Is a Second Marriage Void if Presumptive Legitime Was Not Delivered During Annulment Proceedings? (Philippines)

Introduction

In the Philippines, the dissolution of a marriage through annulment or declaration of nullity raises various legal concerns, particularly regarding property relations, child support, and inheritance rights. One specific issue that often arises is the treatment of the children's presumptive legitime during the annulment process and its potential impact on a party's capacity to enter into a subsequent marriage. This article explores whether the failure to deliver the presumptive legitime during annulment proceedings renders a second marriage void. Drawing from the provisions of the Family Code of the Philippines (Executive Order No. 209, as amended) and relevant Supreme Court jurisprudence, it examines the legal framework, key concepts, procedural requirements, and practical implications. The analysis concludes that such non-delivery does not automatically void a subsequent marriage, though it carries other enforceable consequences.

Key Concepts in Philippine Family Law

Annulment and Declaration of Nullity

Under Philippine law, marriages can be terminated through annulment for voidable marriages (Article 45 of the Family Code) or declaration of absolute nullity for void marriages (Article 35-44). Annulment applies to marriages that were valid until annulled, such as those vitiated by lack of consent or impotence. Declaration of nullity, on the other hand, treats the marriage as having never existed, commonly invoked under Article 36 for psychological incapacity.

Upon a final judgment of annulment or nullity, the marriage bond is severed, restoring the parties' civil status to single and capacitating them to remarry. However, this process involves not only the dissolution of the marital union but also the settlement of property regimes, custody, support, and protection of children's rights.

Presumptive Legitime

Legitime refers to the compulsory portion of a parent's estate reserved for legitimate children and descendants, which cannot be freely disposed of (Article 886, Civil Code). The "presumptive legitime" is a concept unique to marriage dissolution scenarios under the Family Code. It represents the value of the legitime calculated as of the date of the final judgment in annulment, legal separation, or nullity proceedings (Articles 102 and 129).

The purpose of the presumptive legitime is to safeguard the children's inheritance from potential dissipation by the parents following the dissolution of the property regime. In absolute community of property (ACP) or conjugal partnership of gains (CPG), the net assets are liquidated, and the presumptive legitime must be computed based on the children's hypothetical share if the parent were to die at that moment. This amount is then delivered to the children in cash, property, or sound security, unless the children have waived it after reaching the age of majority (Article 51).

Subsequent Marriage

A person whose prior marriage has been annulled or declared null may contract a new marriage, provided the legal requirements for capacity are met. The Civil Code and Family Code emphasize that bigamy or polygamy is void (Article 35[4]), so the prior marriage must be legally terminated. The key question is whether incomplete aspects of the annulment proceedings, such as non-delivery of the presumptive legitime, affect this capacity.

Legal Basis: Provisions of the Family Code

The Family Code outlines the procedure for marriage dissolution and remarriage in Articles 49 to 53:

Article 49: During annulment or nullity proceedings, the court shall provide for support and custody of children, and may order other measures to protect their interests.
Article 50: The final judgment must include provisions for liquidation, partition, and distribution of properties; custody and support of children; and delivery of their presumptive legitimes.
Article 51: The presumptive legitime shall be delivered in cash, property, or sound security upon partition, unless the children (if of age) agree otherwise. If not delivered, any disposition or encumbrance of community or conjugal property requires court approval or the written consent of the affected party or children.
Article 52: The judgment of annulment or nullity, the partition and distribution of properties, and the delivery of the presumptive legitimes shall be recorded in the appropriate civil registries and registries of property.
Article 53: Either former spouse may remarry "after complying with the requirements of the immediately preceding Article" (Article 52); otherwise, the subsequent marriage shall be null and void.

At first glance, Article 53 appears to condition the validity of a second marriage on full compliance with Article 52, including the delivery and recording of the presumptive legitime. This has led to debates on whether non-delivery during or immediately after annulment proceedings voids a subsequent union. However, Supreme Court interpretations have clarified that this is not the case.

Supreme Court Jurisprudence

Philippine jurisprudence has evolved to provide clarity on this issue, emphasizing the distinction between the core requirement for remarriage (recording of the judgment) and ancillary obligations (property settlement and legitime delivery).

Early Interpretations and Strict Compliance

In earlier cases, courts sometimes adopted a strict view. For instance, in Domingo v. Court of Appeals (G.R. No. 104818, September 17, 1993), involving legal separation, the Supreme Court underscored the importance of property liquidation to protect family interests, but this did not directly address remarriage validity since legal separation does not dissolve the marriage bond.

Cases like Terre v. Terre (G.R. No. 92564, July 27, 1992) dealt with bigamy charges where annulment was incomplete, reinforcing that capacity to marry requires a final and executory judgment. However, these did not specifically tackle presumptive legitime.

Clarificatory Ruling in Diño v. Diño

The landmark case of Diño v. Diño (G.R. No. 178044, January 19, 2011) directly addressed the interplay between Articles 52 and 53. Here, the petitioner remarried after the judgment declaring his first marriage null became final but before the liquidation of properties and delivery of presumptive legitimes. The respondent argued that the second marriage was void due to non-compliance with Article 52.

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of validity, holding that:

The recording of the judgment of annulment or nullity in the civil registry is the operative act that restores capacity to marry.
The partition, distribution of properties, and delivery of presumptive legitimes are "mere accessories" to the dissolution, intended to protect creditors, successors-in-interest, and the children, but not prerequisites for remarriage.
Non-compliance with these ancillary matters does not render the subsequent marriage void; instead, they can be addressed in separate proceedings or enforced post-remarriage.

The Court reasoned that interpreting Article 53 strictly would unduly delay remarriage and contradict the intent of restoring civil status promptly after a final judgment.

Subsequent Confirmations

This doctrine was affirmed in later cases:

In Corpuz v. Sto. Tomas (G.R. No. 186571, August 11, 2010), the Court required an affidavit of no property if applicable, but emphasized that such documentation supports recording under Article 52 without barring remarriage if omitted initially.
In Fujiki v. Marinay (G.R. No. 196049, June 26, 2013), involving foreign elements, the Court reiterated that the declaration of nullity itself capacitates remarriage, with property issues separable.
More recently, in Republic v. Olaybar (G.R. No. 189538, February 10, 2014), the focus was on proper recording, but the ruling aligned with Diño by not voiding marriages over pending ancillary matters.

These cases establish that while the court must order the delivery of presumptive legitime in the final judgment (Article 50), failure to execute it during proceedings does not invalidate a second marriage celebrated after the judgment's finality and recording.

Procedural Aspects and Practical Considerations

During Annulment Proceedings

In annulment cases, the court computes the presumptive legitime based on the net assets of the property regime (Articles 102[4] for ACP and 129[4] for CPG). If children are minors, the delivery is typically to a trustee or secured via bonds. Non-delivery might result from disputes over asset valuation, lack of properties, or oversight.

Parties can motion the court for compliance, and failure to adhere may lead to contempt charges or execution of judgment. However, the annulment decree can become final even if liquidation is ongoing, as courts may bifurcate the proceedings.

Requirements for Remarriage

To remarry, the party must obtain a marriage license, presenting proof of the annulment (e.g., annotated marriage certificate and certificate of finality). Civil registrars generally require evidence of the recorded judgment but not necessarily proof of legitime delivery, aligning with jurisprudence that treats it as non-essential for capacity.

If There Are No Children or Properties

If the marriage produced no children, presumptive legitime is irrelevant (Article 51 applies only "if there are children"). If no properties exist, an affidavit suffices for recording under Article 52, further simplifying remarriage.

Consequences of Non-Delivery

While non-delivery does not void the second marriage, it has significant repercussions:

Civil Remedies: Children (upon majority) or their guardians can file actions to compel delivery, including claims for damages if assets are dissipated (Article 51).
Criminal Liability: Willful non-compliance with court orders could lead to indirect contempt (Rule 71, Rules of Court) or estafa if involving fraud.
Property Encumbrances: Any alienation of property without court approval or consent is invalid insofar as it affects the legitime (Article 51).
Inheritance Implications: Undelivered legitime remains a charge on the parent's estate, deductible upon death (Article 908, Civil Code).
Impact on Second Spouse: The second marriage remains valid, but the second spouse's property rights (e.g., in a new regime) are unaffected by the prior non-delivery, though claims from children could complicate shared assets.

In practice, family courts encourage settlement agreements to address legitime early, avoiding post-judgment litigation.

Conclusion

In the Philippine legal context, a second marriage is not void merely because the presumptive legitime was not delivered during annulment proceedings. The Family Code's provisions, as interpreted by the Supreme Court in cases like Diño v. Diño, prioritize the recording of the judgment of annulment or nullity as the key to restoring marital capacity, treating legitime delivery as an enforceable but separate obligation. This approach balances the need for prompt resolution of marital status with the protection of children's rights. Parties facing such issues should consult legal counsel to ensure compliance and address any outstanding deliveries through appropriate remedies, thereby preventing future disputes. This framework underscores the Family Code's emphasis on family welfare while upholding the sanctity of valid marriages.