without a marriage license, save marriages of exceptional character, are void ab initio. This is
clearly applicable in this case.
The remaining issue on the psychological incapacity of private respondent need no longer detain the Court. It is mooted by the conclusion that the marriage of petitioner to respondent is void ab initio for lack of a marriage license at the time their marriage was solemnized.
