Corpuz v. Sto. Tomas, G.R. No. 186571, 11 August 2010
Gerbert R. Corpuz, a former Filipino who became a Canadian citizen married Daisylyn Sto. Tomas, a Filipina, in 2005. Shortly after their wedding, he discovered Daisylyn’s infidelity and returned to Canada, where he obtained a divorce. When Gerbert sought to register the Canadian divorce in the Philippines to remarry, he was informed that, under Philippine law, the marriage still existed unless a Philippine court formally recognized the foreign divorce decree. Gerbert filed a petition for judicial recognition, but the Regional Trial Court (RTC) denied his request, ruling that, as a naturalized Canadian citizen, he was not the proper party to file for recognition of the divorce. Citing Article 26 of the Family Code, the RTC held that only the Filipino spouse could seek judicial recognition of a foreign divorce to enable remarriage, as the provision aims to prevent a scenario where the Filipino remains married to a spouse who, under foreign law, is already divorced.
The issue of the case is that, whether a petition for recognition of a foreign judgment is not the proper proceeding, contemplated under the Rules of Court, for the cancellation of entries in the civil registry?
No, a petition for recognition of a foreign judgment is not the proper remedy contemplated for the cancellation of entries in the civil registry.
Article 412 of the Civil Code states that no entry in the civil registry may be changed or corrected without a judicial order. This provision emphasizes that changes in vital records, such as marital status, cannot be done unilaterally by presenting foreign documents alone; a court order must authorize any alteration or annotation. This requirement ensures that any significant status change in the civil registry—such as marital dissolution through foreign divorce—receives formal judicial scrutiny, thereby preserving the accuracy and integrity of public records.
Rule 108 of the Rules of Court provides the procedural avenue to implement Article 412 by specifying the requirements for judicial correction or cancellation of civil registry entries. A verified petition must be filed in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) where the relevant civil registry is located, and all interested parties, including the civil registrar, must be notified. Additionally, a public hearing notice must be published in a newspaper of general circulation to allow any interested person to contest the correction or cancellation. Rule 108 thus ensures due process by allowing potentially affected parties to participate in the proceedings.
In the case of foreign divorce, these two provisions can work together within a single proceeding. The petitioner can file a Rule 108 petition to both recognize the foreign divorce and to request the appropriate civil registry annotation. Through this process, the court verifies the validity and jurisdictional soundness of the foreign divorce, checks for potential collusion or fraud, and ensures the petitioner’s eligibility to have the divorce recognized in the Philippines. The ruling allows the court to meet the due process requirements and validate the foreign judgment, giving it the force of law under Philippine jurisdiction. This approach efficiently integrates the requirements of both Article 412 and Rule 108, enabling a lawful update of the individual’s civil status in the Philippine civil registry.
Read the full text of the Supreme Court Decision here.
Real LexEcon 