No. L-6505. August 23, 1954
MAIN TOPIC – Rule 34
Asuncion Roque, due to alleged infidelity of Francisco Reyes, prays for (a) legal separation, (b) legal custody of the children, (c) liquidation of the conjugal property, and (d) alimony and support for the children. Reyes denied all the allegations and presented a counterclaim alleging that Asuncion was already a married woman when they contracted the marriage and has been squandering money from him. He also filed a motion for summary judgment and submitted the deposition of former husband of the Asuncion in support of the action. Asuncion filed an opposition on the ground that an action for annulment cannot be a ground for summary judgment.
The trial judge granted the motion for summary judgment and rendered a decision declaring the (a) marriage null and void ab initio; (b) awarding the custody of the children to Reyes, and (c) the rights to the conjugal properties by Asuncion is forfeited in favor of their children. Asuncion seeks to annul the judgment on the ground that the trial court had no jurisdiction to render a summary judgment in the action to annul the marriage, and on the further ground that there were real issues of fact raised in the pleadings, as she believed that her husband was already dead at the time of her marriage to defendant.
Whether or not the counterclaim which is filed for annulment of marriage be decided by the summary judgment proceeding?
No, the trial court committed an error in annulling the marriage of plaintiff to defendant in a summary judgment proceeding without the formality of a trial. An action to annul a marriage is not an action to “recover upon a claim” or “to obtain a declaratory relief,” and, second, because it is the avowed policy of the State to prohibit annulment of marriages by summary proceedings. The fundamental policy of the State, which is predominantly Catholic and considers marriage as indissoluble (there is no divorce under the Civil Code of the Philippines), is to be cautious and strict in granting annulment of marriage.
Action For Annulment Of Marriage Cannot Be Decided By Summary Judgment Proceeding.
abuse of rights Administrative Law Agency alteration Article 19 Article 26 of the Family Code article 36 Article 148 of the Family Code Article 153 of the Family Code Bill of Rights capacity to contract marriage Case Digest Chain of Custody Civil Code civil law Civil Procedure commercial law Company Policies Conflicts of Law Constitutional Law Constitutional Rights of Employers and Employees Corporate Law court of appeals Credit Card Credit Transactions criminal law criminal procedure Different Kind Of Obligations dismissal divorce Donation Dreamwork easements ec2 Effect of Partial payment ejusdem generis Election Law Eminent Domain Employee’s Rights evidence Expropriation Extinguishment of Obligations – Compensation family code family home Federico O Borromeo Inc Foreclosure foreign divorce forgery G.R. No. 107019 G.R. No. 119122 Government Service Insurance System Injunction instagram Insurable Interest Insurance Intellectual Property japan Judicial review Just Compensation L-26002 labor law Law School Local Government Code marriage NAIA Terminal 3 National Labor Relations Commission negotiable instrument Oblicon Obligation and Contracts Payment through Agent Persons and Family Relations Philippine Airlines Philippine Airlines Inc. Philippine Basketball Association Philippine citizenship Police power Political Law Ponente Premium Payment programming property Provisional Remedies Psychological Incapacity public officers R.S. Tomas Inc. Reinsurance Remedial Law Residence Rights to Security of Tenure and Due Process San Miguel Properties security Seven (7) Cardinal Rights of Workers shrines Social justice Sources of Labor Rights and Obligations Succession Taxation Law temple tokyo TYPES of Employees