Você está na página 1de 2

Llave vs.

RP
G.R. No. 169766
Petitioner: Llave
Respondent: People of the Philippines

Ponente: Del Castillo J.

Summary:

Senator Tamano contracted a marriage to Estrellita twice, both in Islamic laws and tradition, and
civil ceremony, in a span of 6 days. After these ceremonies, Estrellita introduced herself to the world as
Sen. Tamano’s wife even after his death. After more or less a year of Sen. Tamano’s death, Zorayda
Tamayo and her son challenged the validity and filled for nullity of the contracted marriage between
Estrellita and Sen. Tamayo before the RTC.

Facts:

-That Senator Tamano’s Civil Status before he contracted the marriage to Estrellita is Divorced.
-That the code governing the marriage of Senator Tamano and Zorayda (1958) is the 1950 Civil Code.
-That Tamano and Zorayda also contracted not only in muslim laws and tradition but also with civil
proceedings
-That the Muslim Code only took effect on 1977
-That the contention that Senator Tamano, upon the passage of the Muslim Code, he is considered as
divorced to Zorayda
-That the Muslim Code or PD 1083 does not specify/provide any retroactive effect
-That the RTC said the marriage of Estrellita and Tamano is viod ad initio (void in the very beginning) for
being bigamous under the Article 35 of the Family Code of the Philippines and under Article 83 of the
Civil Code of the Philippines.
-That the CA concurred in the decision of the RTC that the marriage of Zorayda and Tamano is governed
by the Civil code which does not provide any divorce clause. Thus, establishing that Zorayda has a legal
standing in filling the nullity of marriage in the RTC

Issue:
Whether or not the marriage of Estrellita can invoke the PD 1083 or the Muslim Code on their marriage

Doctrine:
Article 18
in matters which are governed by the Code of Commerce and special laws, their deficiency shall
be supplied by the provisions of this Code

in relation with Article 4 of the NCC or the retroactive provision


No laws shall be provided retroactive effect unless specified in the provision
Ruling:
PD 1083 cannot be invoked over 1950 Civil Code

Ratio:
1. The court ruled that the wording of the PD 1083 does not explicitly said that it has retroactive
effect under 186 (1) Acts executed prior to the effectivity of this Code shall be governed by the
laws in force at the time of their execution
a. The civil law that governs the first marriage should be applicable.
b. The SC also cited that they have already ruled that article 18(1) of the Muslim code “does
not provide for a situation where the parties were married both in civil and Muslim rites”