YAO KEE vs. AIDA SY-GONZALES | G.R. No. L-55960 | November 24, 1988

YAO KEE vs. AIDA SY-GONZALES
G.R. No. L-55960, November 24, 1988 
 
Facts

Sy Kiat, a Chinese National died on January 17, 1977, leaving behind real and personal properties here in the Philippines worth more or less Php 300,000. Thereafter, Aida Sy-Gonzales, Manuel Sy, Teresita Sy-Bernabe, and Rodolfo Sy filed a petition alleging that they are the children of the deceased with Asuncion Gillego. However, Yao Kee testified that she was married to Sy Kiat on Jan. 19, 1981 through a Chinese marriage with Sze Sook Wah, Sze Lai Cho, and Chun Yen as their children. Petitioners provided that fact of marriage through evidences like Yao Kee‘s and Gan Ching‘s testimony, Sy Kiat‘s Master Card of Registration stating his marriage with Yao Kee, and the certificate by the Embassy of the People‘s Republic of China affirming the fact of the marriage.  
 
Issue

Whether or not the marriage of Sy Kiat and Yao Kee was valid. 
 
Ruling

Under Article 71 of the Civil Code to establish the validity of foreign marriages the existence of the foreign law as a question of fact must be proven and the alleged foreign marriage must be proven by convincing evidence. The petitioners have provided the fact of marriage however the same do not suffice to establish the validity of said marriage with Chinese Law or custom. In such absence of foreign law, the doctrine of processual presumption must be applied. The Supreme Court then held that in the absence of a foreign law it must be presumed as the same as ours. In the Philippine Laws, a marriage cannot be valid without the presence of a solemnizing officer; therefore the marriage of Sy Kiat to Yao Kee was null and void. 
 
 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

MICIANO vs. BRIMO | G.R. No. L-22595 | November 1, 1927

MICIANO vs. BRIMO G.R. No. L-22595, November 1, 1927  Facts Joseph G. Brimo, a citizen of Turkey, died and left a partition of the estate. Juan Miciano, the judicial administrator of the estate left filed a scheme of partition. However, Andre Brimo, one of the brothers of the deceased, opposed it. Brimo‘s opposition is based on the fact that the partition in question puts into effect the provisions of Joseph Brimo‘s will which are not in accordance with the laws of his Turkish nationality, for which reason they are void as being in violation of Article 10 of the Civil Code.  Issue Whether or not the national law of the testator is the one to govern his testamentary disposition.  Ruling Joseph Brimo, a Turkish citizen, though he declared in his will that Philippine laws must govern the disposition of his estate; however, it must not prejudice the heir or legatee of the testator. Therefore, the testator‘s national law must govern in accordance wit...
Read more

MICHAEL C. GUY vs. COURT OF APPEALS | G.R. No. 163707 | September 15, 2006

MICHAEL C. GUY vs. COURT OF APPEALS G.R. No. 163707, September 15, 2006    Facts On October 29, 1992, Sima Wei died in Makati City leaving an estate valued 10 million more or less. His known heirs are his spouse Shirley Guy with their children five children. On June 13, 1997, private respondents Karen Oanes Wei and Kamille Oanes Wei represented by their mother Remedios filed a petition for letters of administration before the Regional Trial Court alleging that they are duly acknowledged illegitimate children of Sima Wei. However, petitioner and co-heirs alleged that private respondent‘s claim had been paid, waived, abandoned, or otherwise extinguished by Remedios‘ June 7, 1993 Release and Waiver of Claim stating that in exchange for the financial and educational support received from petitioner, Remedios and her minor children discharge the estate of Sima Wei and any and all liabilities.   The petition was denied in the lower court and the motion for reconsidered dis...
Read more

EDUARDO MANUEL vs. PEOPLE | GR. No. 165842 | November 29, 2005

EDUARDO MANUEL vs. PEOPLE GR. No. 165842, November 29, 2005    Facts This case is a petition for review on certiorari of the decision of Court of Appeals affirming the decision of the Regional Trial Court of Baguio City, convicting the petitioner for the crime of bigamy.    Eduardo P. Manuel, herein petitioner, was first married to Rubylus Gaña on July 18, 1975, who, according to the former, was charged with estafa in 1975 and thereafter imprisoned and was never seen again by him after his last visit. Manuel met Tina B. Gandalera in January 1996 when the latter was only 21 years old. Three months after their meeting, the two got married through a civil wedding in BaguioCity without Gandalera‘s knowledge of Manuel‘s first marriage. In the course of their marriage, things got rocky and Gandalera learned that Eduardo was in fact already married when he married him. She then filed a criminal case of bigamy against Eduardo Manuel. The latter‘s defense being that his decla...
Read more