SISON vs TE LAY LI

NO 7037- May 7, 1952

Plaintiff and Appellee: Juanita Sison
Defendant and Appellant: Te Lay Li
Nature of the Case: Appeal from a judgment of the CFI of Davao
Ponente: Reyes, JBL, J.
Issue;
Facts:
1) Appeal from a decision of CFI Davao declaring the two marriages celebrated one after another on April
28, 1949 null and void on the ground of plaintiff’s consent was obtained through force and intimidation
employed upon her by her father
2) Morning of April 28, 1949—civil wedding before Judge Delfin Hofilena of MC of Davao, afternoon—
remarried in accordance with rites of Republic of China before Chinese Consul S.T. Mih in office in Davao
City
3) Plaintiff’s testimony:
- Defendant never wooed her
- Wedding arranged by father
- Father whipped her often as she opposed marriage
- Resorted to beating her
- She ran away from home but found by father and promised she will not force her again
- But renewed subject of marriage—handed her a knife telling her to choose between her life of his—
because of fear that her father might kill her she agreed to the marriage
- Testimony corroborated by mother and Epifania del Rio—relative of her mother
- She lived with her husband in his parent’s home but considered him a stranger since she doesn’t love
him
- She was kept a prisoner in the house; she never occupied the same bed with husband
- Never had sexual intercourse except on June 1, 1949 forced by husband using a knife—she mustered
courage to escape from her husband’s home
4) DEFENDANT’S CLAIMS:
- Marriages were regular and legal
- Entered into marriage freely and voluntarily
- Plaintiff not kept a prisoner
- Plaintiff would everyday ask her father in law to give her and her husband their own house and business
- She slapped her—only when she ran away with P1200 and when asked where she came from she
retorted it was none of his business
-CFI: finding the plaintiff’s marriage consummated only by intimidation and force and that plaintiff never
for a moment acquiesced to the status of a wife to the defendant and declared two marriages between
them null and void; defendant ordered to return the P1200 and whatever personal belongings the plaintiff
had left in their house
Witnesses; Judge Delfin Hofilena for defendant but testified in cross examination that plaintiff came to him
and confided that she was being compelled to marry a man she did not like
Te Seng: plaintiff ran away, her father asked help from him to take daughter home; confessed that
daughter did not want to marry the defendant
DECISION OF SC: The decision appealed from is AFFIRMED with the sole modification that the amount
ordered return to plaintiff should be P1248 according to evidence and not P1200.
REASONS:
1) While it is true that it is the policy of the law to maintain the marriage ties, when it is amply proved that
the marriage is effected through duress and intimidation and w/o the consent and against the will of one
of the parties, there are no ties to be preserved and the marriage should consequently be annulled
2) There was no voluntary cohabitation on the wife’s part