Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 104 views

    Republic vs. Albios

    Uploaded by

    Jam Gonzaga
    This document summarizes a Supreme Court case regarding the validity of a marriage entered into solely for the purpose of acquiring American citizenship. The Court ruled that (1) consent was freely given by both parties as evidenced by their conscious purpose in getting married, and (2) the possibility that parties may not intend to establish a life together is insufficient to nullify an otherwise valid marriage under the law. Therefore, the marriage was declared valid since all essential legal requisites were met and no grounds existed to void the marriage under Philippine law.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Republic vs. Albios

    Uploaded by

    Jam Gonzaga
    104 views2 pages
    This document summarizes a Supreme Court case regarding the validity of a marriage entered into solely for the purpose of acquiring American citizenship. The Court ruled that (1) consent was freely given by both parties as evidenced by their conscious purpose in getting married, and (2) the possibility that parties may not intend to establish a life together is insufficient to nullify an otherwise valid marriage under the law. Therefore, the marriage was declared valid since all essential legal requisites were met and no grounds existed to void the marriage under Philippine law.

    Original Description:

    Essential Requisites of Marriage

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document summarizes a Supreme Court case regarding the validity of a marriage entered into solely for the purpose of acquiring American citizenship. The Court ruled that (1) consent was freely given by both parties as evidenced by their conscious purpose in getting married, and (2) the possibility that parties may not intend to establish a life together is insufficient to nullify an otherwise valid marriage under the law. Therefore, the marriage was declared valid since all essential legal requisites were met and no grounds existed to void the marriage under Philippine law.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    104 views2 pages

    Republic vs. Albios

    Uploaded by

    Jam Gonzaga
    This document summarizes a Supreme Court case regarding the validity of a marriage entered into solely for the purpose of acquiring American citizenship. The Court ruled that (1) consent was freely given by both parties as evidenced by their conscious purpose in getting married, and (2) the possibility that parties may not intend to establish a life together is insufficient to nullify an otherwise valid marriage under the law. Therefore, the marriage was declared valid since all essential legal requisites were met and no grounds existed to void the marriage under Philippine law.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    G.R. No.

    198780               October 16, 2013

    REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioner,


    vs.
    LIBERTY D. ALBIOS, Respondent.

    Syllabus:

    (a) Under said Article 2, for consent to be valid, it must be (1) freely given and (2) made in the presence of
    a solemnizing officer. A freely given consent requires that the contracting parties willingly and
    deliberately entered into marriage. Consent must be real, in the sense that it is not vitiated nor rendered
    defective by any of the vices listed under Article 45 & 46 of the Family Code. Consent must also be
    conscious or intelligent, that is, the parties’ understanding of their act is not affected by insanity,
    intoxication, drugs, or hypnotism.

    (b) The possibility that the parties in a marriage might have no real intention to establish a life together is,
    however, insufficient to nullify a marriage freely entered into in accordance with law. Therefore, so long as
    all the essential and formal requisites prescribed by law are present, and it is not void or voidable under the
    grounds provided by law, it shall be declared valid.

    (c) The State does not and cannot dictate on the kind of life that a couple chooses to lead. Any attempt to
    regulate their lifestyle would go into the realm of their right to privacy and would raise serious
    constitutional questions.29 The right to marital privacy allows married couples to structure their marriages
    in almost any way they see fit.

    Facts:

    Herein respondent filed before the RTC a petition for declaration of nullity of her marriage with an
    American citizen named Fringer, who both contracted marriage on 2004 to enable her to acquire an
    American citizenship, in consideration that she will pay Fringer the sum of 2000$. She contend that her
    marriage with Fringer was a marriage made in jest, and therefore null and void ab initio. The RTC thus
    declared the marriage void ab initio, on the ground that their purpose was other than the establishment of a
    conjugal and family life, thus it should not be recognized from its inception. Upon its denial of the OSG’s
    motion for recon, the RTC further hold that the parties failed to freely give their consent. It was thus
    reiterated by the CA, ruling that the essential requisite of consent was lacking, thus the marriage was made
    in jest. Petitioner (Republic) contends that since both parties have knowingly entered into marriage in view
    of its benefits and consequences, their consent have been freely given, and thus the present case do not fall
    within the concept of a marriage in jest.

    Issue: Is a marriage, contracted for the sole purpose of acquiring American citizenship in consideration of
    $2,000.00, void ab initio on the ground of lack of consent?

    Ruling:

    No, the marriage of respondent is not void ab initio. Consent was not lacking in respondent’s marriage
    since their consent, that was freely given, was best evidenced by their conscious purpose of acquiring
    American citizenship thru marriage. There was complete and full understanding of the leagl effects that
    would be created between them. Respondent’s marriage is not one made in jest, since only a genuine
    consent to be married would allow them to further their objective.

    The possibility that the parties in a marriage might have no real intention to establish a life together is,
    however, insufficient to nullify a marriage freely entered into in accordance with law. Therefore, so long as
    all the essential and formal requisites prescribed by law are present, and it is not void or voidable under the
    grounds provided by law, it shall be declared valid. Petition is granted and the Decision of the CA and the
    RTc is annulled and dismissed.

    You might also like