FACTS:
Gerbert R. Corpuz, a former Filipino who became a naturalized Canadian citizen in 2000, married Daisylyn Tirol Sto. Tomas (a Filipina) in Pasig City on January 18, 2005. Shortly after the wedding, Gerbert left for Canada due to work commitments. When he returned in April 2005, he discovered his wife was having an affair. He went back to Canada and filed for divorce, which was granted by the Superior Court of Justice in Windsor, Ontario on December 8, 2005 (effective January 8, 2006).
Two years later, Gerbert wanted to remarry another Filipina in the Philippines. He registered the Canadian divorce decree with the Pasig City Civil Registry, but the NSO informed him the marriage still subsists under Philippine law and required judicial recognition of the foreign divorce decree. Gerbert then filed a petition for judicial recognition of the foreign divorce with the RTC. Daisylyn did not oppose and even expressed her desire for the same relief.
ISSUE:
Whether a naturalized foreign citizen (the alien spouse) has the legal standing to petition a Philippine court for recognition of a foreign divorce decree under the second paragraph of Article 26 of the Family Code.
RULING:
The Supreme Court reversed the RTC decision and remanded the case for further proceedings. The Court held:
Only the Filipino spouse can invoke Article 26, paragraph 2 of the Family Code—the alien spouse cannot claim rights under this provision.
However, the alien spouse still has legal standing to petition for recognition of the foreign divorce decree based on Section 48, Rule 39 of the Rules of Court (effect of foreign judgments). The foreign divorce decree itself serves as presumptive evidence of a right sufficient to give the alien spouse legal interest to file the petition.
The Court ordered the case remanded to the RTC to determine whether the divorce decree complies with Canadian law (since proof of foreign law was not submitted).
The Court also ruled that the Pasig City Civil Registry acted improperly by annotating the divorce decree without judicial recognition—such registration is void and produces no legal effect.
DOCTRINE:
Article 26, paragraph 2 of the Family Code is intended solely for the benefit of the Filipino spouse to avoid the absurd situation where the Filipino remains married while the alien spouse is no longer bound by the marriage after obtaining a valid foreign divorce.
However, an alien spouse may still petition for judicial recognition of a foreign divorce decree under Section 48, Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, as the foreign judgment serves as presumptive evidence of a right, giving the alien sufficient legal interest to seek recognition.
Registration of foreign divorce decrees in the civil registry requires prior judicial recognition—civil registrars cannot register foreign divorce decrees based solely on their presentation.