Yao Kee Vs Sy Gonzales - Case Digest

YAO KEE, SZE SOOK WAH, SZE LAI CHO, and SY CHUN YEN, The probate court ruled
The probate court ruled in favour of the oppositors and recognised Yao Kee
petitioners, vs. AIDA SY-GONZALES, MANUEL SY, TERESITA SY- as the wife of the late Sy Kiat and that Sze Sook Wah, Sze Lai Cho and Sze
BERNABE, RODOLFO SY, and HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS, Chum Yen are the legitimate children of Yao Kee with Sy Kiat
respondents.
CA
RELEVANT DOCTRINES The CA modified the decision of the lower court and ruled that the original
Rule on proving a foreign marriage. petitioners and oppositors were all acknowledged natural children of the
deceased, the petitioner being his children with Asuncion an unmarried
FACTS woman with whom he lived as husband and wife without benefit of marriage
Sy Kiat, a Chinese national died and left behind certain properties. Aida Sy- for many years and the oppositors being since the legality of the alleged
Gonzales, Manuel Sy, Teresita Sy-Bernabe and Rodolfo Sy (original marriage of Sy Kiat to Yao Kee in China had not been proven to be valid to
petitioners) filed a petition for the grant of letters of administration claiming that the laws of the Chinese People's Republic of China.
they were the children of the late Sy Kiat with deceased Asuncion Gillego. The
petition was opposed by Yao Kee, Sze Sook Wah, Sze Lai Cho and Sy Yun Both parties appealed the decision of the CA. Hence the instant petition.
Chen (oppositors) who alleged that: (a) Yao Kee is the lawful wife of Sy Kiat
whom he married on January 19, 1931 in China; (b) the other oppositors are ISSUE
the legitimate children of the deceased with Yao Kee. 1. WON the fact of marriage between Yao Kee and Sy Kiat in accordance
with Chinese customs was proved under existing rules.
CASES FILED 2. WON the petitioners are duty bound to prove the Chinese law on
Private respondents (original petitioners) filed a petition for the grant of letters marriage as judicial notice thereof.
of administration.
ARGUMENTS RULING
1. NO. The law requires that "a custom must be proved as a fact, according
PETITIONER to the rules of evidence”. On this score the Court had occasion to state
1. Petitioners argue that the marriage of Sy Kiat to Yao Kee in accordance that "a local custom as a source of right can not be considered by a court
with Chinese law and custom was conclusively proven. To support this of justice unless such custom is properly established by competent
argument, they relied on the following documentary evidence: (a) Yao Kee evidence like any other fact”. The same evidence, if not one of a higher
testified that she was married to Sy Kiat on January 19, 1931 in Fookien, degree, should be required of a foreign custom. Under Article 71 of the
China; that she does not have a marriage certificate because the practice Civil Code the Court has held that to establish a valid foreign marriage
during that time was for elders to agree upon the betrothal of their children; two things must be proven, namely: (1) the existence of the foreign law
(b) Gan Ching, Yao Kee’s brother also testified that he was one of the of as a question of fact; and (2) the alleged foreign marriage by convincing
the many people who attended the wedding ; (c) Sy Kiat’s master card and evidence. Proof of a written foreign law, on the other hand, is provided for
alien certifiedate of registration which stated that he was married to Yao under Rule 132 section 25. The court has interpreted section 25 to include
Kee and; (d)Certification from the Chinese embassy that Sy Kiat was a competent evidence like the testimony of a witness to prove the existence
Chinese national married to Yao Kee. of a foreign law. In the case at bar, the petitioners failed to present
competent evidence relative to the law and custom of China on marriage.
2. Petitioners contend that contrary to the Court of Appeals' ruling they are The testimonies of Yao and Gan Ching cannot be considered as proof of
not duty bound to prove the Chinese law on marriage as judicial notice China's law or custom on marriage not only because they are self- serving
thereof had been taken by this Court in the case of Sy Joc Lieng v. Sy evidence, but more importantly, there is no showing that they are
Quia. competent to testify on the subject matter. For failure to prove the foreign
law or custom, and consequently, the validity of the marriage in
accordance with said law or custom, the marriage between Yao Kee and
DECISIONS
Sy Kiat cannot be recognized in this jurisdiction.
PROBATE COURT
2. NO. Well-established in this jurisdiction is the principle that Philippine
courts cannot take judicial notice of foreign laws. They must be alleged
and proved as any other fact.
Therefore the CA did not err in its decision.

Yao Kee Vs Sy Gonzales - Case Digest

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Yao Kee Vs Sy Gonzales - Case Digest

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Yao Kee Vs Sy Gonzales - Case Digest

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

YAO KEE, SZE SOOK WAH, SZE LAI CHO, and SY CHUN YEN, The probate court ruled

Therefore the CA did not err in its decision.

You might also like