Scribd
Upload
103 views1 page

16 - Navarro Vs Domagtoy

The complainant filed an administrative case against respondent Judge Hernando Domagtoy for solemnizing two marriages in violation of law. Respondent performed one marriage where the groom was merely separated from his first wife, not legally allowed to remarry. He also performed a second marriage outside of his court's jurisdiction. The Court found the respondent guilty of gross ignorance of the law, as the legal principles were elementary. Respondent erred in his understanding of proof of death of a spouse and his authority to solemnize marriages. As a result, the Court suspended respondent Judge for six months and issued a stern warning.

Uploaded by

STEPHEN NIKOLAI CRISANG
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
103 views1 page

16 - Navarro Vs Domagtoy

The complainant filed an administrative case against respondent Judge Hernando Domagtoy for solemnizing two marriages in violation of law. Respondent performed one marriage where the groom was merely separated from his first wife, not legally allowed to remarry. He also performed a second marriage outside of his court's jurisdiction. The Court found the respondent guilty of gross ignorance of the law, as the legal principles were elementary. Respondent erred in his understanding of proof of death of a spouse and his authority to solemnize marriages. As a result, the Court suspended respondent Judge for six months and issued a stern warning.

Uploaded by

STEPHEN NIKOLAI CRISANG
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

PERSONS Doctrine:  Article 7 of the Civil Code (Although wala xang connect)

Article 3,7 & 8 of the Family Code (Who and Where to solemnize
marriages)
Title A.M. No. MTJ-96-1088
RODOLFO G. NAVARRO, complainant, Date: July 19, 1996
vs Ponente: ROMERO, J
JUDGE HERNANDO C. DOMAGTOY, respondent.
RODOLFO G. NAVARRO, complainant, JUDGE HERNANDO C. DOMAGTOY, respondent
Nature of the case: This is an administrative case filed by the complainant alleging that the
respondent exhibited gross misconduct, inefficiency in office and ignorance of the law
solemnizing two marriages mentioned below.
FACTS
Respondent performed two marriage ceremonies that is being questioned reflecting his
performance as a Judge. Respndent Judge Domagtoy solemnized the wedding between
Gaspar A. Tagadan and Arlyn F. Borga, despite the knowledge that the groom is merely
separated from his first wife. He also performed another marriage ceremony between Floriano
Dador Sumaylo and Gemma G. del Rosario outside his court's jurisdiction, Municipal Circuit
Trial Court of Sta. Monica-Burgos, Surigao del Norte. The wedding was solemnized at the
respondent’s residence in the municipality of Dapa, which does not fall within his jurisdictional
area of the municipalities of Sta. Monica and Burgos.
Petitioner, the Municipal Mayor of Dapa, Surigao del Norte, Rodolfo G. Navarro
submitted evidence in relation to two specific acts committed by respondent Municipal Circuit
Trial Court Judge Hernando Domagtoy, which, he contends, exhibits gross misconduct as well
as inefficiency in office and ignorance of the law.
ISSUE/S
Whether or not Respondent Judge is guilty of gross misconduct, as well as inefficiency
in office and ignorance of the law?
RATIO DECIDENDI
The Court finds respondent to have acted in gross ignorance of the law. The legal
principles applicable in the cases brought to the Court’s attention are elementary and
uncomplicated; prompting the Court to conclude that respondent's failure to apply them is due to
a lack of comprehension of the law.
Respondent erred in maintaining that the joint affidavit submitted is sufficient proof that
Tagadan has the legal capacity to remarry presuming his previous wife’s death instead of a
mandatory requirement of summary proceedings. Also, he does not have the authority to
solemnize the second wedding outside his court’s jurisdiction. Under Article 7 of the Family
Code, marriage can be solemnized by any member of the judiciary within the court’s jurisdiction.
Article 8 of the Family Code, which is a directory provision, refers only to the venue of the
marriage ceremony and does not alter or qualify the authority of the solemnizing officer as
provided in the preceding provision. Non-compliance herewith will not invalidate the marriage,
but can subject the officiating official to administrative liability.
WHEREFORE
Respondent Judge Hernando C. Domagtoy is hereby SUSPENDED for a period of six
(6) months and given a STERN WARNING that a repetition of the same or similar acts will be
dealt with more severely.
Notes
1.  Article 3, 7 & 8 of the Family Code.
1-C 2015-16 (BASILLA, JOMARI ACE V.)

You might also like