This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2015-03-11 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| Also relevant herein are the following pronouncements of the Court in Minoru Fujiki v. Marinay[37]: A petition to recognize a foreign judgment declaring a marriage void does not require relitigation under a Philippine court of the case as if it were a new petition for declaration of nullity of marriage. Philippine courts cannot presume to know the foreign laws under which the foreign judgment was rendered. They cannot substitute their judgment on the status, condition and legal capacity of the foreign citizen who is under the jurisdiction of another state. Thus, Philippine courts can only recognize the foreign judgment as a fact according to the rules of evidence. | |||||
|
2014-08-20 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| The requirements of presenting the foreign divorce decree and the national law of the foreigner must comply with our Rules of Evidence. Specifically, for Philippine courts to recognize a foreign judgment relating to the status of a marriage, a copy of the foreign judgment may be admitted in evidence and proven as a fact under Rule 132, Sections 24 and 25, in relation to Rule 39, Section 48(b) of the Rules of Court.[15] | |||||
|
2014-02-10 |
PERALTA, J. |
||||
| "fn">[24] that: To be sure, a petition for correction or cancellation of an entry in the civil registry cannot substitute for an action to invalidate a marriage. A direct action is necessary to prevent circumvention of the substantive and procedural safeguards of marriage under the Family | |||||