Aguilar v. Lazaro
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Natividad Aguilar, aged 19 years and 3 months, a natural daughter, left her father's home a day or two before her marriage due to mistreatment and abandonment, going to stay with her aunt. Plácido Lazaro, whom she had known since childhood and who had been paying her special attention for two to three years, visited her at her aunt's house. Knowing she had left her father's home and the reason why, Lazaro proposed that they go to the Parish Priest and get married to avoid her return home. Aguilar consented, and they were married legally. Lazaro then left her at her aunt's house, promising to return, but never did, nor did he ever visit her or live with her as her husband. Procedural History: The action was brought by Natividad Aguilar to secure a declaration of the nullity of her marriage. The court below rendered judgment against the plaintiff, who then brought the case to the Supreme Court via a bill of exceptions. The Petition: The appellant accepted the facts as stated in the decision of the court below. The core of the appeal hinges on whether the marriage can be annulled under Section 10 of General Orders No. 68, given that the plaintiff did not obtain the consent of her natural father or mother for the marriage. The appellant argues that the marriage should be declared null and void.
Issue(s)
Whether the marriage of Natividad Aguilar and Plácido Lazaro, contracted without the consent of the former's parents, is voidable under Section 10, paragraph 1 of General Orders No. 68. Whether the interpretation of "age of legal consent" in Section 10, paragraph 1 of General Orders No. 68 includes the age requiring parental consent.
Ruling
The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the court below, holding that the marriage is valid and cannot be annulled. The costs of the instance were assessed against the appellant.
Ratio Decidendi
On Issue 1: The Supreme Court held that the marriage is not voidable under Section 10, paragraph 1 of General Orders No. 68. This paragraph provides that a marriage may be annulled if a party was "under the age of legal consent" and the marriage was contracted without parental consent, unless there was subsequent free cohabitation as husband and wife after attaining the age of consent. The Court clarified that "age of legal consent" refers to the ages of 12 for females and 14 for males, as stipulated in Section 1 of the same General Order. Since Natividad Aguilar was 19 years and 3 months old at the time of the marriage, she was above the age of legal consent. Therefore, this specific ground for annulment under paragraph 1 of Section 10 does not apply, even though parental consent was not obtained and she was under 21 years of age. On Issue 2: The Court definitively interpreted the phrase "age of legal consent" in Section 10, paragraph 1 of General Orders No. 68 to mean the age at which parties can give their own consent to marriage (12 for females, 14 for males), and not the age under which parental consent is required (21 years). The English text of the provision was deemed clear on this point. While Section 7 of the same General Order mandates that a marriage shall not be performed when either party is under 21 years unless parental consent is obtained, the law does not explicitly state that such a marriage, if celebrated without consent, shall be void or voidable. The Court noted that under the Civil Code, Article 45 prohibited such marriages, but Article 50 provided that if the marriage was nevertheless celebrated, it remained valid. Consequently, the marriage in question, having been celebrated under General Orders No. 68, and not falling under any provision that renders it void or voidable, must be considered valid.
Main Doctrine
Under General Orders No. 68, a marriage is voidable under Section 10, paragraph 1, if a party was under the 'age of legal consent' (12 for females, 14 for males) and the marriage was contracted without parental consent, unless there was subsequent cohabitation after reaching the age of legal consent. However, a marriage contracted by parties who are above the age of legal consent but below 21 years, without parental consent, is not declared void or voidable by the said General Order, and therefore remains valid. The Court emphasized that the English text of Section 10, paragraph 1, clearly refers to the 'age of legal consent' and not the age requiring parental consent.