Cosca V Palaypayon

Cosca v.
Palaypayon ISSUE: WON Judge Palaypayon should be held liable under

AM MTJ-92-721 | Sept. 30, 1994 | Per Curiam Art. 4(3) of FC – YES.
a. On the charge regarding illegal marriages, the Family Code
PARTIES pertinently provides that the formal requisites of
Petitioners: Juvy Cosca, Edmundo Peralta, Ramon Sambo, and marriage are, inter alia, a valid marriage license except in
Apollo Villamora, Stenographer I, Interpreter I, Clerk II, and the cases provided for therein.
Process Server, respectively, of MTC Tinambac, Camarines Sur b. Complementarily, it declares that the absence of any of
Respondent: Judge Lucio Palaypayon, Jr. and Nelia Esmeralda- the essential or formal requisites shall generally render
Baroy are respectively the Presiding Judge and Clerk of Court II the marriage void ab initio and that, while an irregularity
of MTC Tinambac, Camarines Sur in the formal requisites shall not affect the validity of the
marriage, the party or parties responsible for the
FACTS irregularity shall be civilly, criminally and
1. Petitioners, in an administrative complaint filed with OCA, administratively liable.
charged respondents with the following offenses: (i) c. The civil aspect is addressed to the contracting parties and
illegal solemnization of marriage; (ii) falsification of those affected by the illegal marriages, and what we are
monthly reports of cases; (iii) bribery in consideration of providing for herein pertains to the administrative liability
an appointment in the court; (iv) non-issuance of receipt of respondents, all without prejudice to their criminal
for cash bond received; (v) infidelity in the custody of responsibility.
detained prisoners; and (vi) requiring payment of filing d. The Revised Penal Code provides that "(p)riests or
fees from exempted entities. ministers of any religious denomination or sect, or civil
2. On illegal solemnization of marriage, complainants alleged authorities who shall perform or authorize any illegal
that respondent judge solemnized marriages even marriage ceremony shall be punished in accordance with
without the requisite marriage license. the provisions of the Marriage Law." This is of course,
a. Couples were able to get married by simply paying the within the province of the prosecutorial agencies of the
marriage fees to respondent Baroy. Consequently, the Government.
marriage contracts did not reflect any marriage license
number. RULING: SC imposed a fine of P20,000 on respondent Judge
b. In addition, respondent judge did not sign the marriage Lucio Palaypayon, Jr. with stern warning that any repetition of
contracts and did not indicate the date of the same or similar offenses in the future will definitely be
solemnization, the reason being that he allegedly had severely dealth with. Respondent Nelia Esmeralda-Baroy is
to wait for the marriage license to be submitted by the DISMISSED from service, with forfeiture of all retirement
parties which was usually several days after the benefits and with prejudice to employment in any branch,
ceremony. agency, or instrumentality of the government, including GOCC.
3. The complaint was referred to RTC Naga City and based on
the report and recommendations of RTC Judge Gerona,
Judge Palaypayon had solemnized 6 marriages without a
marriage license.
4. In all those marriages, the black space in the marriage
contracts to show the number of the marriage was
solemnized, as required by Art. 22 of the Family Code
were not filled up.
5. While the contracting parties and their witnesses signed
their marriage contracts, Judge Palaypayon did not affix
his signature therein.
6. The contracting parties were also not furnished a copy of
their marriage contract and the Local Civil Registrar was
not sent either a copy of the marriage certificate, as
required by Art. 23 of the Family Code.
7. As such, by solemnizing alone a marriage without a
marriage license, he as the solemnizing officer is the one
responsible for the irregularity in not complying (with) the
formal requisites of marriage, and under Art. 4(3) of the
Family Code, he shall be civilly, criminally and
administratively liable.

Cosca V Palaypayon

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cosca V Palaypayon

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Cosca V Palaypayon

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Cosca v.

Palaypayon ISSUE: WON Judge Palaypayon should be held liable under

You might also like