Facts:
Petitioner Alice Reyes Van Dorn is a citizen of the Philippines while private respondent Richard Upton is a citizen of the United States. They were married in Hongkong in 1972 and established their residence in the Philippines. They begot two children born on April 4, 1973 and December 18, 1975, respectively. But the parties were divorced in Nevada, United States, in 1982 and the petitioner had remarried also in Nevada, this time to Theodore Van Dorn.
On July 8, 1983, Richard Upton filed a suit against petitioner, asking that Alice Van Dorn be ordered to render an accounting of her business in Ermita, Manila and be declared with right to manage the conjugal property.
Issue:
Whether or not the foreign divorce is binding in the Philippines
Held:
Yes, the divorce is valid and binding in the Philippines. Petitioner should not be obliged to live together with, observe respect and fidelity, and render support to private respondent. The latter should not continue to be one of her heirs with possible rights to conjugal property. She should not be discriminated against in her own country if the ends of justice are to be served.
There can be no question as to the validity of that Nevada divorce in any of the States of the United States. The decree is binding on private respondent as an American citizen. Pursuant to his national law, private respondent is no longer the husband of petitioner. He would have no standing to sue in the case below as petitioner’s husband entitled to exercise control over conjugal assets. As he is bound by the Decision of his own country’s Court, which validly exercised jurisdiction over him, and whose decision he does not repudiate, he is estopped by his own representation before said Court from asserting his right over the alleged conjugal property.
Real LexEcon 