Morisono v. Morisono
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Luzviminda Dela Cruz Morisono (Filipino) and Ryoji Morisono (Japanese) were married in Quezon City on December 8, 2009. They lived in Japan for over a year but had no children. Their marriage was marked by constant quarrels due to Ryoji's philandering and age difference. They obtained a "Divorce by Agreement" in Japan, approved on January 17, 2012, and recorded on July 1, 2012. Luzviminda filed a petition for recognition of this foreign divorce decree before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Quezon City to cancel Ryoji's surname in her passport and to enable her to remarry. Procedural History: The RTC denied Luzviminda's petition, holding that while foreign divorce decrees obtained by an alien spouse are recognizable, the same does not apply when the Filipino spouse procured the divorce. The RTC invoked the nationality principle and Article 26(2) of the Family Code, stating that since Philippine law does not allow divorce for Filipinos, the decree Luzviminda obtained is not binding. The Petition: Luzviminda filed a petition for review on certiorari before the Supreme Court, assailing the RTC's decision.
Issue(s)
Whether the RTC correctly denied Luzviminda's petition for recognition of the foreign divorce decree she procured with Ryoji. Whether Article 26(2) of the Family Code applies when the Filipino spouse initiates the divorce proceedings abroad.
Ruling
The Supreme Court partly granted the petition, reversed and set aside the RTC's decision, and remanded the case to the RTC for further proceedings. The Court held that foreign divorce decrees obtained to nullify marriages between a Filipino and an alien citizen may be recognized, regardless of who initiated the divorce, provided the decree is proven as a fact and conforms to the foreign law. However, since Luzviminda had yet to prove the fact of her divorce and its conformity with Japanese law, a remand was necessary.
Ratio Decidendi
On whether the RTC correctly denied Luzviminda's petition for recognition of the foreign divorce decree: The RTC erred in denying the petition solely on the ground that Luzviminda, the Filipino spouse, initiated the divorce proceedings. The Supreme Court, in the case of Republic v. Manalo, clarified that Article 26(2) of the Family Code applies even when the Filipino spouse initiates the divorce abroad. The provision's purpose is to avoid the absurd situation where the Filipino spouse remains married while the alien spouse is free to remarry. This purpose is achieved regardless of who initiated the divorce. Therefore, the nationality principle, as applied by the RTC, does not bar the recognition of a foreign divorce obtained by a Filipino against an alien spouse, provided it is validly obtained abroad and capacitates the alien spouse to remarry. The Court reiterated that the law does not distinguish whether the Filipino spouse was the petitioner or respondent in the foreign divorce proceeding. The key is the existence of a valid divorce obtained abroad that severs the marital bond. On whether Article 26(2) of the Family Code applies when the Filipino spouse initiates the divorce proceedings abroad: The Supreme Court ruled in the affirmative, extending the application of Article 26(2) of the Family Code. The Court emphasized that the provision's intent is to prevent the anomalous situation where a Filipino spouse remains bound to a marriage that has been dissolved in the alien spouse's country. The Court stated that there is no real and substantial difference between a Filipino who initiated a foreign divorce and one who obtained it upon the instance of their alien spouse, as both are freed from the marital bond. To make a distinction based solely on who initiated the proceedings would be unfair and discriminatory. The Court further reasoned that a marriage is a mutual commitment, and it is unproductive to society if one party is released from the marital bond while the other remains bound. The ruling in Republic v. Manalo established that the legal effects of a foreign divorce decree on a Filipino spouse should be recognized, including the capacity to remarry, irrespective of who initiated the divorce action.
Main Doctrine
A foreign divorce decree obtained by a Filipino citizen against an alien spouse is recognizable in the Philippines, regardless of who initiated the divorce proceedings, provided the decree is proven to be valid according to the national law of the alien spouse.