Can a foreigner sue for annulment of marriage in the Phls?

By Atty. Eduardo T. Reyes III

People marry for different reasons. Love may be the ideal consideration. But many are fueled by other factors such as swooning over a lover, palliative or avuncular partnership, or perhaps for some intrepid nudges.

Regardless of the motivation, marriage is supposed to be for keeps. For better or worse and until death the couple must be a part of each other.

But when there is erosion of trust and the marital bond starts to corrode, these heralds an annulment proceeding.

When this happens, can any spouse just file a petition to nullify the marriage in the Philippines?

Two cases are a study in contrast in respect to this question. Envisaged in these two cases are: 1) A marriage solemnized abroad between two foreigners; and, 2) A marriage solemnized between a foreigner and a Filipino in the Philippines. 

Let us start with the first case.

1) Marriage solemnized abroad between two foreigners 

            In ANGELITA SIMUNDAC-KEPPEL v. GEORG KEPPEL, G.R. No. 202039, August 14, 2019, the laws governing divorce when applicable in the Philippines, were contextualized by citing the previous case of Morisono v. Morisono, thus:

            “first, Philippine laws do not provide for absolute divorce, and hence, the courts cannot grant the same; second, consistent with Articles 15 and 17 of the Civil Code, the marital bond between two (2) Filipino citizens cannot be dissolved even by an absolute divorce obtained abroad;  third, an absolute divorce obtained abroad by a couple who are both aliens may be recognized in the Philippines, provided it is consistent with their respective national laws; and  fourth, in mixed marriages involving a Filipino and a foreigner, the former is allowed to contract a subsequent marriage in case the absolute divorce is validly obtained abroad by the alien spouse capacitating him or her to remarry”. 

In this case of ANGELITA SIMUNDAC-KEPPEL v. GEORG KEPPEL, given that the former Filipina who married a German national had already acquired German citizenship as well, the Supreme Court explained that based on the “Nationality Principle”, she is now governed by German Law insofar as the incidents of her marriage are concerned. As such, she cannot sue for nullity of marriage under Article 36 of the Family Code that envisages psychological incapacity of either or both spouses. Thus:

“Under the Nationality Principle, the petitioner cannot invoke Article 36 of the Family Code unless there is a German law that allows her to do so. 

A fundamental and obvious defect of Angelita’s petition for annulment of marriage is that it seeks a relief improper under Philippine law in light of both Georg and Angelita being German citizens, not Filipinos, at the time of the filing thereof. Based on the Nationality Principle, which is followed in this jurisdiction, and pursuant to which laws relating to family rights and duties, or to the status, condition and legal capacity of persons are binding upon citizens of the Philippines, even though living abroad, it was the pertinent German law that governed. In short, Philippine law finds no application herein as far as the family rights and obligations of the parties who are foreign nationals are concerned.

            Firstly, what governs the marriage of the parties is German, not Philippine, law, and this rendered it incumbent upon Angelita to allege and prove the applicable German law. We reiterate that our courts do not take judicial notice of foreign laws; hence, the existence and contents of such laws are regarded as questions of fact, and, as such, must be alleged and proved like any other disputed fact.” 

The Supreme Court further illumined that it would be a precipitous route to take for Philippine courts to annul her marriage with her German husband – she being a German national already- given that it is unclear whether German law allows for a marriage to be terminated based on psychological incapacity. Thus: “And, secondly, Angelita overlooked that German and Philippine laws on annulment of marriage might not be the same. In other words, the remedy of annulment of the marriage due to psychological incapacity afforded by Article 36 of the Family Code might not be available for her. In the absence of a showing of her right to this remedy in accordance with German law, therefore, the petition should be dismissed.”

2) Marriage solemnized between a foreigner and a Filipino in the Philippines 

                By sharp contrast, in the recent case of Paul Ambrose v. Louella Suque-Ambrose, G.R. No. 206761. June 23, 2021 [Date Uploaded on SC website: 11/16/2021]), the Supreme Court ruled that a foreigner can sue for annulment of marriage in the Philippines provided that two (2) conditions are satisfied: 1)That the marriage was celebrated in the Philippines based on the lex loci celebrationis principle; and, 2) one of the parties to the marriage is a Filipino. Thus:

“Lex loci celebrationis is a conflict of law principle that comes into play when there are substantive issues relating to a contract that is celebrated elsewhere than the place of citizenship of its parties. Philippine courts apply the same, not only with respect to marriage but to other contracts, in order to determine the law that is to be applied in resolving disputes that arise as a result thereof.

Applied to this controversy, the marriage between the parties having been celebrated in the Philippines, is governed by Philippine laws. The same laws holds true with its incidents and consequences. Thus, all matters relating to the validity of the contract of marriage, such as the presence or absence of requisites, forms, or solemnities are to be judged in relation to the law in which it has been celebrated or performed.

X x x

Based on the foregoing, it is clear that the petitioner has both the legal capacity and personality to sue. His legal personality proceeds from the fact that it is his marriage to the respondent, which, in tum, relates to his civil status, that stands to be affected by the petition for nullity that he instituted. He has legal personality in the action as he has personal and material interest in the result of the action.  

• With respect to his legal capacity to sue, the statement as to who may institute an action a petition for nullity of marriage does not distinguish between citizens of the Philippines and foreigners. Section 2 of A.M. No. 02- 11-10-SC, provides:
• Section 2. Petition for declaration of absolute nullity of void marriages.
• Who may file. – A petition for declaration of absolute nullity of void marriage may be filed solely by the husband or the wife.

The provision is clear in that either of the contracting parties may file a petition to declare the marriage void. It is a basic rule in statutory construction that where the law does not distinguish, the courts should not distinguish. Ubi lex non distinguit nee nos distinguere debemos. No distinction should be made in the application of the law where none has been indicated. Courts can only interpret the law; it cannot read into the law what is not written therein.”

Given the benefit of hindsight, choosing the venue for a marriage ceremony is important because the law that will govern the incidents of the martial relations will not only be the national law of the parties but also the law of the country where the marriage vows are sealed.

(The author is the senior partner of ET Reyes III & Associates- a law firm based in Iloilo City. He is a litigation attorney, a law professor, and a law book author. His website is etriiilaw.com).