Scribd
Upload
356 views11 pages

Manalo Divorce Case Ruling Summary

Marelyn Tanedo Manalo, a Filipino citizen, obtained a divorce decree from a Japanese court after marrying a Japanese national. She filed to have the divorce recognized in the Philippines. The trial court denied the petition citing that Filipinos cannot file for divorce. However, the Court of Appeals reversed, stating that under the Family Code, it does not matter who filed for divorce. The Supreme Court upheld the appellate court's ruling, finding that the Family Code allows recognition of foreign divorces regardless of who filed. It remanded the case back to trial court to prove the relevant Japanese law on divorce.

Uploaded by

gulp_burp
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
356 views11 pages

Manalo Divorce Case Ruling Summary

Marelyn Tanedo Manalo, a Filipino citizen, obtained a divorce decree from a Japanese court after marrying a Japanese national. She filed to have the divorce recognized in the Philippines. The trial court denied the petition citing that Filipinos cannot file for divorce. However, the Court of Appeals reversed, stating that under the Family Code, it does not matter who filed for divorce. The Supreme Court upheld the appellate court's ruling, finding that the Family Code allows recognition of foreign divorces regardless of who filed. It remanded the case back to trial court to prove the relevant Japanese law on divorce.

Uploaded by

gulp_burp
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
  • Case Title: Presents the title and basic identification details for the legal case discussed in the document.
  • Facts: Details the factual background of the case, including the parties involved and the procedural history.
  • Issue: Identifies the legal question addressed by the court regarding the divorce decree obtained abroad.
  • Ruling: Explains the court's decision and reasoning, discussing the legal implications and precedents related to the divorce decree.

CASE NO.

48
RP V. MANALO
G.R. NO. 221029
APRIL 24, 2018
FACTS:
■ Respondent Marelyn Tanedo Manalo married a
Japanese national, Yoshino Minoro, in the
Philippines
■ She filed for divorce in Japan and was able to obtain
a divorce decree from a Japanese Court
■ She filed a petition for cancellation of entry of
marriage in the Civil Registry of San Juan, Metro
Manila which was alter amended so that it will also
be treated as a petition for recognition of foreign
judgement
FACTS:
■ Trial court denied petition on the ground that under
Article 15 of the Civil Code, Filipinos are not
allowed to file for divorce
■ The Court of Appeals reversed and set aside the
lower court’s decision stating that under Article 26
of the Family Code, it is inconsequential who filed
for divorce because “it would be the height of
injustice to consider Manalo still married to the
Japanese national, who, in turn, is no longer married
to her.”
■ OSG filed a petition assailing the appellate court’s
decision
ISSUE:
■ Whether or not the Divorce Decree from
a Japanese Court obtained by Marelyn
Tanedo Manalo is valid
RULING:
■ Yes, the Divorce Decree from a Japanese Court
obtained by Marelyn Tanedo Manalo can be valid
provided that she prove such foreign law.
RULING:
■ The Supreme Court held that Paragraph 2 of Article 26
of the Family Code only requires that there be a
divorce validly obtained abroad. It “does not demand
that the alien spouse should be the one who initiated
the proceeding wherein the divorce decree was
granted. It does not distinguish whether the Filipino
spouse is the petitioner or the respondent in the foreign
divorce proceeding. A Filipino who initiated a foreign
divorce proceeding is in the same place and in like
circumstances as a Filipino who is at the receiving end
of an alien-initiated proceeding.”
RULING:
■ Prior to the Manalo ruling, it has been the opinion of
civil law experts that a petition for divorce must be
initiated by the foreign spouse in order to be validly
recognized under Article 26 (2). This view was
abandoned in this case.
■ The purpose of Article 26 (2) is to avoid the absurd
situation where the Filipino spouse remains married
to the spouse who, after a foreign divorce decree that
is effective in the country where it is rendered, is no
longer married to the Filipino spouse.
RULING:
■ Thus, a Filipino citizen, who initiated a divorce
proceeding abroad and obtained a favorable
judgement against his or her alien spouse who is
capacitated to remarry, has the capacity to remarry
pursuant to Article 26 of the Family Code.
RULING:
■ In this case, Manalo only has to prove the Divorce
Decree and the existence of the law on divorce in the
country where it was obtained. She was able to
submit before the court the (1) Decision of the
Japanese Court allowing the divorce, (2) the
Authentication/Certification issued by the Philippine
Consulate General in Osaka, Japan of the Decree of
Divorce, and (3) Acceptance of Certificate of
Divorce by Petitioner and the Japanese national. The
Japanese law on divorce must still be proved.
RULING:
■ WHEREFORE, the petition for review on certiorari
is DENIED. The Decision of the Court of Appeals
are AFFIRMED IN PART. The case is REMANDED
to the court of origin for further proceedings and
reception of evidence as to the relevant Japanese law
on divorce.
THANK YOU!

You might also like