Friday, October 9, 2015

ERMITA-MALATE HOTEL & MOTEL OPERATORS v. CITY MAYOR OF MANILA (G.R. No. L-24693)

Facts:
The petitioners filed a petition for prohibition against Ordinance No. 4760 for being violative of the due process clause, contending that said ordinance is not only arbitrary, unreasonable or oppressive but also vague, indefinite and uncertain, and likewise allege the invasion of the right to privacy and the guaranty against self-incrimination.

Ordinance No. 4760 has the following provisions:
1. Refraining from entertaining or accepting any guest or customer unless it fills out a prescribed form in the lobby in open view;
2. prohibiting admission o less than 18 years old; 
3. usurious increase of license fee to P4,500 and 6,000 o 150% and 200% respectively (tax issue also);
4. making unlawful lease or rent more than twice every 24 hours; and
5. cancellation of license for subsequent violation.

The lower court ruled in favor of the petitioners. Hence, the appeal.

ISSUE:
Whether or not Ord 4760 is against the due process clause.


HELD:
The SC ruled in favor of Astorga. There is a presumption that the laws enacted by Congress (in this case Mun Board) is valid. W/o a showing or a strong foundation of invalidity, the presumption stays. As in this case, there was only a stipulation of facts and such cannot prevail over the presumption. Further, the ordinance is a valid exercise of Police Power. There is no question but that the challenged ordinance was precisely enacted to minimize certain practices hurtful to public morals. This is to minimize prostitution. The increase in taxes not only discourages hotels/motels in doing any business other than legal but also increases the revenue of the LGU concerned. And taxation is a valid exercise of police power as well. 

The due process contention is likewise untenable, There is no controlling and precise definition of due process. It has a standard to which the governmental action should conform in order that deprivation of life, liberty or property, in each appropriate case, be valid. What then is the standard of due process which must exist both as a procedural and a substantive requisite to free the challenged ordinance from legal infirmity? It is responsiveness to the supremacy of reason, obedience to the dictates of justice. Negatively put, arbitrariness is ruled out and unfairness avoided. Nothing in the petition is sufficient to prove the ordinance’s nullity for an alleged failure to meet the due process requirement.

On the impairment of freedom to contract by limiting duration of use to twice every 24 hours- It was not violative of due process. 'Liberty' as understood in democracies, is not license; it is 'liberty regulated by law.' Implied in the term is restraint by law for the good of the individual and for the greater good of the peace and order of society and the general well-being.

The Court reversed the judgment of the lower court and lifted the injuction on the Ordinance in question

REPUBLIC vs. LIM (GR no. 161656) - Digest

FACTS:
In 1938, the Republic instituted a special civil action for expropriation of a land in Lahug, Cebu City for the purpose of establishing a military reservation for the Philippine Army. The said lots were registered in the name of Gervasia and Eulalia Denzon. The Republic deposited P9,500 in the PNB then took possession of the lots. Thereafter, on May 1940, the CFI rendered its Decision ordering the Republic to pay the Denzons the sum of P4,062.10 as just compensation. The Denzons appealed to the CA but it was dismissed on March 11, 1948. An entry of judgment was made on April 5, 1948.

In 1950, one of the heirs of the Denzons, filed with the National Airports Corporation a claim for rentals for the two lots, but it "denied knowledge of the matter." On September 6, 1961, Lt. Cabal rejected the claim but expressed willingness to pay the appraised value of the lots within a reasonable time.

For failure of the Republic to pay for the lots, on September 20, 1961, the Denzons· successors-in-interest,Valdehueza and Panerio, filed with the same CFI an action for recovery of possession with damages against the Republic and AFP officers in possession of the property.

On November 1961, Titles of the said lots were issued in the names of Valdehueza and Panerio with the annotation "subject to the priority of the National Airports Corporation to acquire said parcels of land, Lots 932 and939 upon previous payment of a reasonable market value".

On July 1962, the CFI promulgated its Decision in favor of Valdehueza and Panerio, holding that they are the owners and have retained their right as such over lots because of the Republic·s failure to pay the amount of P4,062.10,adjudged in the expropriation proceedings. However, in view of the annotation on their land titles, they were ordered to execute a deed of sale in favor of the Republic.

They appealed the CFI·s decision to the SC. The latter held that Valdehueza and Panerio are still the registered owners of Lots 932 and 939, there having been no payment of just compensation by the Republic. SC still ruled that they are not entitled to recover possession of the lots but may only demand the payment of their fair market value.

Meanwhile, in 1964, Valdehueza and Panerio mortgaged Lot 932 to Vicente Lim, herein respondent, as security for their loans. For their failure to pay Lim despite demand, he had the mortgage foreclosed in 1976. The lot title was issued in his name.

On 1992, respondent Lim filed a complaint for quieting of title with the RTC against the petitioners herein. On 2001, the RTC rendered a decision in favor of Lim, declaring that he is the absolute and exclusive owner of the lot with all the rights of an absolute owner including the right to possession. Petitioners elevated the case to the CA. In its Decision dated September 18, 2003, it sustained the RTC Decision saying: ´... This is contrary to the rules of fair play because the concept of just compensation embraces not only the correct determination of the amount to be paid to the owners of the land,but also the payment for the land within a reasonable time from its taking. Without prompt payment, compensation cannot be considered "just"...”

Petitioner, through the OSG, filed with the SC a petition for review alleging that they remain as the owner of Lot 932.

ISSUE:
Whether the Republic has retained ownership of Lot 932 despite its failure to pay respondent’s predecessors-in-interest the just compensation therefor pursuant to the judgment of the CFI rendered as early as May 14, 1940.


HELD: 
One of the basic principles enshrined in our Constitution is that no person shall be deprived of his private property without due process of law; and in expropriation cases, an essential element of due process is that there must be just compensation whenever private property is taken for public use. Accordingly, Section 9, Article III,  of our Constitution mandates: "Private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation." The Republic disregarded the foregoing provision when it failed and refused to pay respondent’s predecessors-in-interest the just compensation for Lots 932 and 939.

The Court of Appeals is correct in saying that Republic’s delay is contrary to the rules of fair play. In jurisdictions similar to ours, where an entry to the expropriated property precedes the payment of compensation, it has been held that if the compensation is not paid in a reasonable time, the party may be treated as a trespasser ab initio.

As early as May 19, 1966, in Valdehueza, this Court mandated the Republic to pay respondent’s predecessors-in- interest the sum of P16,248.40 as "reasonable market value of the two lots in question." Unfortunately, it did not comply
and allowed several decades to pass without obeying this Court’s mandate. It is tantamount to confiscation of private property. While it is true that all private properties are subject to the need of government, and the government may take them whenever the necessity or the exigency of the occasion demands, however from the taking of private property by the government under the power of eminent domain, there arises an implied promise to compensate the owner for his loss.
There is a recognized rule that title to the property expropriated shall pass from the owner to the expropriator only upon full payment of the just compensation. So, how could the Republic acquire ownership over Lot 932 when it has not paid its owner the just compensation, required by law, for more than 50 years? Clearly, without full payment of just compensation, there can be no transfer of title from the landowner to the expropriator.

SC ruled in earlier cases that expropriation of lands consists of two stages. First is concerned with the determination of the authority of the plaintiff to exercise the power of eminent domain and the propriety of its exercise. The second is concerned with the determination by the court of "the just compensation for the property sought to be taken." It is only upon the completion of these two stages that expropriation is said to have been completed In Republic v. Salem Investment Corporation, we ruled that, "the process is not completed until payment of just compensation." Thus, here, the failure of the Republic to pay respondent and his predecessors-in-interest for a period of 57 years rendered the expropriation process incomplete.

Thus, SC ruled that the special circumstances prevailing in this case entitle respondent to recover possession of the expropriated lot from the Republic.

While the prevailing doctrine is that "the non-payment of just compensation does not entitle the private landowner to recover possession of the expropriated lots, however, in cases where the government failed to pay just compensation within five (5) years from the finality of the judgment in the expropriation proceedings, the owners concerned shall have the right to recover possession of their property. After all, it is the duty of the government, whenever it takes property from private persons against their will, to facilitate the payment of just compensation. In Cosculluela v. Court of Appeals, we defined just compensation as not only the correct determination of the amount to be paid to the property owner but also the payment of the property within a reasonable time. Without prompt payment, compensation cannot be considered "just."

Republic of the Philippines vs. Vda. De Castellvi (G.R. No. L-20620) - Digest

Facts:
In 1947, the republic, through the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP), entered into a lease agreement over a land in Pampanga with Castellvi on a year-to-year basis. When Castellvi gave notice to terminate the lease in 1956, the AFP refused because of the permanent installations and other facilities worth almost P500,000.00 that were erected and already established on the property. She then instituted an ejectment proceeding against the AFP. In 1959, however, the republic commenced the expropriation proceedings for the land in question.

Issue: Whether or not the compensation should be determined as of 1947 or 1959.

Ruling:
The Supreme Court ruled that the taking should not be reckoned as of 1947, and that just compensation should not be determined on the basis of the value of the property that year .

The requisites for taking are:
1. The expropriator must enter a private property;
2. The entry must be for more than a momentary period;
3. It must be under warrant or color of authorities;
4. The property must be devoted for public use or otherwise informally appropriated or injuriously affected; and
5. The utilization of the property for public use must be such a way as to oust the owner and deprive him of beneficial enjoyment of the property.

Only requisites 1, 3 and 4 are present. It is clear, therefore, that the “taking” of Castellvi’s property for purposes of eminent domain cannot be considered to have taken place in 1947 when the republic commenced to occupy the property as lessee thereof.

Requisite number 2 is not present according to the Supreme Court, “momentary” when applied to possession or occupancy of real property should be construed to mean “a limited period” -- not indefinite or permanent. The aforecited lease contract was for a period of one year, renewable from year to year. The entry on the property, under the lease, is temporary, and considered transitory. The fact that the Republic, through AFP, constructed some installations of a permanent nature does not alter the fact that the entry into the lant was transitory, or intended to last a year, although renewable from year to year by consent of the owner of the land. By express provision of the lease agreement the republic, as lessee, undertook to return the premises in substantially the same condition as at the time the property was first occupied by the AFP. It is claimed that the intention of the lessee was to occupy the land permanently, as may be inferred from the construction of permanent improvements. But this “intention” cannot prevail over the clear and express terms of the lease contract.

The 5th requirement is also lacking. In the instant case the entry of the Republic into the property and its utilization of the same for public use did not oust Castellvi and deprive her of all beneficial enjoyment of the property. Cstellvi remained as owner, and was continuously recognized as owner by the Republic, as shown by the renewal of the lease contract from year to year, and by the provision in the lease contract whereby the Republic undertook to return the property to Castellvi when the lease was terminated. Neither was Castellvi deprived of all the beneficial enjoyment of the property, because the Republic was bound to pay, and had been paing, Castellvi the agreed monthly rentals until the time when it filed the complaint for eminent domain on June 26, 1959.

It is clear, therefore, that the “taking” of Castellvi’s property for purposes of eminent domain cannot be considered to have taken place in 1947 when the Republic commenced to occupy the property as lessee thereof, and that the just compensation to be paid for the Castellvi’s property should not be determined on the basis of the value of the property as of that year. The lower court did not commit an error when it held that the “taking” of the property under expropriation commenced with the filing of the complaint in this case.

Under Sec. 4, Rule 67 of the Rules of Court, “just compensation” is to be determined as of the date of the filing of the complaint. The Supreme Court has ruled that when the taking of the property sought to be expropriated coincides with the commencement of the expropriation proceedings, or takes place subsequent to the filing of the complaint for eminent domain, the just compensation should be determined as of the date of the filing of the complaint.

Tuesday, October 6, 2015

Family Code of the Philippines Reviewer - Articles 1-14

The Family Code of the Philippines
(Executive Order 209, July 6, 1987, as amended by Executive Order 227, July 17, 1987)

Title I

MARRIAGE

Chapter 1

REQUISITES OF MARRIAGE

ARTICLE 1. MARRIAGE IS A SPECIAL CONTRACT OF PERMANENT UNION BETWEEN A MAN AND A WOMAN ENTERED INTO IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF CONJUGAL AND FAMILY LIFE. IT IS THE FOUNDATION OF THE FAMILY AND AN INVIOLABLE SOCIAL INSTITUTION WHOSE NATURE, CONSEQUENCES AND INCIDENTS ARE GOVERNED BY LAW AND NOT SUBJECT TO STIPULATION, EXCEPT THAT MARRIAGE SETTLEMENTS MAY FIX THE PROPERTY RELATIONS DURING THE MARRIAGE WITHIN THE LIMITS PROVIDED BY THIS CODE.

The Two Aspects of Marriage
1. It is a special contract
2. It is a status or a relation or an institution

Note: The enactment of RA 6955 declaring unlawful the practice of matching Filipino women for marriage to foreign nationals on a mail-order basis and other similar practices.

Marriage Distinguished from Ordinary Contracts

Marriage                                                            Ordinary Contract
1. Both a contract AND a social institution   1. Merely a contract
2. Generally, stipulations are fixed                   2. Stipulations are generally fixed by the parties.
by law - not by the parties                                3. Can be ended by mutual agreement and 
(exception: marriage settlement provisions)        by other legal causes
3. Can be dissolved only by death or 
annulment, not by mutual agreement

Offer of Marriage
The offer of the accused to marry the victim establishes his guilt. As a rule in rape cases, an offer of marriage is an admission of guilt.

ARTICLE 2. NO MARRIAGE SHALL BE VALID, UNLESS THESE ESSENTIAL REQUISITES ARE PRESENT:

1. LEGAL CAPACITY OF THE CONTRACTING PARTIES WHO MUST BE A MALE AND FEMALE; AND
2. CONSENT FREELY GIVEN IN THE PRESENCE OF A SOLEMNIZING OFFICER.

ARTICLE 3. THE FORMAL REQUISITES OF MARRIAGE ARE:

1. AUTHORITY OF THE SOLEMNIZING OFFICER;
2. A VALID MARRIAGE LICENSE IN THE CASES PROVIDED FOR IN CHAPTER 2 OF THIS TITLE; AND
3. A MARRIAGE CEREMONY WHICH TAKES PLACE WITH THE APPEARANCE OF THE CONTRACTING PARTIES BEFORE THE SOLEMNIZING OFFICER AND THEIR PERSONAL DECLARATION THAT THEY TAKE EACH OTHER AS HUSBAND AND WIFE IN THE PRESENCE OF NOT LESS THAN TWO WITNESSES OF LEGAL AGE.

Their Consent Freely Given
A. “Consent” refers to the consent of the contracting parties, not parental consent. Parental consent is in connection with requisite No. 1 referring to legal capacity.
B. Consent is required because marriage is a contract, a voluntary act.
C. If there is consent, but it is VITIATED by error, fraud, intimidation, force, etc., the marriage is not void; it is merely VOIDABLE, i.e., valid until annulled.
D. If there is absolutely no consent, or when the parties did not intend to be bound, as in the case of a JOKE or in the case of a STAGE or MOVIE PLAY, the marriage is VOID.

Note: Absence of any of the formal requisites - the marriage is VOID AB INITIO, unless one or both of the parties are in good faith.

ARTICLE 4. THE ABSENCE OF ANY OF THE ESSENTIAL OR FORMAL REQUISITES SHALL RENDER THE MARRIAGE VOID AB INITIO, EXCEPT AS STATED IN ARTICLE 35(2).

A DEFECT IN ANY OF THE ESSENTIAL REQUISITES SHALL RENDER THE MARRIAGE VOIDABLE AS PROVIDED IN ARTICLE 45.

AN IRREGULARITY IN THE FORMAL REQUISITES SHALL NOT AFFECT THE VALIDITY OF THE MARRIAGE BUT THE PARTY OR PARTIES RESPONSIBLE FOR THE IRREGULARITY SHALL BE CIVILLY , CRIMINALLY AND ADMINISTRATIVELY LIABLE.

Examples of Irregularities
1. Presence of only one witness
2. Lack of legal age of witnesses
3. Failure to comply with procedural requirements under Art. 12
4. Non-observance of 3-month period under Art. 15
5. Failure to comply with requirements of notice under Art. 17.

ARTICLE 5. ANY MALE OR FEMALE OF THE AGE OF EIGHTEEN YEARS OR UPWARDS NOT UNDER ANY OF THE IMPEDIMENTS MENTIONED IN ARTICLE 37 AND 38, MAY CONTRACT MARRIAGE.

ARTICLE 6. NO PRESCRIBED FORM OR RELIGIOUS RITE FOR THE SOLEMNIZATION OF THE MARRIAGE IS REQUIRED. IT SHALL BE NECESSARY, HOWEVER, FOR THE CONTRACTING PARTIES TO APPEAR PERSONALLY BEFORE THE SOLEMNIZING OFFICER AND DECLARE IN THE PRESENCE OF NOT LESS THAN TWO WITNESSES OF LEGAL AGE THAT THEY TAKE EACH OTHER AS HUSBAND AND WIFE. THIS DECLARATION SHALL BE CONTAINED IN THE MARRIAGE CERTIFICATE WHICH SHALL BE SIGNED BY THE CONTRACTING PARTIES AND THEIR WITNESSES AND ATTESTED BY THE SOLEMNIZING OFFICER.

IN CASES OF A MARRIAGE IN ARTICULO MORTIS, WHEN THE PARTY AT THE POINT OF DEATH IS UNABLE TO SIGN THE MARRIAGE CERTIFICATE, IT SHALL BE SUFFICIENT FOR ONE OF THE WITNESSES TO THE MARRIAGE TO WRITE THE NAME OF SAID PARTY, WHICH FACT SHALL BE ATTESTED BY THE SOLEMNIZING OFFICER.

Common -Law Marriage
A common-law marriage is one where the man and the woman just live together as husband and wife without getting married. In today’s language, this is referred to as a live-in relationship.

Marriages by Proxy
Marriage by proxy is one where the other party is merely represented by a delegate or friend.

Rules:
A. If performed here in the Philippines, the marriage is void because physical presence of both parties is required under Art. 6 of the Family Code.
B. If performed abroad, whether between Filipinos or foreigners or mixed, it would seem that the controlling Article is Art. 26 of the Family Code. Hence, ordinarily, if the marriage by proxy is valid as such where celebrated, it should be considered as valid in the Philippines, without prejudice to any restrictions that may be imposed by our Immigration Laws for purposes of immigration.

Note: The marriage by proxy is deemed celebrated at the place where the delegate or the proxy appears.

ARTICLE 7. MARRIAGE MAY BE SOLEMNIZED BY:

1. ANY INCUMBENT MEMBER OF THE JUDICIARY WITHIN THE COURT’S JURISDICTION;
2. ANY PRIEST, RABBI, IMAM, OR MINISTER OF ANY CHURCH OR RELIGIOUS SECT DULY AUTHORIZED BY HIS CHURCH OR RELIGIOUS SECT AND REGISTERED WITH THE CIVIL REGISTRAR GENERAL, ACTING WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE WRITTEN AUTHORITY GRANTED HIM BY HIS CHURCH OR RELIGIOUS SECT AND PROVIDED THAT AT LEAST ONE OF THE CONTRACTING PARTIES BELONGS TO THE SOLEMNIZING OFFICER’S CHURCH OR RELIGIOUS SECT;
3. ANY SIP CAPTAIN OR AIRPLANE CHIEF ONLY IN THE CASES MENTIONED IN ARTICLE 31;
4. ANY MILITARY COMMANDER OF A UNIT TO WHICH A CHAPLAIN IS ASSIGNED, IN THE ABSENCE OF THE LATTER, DURING A MILITARY OPERATION, LIKEWISE ONLY IN THE CASES MENTIONED IN ARTICLE 32; OR
5. ANY CONSUL-GENERAL, CONSUL OR VICE CONSUL IN THE CASE PROVIDED IN ARTICLE 10.

Governors, Mayors and Ambassadors Lack Authority to Solemnize Marriages
Under the family Code, governors, mayors, and ambassadors are not authorized to perform marriages. (Inclusio unius est exclusio alterius - What the law does not include, it excludes.)

ARTICLE 8. THE MARRIAGE SHALL BE SOLEMNIZED PUBLICLY IN THE CHAMBERS OF THE JUDGE OR IN OPEN COURT, IN THE CHURCH, CHAPEL OR TEMPLE, OR IN THE OFFICE OF THE CONSUL-GENERAL, CONSUL OR VICE-CONSUL, AS THE CASE MAY BE, AND NOT ELSEWHERE, EXCEPT IN CASES OF MARRIAGES CONTRACTED AT THE POINT OF DEATH OR IN REMOTE PLACES IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 29 OF THIS CODE, OR WHERE BOTH OF THE PARTIES REQUEST THE SOLEMNIZING OFFICER IN WRITING IN WHICH CASE THE MARRIAGE MAY BE SOLEMNIZED AT A HOUSE OR PLACE DESIGNATED BY THEM IN A SWORN STATEMENT TO THE EFFECT.

Instances Where Public Solemnization is Not Needed
Public solemnization is needed excerpt:
A. Marriages in chambers of the Justice or Judge
B. In marriages in articulo mortis.
C. In marriages in remote place.
D. When both of the parties request in writing for solemnization in some other place. The place must be designated in a sworn statement.

ARTICLE 9. A MARRIAGE LICENSE SHALL BE ISSUED BY THE LOCAL CIVIL REGISTRAR OF THE CITY OR MUNICIPALITY WHERE WITHER CONTRACTING PARTY HABITUALLY RESIDES, EXCEPT IN MARRIAGES WHERE NO LICENSE IS REQUIRED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 2 OF THIS TITLE.

Marriages of Exceptional Character (No Marriage License is Required)
A. In articulo mortis
B. In a remote place
C. Marriage of people who have previously cohabited for at least 5 years.
D. Marriages between pagans or Mohammedans, who live in non-Christian provinces, and who are married in accordance with their customs.

ARTICLE 10. MARRIAGES BETWEEN FILIPINO CITIZENS ABROAD MAY BE SOLEMNIZED BY A CONSUL-GENERAL, CONSUL OR VICE-CONSUL OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES. THE ISSUANCE OF THE MARRIAGE LICENSE AND THE DUTIES OF THE LOCAL CIVIL REGISTRAR AND OF THE SOLEMNIZING OFFICER WITH REGARD TO THE CELEBRATION OF MARRIAGE SHALL BE PERFORMED BY SAID CONSULAR OFFICIAL.

ARTICLE 11. WHERE A MARRIAGE LICENSE IS REQUIRED, EACH OF THE CONTRACTING PARTIES SHALL FILE SEPARATELY A SWORN APPLICATION FOR SUCH LICENSE WITH THE PROPER LOCAL CIVIL REGISTRAR WHICH SHALL SPECIFY THE FOLLOWING:

1. FULL NAME OF THE CONTRACTING PARTY;
2. PLACE OF BIRTH;
3. AGE AND DATE OF BIRTH;
4. CIVIL STATUS
5. IF PREVIOUSLY MARRIED, HOW, WHEN AND WHERE THE PREVIOUS MARRIAGE WAS DISSOLVED OR ANNULLED;
6. PRESENT RESIDENCE AND CITIZENSHIP;
7. DEGREE OF RELATIONSHIP OF THE CONTRACTING PARTIES;
8. FULL NAME, RESIDENCE AND CITIZENSHIP OF THE FATHER;
9. FULL NAME, RESIDENCE AND CITIZENSHIP OF THE MOTHER; AND
10. FULL NAME, RESIDENCE AND CITIZENSHIP OF THE GUARDIAN OR PERSON HAVING CHARGE, IN CASE THE CONTRACTING PARTY HAS NEITHER FATHER NOR MOTHER AND IS UNDER THE AGE OF TWENTY-ONE YEARS.

THE APPLICANTS, THEIR PARENTS OR GUARDIANS SHALL NOT BE REQUIRED TO EXHIBIT THEIR RESIDENCE CERTIFICATE IN ANY FORMALITY IN CONNECTION WITH THE SECURING OF THE MARRIAGE LICENSE.

ARTICLE 12. THE LOCAL CIVIL REGISTRAR, UPON RECEIVING SUCH APPLICATION, SHALL REQUIRE THE PRESENTATION OF THE ORIGINAL BIRTH CERTIFICATES OR, IN DEFAULT THEREOF, THE BAPTISMAL CERTIFICATES OF THE CONTRACTING PARTIES OR COPIES OF SUCH DOCUMENTS DULY ATTESTED BY THE PERSONS HAVING CUSTODY OF THE ORIGINALS THESE CERTIFICATES OR CERTIFIED COPIES OF THE DOCUMENTS REQUIRED BY THIS ARTICLE NEED NOT BE SWORN TO AND SHALL BE EXEMPT FROM THE DOCUMENTARY STAMP TAX. THE SIGNATURE AND OFFICIAL TITLE OF THE PERSON ISSUING THE CERTIFICATE SHALL BE SUFFICIENT PROOF OF ITS AUTHENTICITY.

IF EITHER OF THE CONTRACTING PARTIES IS UNABLE TO PRODUCE HIS BIRTH OR BAPTISMAL CERTIFICATE OR A CERTIFIED COPY OF EITHER BECAUSE OF THE DESTRUCTION OR LOSS OF THE ORIGINAL, OR IF IT IS SHOWN BY AN AFFIDAVIT OR SUCH PARTY OR OF ANY OTHER PERSON THAT SUCH BIRTH OR BAPTISMAL CERTIFICATE HAS NOT YET BEEN RECEIVED THOUGH THE SAME HAS BEEN REQUIRED OF THE PERSON HAVING CUSTODY THEREOF AT LEAST FIFTEEN DAYS PRIOR TO THE DATE OF THE APPLICATION, SUCH PARTY MAY FURNISH IN LIEU THEREOF HIS CURRENT RESIDENCE CERTIFICATE OR AN INSTRUMENT DRAWN UP AND SWORN TO BEFORE THE LOCAL CIVIL REGISTRAR CONCERNED OR ANY PUBLIC OFFICIAL AUTHORIZED TO ADMINISTER OATHS. SUCH INSTRUMENT SHALL CONTAIN THE SWORN DECLARATION OF TWO WITNESSES OF LAWFUL AGE, SETTING FORTH THE FULL NAME, RESIDENCE AND CITIZENSHIP OF SUCH CONTRACTING PARTY AND OF HIS OR HER PARENTS, IF KNOWN, AND THE PLACE AND DATE OF BIRTH OF SUCH PARTY. THE NEAREST OF KIN OF THE CONTRACTING PARTIES SHALL BE PREFERRED AS WITNESSES, OR, IN THEIR DEFAULT, PERSONS OF GOOD REPUTATION IN THE PROVINCE OR THE LOCALITY.

THE PRESENTATION OF BIRTH OR BAPTISMAL CERTIFICATE SHALL NOT BE REQUIRED IF THE PARENTS OF THE CONTRACTING PARTIES APPEAR PERSONALLY BEFORE THE LOCAL CIVIL REGISTRAR CONCERNED AND SWEAR TO THE CORRECTNESS OF THE LAWFUL AGE OF SAID PARTIES, AS STATED IN THE APPLICATION, OR WHEN THE LOCAL CIVIL REGISTRAR SHALL, BY MERELY LOOKING AT THE APPLICANTS UPON THEIR PERSONALLY APPEARING BEFORE HIM, BE CONVINCED THAT EITHER OR BOTH OF THEM HAVE THE REQUIRED AGE.

ARTICLE 13. IN CASE WITHER OF THE CONTRACTING PARTIES HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY MARRIED, THE APPLICANT SHALL BE REQUIRED TO FURNISH, INSTEAD OF THE BIRTH OR BAPTISMAL CERTIFICATE REQUIRED IN THE LAST PRECEDING ARTICLE, THE DEATH CERTIFICATE OF THE DECEASED SPOUSE OR THE JUDICIAL DECREE OF THE ABSOLUTE DIVORCE, OR THE JUDICIAL DECREE OF ANNULMENT OR DECLARATION OF NULLITY OF HIS OR HER PREVIOUS MARRIAGE. IN CASE THE DEATH CERTIFICATE CANNOT BE SECURED, THE PARTY SHALL MAKE AN AFFIDAVIT SETTING FORTH THIS CIRCUMSTANCE AND HIS OR HER ACTUAL CIVIL STATUS AND THE NAME AND DATE OF DEATH OF THE DECEASED SPOUSE.

ARTICLE 14. IN CASE EITHER OR BOTH OF THE CONTRACTING PARTIES, NOT HAVING BEEN EMANCIPATED BY A PREVIOUS MARRIAGE, ARE BETWEEN THE AGES OF EIGHTEEN AND TWENTY-ONE, THEY SHALL, IN ADDITION TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE PRECEEDING ARTICLES, EXHIBIT TO THE LOCAL CIVIL REGISTRAR, THE CONSENT TO THEIR MARRIAGE OF THEIR FATHER, MOTHER, SURVIVING PARENT OR GUARDIAN, OR PERSONS HAVING LEGAL CHARGE OF THEM, IN THE ORDER MENTIONED. SUCH CONSENT SHALL BE MANIFESTED IN WRITING BY THE INTERESTED PARTY, WHO PERSONALLY APPEARS BEFORE THE PROPER LOCAL CIVIL REGISTRAR, OR IN THE FORM OF AN AFFIDAVIT MADE IN THE PRESENCE OF TWO WITNESSES AND ATTESTED BEFORE ANY OFFICIAL AUTHORIZED BY LAW TO ADMINISTER OATHS. THE PERSONAL MANIFESTATION SHALL BE RECORDED IN BOTH APPLICATIONS FOR MARRIAGE LICENSE, AND THE AFFIDAVIT, IF ONE IS EXECUTED INSTEAD, SHALL BE ATTACHED TO SAID APPLICATIONS.

Civil Code Reviewer - Articles 381-196

TITLE XIV

ABSENCE

CHAPTER 1
PROVISIONAL MEASURES IN CASE OF ABSENCE

Article 381. WHEN A PERSON DISAPPEARS FROM HIS DOMICILE, HIS WHEREABOUTS BEING UNKNOWN, AND WITHOUT LEAVING AN AGENT TO ADMINISTER HIS PROPERTY, THE JUDGE, AT THE INSTANCE OF AN INTERESTED PARTY, A RELATIVE, OR A FRIEND, MAY APPOINT A PERSON TO REPRESENT HIM IN ALL THAT MAY BE NECESSARY.

THIS SAME RULE SHALL BE OBSERVED WHEN UNDER SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCES THE POWER CONFERRED BY THE ABSENTEE HAS EXPIRED.

Note: Before an action can be brought on behalf of an absent person, the complaint must contain allegations sufficient to show that the provisions of the Civil Code regarding declaration of absence, etc., have been complied with.

Stages of absence
1. Provisional Absence (Article 381)
2. Declaration of Absence (Article 384)
3. Presumption of Death (Article 390, 391)

Where Petition is to be Filed
- The petition shall be filed with the Court of First Instance (now Regional Trial Court) of the place where the absentee resided before his disappearance.

Article 382. THE APPOINTMENT REFERRED TO IN THE PRECEDING ARTICLE HAVING BEEN MADE, THE JUDGE SHALL TAKE THE NECESSARY MEASURES TO SAFEGUARD THE RIGHTS AND INTERESTS OF THE ABSENTEE AND SHALL SPECIFY THE POWERS, OBLIGATIONS AND RENUMERATION OF HIS REPRESENTATIVE, REGULATING THEM, ACCORDING TO THE CIRCUMSTANCES, BY THE RULES CONCERNING GUARDIANS.

Article 383. IN THE APPOINTMENT OF A REPRESENTATIVE, THE SPOUSE PRESENT SHALL BE PREFERRED WHEN THERE IS NO LEGAL SEPARATION.

IF THE ABSENTEE LEFT NO SPOUSE, OR IF THE SPOUSE PRESENT IS A MINOR, ANY COMPETENT PERSON MAY BE APPOINTED BY THE COURT.

Necessity of Judicial Appointment
- appointment by the Court is essential to capacitate the wife to represent the absentee, otherwise she cannot, for example, dispose of conjugal property.


CHAPTER 2

DECLARATION OF ABSENCE

Article 384. TWO YEARS HAVING ELAPSED WITHOUT ANY NEWS ABOUT THE ABSENTEE OR SINCE THE RECEIPT OF THE LAST NEWS, AND FIVE YEARS IN CASE THE ABSENTEE HAS LEFT A PERSON IN CHARGE OF THE ADMINISTRATION OF HIS PROPERTY, HIS ABSENCE MAY BE DECLARED.

When absence May Be Judicially Declared
1. Absence without administrator
2. Absence with Administrator

The reason for the longer period of time for Absence with Administrator, is the greater probability that the estate or property is being well-taken cared of, if a manager or administrator had been left in charge of the property.


Article 383. THE FOLLOWING MAY ASK FOR THE DECLARATION OF ABSENCE:

(1) THE SPOUSE PRESENT;
(2) THE HEIRS INSTITUTED IN A WILL, WHO MAY PRESENT AN AUTHENTIC COPY OF THE SAME;
(3) THE RELATIVES WHO MAY SUCCEED BY THE LAW OF INTESTACY;
(4) THOSE WHO MAY HAVE OVER THE PROPERTY OF THE ABSENTEE SOME RIGHT SUBORDINATED TO THE CONDITION OF HIS DEATH.

Article 384. THE JUDICIAL DECLARATION OF ABSENCE SHALL NOT TAKE EFFECT UNTIL SIX MONTHS AFTER ITS PUBLICATION IN A NEWSPAPER OF GENERAL CIRCULATION.

The period of six months is given to enable those who may have heard of the absentee in the meantime to give their information to the parties or persons concerned, and if said absentee should reappear within such period, then the judicial declaration of his absence will not have any effect at all.


CHAPTER 3

ADMINISTRATION OF THE PROPERTY OF THE ABSENTEE

Article 387. AN ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ABSENTEE’S PROPERTY SHALL BE APPOINTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 383.

Article 388. THE WIFE WHO IS APPOINTED AS AN ADMINISTRATIX OF THE HUSBAND’S PROPERTY CANNOT ALIENATE OR ENCUMBER THE HUSBAND’S PROPERTY OR THAT OF THE CONJUGAL PARTNERSHIP, WITHOUT JUDICIAL AUTHORITY.

Article 389. THE ADMINISTRATION SHALL CEASE IN ANY OF THE FOLLOWING CASES:

(1) WHEN THE ABSENTEE APPEARS PERSONALLY OR BY MEANS OF AN AGENT;
(2) WHEN THE DEATH OF THE ABSENTEE IS PROVED AND HIS TESTATE OR INTESTATE HEIRS APPEAR;
(3) WHEN A THIRD PERSON APPEARS, SHOWING BY A PROPER DOCUMENT THAT HE HAS ACQUIRED THE ABSENTEE’S PROPERTY BY PURCHASE OR OTHER TITLE.

IN THESE CASES THE ADMINISTRATOR SHALL CEASE IN THE PERFORMANCE OF HIS OFFICE, AND THE PROPERTY SHALL BE AT THE DISPOSAL OF THOSE WHO MAY HAVE A RIGHT THERETO.


CHAPTER 4

PRESUMPTION OF DEATH

Article 390. AFTER AN ABSENCE OF SEVEN YEARS, IT BEING UNKNOWN WHETHER OR NOT THE ABSENTEE STILL LIVES, HE SHALL BE PRESUMED DEAD FOR ALL PURPOSES, EXCERPT FOR THOSE OF SUCCESSION.

THE ABSENTEE SHALL NOT BE PRESUMED DEAD FOR THE PURPOSE OF OPENING HIS SUCCESSION TILL AFTER AN ABSENCE OF TEN YEARS. IF HE DISAPPEARED AFTER THE AGE OF SEVENTY-FIVE YEARS, AN ABSENCE OF FIVE YEARS SHALL BE SUFFICIENT IN ORDER THAT HIS SUCCESSION MAY BE OPENED.

Computation of the Period of Absence
- the computation of the seven-year period begins not fro the declaration of absence, nor from the publication in the Official Gazette, but from the date on which the last news concerning the absentee is received.

Article 391. THE FOLLOWING SHALL BE PRESUMED DEA FOR ALL PURPOSES, INCLUDING THE DIVISION OF THE ESTATE AMONG HEIRS:

(1) A PERSON ON BOARD A VESSEL LOST DURING A SEA VOYAGE, OR AN AEROPLANE WHICH IS MISSING, WHO HAS NOT BEEN HEARD FOR FOUR YEARS SINCE THE LOSS OF THE VESSEL OR AEROPLANE;
(2) A PERSON IN THE ARMED FORCES WHO HAS TAKEN PART IN WAR, AND HAS BEEN MISSING FOR FOUR YEARS;
(3) A PERSON WHO HAS BEEN IN DANGER OF DEATH UNDER OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES AND HIS EXISTENCE HAS NOT BEEN KNOWN FOR FOUR YEARS.

Two kinds of Absence
1. Ordinary Absence
Questions: In ordinary absence, when is death presumed to have occurred?
Answer: On the last day of the period
2. Qualified or Extraordinary Absence
Questions In the case of qualified or extraordinary absence, when is death presumed to have occured?
Answer: At the beginning of the period (because of the danger of death).

When the Article Cannot Apply
- Article 391 cannot apply if the vessel was not lost or missing but instead destroyed by fire and washed ashore. Moreover, if it is established as a fact that the missing person had jumped overboard and since then has not been heard from, the rule on presumption of death cannot apply. Instead, the rule on preponderance of evidence applies to establish the fact of death.

Article 392. IF THE ABSENTEE APPEARS, OR WITHOUT APPEARING HIS EXISTENCE IS PROVED, HE SHALL RECOVER HIS PROPERTY IN THE CONDITION IN WHICH IT MAY BE FOUND, AND THE PRICE OF ANY PROPERTY THAT MAY HAVE BEEN ALIENATED OR THE PROPERTY ACQUIRED THEREWITH; BUT HE CANNOT CLAIM EITHER FRUITS OR RENTS.

Recovery of Property by Absentee
- this gives the right to recover. This is because succession has not really taken place. However, extraordinary prescription (real property - 30 years; personal property - 8 years; counted from the time the heir is in possession in the concept of owner) may prevent recovery. In other words, the heir may have acquired the property not by succession but by prescription.
- Be it noted that the prescription required is EXTRAORDINARY PRESCRIPTION in view of the absence of just title.

Non- Return of Fruits or Rents
- the fruits or rents are not to be returned, since the recipient is supposed to have been a possessor in good faith.


CHAPTER 5

EFFECT OF ABSENCE UPON THE CONTINGENT RIGHTS OF THE ABSENTEE

Article 393. WHOEVER CLAIMS A RIGHT PERTAINING TO A PERSON WHOSE EXISTENCE IS NOT RECOGNIZED MUST PROVE THAT HE WAS LIVING AT THE TIME HIS EXISTENCE WAS NECESSARY IN ORDER TO ACQUIRE SAID RIGHT.

Example:
X was presumed dead in 2002. If Y later alleges that he purchased property from X in 2003 (when the existence of X was no longer recognized), Y has to prove that X was still alive in 2002.

Article 394. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE PROVISION OF THE PRECEDING ARTICLE, UPON THE OPENING OF A SUCCESSION TO WHICH AN ABSENTEE IS CALLED, HIS SHARE SHALL ACCRUE TO HIS CO-HEIRS, UNLESS HE HAS HEIRS, ASSIGNS, OR A REPRESENTATIVE. THEY SHALL ALL, AS THE CASE MAY BE, MAKE AN INVENTORY OF THE PROPERTY.

Effect if the Absentee is supposed to Inherit
1. Y died. His heirs are X and S. X, however, has been declared an absentee or, for that matter, he may have already been presumed dead under the law. Who shall get the share of X in the estate of Y?
Answer: The share of X will accrue to S, unless the heirs of X, of the assigns or representatives of X, will claim such property. If they do this, whoever gets the property that should have gone to X must make an inventory of such property.

2. If it turns out that the absentee-heir had already died ahead (a case of predecease) of a decease, said absentee-heir, if a voluntary heir, transmits no rights to his own heir.

Article 296. THE PROVISIONS OF THE PRECEDING ARTICLE ARE UNDERSTOOD TO BE WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ACTION OF PETITIONER FOR INHERITANCE OR OTHER RIGHTS WHICH ARE VESTED IN THE ABSENTEE, HIS REPRESENTATIVE OR SUCCESSORS IN INTERESTS. THESE RIGHTS SHALL NOT BE EXTINGUISHED SAVE BY LAPSE OF TIME FIXED FOR PRESCRIPTION. IN THE RECORD THAT IS MADE IN THE REGISTRY OF THE REAL ESTATE WHICH ACCRUES TO THE CO-HEIRS, THE CIRCUMSTANCE OF ITS BEING SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ARTICLE SHALL BE STATED.

Example: in his will, a testator gave a parcel of land to X, Y, and Z. When the testator died, X was absent, but X himself has a child R. R in the meantime got X’s share. In default of R, the other heirs or devisees, Y and Z, can have the land registered in their name. If X turns out to be alive, his share can still be recovered from Y and Z, unless X loses the right by prescription.

Article 396. THOSE WHO MAY HAVE ENTERED UPON THE INHERITANCE SHALL APPROPRIATE THE FRUITS RECEIVED IN GOOD FAITH SO LONG AS THE ABSENTEE DOES NOT APPEAR, OR WHILE HIS REPRESENTATIVES OR SUCCESSORS IN INTEREST DO NOT BRING THE PROPER ACTIONS.

Rights to Use the Fruits
- the right to the fruits is given to the person who was awarded the property in the inheritance proceedings as long as the person declared absent has not reappeared and as long as no action on the matter has been brought by the absentee’s representatives or successors in interest. The right to the fruits naturally ceases when either the absentee reappears or the proper action has been brought.

Civil Code Reviewer - Articles 305-310; 407-413

Title X -- Funerals

Article 305. The duty and the right to make arrangements for the funeral of a relative shall be in accordance with the order established for support, under Article 294 (now Article 199 of the Family Code). In case of descendants of the same degree, or of brothers and sisters, the oldest shall be preferred. In case of ascendants, the paternal shall have a better right.

Article 199 of the Family Code: Whenever two or more persons are obliged to give support, the liability shall devolve upon the following persons in the order herein provided:
(1) The Spouse;
(2) The descendants in the nearest degree;
(3) The ascendants in the nearest degree; and
(4) The brothers and sister.

Article 306. Every funeral shall be in keeping with the social position of the deceased.

Funeral in Accordance With Social Position
- the higher the standing of the deceased in life the more dignified and expensive should his funeral be, as a general rule. The Revised Penal Code, however, prohibits the pompous and elaborate funeral of a criminal who has been given the death penalty. This is for the purpose of not giving undue publicity to the notoriety in life of the criminal.
- Article 2165: “When funeral expenses are borne by a third person, without the knowledge of those relatives who were obliged to give support to the deceased, said relatives shall reimburse the third person should the latter claim reimbursement.”

Funerals
- the incidents of funerals are governed by the law of the country where the body is to be buried.
- incidental to funerals are the so-called “funeral expenses,” i.e., the money expended in procuring the interment, cremation, or other disposition of a corpse, including suitable monument, perpetual care of burial lot and entertainment of those participating in the wake. 

Definition of Terms
A. Burial - interment of remains in a grave, tomb or the sea.
B. Burial Grounds - cemetery, memorial park or any place duly authorized by law for permanent disposal of the dead.
C. Catacomb - place of burial consisting of galleries or passages with side recesses for tombs.
D. Cemetery - public or private land used for the burial of the dead and other uses dedicated for cemetery purposes, to include landscaped grounds, driveways, walks, columbaria, crematories, mortuaries, mausoleums, niches, graveyards and public comfort rooms.
E. Cinerary Remains/Cremains - the ashes resulting from cremation of a dead body.
F. Cremation - a process that reduces human remains to bone fragments of fine sand or ashes through combustion and dehydration.
G. Crematorium - any designated place duly authorized by law to cremate dead persons.
H. Embalming - preparing, disinfecting and preserving a dead body before its final disposal.
I. Funeral Establishments - includes funeral parlors, funeral chapels and any similar place used in the preparation, storage and care of the body of a deceased person for burial or cremation.
J. Memorial Park - a cemetery with well kept landscaped lawns and wide roadways and footpaths separating the areas assigned for ground interments, tombs, mausoleums and columbaria; with or without a mortuary chapel; and provided with systematic supervision and maintenance.
K. Morgue - a place in which dead bodies are temporarily kept pending identification or burial.
L. Niche - interment space for remains.
M. Public Cemetery - a burial ground, government or privately-owned, open for general use of the public.
N. Private Burying Ground or Place of Enshrinement - a family or individual or other similar exclusive burial ground established and authorized subject to these rules and regulations.
O. Remains - the body or parts of the body of a dead person including the cremated remains.
P. Undertaker - a duly licensed person who practices undertaking.
Q. Undertaking - the care, transport and disposal of the body of a deceased person by any means other than embalming.

Burial Requirements
A. Death Certificate Requirements:
    (1) No remains shall be buried or cremated without death certificate;
    (2) The death certificate must be issued by the attending government or private physician;
    (3) In extreme cases, where no physician in attendance, it shall be issued by the:
             a) City/municipal health officer,
             b) Mayor, or
             c) The secretary of the municipal board, or
             d) A councilor of the municipality where the death occurred

The basis of the death certificate shall be an affidavit duly executed by a reliable informant stating the circumstances regarding the cause of death; and

  (4) The death shall be reported to the local health officer within 48 hours after death and the death   certificate shall be forwarded to the local civil registrar concerned within 30 days after death for registration.

B. Shipment of Remains:
- the following are the requirements in the shipment or transfer of cadaver from one place to another:
(1) Death certificate must be secured;
(2) Transfer permit must be secured from the local health authority of the point of origin;
(3) The remains must be properly embalmed;
(4) Transit permit shall also be secured from places where the remains will pass if local ordinances of such place so require; and
(5) Shipments of remains to and from abroad shall be governed by the rules and regulations of the National Quarantine Office.

C. Grave Requirements:
(1) Grave where remains are buried shall be at least one and one half meters deep and filled well and firmly; and
(2) No remains shall be buried in a grave where water table is less than two meters deep from natural ground surface.

D. Cost of Burial
(1) The cost of burial of a dead person shall be borne by the nearest kin in the following order:
a) The spouse;
b) The descendants in the nearest degree;
c) The ascendant in the nearest degree; and
d) The brothers and sister.
(2) In the absence of the nearest kin above or if the kin is not financially capable of defraying the expenses, the cost shall be borne by the city or municipal government.
(3) Every funeral shall be in keeping with the customs and traditions of the deceased and in accordance with the expressed wishes and religious beliefs of the deceased provided it is in accordance with law.

E. Burial of Remains:
- the burial of remains in city or municipal burial grounds and similar burial grounds like cemetery/memorial parks, etc. Shall not be prohibited on account of race, nationality, religion or political persuasion.

F. Medico-legal Cases
- if the local health officer who issues a death certificate has reasons to believe or suspect that the cause of death was due to violence or crime, he shall notify immediately the authorities of the Philippine National Police or National Bureau of Investigation concerned.

Article 307. The funeral shall be in accordance with the expressed wishes of the deceased. In the absence of such expression, his religious beliefs or affiliation shall determine the funeral rites. In case of doubt, the form of the funeral shall be decided upon by the person obliged to make arrangements for the same, after consulting the other members of the family.

How the Funeral Rites Shall be Conducted - Order of Preference
A. Express wishes of the deceased;
B. Religious beliefs or affiliation, and
C. Desire of person obliged to make funeral arrangements - after consulting the other members of the family.

Article 308. No human remains shall be retained, interred, disposed of or exhumed without the consent of the persons mentioned in Articles 249 (now Article 100 of the Family Code) and 305.

Disposition of the Remains
A. Retaining,
B. Interring,
C. Disposin, and
D. Exhuming of the human remains.

Article 309. Any person who shows disrespect to the dead, or wrongfully interferes with a funeral shall be liable to the family of the deceased for damages, material and moral.

Article 310. The construction of a tombstone or mausoleum shall be deemed a part of the funeral expenses, and shall be chargeable to the conjugal partnership property, if the deceased is one of the spouses.

Expenses for Mausoleum
Who pays for the mausoleum of the widow?
Answer: Her own property, for here conjugal partnership had long been dissolved.


Title XVI
CIVIL REGISTER

Proclamation No. 326 - Declaring as a National State Policy the Registration of Births, Deaths, Marriages and Foundlings.

Article 407. Acts, events and judicial decrees concerning the civil status of persons shall be recorded in the civil register.

Probative Value of Entries in the Civil Registry
- although the Civil Registry is an official record, still the entries made therein are only prima facie evidence of the facts stated. Consequently, the correction and cancellation thereof, in proper cases and by judicial order, is allowed.

Rule Under Presidential Decree 603 Regarding Non-Disclosure of Birth Records
Article 7. Non-disclosure of Birth Records. - The record of a person’s birth shall be kept strictly confidential and no information relating thereto shall be issued except on the request of any of the following:
(1) The person himself, or any person authorized by him;
(2) His spouse, his parent or parents, his direct descendants, or the guardian or institution legally in charge of him if he is a minor;
(3) The court or proper public official whenever absolutely necessary in administrative, judicial or other official proceedings to determine the identity of the child’s parents or other circumstances surrounding his birth; and
(4) In case of the person’s death, the nearest of kin.

Any person violating the prohibition shall suffer the penalty of imprisonment of at least two months or a fine in an amount not exceeding five hundred pesos, or both, in the discretion of the court.

Article 408. The following shall be entered in the civil register:
(1) Births; (2) marriages; (3) deaths; (4) legal separations; (5) annulment of marriages; (6) judgments declaring marriages void from the beginning; (7) legitimations; (8) adoptions; (9) acknowledgments of natural children; (10) naturalization; (11) loss; or (12) recovery of citizenship; (13) civil interdiction; (14) judicial determination of filiation; (15) voluntary emancipation of a minor; and (16) changes of name.

The Recording of Names
The name that appears in the Civil Register should be considered as the real name of a person, for all legal purposes. When there is a change of name, the old name is not erased or corrected; the new name is simply annotated in the register. To the same effect, the supplying of a name that had been left BLANK in the original recording of birth may be done by judicial order due publication of the petition and proper hearing.

Value of Certification
A certification of live birth of a child is not a conclusive evidence of birth; it is only prima facie or disputable. This is because the Local Civil Registrar merely receives the information given him. He does not make any verification.

“Death Certificate” Defined
It is a document issued by the attending physician or, in his absence, by the city/municipal health officer or other duly authorized government official, using the prescribed form certifying the death of a person.

Article 409. In cases of legal separation, adoption, naturalization and other judicial orders mentioned in the preceding article, it shall be the duty of the clerk of the court which issued the decree to ascertain whether the same has been registered, and if this has not been done, to send a copy of said decree to the civil registry of the city or municipality where the court is functioning.

Article 410. The books making up the civil register and all documents relating thereto shall be considered public documents and shall be prima facie evidence of the facts therein contained.

Article 411. Every civil registrar shall be civilly responsible for any unauthorized alteration made in any civil register, to any person suffering damage thereby. However, the civil registrar may exempt himself from such liability if he proves that he has taken every reasonable precaution to prevent the unlawful alteration.

Article 412. No entry in a civil register shall be changed or corrected, without a judicial order.


Errors Contemplated
The errors which can be corrected in mere summary proceedings are clerical or typographical errors, not those on such important things as legitimacy or nationality or other controversial matters. Similarly, the changing of an allegedly erroneous name registered is a SUBSTANTIAL change because the identity of a parent is affected. The proper step would be an appropriate proceeding, not a summary one. Be it noted therefore that if the error is a substantial or material one, same can still be corrected by a court judgment -- provided that the action is not summary in nature. More detailed and appropriate proceedings are required.

A harmless change in the name that has been clearly mis-spelled may however be allowed under Article 312. Where the name appearing in the Civil Registry is not incorrect but merely incomplete, such incompleteness is not sufficient to authorize correction thereof, especially if the purpose is to secure authority to use an alias. However, where no controversial issue exists, and the correction has for its purpose to have the records state a fact already established by competent authority, the same should be granted. A petition should also be granted when in matters of paternity, the registrar had NO right to record the name of the alleged father, when it was only the mother who appeared at the office of the Civil Registrar and she had no authority to reveal the name of the said father. However, ordinarily, so long as the entry could property be made by the Registrar, “one’s filiation or parentage appearing in a public record where the law requires it to be entered, may not be changed except in a proper proceeding where the person concerned is given an appropriate time to be heard.”

Article 413. All matter pertaining to the registration of civil status shall be governed by special laws.

Special Laws on Registration
Act 3753 - Civil Registry Act
Republic Act 9048 - An Act Authorizing the City of Municipal Civil Registrar or the Consul General to Correct a Clerical or Typographical Error in an Entry and/or Change of First Name or Nickname in the Civil Register Without Need of a Judicial Order Amending for this Purpose Articles 376 and 412 of the Civil Code of the Philippines.

Civil Code Reviewer - Articles 47-51

TITLE II

CITIZENSHIP AND DOMICILE

Citizenship and Nationality
- Citizenship - is the status of being a citizen, or of owing allegiance to a certain state for the privilege of being under its protection.
- While citizenship is political in character, nationality refers to a racial or ethnic relationship.

Three Kinds of Citizens
A. Natural-born citizens - those who are citizens of the Philippines from birth without having to perform any act to acquire or perfect their Philippine citizenship. (This must be distinguished from the native-born citizen, once born in the country of which he is a citizen. Hence, a child born to a Filipino father in Germany is a natural-born, but not native-born citizen.)
B. Naturalized citizens - citizens who become such through judicial proceedings.
C. Citizen by election - citizens who become such by exercising the option to elect a particular citizenship, usually within a reasonable time after reaching the age of majority.

Two Theories on Whether Place or Ancestry Determines Citizenship
A. Jus Soli - if born in a country, a person is a citizen of the same. (This is not applied in the Philippines.)
B. Jus Sanguini - one follows the citizenship of his parents; this is citizenship by blood. (This is the rule followed in the Philippines.)

The Problem of Dual and Multiple Nationalities
Examples:
A. A testator, considered a Filipino citizen under our law and a Chinese under Chinese law, died in France leaving properties in the Philippines. How should a Filipino judge in a Philippine court of justice determine the successional rights to the estate of the decedent?
Answer: Inasmuch as we regard him as a Filipino citizen, there is no doubt that applying Article 16, paragraph 2 of our Civil Code, Philippine law shall control the successional rights to his estate.
RULE: Get the law of the forum if the forum is one of the countries of which the deceased was a national.

B. A testator, considered a Chinese under Chinese law, and a Japanese under Japanese law, died in Manila, leaving properties in the Philippines. Prior to his death, the deceased was domiciled in Japan. How should a Filipino judge presiding over a Philippine tribunal adjudicate successional rights to the estate of the deceased?
Answer: Japanese law shall be applied, because the deceased was BOTH a citizen and a domiciliary of Japan. Japanese law, obviously is preferred over Chinese law, for the DOMICILE was also in Japan. In a case like this, it has been said that the domiciliary theory runs to the rescue of the nationality theory.
RULE: If the deceased is not a citizen of the forum, we must get the law of the nation of which he was both a national and a domiciliary. This is the theory of effective nationality: it is evident that here the deceased himself considered the domicile as the more effective connection factor for his personal law.

C. A testator, considered a Cuban under Cuban law, and an Algerian under Algerian law, was domiciled at the moment of his death in Italy. He died in Alaska, leaving properties in the Philippines. How should a Philippine court dispose of the successional rights to his estate?
Answer: To properly apply Article 16 Paragraph 2 of our Civil Code, it is believed that in a case like this, our rule should be:
1. First, get the Cuban and the Algerian laws on succession, and apply them in so far as they are consistent with or identical to each other;
2. Secondly, in so far as there is a conflict, we must apply the law of Italy, the law of the domicile, to resolve the conflict.

Various Ways in which Dual Citizenship may Arise
1. Through Marriage
2. Through a naturalized citizen’s failure to comply with certain legal requirements in the country of origin.
3. From a combined application of Jus Soli and Jus Sanguini
4. By the legislative act of states.
5. By the voluntary act if the individual concerned.
Ex. A citizen of state X may become a naturalized citizen of state Y, but at the same time, he may have received permission from state X to remain a citizen of state X.

Duals May Now Exercise the Right to Suffrage
- R.A. 9225 grands under its Sec.5(1) the same right of suffrage as that granted an absentee voter under R.A. 9189.

The Problem of Stateless Individuals
1. How statelessness is brought about:
A. He may have been deprived of his citizenship for any cause, such as the commission of a crime.
B. He may have renounced his nationality by certain acts, express or implied
C. He may have voluntarily asked for a release from his original state;
D. He may have been born in a country which recognizes only the principle of jus sanguinis -- citizenship by blood, of parents whose law recognizes only the principle of jus soli -- citizenship by birth in a certain place. Thus, he is neither a citizen of the country where he was born, nor a citizen of the country of his parents.
2. Personal law of stateless individual
A. The law of the domicile (habitual residence); or
B. Secondarily, the law of the place of temporary residence

Successional Rights
- under Article 16, the rights to the succession of a person are governed by his national law. Suppose the deceased had no nationality or citizenship, the law of the domicile will apply.

Article 48. THE FOLLOWING ARE CITIZENS OF THE PHILIPPINES:

(1) THOSE WHO WERE CITIZENS OF THE PHILIPPINES AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE PHILIPPINES;

(2) THOSE BORN IN THE PHILIPPINES OF FOREIGN PARENTS WHO, BEFORE THE ADOPTION OF SAID CONSTITUTION, HAD BEEN ELECTED TO PUBLIC OFFICE IN THOSE WHOSE FATHERS ARE CITIZENS OF THE PHILIPPINES;

(4) THOSE WHOSE MOTHERS ARE CITIZENS OF THE PHILIPPINES AND, UPON REACHING THE AGE OT MAJORITY, ELECT PHILIPPINE CITIZENSHIP;

(5) THOSE WHO ARE NATURALIZED IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

Citizens by Virtue of Having Been Elected to a Public Office
- the law says: “Those born in the Philippines of foreign parents who, before the adoption of the Philippine Constitution, had been elected to a public office in the Philippines.”

This provision does not rely on jus soli exclusively, service should have been rendered.
If “born OUTSIDE the Philippines,” the article does not apply.
If “appointed” and not “elected,” the article does not apply.
If “private” instead of “public” office, the article does not apply.

Note: This proviso has been eliminated in the 1973 and 1987 Constitutions. It is understood, however, that those falling under No. 2 of the 1935 Constitution may now be classified under No. 1 of the 1973 Constitution.

Children of Filipino Fathers
This paragraph enunciates the principle of JUS SANGUINIS.
The rule applies whether the mother is a Filipino or not; and whether the child is born in the Philippines or outside.
The rule certainly is applicable if the father is a natural born Filipino Citizen; does it also apply if the father is a naturalized Filipino?

Here is the RULE:
1. A minor child born BEFORE naturalization ---
A. If born in the Philippines -- is a Filipino;
B. If born outside the Philippines --
If dwelling in the Philippines at the time of the parent’s naturalization -- is a Filipino;
Dwelling outside the Philippines at the time of parent’s naturalization -- is a Filipino only during his minority unless he resides permanently here when still a minor, in which case he will continue to be a Philippine citizen even after becoming of age.
2. A minor child born AFTER naturalization --
A. If born in the Philippines -- is a Filipino;
B. If born outside the Philippines -- shall be considered a Philippine citizen, unless within one year after reaching the age of majority he fails to register himself as a Philippine citizen at the Philippine consulate of the country where he resides and to take the necessary oath of allegiance.

Children of Filipino Mothers
1. Provision of the 1935 Constitution -- “Those whose mothers are citizens of the Philippines and upon reaching the age of majority elect Philippine citizenship.”
2. Requisites under the 1935 Constitution
A. The father must NOT be a Filipino citizen, otherwise, another provision applies;
B. The mother must be a Filipino citizen;
C. Upon reaching the age of majority, the child, to be a Filipino, must elect Philippine citizenship.
3. Question: As of what moment must the mother be a citizen of the Philippines?
- it is sufficient for the mother to have been a Filipino citizen at the time of her marriage to a foreigner.

Question: Within what period after attaining the age of majority must the child elect Philippine citizenship?
- the option must be exercised within a REASONABLE period after having attained the age of majority. What is reasonable is a question of fact, depending upon the peculiar circumstances of each case. In one instance, three years was still considered a reasonable period. But generally, five years would be unreasonable.

Question: Before the child elects Philippine nationality, what is his nationality?
- Generally, this would be the nationality of the father, if the child is a legitimate child. But of course this would depend on the father’s national law.

Question: Suppose a Filipino mother is not married to a Chinese but is merely cohabiting with him, is the child still a Filipino?
- Yes, a child born outside a lawful marriage of an alien father and a Filipino mother, being illegitimate, follows the mother’s citizenship. However, if the parents should marry each other later, the legitimated child should generally follow the father’s citizenship.

Question: If a Filipino woman marries a foreigner, she gets her husband’s nationality or citizenship, if the law of her husband’s country so provide. In such a case, she loses Philippine citizenship. Now then, upon the husband’s death, does she immediately reacquire Philippine citizenship?
- if she became a widow before the effectivity of the Commonwealth Act 63 (October 21, 1936), she immediately reacquired Philippine citizenship without any need of repatriating herself, since it would be unfair to require repatriation (reacquisition of citizenship by a formal act) before there existed any Act requiring her to do so. There is one exception, however, and this would be if she, by outward or external acts, decided to continue being a citizen of her husband’s country.
- if he became a widow on or after October 1, 1936, she has to repatriate herself; otherwise, she remains a foreigner

Question: If the woman repatriates herself, does her repatriation carry with it the repatriation of her minor child?
- No, for repatriation means re-acquisition. Since the child never was a Filipino previously, it is obvious that he cannot reacquire that which he never had. It should be observed, however, that if instead of repatriation (for repatriation, there must be a formal act) the widow had automatically regained Philippine citizenship, the nationality of her minor child would follow hers.

Article 49. NATURALIZATION AND THE LOSS AND RE-ACQUISITION OF CITIZENSHIP OF THE PHILIPPINES ARE GOVERNED BY SPECIAL LAWS.

“Naturalization” Defined
- naturalization is the process of the citizenship of another country.
- in its strict sense, it is a judicial process, where formalities of the law have to be complied with, including a judicial hearing and approval of the petition.
Attributes of Naturalization
1. Citizenship is not a right, it is a privilege
2. Requisites of naturalization are laid down by Congress. Courts cannot change or modify them.
3. Only foreigners may be naturalized.
4. Naturalization may be revoked.
5. Naturalization demands allegiance to our Constitution, laws and government.

Qualification of Naturalization
- the law requires the petitioner to have ALL the qualifications and NONE of the disqualifications.
- the qualifications must be possessed at the time the petitioner applies and not subsequently.

Qualifications:
1. The petitioner must not be less than 21 (majority age today is 18) years of age on the date of the hearing of the petition;
2. He must have, as a rule, resided in the Philippines for a continuous period of not less than ten years;
A. The residence requirement is reduced to 5 years in the following cases:
If the applicant has honorably held office under the Government of the Philippines r under that of any of the provinces, cities, municipalities, or political subdivisions thereof;
If he has established a new industry or introduced a useful invention in the Philippines;
If he is married to a Filipino woman;
If he had been engaged as a teacher in a public or recognized private school not established for the exclusive instruction of children of persons of a particular nationality or race in any of the branches of education or industry for a period of two years;
If he was born in the Philippines.

Physical presence is not necessarily required for the entire period of residence required of the petitioner. Not every absence is fatal to continuous residence. So long as there is an intent to return (animus revertendi) the residence may still be considered continuous. The temporary absence must however, be of short duration: certainly an absence o say six years is not of a short duration.

1. He must be of good moral character, and believe in the principles underlying the Philippine Constitution, and must have conducted himself in a proper and irreproachable manner during the entire period of his residence in the Philippines in his relation with the constituted government as well as with the community which he is living.

Question: if because of certain specified acts, a petition is denied because of lack of irreproachable conduct, is there a chance that the alien can later on be granted naturalization upon proof of having reformed?
- Yes, provided that a sufficient number of years have elapsed. A second petition filed less than a year after the denial of the first application would not comply with the number of years required. But if for a reasonable number of years after the denial of one’s application the petitioner proves in the requisite proceeding to have reformed and has observed irreproachable conduct, the bar may be lifted.

2. He must own a real estate in the Philippines worth not less than P5,000, Philippine currency, or must have some lucrative trade, profession, or lawful occupation;
-“Lucrative” implies substantial or gainful employment, or the obtaining of tangible receipts.
The Court stated that for lucrative employment to be present, there must be an appreciable margin of income over expenses in order to provide for adequate support in the event of unemployment, sickness, or disability to work. The lucrative level of an applicant’s income is determined as of the time of the filing of the petition.

3. He must be able to speak and write English or Spanish and any one of the Principal Philippine languages;
- a Deaf-mute cannot speak, therefore, he cannot be naturalized.
-The ability to write may be inferred from the ability to speak in business and society. If the applicant can understand, but cannot speak and write the requisite language, he is not qualified.

4. He must have enrolled his minor children of school age in any of the public schools or private schools recognized by the Bureau of Private Schools where Philippine history, government, and civics are taught or prescribed as part of the school curriculum during the entire period of the residence required of him, prior to the hearing of his petition for naturalization as citizen.
- all the children concerned should have been enrolled. Failure to enroll even one of them will result in a denial of the petition.
- the denial of the first petition for naturalization by reason of applicant’s failure to bring to the Philippines his child of school age is a bar to the gant of a subsequent petition even if at the time the new petition is presented, the child is no longer of school age.

Disqualification for Naturalization
1. Persons opposed to organized government or affiliated with any association or group of persons who uphold and teach doctrines opposing all organized governments;
2. Persons defending or teaching the proprietary of violence, personal assault, or assassination for the success and predominance of their ideas;
3. Polygamists or believers in the practice of polygamy;
4. Persons convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude;
5. Persons suffering from mental alienation or incurable contagious diseases;
6. Persons who, during the period of their residence in the Philippines, have not mignled socially with the Filipinos or who have not evinced a sincere desire to learn and embrace the customs, traditions, and ideals of the Filipinos;
7. Citizens or subjects of nations with whom the United States and the Philippines are at war;
8. Citizens or subject of a foreign country other than the United States, whose laws do not grant Filipinos the right to become naturalized citizens or subjects thereof.

Steps in Naturalization Proceedings
1. A declaration of intention to become a Filipino citizen must first be filed, unless the applicant is exempted from this requirement.
Persons Exempt from the requirement to Make a Declaration of Intention:
Persons born in the Philippines and who have received their primary and secondary education in public schools or private schools recognized by the Government, and not limited to any race or nationality;
Those who have resided continuously in the Philippines for a period of thirty years or more before filing their application;
The widow and minor children of an alien who has declared his intention to become a citizen of the Philippines and dies before he is actually naturalized.

1. The petition for naturalization must then be filed.
2. The petition will then be heard.
3. If the petition is approved, there will be a rehearing two years after the promulation of the judgment awarding naturalization.
4. The last step will be the taking of the oath of allegiance to support and defend the Constitution and the laws of the Philippines.

Cancellation of the Naturalization Certificate
- Section 18 of the Naturalization Law provides:
“Upon motion made in the roper proceedings by the Solicitor-General or his representatives, or by the proper provincial Fiscal, the competent Judge may cancel the naturalization certificate issued and its registration in the Civil Registry:
A. If it was shown that said naturalization certificate was obtained fraudulently or illegally;
B. If the person naturalized shall, within five years next following issuance of said naturalization certificate, return to his native country or to some foreign country and establish his permanent residence therein: Provided, that the fact if the person naturalized remaining for more than one year in his native country or the country of his former nationality, or two years in any other country, shall be considered as prima facie evidence of his intention of taking up permanent residence in the same;
C. If the petition was made on an invalid declaration of intention;
D. If it is shown that the minor child of the person naturalized failed to graduate from public or private high school recognized by the Bureau of Private Schools (now Department of Education, Culture and Sports), where Philippine history, government, and civics are taught or prescribed as part of the school curriculum, through the fault of their parents either by neglecting to support them or by transferring them to another school or schools. A certificate shall be forwarded by the Clerk of the Court to the Office of the President and the Office of the Solicitor-General
E. If it is shown that the naturalized citizen has allowed himself to be used as a dummy in violation of the Constitution or legal provision requiring Philippine citizenship as requisite for the exercise, use or enjoyment of a right, franchise, or privilege.”

How Citizenship May Be Lost in General
1. By substitution of a new nationality

Note: If a Filipino woman marries a stateless citizen, she retains Philippine citizenship for the simple reason that she has not acquired any new nationality.

2. By renunciation of citizenship
Expatriation - the voluntary renunciation or abandonment of nationality and allegiance.
Renunciation may be EXPRESS or IMPLIED.
Express renunciation exists in the following provision:
“By subscribing to an oath of allegiance to support the constitution or laws of a foreign country upon attainment of 21 years of age or more.”
Renunciation, whether express or implied, cannot be lawfully done while the Philippine Republic is at war with any country. It would mean treason.

3. By deprivation
- Deprivation exist when a person is deprived of his citizenship as a sort of punishment.

4. By release
- as distinguished fro deprivation, a release is voluntary in the sense that a person asks the permission of his country to be freed from citizenship therein.

5. By expiration
- this principle is ordinarily NOT applicable to FILIPINOS
- However, if a naturalized citizen, within five years from the time he is issued naturalization certificate, permanently resides in a different country, his naturalization certificate may be cancelled on this ground. This is our equivalent of expiration.

How Philippine Citizenship May Be Lost
1. By naturalization in foreign countries; or
2. By express renunciation of citizenship

Denaturalization Proceedings
- Denaturalization proceedings (to cancel one’s naturalization certificate for instance) must be commenced upon motion by the Solicitor -General or by his representative or by the Provincial Fiscal (now Prosecutor), the Judge cannot therefore motu proprio declare null and void the grant of citizenship by a competent court.

How Philippine Citizenship May Be Reacquired
1. By naturalization;
2. By repatriation of deserters of the Army, Navy or Air Corps: Provided, that a woman who lost her citizenship by reason of her marriage to an alien may be repatriated in accordance with the provisions of this Act after the termination of the marital status;
3. By direct act of the National Assembly, provided that:
A. The applicant be at least twenty-one years of age and shall have resided in the Philippines at least six months before he applies for naturalization;
B. He shall have conducted himself in a proper and irreproachable manner during the entire period of his residence in the Philippines, in his relation with the constituted government as well as with the community in which he is living; and perpetually all faith and allegiance to the foreign authority, state or sovereignty of which he was a citizen or subject.
4. Repatriation shall be effected by merely taking the necessary oath of allegiance to the Commonwealth of the Philippines and registration in the proper civil registry.

Who Can Avail of the Privilege of Repatriation?
1. To natural-born Filipinos who lost their citizenship on account of political or economic necessity; and
2. To the minor children of said natural-born Filipinos.
- to claim the benefit of RA 8171, however, the said children must be of minor age at the time the petition is filed by the parent.

Article 50. FOR THE EXERCISE OF CIVIL RIGHTS AND THE FULFILLMENT OF CIVIL OBLIGATIONS, THE DOMICILE OF NATURAL PERSONS IS THE PLACE OF THEIR HABITUAL RESIDENCE.

“Domicile” Distinguished from “Citizenship” or “Nationality”
- Domicile speaks of one’s permanent place of abode, in general; on the other hand, citizenship  nationality indicates ties of allegiance and loyalty.

Definition of Domicile
- Domicile is that place where a person has certain settled, fixed, legal relations because:
A. It is assigned to him by the law at the moment of birth;
B. It is assigned to him also by the law after birth on account of legal disability cause for instance by minority, insanity, or marriage in the case of a woman.
C. Because he has his home there -- that to which whenever he is absent, he intends to return.

The Three Kinds of Domicile
1. Domicile of Origin
- acquired at birth
- applies only to infants
- it never changes for a person is born only once.
2. Constructive domicile or the domicile by operation of law
- given after birth
- refers to all those who lack capacity to choose their own domicile: infants, married women, idiots, and insane. Legal disabilities prevent their making a choice.
- may change from time to tie depending upon circumstances which will be subsequently discussed.
3. Domicile of choice
- is a result of the voluntary will and action of the person concerned.

Rules for the Domicile of Origin (Domicilium Originis)
1. A legitimate child -- is the domicile of choice of his father at the moment of the birth of the child.
Example: If a Filipino child is born in France at the time that his father is domiciled in Japan, the domicile of origin of the child is in Japan.

However, if the child is a posthumous one (born after the death of the father) its domicile of origin is the domicile of the mother.
2. An illegitimate child -- is the domicile of choice of the mother at the time of the birth of the child.
3. A legitimated child (an illegitimate child who subsequently is granted the status of a legitimate child by the process call legitimation) -- is the domicile of the father at the time of the birth (not the legitimation) of the child. This is so because “legitimation shall take effect from the time of the child’s birth.”
4. An adopted child -- is not the domicile of the adopter (for generally adoption takes place sometime after the birth of the child) but the domicile of the real parent of the parent by consanguinity.
5. A foundling (an abandoned infant whose parents are unknown) -- is the country where it was found.

Importance of Knowing Domicile
1. Firstly, our law makes in some cases the law of domicile as the controlling factor in the solution of conflicts problems rather than the national law of the person involved. This is particularly true in the revocation of wills.
2. Secondly, in some codal provisions, both the domiciliary and the nationality of theories are used.
3. Thirdly, the domiciliary theory often runs to the rescue of the nationality theory in solving conflicts problems posed by stateless individuals, and by those possessed by a dual or multiple citizenship.
4. Fourthly, during the years when we were under the control and jurisdiction of the United States, many domiciliary rules prevalent then were engrafted into our jurisprudence.

Rules for the Constructive Domicile (Domicilium Necesarium)
1. Rules for Infants
A. If legitimate -- the domicile of choice of the father.
B. If illegitimate -- the domicile of choice of the mother (after all she is supposed to take care of the child).
C. If adopted -- the domicile of choice of the adopter.
D. If a ward -- the domicile of choice of the guardian.

2. Rules for Married Women
A. If the marriage is valid -- the domicile of choice of her husband. However, the wife is allowed to have a separate domicile in the following instances:
If the husband lives abroad, except if living abroad is in the service of the Republic.
If they are legally separated
If the husband forcibly ejects the wife from the conjugal home so that he may have illicit relations with another.
If there is a separation de facto of the spouses.
B. If the marriage is voidable -- the marriage is regarded as valid until annulled; therefore, prior to annulment the constructive domicile of the wife is the domicile of choice of the husband, unless she is permitted under the circumstances to select her own domicile of choice. After the marriage is annulled, the woman ceases to be a wife; hence, being no longer under any legal disability, she no longer has any constructive domicile. If she decides to remain in the domicile of her former husband, this would be her own freely selected domicile of choice, not her constructive domicile.
C. If the marriage is void -- it is as if there was no marriage and the “wife” is not really one. Hence, she is not laboring under any legal disability; consequently, she has no constructive domicile. Should she continue being domiciled in the same place as where her “husband” is a domiciliary, such place would not be her constructive domicile, it would be her domicile of choice.

3. Rules for Idiots, Lunatics, and the Insane - the law assigns to them their domicile:
A. If they are below the age of majority -- they are still considered infants under the law; thus, the rules for infants are applicable to them.
B. If they are above the age of majority a distinction must be made: if they have guardians over their persons, they have to follow the domicile of choice of their guardians; if they have no guardians over their persons, their constructive domicile is in the place where they had their domicile of choice shortly before they became insane.

Rules of Domicile of Choice
- Domicile of choice is that which is voluntarily chosen by a sui juris -- as his more or less permanent home -- that to which whenever he is absent, he intends to return.


There are certain fundamental principles governing domicile choice:
A. No natural person must ever be without a domicile.
B. No person can have two or more domiciles at the same time, except for certain purposes and from different legal viewpoints.
C. Every sui juris may change his domicile.
D. Once acquired, it remains the domicile unless a new one is obtained:

       By a capacitated person;
      With freedom of choice
      With actual physical presence in the place chosen;
      And a provable intent that it should be one’s fixed and permanent place of abode -- one’s home --       that is, there should be “animus revertendi” (intent to remain) or “animus non-revertendi” (intent         not to return to the original abode)

Domicile Distinguished from Residence
- the principal distinction is this: while residence is more or less temporary, domicile is more or less permanent. Secondly, while a person can have several places of residence, he can have generally only one domicile. As a matter of fact, under the Civil Code, domicile carries a note of habituality.
- Residence is used to indicate a pace of abode, whether permanent or temporary; domicile denotes a fixed permanent residence to which when absent, one has the intention of returning.

Article 51. WHEN THE LAW CREATING OR RECOGNIZING THEM, OR ANY OTHER PROVISION DOES NOT FIX THE DOMICILE OF JURIDICAL PERSONS, THE SAME SHALL BE UNDERSTOOD TO BE THE PLACE WHERE THEIR LEGAL REPRESENTATION IS ESTABLISHED OR WHERE THEY EXERCISE THEIR PRINCIPAL FUNCTIONS.

Rules for Determining the Domicile of Juridical Persons
1. Get the domicile provided for in the law creating or recognizing them or in their articles of agreement.
2. If not provided for, get the place:
A. Where their legal representation is established.
B. Or where they exercise their principal functions.

Domicile of a De Facto Partnership
- a defectively organized partnership which the law recognizes as de facto insofar as third persons are concerned can possess a domicile for purposes of its de facto existence.

Domicile of a Corporation with a Head Office and with Branches
- here the domicile is where the head office is located.