G.R. No. 173540; January 22, 2014
PEREGRINA MACUA VDA. DE AVENIDO, Petitioner, vs. TECLA HOYBIA AVENIDO, Respondent.

FACTS

Respondent Tecla Hoybia Avenido filed a Complaint for Declaration of Nullity of Marriage against petitioner Peregrina Macua Vda. de Avenido. Tecla claimed to be the lawful wife of the deceased Eustaquio Avenido, having been married to him in a church ceremony in Talibon, Bohol, on September 30, 1942. She presented testimonial evidence from witnesses, including Eustaquio’s sister, and various certifications. These documents explained that the official marriage record was destroyed during World War II, but a certification from the parish priest attested to the marriage. Tecla and Eustaquio had four children together. After Eustaquio left in 1954, Tecla later discovered he had married Peregrina in Davao City on March 30, 1979. Peregrina defended her marriage, presenting her marriage contract and an affidavit from Eustaquio where he declared himself “single” prior to marrying her, acknowledging only a prior common-law relationship with Tecla.
The Regional Trial Court (RTC) denied Tecla’s petition, giving credence to Eustaquio’s affidavit declaring his single status. The Court of Appeals (CA) reversed the RTC, finding Tecla’s prior marriage to Eustaquio sufficiently proven and declaring Peregrina’s subsequent marriage bigamous and void. Peregrina elevated the case to the Supreme Court via a Petition for Review on Certiorari.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in declaring the marriage between Peregrina and Eustaquio null and void on the ground of bigamy, based on its finding that Tecla successfully proved the existence of her prior marriage to Eustaquio.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the CA decision. The legal logic centers on the presumption of marriage and the standard of evidence required to prove a prior marriage for a bigamy case. The Court emphasized that in cases where official records are lost or destroyed, as with Tecla’s 1942 marriage due to the war, the fact of marriage may be proven by any competent and relevant evidence. Tecla presented clear and convincing evidence consisting of the consistent testimonies of disinterested witnesses, including Eustaquio’s own sister who attended the wedding, and the certifications from the parish priest and civil registrar explaining the record loss.
This evidence successfully established the fact of the 1942 marriage, giving rise to the legal presumption that a marriage once proved continues to exist. The burden then shifted to Peregrina to present compelling evidence of its dissolution. She failed to do so. Eustaquio’s self-serving affidavit, executed long after the fact and in preparation for his second marriage, could not overcome the positive evidence and legal presumption in favor of the first marriage’s validity and continuance. Consequently, since Tecla’s marriage to Eustaquio was subsisting when he married Peregrina in 1979, the latter marriage was bigamous and void ab initio under Article 41 of the Family Code. The Court upheld the CA’s finding that the totality of Tecla’s evidence met the required quantum of proof.