G.R. No. 206761 , June 23, 2021
PAUL AMBROSE, PETITIONER, VS. LOUELLA SUQUE-AMBROSE, RESPONDENT.

FACTS

Petitioner Paul Ambrose, a United States citizen, married respondent Louella Suque-Ambrose in Manila, Philippines, on March 13, 2005. On April 20, 2007, petitioner filed a Petition for Declaration of Nullity of Marriage against respondent on the ground of psychological incapacity under Article 36 of the Family Code. After trial, where only the petitioner presented evidence, the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Quezon City dismissed the petition. The RTC held that the petitioner, being an American citizen, lacked the legal capacity to sue under the nationality principle in Article 15 of the Civil Code, which states that laws relating to family rights and duties, status, condition, and legal capacity are binding upon citizens of the Philippines, even though living abroad. The petitioner filed a Notice of Appeal, but the RTC denied it due course for failure to file a Motion for Reconsideration as required by the Rule on Declaration of Absolute Nullity of Void Marriages and Annulment of Voidable Marriages (A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC). This prompted the petitioner to file a petition for review on certiorari directly with the Supreme Court.

ISSUE

Whether the Regional Trial Court erred in dismissing the petition for declaration of nullity of marriage on the ground that the petitioner, a foreign citizen, lacks the legal capacity to sue under Article 15 of the Civil Code.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court granted the petition, reversed and set aside the RTC Decision and Order, and remanded the case to the RTC for further proceedings. The Court held that the RTC erred in applying the nationality principle under Article 15 of the Civil Code to bar the petitioner from filing the action. The validity of a marriage celebrated in the Philippines is governed by the principle of lex loci celebrationis (the law of the place of celebration). Since the marriage was solemnized in the Philippines, Philippine law governs all matters relating to its validity, including actions for its nullity. The Court further ruled that the petitioner possesses both the legal capacity and legal personality to sue. Legal capacity to sue refers to a party’s qualification to institute an action, and Section 2(A) of A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC explicitly allows “the husband or the wife” to file a petition for declaration of absolute nullity, without distinction as to citizenship. Legal personality to sue means the petitioner is the real party in interest, which he is, as his civil status is directly affected by the outcome of the case. The Court also relaxed the procedural rule requiring a motion for reconsideration before an appeal, in the interest of substantial justice, given that the notice of appeal was filed within the reglementary period and the dismissal was based purely on a legal technicality.