Você está na página 1de 20

Navarro vs Domagtoy

Parties
Respondent

Complainant

Hernando Domagtoy

Rodolfo Navarro

Mayor of Dapa , Surigao del Norte

Judge of MCTC Sta. MonicaBurgos , Surigao del Norte

Domagtoy Solemnized
Where the groom is
merely separated from
his previous wife

Wedding between Gaspar A. Tagadan and Arlyn Borga

On September 27 ,1994

Where he has no
jurisdiction
Wedding between Floriano
Sumaylo and Gemma del
Rosario
On October 27, 1994
In Dapa, Surigao del Norte in
his residence

Seeks Exculpation
Did not violate Article 7
Of the Family Code

Marriage between
Tagadan and Borga

Relied

Affidavit issued by the Municipal Trial Judge of Basey Samar


Confirming that Tagadan and his previous wife have not seen
each other for almost seven years which gives rise to the
presumption that the absentee is already dead

That marriage may be


solemnized by an incumbent
member of judiciary within
the courts Jurisdiction
Article 8 Applies to case in
question

Judge Domagtoy Maintains that the


AFFIDAVIT
Sufficient Proof of Ida Penarandas Presumptive Death

AFFIDAVIT

Art . 41 of The Family Code


Art. 41. A marriage contracted by any person during subsistence of
a previous marriage shall be null and void, unless before the
celebration of the subsequent marriage, the prior spouse had been
absent for four consecutive years and the spouse present has a wellfounded belief that the absent spouse was already dead. In case of
disappearance where there is danger of death under the
circumstances set forth in the provisions of Article 391 of the Civil
Code, an absence of only two years shall be sufficient.

For the purpose of contracting the subsequent marriage under the


preceding paragraph the spouse present must institute a
summary proceeding as provided in this Code for the
declaration of presumptive death of the absentee, without
prejudice to the effect of reappearance of the absent spouse.

Article 41 Subsequent Marriages


Summary Proceeding for the Judicial Declaration of Presumptive
Death

Absence of Judicial Declaration

Marriage is Void Ab Initio


Under article 35 of the Family Code

Whether wittingly or unwittingly, it was a manifest error


on the part of the judge to have accepted such joint
affidavit submitted by the groom. Such ignorance and
neglect of the law has resulted in bigamous, and
therefore void, marriage. Under Art. 35 of the Family
Code, the following marriage shall be void from the
beginning; (4) those bigamous x x x not falling under Art
41.

Solemnization of marriage ceremony


outside of his courts jurisdiction
In which he alleges that Article 7 and 8 of the Family Code apply
accordingly

Authority from Article 7

Art. 7 Marriage may be solemnized by:

Any incumbent member of the judiciary within the courts


jurisdiction;
Emphasis supplied by respondent

Venues for Marriage Ceremony

Art 8: The marriage shall be solemnized publicly in the chambers of the


judge or in open court, in the church, chapel or temple, or in the office
the consul-general, consul or vice-consul, as the case may be, and not
elsewhere, except in cases of marriages contracted on the point
of death or in remote places in accordance with Article 29 of this
Code, or where both of the parties request the solemnizing
officer in writing in which case the marriage may be solemnized
at a house or place designated by them in a sworn statement to
that effect. (57a)

Contention against Article 8

Articulo Mortis

In a remote place

Written Request addressed to the respondent judge was only made by


ONE party, Gemma del Rosario

Main Issue: Misplaced Authority

Under Art 3
The formal requisites of marriage ar
(1) Authority of Solemnizing officer;

Under Art 7
Marriage may be solemnized by
(1) Any incumbent member of the judiciary within the courts

jurisdiction

Article 8 Directory Provision for the for venue of marriage ceremony

Liability
Under Article 4
An irregularity in the formal requisites shall not affect the
validity of the marriage but the party or parties responsible
for the irregularity shall be civilly, criminally and
administratively liable. (n)

Members of the Judiciary

Excellent or Proficient

Skilled and competent

Conversant with Basic Legal Principles

Lack of understanding of basic principles of civil law

Gross ignorance of the law

Lack of comprehension

Judgment
IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, respondent Judge Hernando C. Domagtoy is
hereby SUSPENDED for a period of six (6) months and given a STERN
WARNING that a repetition of the same or similar acts will be dealt with
more severely