Mora VS Cheong

ADONG V.
CHEONG SENG GEE (1922)

Short summary: The alleged legitimate child of the decedent in an alleged Chinese
wedding claimed against the lawfully married wife of the decedent in RP for 23 years
Facts:
-decedent: CHEONG BOO
>native of China
>died intestate in Zamboanga (Aug 1919)
-estate claimed by 2 parties
1. CHEONG SENG GEE
-alleged legitimate child of Cheong Boo with his marriage w/ TAN DIT in China in 1895
-admitted to the country as the son of the deceased
2. MORA ADONG
-lawfully married to CHEONG BOO in 1896 in Basilan
-had 2 daughters with CHEONG BOO, PAYANG & ROSALIA
CFI: Chinese marriage not proven but since CHEONG SEE GEE was admitted to RP as
CHEONG BOO's son, then he should have a share in the estate as a natural child (It was
also ruled that though the marriage between ADONG and CHEONG BOO was
adequately proven, it was conducted in accordance with Moro rituals which are not
recognized by RP law so only PAYANG & ROSALIA as natural children could inherit,
not ADONG)
-both parties appealed
WON the CHINESE MARRIAGE WAS SUFFICIENTLY PROVEN AND VALID

IN RP? NO
-cited SEC IV, Marriage Law (General Order No. 68) = Article 26, FC
-how to establish a valid foreign marriage:
a. Prove existence of foreign law as a question of fact
b. Prove the alleged foreign marriage by convincing evidence
-cited SY JOC LIENG V. ENCARNACION: Chinese marriage in this case was not
proven by clear, strong, and unequivocal evidence as to produce a moral conviction of its
existence so as to interrupt 40 years of uninterrupted marital life.
-using SY JOC LIENG case, court merely substituted the 40 years with the 23 years in
this case.
HELD: Chinese marriage not proven, Moro Marriage acceptable under RP Law
(compared to Marriage law in US which was made to accommodate marriages between
Indians, Quakers and Mormons) so ADONG would have a share as the legitimate wife,
together with the 2 children
Adong vs. Cheong Seng Gee

GR No.18081 March 3, 1922
FACTS:
Cheong Boo, a native of China died in Zamboanga, Philippine Islands on
August 5, 1919 and left property worth nearly P100,000 which is now being claimed
by two parties - (1) Cheong Seng Gee who alleged that he was a legitimate child by
marriag contracted by Cheong Boo with Tan Bit in China in 1985, and (2) Mora
Adong who alleged that she had been lawfully married to Cheong Boo in 1896 in
Basilan, Philippine Islands and had two daughters with the deceased namely Payang
and Rosalia. The conflicting claims to Cheong Boo’s estate were ventilated in the
lower court that ruled that Cheong Seng Gee failed to sufficiently establish the
Chinese marriage through a mere letter testifying that Cheong Boo and Tan Bit
Page 1 of 2
married each other but that because Cheong Seng Gee had been admitted to the
Philippine Islands as the son of the deceased, he should share in the estate as a
natural child. With reference to the allegations of Mora Adong and her daughters,
the trial court reached the conclusion that the marriage between Adong and Cheong
Boo had been adequately proved but that under the laws of the Philippine Islands it
could not be held to be a lawful marriage and thus the daughter Payang and Rosalia
would inherit as natural children. The lower court believes that Mohammedan
marriages are not valid under the Philippine Island’s laws this as an Imam as a
solemnizing officer and under Quaranic laws.
ISSUES:
Whether or not the Chinese marriage between Cheong Boo and Tan Dit is
valid. Whether or not the Mohammedan marriage between Cheong Boo and Mora
Adong is valid
HELD:
The Supreme Court found the (1) Chinese marriage not proved and
Chinaman Cheong Seng Gee has only the rights of a natural child while (2) it found
the Mohammedan marriage to be proved and to be valid, thus giving to the widow
Mora Adong and the legitimate children Payang and Rosalia the rights accruing to
them under the law. The Supreme Court held that marriage in this jurisdiction is not
only a civil contract but it is a new relation, an instruction in the maintenance of
which the public is deeply interested. The presumption as to marriage is that every
intendment of the law leans toward legalizing matrimony. Persons dwelling
together in apparent matrimony are presumed, in the absence of counter-
presumption or evidence special to the case, to be in fact married. The reason is that
such is the common order of society, and if the parties were not what they thus hold
themselves out as being, they would be living in the constant violation of decency of
the law. As to retroactive force, marriage laws is in the nature of a curative provision
intended to safeguard society by legalizing prior marriages. Public policy should aid
acts intended to validate marriages and should retard acts intended to invalidate
marriages. This as for public policy, the courts can properly incline the scales of
their decision in favor of that solution which will most effectively promote the
public policy. That is the true construction which will best carry legislative intention
into effect. Sec. IV of the Marriage law provides that “all marriages contracted
outside the islands, which would be valid by the laws of the country in which the
same were contracted, are valid in these islands. To establish a valid foreign
marriage pursuant to this comity provision, it is first necessary to prove before the
courts of the Islands the existence of the foreign law as a question of fact, and it is
then necessary to prove the alleged foreign marriage by convincing evidence. A
Philippine marriage followed by 23 years of uninterrupted marital life, should not
be impugned and discredited, after the death of the husband through an alleged
prior Chinese marriage, “save upon proof so clear, strong and unequivocal as to
produce a moral conviction of the existence of such impediment.” A marriage
alleged to have been contracted in China and proven mainly by a so-called
matrimonial letter held not to be valid in the Philippines.
Page 2 of 2

Mora VS Cheong

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mora VS Cheong

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

Mora VS Cheong

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ADONG V.

CHEONG SENG GEE (1922)

WON the CHINESE MARRIAGE WAS SUFFICIENTLY PROVEN AND VALID

Adong vs. Cheong Seng Gee

You might also like