1

VDA. DE AVENIDO vs. AVENIDO (2014) [Best Evidence Rule] Electronic copy of the Marriage Contract between Eustaquio
Petitioner/s: PEREGRINA MACUA VDA. DE AVENIDO and Peregrina.
Respondent/s: TECLA HOYBIA AVENIDO Peregrina, on the other hand, presented the ff. evidences:
Ponente: PEREZ, J. o Her testimony that she was the legal wife; she took care of Eustaquio
when he was dying; her knowledge that Tecla was only a common-law
FACTS: wife.
Tecla Hoybia Avenido instituted a complaint for declaration of nullity of marriage o Documentary evidence:
against Peregrina Macua Vda. de Avenido with deceased Eustaquio Avenido on the Their marriage contract
ground of bigamy. Affidavit of Eustaquio declaring himself as single when he
o She claims that she is the lawful wife, their marriage having been contracted marriage with the petitioner although he had a
solemnized on September 30, 1942 in Talibon, Bohol and officiated by a common law relation with one Tecla Hoybia with whom he had
parish priest of the town. four (4) children namely: Climaco, Tiburcio, Editha and
Evidence: Marriage Certificate recorded with the Office of the Eustaquio, Jr., all surnamed Avenido
Local Civil Registrar (LCR) of Talibon, Bohol. Letter of Atty. Edgardo T. Mata dated 15 April 2002 to the Civil
However, this was destroyed because of WWII. Registrar of the Municipality of Alegria, Surigao del Norte
Only a Certification was issued by the LCR. Certification dated 25 April 2002 issued by Colita P. Umipig, in
o They had 4 children: Climaco, Avenido, Editha, and Eustaquio, Jr. her capacity as the Civil Registrar of Alegria, Surigao del Norte.
o In 1958, she was informed that Eustaquio, Sr. was in Davao living with RTC: for Peregrina
another woman, Buenaventura Sayson (died in 1977) CA: reversed
o In 1979, she claims that she found out that Eustaquio, Sr. married o TC erred in failing to consider testimony of Adelina (sister of Eustaquio Sr)
another woman, Peregrina (petitioner in this case) that she personally witnessed the wedding celebration of Eustaquio and
Peregrina, in her answer with counterclaim, claims that she is the legal wife of late Tecla
Eustaquio, Sr., their marriage having been celebrated on March 30, 1979 at St. Jude o Climaco, who testified that his mother [Tecla] was married to his father
Parish, Davao City. o documentary evidence
o Claims that this case was instituted to deprive her of the properties she due execution and the loss of the marriage contract, both
owns in her own right and as an heir of Eustaquio. constituting the condition sine qua non, for the introduction of
During trial, Tecla presented testimonial and documentary evidences: secondary evidence of its contents,
o Testimonies of Adelina, Climaco, and Tecla, herself.
o Documents: W/N the evidence presented during the trial proves the existence of the marriage of Tecla
Certification of Loss/Destruction of Record of Marriage from to Eustaquio? YES.
1900 to 1944 issued by the LCR, Talibon, Bohol TC did not give credence to the testimonies of Tecla, Adelina, and Climaco because
of the absence of a marriage contract considering them as self-serving assertions. It
Certification of Submission of a copy of Certificate of Marriage
did not consider the certifications issued by NSO.
to the Office of the Civil Registrar General, NSO, Manila.
o Relied on Section 3 (a) and Section 5, Rule 130 of the Rules of Court
Certification that Civil Registry records of births, deaths and
marriages that were actually filed in the NSO, Manila. CA, on the other hand, concluded that there was a presumption of lawful marriage
Certification that Civil Registry records submitted to the Office between Tecla and Eustaquio as they deported themselves as husband and wife
of the Civil Registrar General, NSO, from 1932 to the early part and begot 4 children.
of 1945, were totally destroyed during the liberation of Manila o Presumption + documentary evidence + testimonial evidence = sufficient
Certification of Birth of Apolinario, Eustaquio Jr., and Editha proof of the fact of marriage
Certification of Marriage between Eustaquio Sr. and Tecla SC upheld CA decision:
issued by the Parish Priest of Talibon, Bohol on 30 Sept 1942; o Anonuevo vs. Intestate Estate of Rodolfo Jalandoni: While a marriage
Certification that record of birth from 1900 to 1944 were certificate is considered the primary evidence of a marital union, it is not
destroyed by WWII, issued by Office of the Municipal Registrar regarded as the sole and exclusive evidence of marriage. Jurisprudence
of Talibon, Bohol, that they cannot furnish as requested a true teaches that the fact of marriage may be proven by relevant evidence
transcription from the Register of Birth of Climaco other than the marriage certificate. Hence, even a persons birth
Certificate of Baptism of Climaco indicating that he was born on certificate may be recognized as competent evidence of the marriage
30 March 1943 to spouses Eustaquio and Tecla between his parents.
 2
o Vda. de Jacob vs. CA: Proofs of the execution are not dependent on the
existence or non-existence of the document, and, as a matter of fact,
such proofs of the contents: due execution, besides the loss, has to be
shown as foundation for the introduction of secondary evidence of the
contents.
o Evidence of the execution of a document is, in the last analysis,
necessarily collateral or primary. It generally consists of parol testimony
or extrinsic papers. Even when the document is actually produced, its
authencity is not necessarily, if at all, determined from its face or recital of
its contents but by parol evidence. At the most, failure to produce the
document, when available, to establish its execution may effect the
weight of the evidence presented but not the admissibility of such
evidence.
Lim Tanhu vs. Ramolete: The Court has also held that [t]he loss may be shown by
any person who [knows] the fact of its loss, or by any one who ha[s] made, in the
judgment of the court, a sufficient examination in the place or places where the
document or papers of similar character are usually kept by the person in whose
custody the document lost was, and has been unable to find it; or who has made
any other investigation which is sufficient to satisfy the court that the instrument
[has] indeed [been] lost.
Here, the evidences presented by Tecla were relevant and competent:
o Testimony od Adelina and Tecla as living witnesses to the wedding
ceremony
o Certifications issued by NSO and LCR of Talibon, Bohol showing loss of
documents.
Since the due execution and the loss of the marriage contract were clearly shown
by the evidence presented, secondary evidence testimonial and documentary
may be admitted to prove the fact of marriage.
Pugeda vs. Trias: marriage may be proven by any competent and relevant
evidence. The testimony by one of the parties to the marriage or by one of the
witnesses to the marriage has been held to be admissible to prove the fact of
marriage. The person who officiated at the solemnization is also competent to
testify as an eyewitness to the fact of marriage.
Starting point is the presumption of marriage. Marriage in this jurisdiction is not
only a civil contract, but it is a new relation, an institution in the maintenance of
which the public is deeply interested. Consequently, every intendment of the law
leans toward legalizing matrimony. A presumption established by our Code of Civil
Procedure is that a man and a woman deporting themselves as husband and wife
have entered into a lawful contract of marriage. Semper praesumitur pro
matrimonio always presume marriage. (Adeong vs. Cheong Seng Gee)

DISPOSITIVE:
WHEREFORE, the Petition is DENIED and the assailed Decision of the Court of Appeals in
CA-G.R. CV No. 79444 is AFFIRMED. The marriage between petitioner Peregrina Macua
Avenido and the deceased Eustaquio Avenido is hereby declared NULL and VOID. No
pronouncement as to costs.