GR 162580; (January, 2006) (Digest)
G.R. No. 162580 ; January 27, 2006
ELMAR O. PEREZ, Petitioner, vs. COURT OF APPEALS, Fifth Division, TRISTAN A. CATINDIG and LILY GOMEZ-CATINDIG, Respondents.
FACTS
Private respondents Tristan A. Catindig and Lily Gomez-Catindig, both Filipino citizens, were married in 1968. They later obtained a divorce decree from the Dominican Republic in 1984. Subsequently, Tristan married petitioner Elmar O. Perez in Virginia, USA, in 1984. Years later, petitioner learned the Dominican divorce might not be recognized in the Philippines, rendering her marriage to Tristan potentially void. Tristan assured her he would legalize their union after annulling his marriage to Lily.
In 2001, Tristan filed a petition for declaration of nullity of his marriage to Lily before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Quezon City. Petitioner filed a Motion for Leave to File Intervention, claiming a legal interest as Tristan’s wife and possessing information relevant to the annulment case. The RTC granted her motion and admitted her complaint-in-intervention. Tristan challenged this order via a petition for certiorari before the Court of Appeals (CA).
ISSUE
Whether the Court of Appeals committed grave abuse of discretion in nullifying the RTC’s order allowing petitioner’s intervention in the annulment case.
RULING
The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, affirming the CA’s decision. The Court held that the CA did not commit grave abuse of discretion. For intervention under the Rules of Court, a person must have a legal interest in the matter in litigation. The core of petitioner’s claim to such interest was her status as Tristan’s wife by virtue of their 1984 marriage in the USA.
The Court explained that under Article 15 of the Civil Code, laws relating to family rights and duties, including marital capacity, are governed by the national law of the parties. Since both Tristan and Lily were Filipino citizens at the time of the Dominican divorce, Philippine law governed the validity of that divorce. Applying the doctrine in Tenchavez v. Escaño, a foreign divorce between Filipino citizens obtained after the effectivity of the Civil Code is not recognized in the Philippines. Consequently, Tristan’s first marriage to Lily remained valid and subsisting under Philippine law. His subsequent marriage to petitioner was therefore void from the beginning. Having no valid marriage to Tristan, petitioner never acquired the legal interest of a wife necessary to intervene in the annulment case. The RTC’s order granting intervention, being devoid of a legal basis, was issued with grave abuse of discretion, correctly set aside by the CA.