Incomplete evidence

When a marriage between a Filipino and a foreigner is validly celebrated outside the Philippines and a divorce is thereafter validly obtained by the alien spouse capacitating him or her to remarry, the Filipino spouse shall likewise have the capacity to remarry under Philippines Law (Art.26 Family Code). But what must the Filipino spouse prove in order that the divorce obtained abroad may be recognized here? This is the question raised and answered in this case of Marley and Quasimodo, a Japanese citizen.

Marley, a Filipino, married Quasimodo in Japan. But after 14 years of marriage, they jointly filed for divorce in Japan. As the divorce was approved and accepted, Marley sought recognition of such divorce here in the Philippines before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of her province.

During the hearing of the petition, Marley presented the following: (1) the acceptance certificate issued by the mayor of the city in Japan; (2) authentication from the vice consul of the Philippine embassy in Japan and (3) a photocopy of the Civil Code of Japan in English text.

The Republic, as represented by the Office of the City Prosecutor, did not object to the presentation and offer of such evidence and manifested that it will not adduce controverting evidence. So the RTC granted the petition. This ruling was affirmed by the Court of Appeals.

Undeterred, the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) filed a Petition for Review by Certiorari before the Supreme Court, arguing that Marley failed to comply with the requirements of authentication and proof of documents, particularly Japan’s foreign law on divorce. Was the OSG correct?

The Supreme Court (SC) said that the OSG was partly correct. The SC said that Marley was able to establish the fact of divorce through the acceptance certificate issued by the mayor of the city in Japan, stating that the written notification of the divorce of Marley and Quasimodo has been accepted by the mayor of the city in Japan with the authentication issued by the vice consul of the Philippine embassy in Japan.

Nevertheless, Marley was unable to establish the law of Japan on divorce. She merely submitted a photocopy of the English translation of the Civil Code of Japan. Not being an official translation, such document does not prove the existing law on divorce in Japan. There is nothing on record to establish that the divorce of Marley and Quasimodo was validly obtained and is consistent with the Japanese law on divorce.

But given that Marley was able to establish the fact of divorce, the case should be remanded to the court of origin for reception of evidence on the Japanese law on divorce. (Republic of the Philippines vs. Asusano Kikuchi etc. G.R. No.243646, June 22, 2022)