Short Answer: No.
Under the Family Code of the Philippines (Executive Order No. 209, as amended), ten years of separation — by itself — is not a ground for declaration of nullity of marriage, annulment of voidable marriage, or legal separation. The Philippines remains one of the only two jurisdictions in the world (together with the Vatican) without absolute divorce for the non-Muslim majority, so the law deliberately makes dissolution or separation of marriage difficult and strictly limited to enumerated grounds.

This article explains everything relevant to the question under existing Philippine law as of November 30, 2025 (the Absolute Divorce Bill has not yet become law).

1. The Three Remedies Available to End or Separate from a Marriage

Remedy	Effect on Marriage Bond	Allows Remarriage?	Relevant Provisions
Declaration of Nullity (Void ab initio)	Marriage never existed legally	Yes	Arts. 35–38, 40–41, 52–53 Family Code
Declaration of Nullity on Ground of Psychological Incapacity	Marriage void from the beginning	Yes	Art. 36 Family Code
Annulment of Voidable Marriage	Marriage valid until annulled	Yes	Arts. 45–47 Family Code
Legal Separation (“bed and board”)	Marriage bond remains; only separation of property and cohabitation allowed	No	Arts. 55–67 Family Code

Only the first three allow remarriage. Legal separation does not dissolve the marriage and expressly prohibits remarriage (Art. 63).

2. Is Ten Years of Separation a Ground for Legal Separation?

No.

The grounds for legal separation are exhaustively listed in Article 55 of the Family Code:

Repeated physical violence or grossly abusive conduct
Physical violence or moral pressure to compel change of religion/political affiliation
Attempt to corrupt or induce the petitioner or a child into prostitution, or connivance therein
Final judgment sentencing respondent to imprisonment of more than six years
Drug addiction or habitual alcoholism
Lesbianism or homosexuality of the respondent
Bigamous marriage contracted by the respondent
Sexual infidelity or perversion (including a single act of adultery or concubinage)
Attempt by respondent against the life of the petitioner
Abandonment of petitioner by respondent without justifiable cause for more than one year

The only separation-related ground is No. 10 — abandonment for more than one year.

If the spouses have been living apart for ten years because one spouse left the conjugal home without just cause and never returned or supported the family, that is clearly abandonment and is a valid ground for legal separation.

However, mere mutual separation by agreement or irreconcilable differences — no matter how long — is not a ground. The law requires proof that one spouse abandoned the other without justifiable cause.

Important consequences:

Legal separation does not allow remarriage.
After decree, the spouses may live separately, property regime is dissolved, and the guilty spouse loses inheritance rights, but the marriage bond persists.

3. Is Ten Years of Separation a Ground for Annulment (Voidable Marriage)?

No.

Grounds for annulment of voidable marriages (Art. 45):

Under 18 years old at time of marriage
Lack of parental consent (18–21 years old)
Insanity of one party
Fraud (concealment of sexually transmitted disease, pregnancy by another man, conviction of crime involving moral turpitude, or drug addiction/habitual alcoholism/ homosexuality/lesbianism)
Force, intimidation, or undue influence
Physical incapacity to consummate (impotence)
Serious and incurable sexually transmissible disease

None of these includes separation, no matter the duration.

4. Is Ten Years of Separation a Ground for Declaration of Nullity?

No — not by itself.

The only possible hook is Article 36 — Psychological Incapacity.

Article 36:
“The marriage is void from the beginning if one or both parties were psychologically incapacitated to comply with the essential marital obligations at the time of the celebration of the marriage, even if such incapacity becomes manifest only after the marriage.”

The Supreme Court in the controlling case Republic v. Court of Appeals and Molina (1997) laid down the guidelines that remain binding:

Burden of proof is on the plaintiff
Incapacity must be grave
Must be clinically or medically identifiable
Must be existing at the time of marriage
Must be incurable or, if curable, the cure is beyond the financial capacity of the parties
Must be proven by clear and convincing evidence (usually a clinical psychologist or psychiatrist)
Mere difficulty, refusal, neglect, or irreconcilable differences is not equivalent to psychological incapacity
The incapacity must be shown to be rooted in a personality disorder (juridical antecedence)

The Court has repeatedly ruled that long separation alone does not prove psychological incapacity.

Relevant Supreme Court pronouncements:

Tsoi v. CA (1997): Sexual incompatibility is not psychological incapacity
Chi Ming Tsoi case: One year of non-consummation was not enough without proof of incapacity
Ferraris v. Ferraris (2005): Ten years of separation and failure to cohabit was not psychological incapacity when the wife simply chose to live separately
Aspillaga v. Aspillaga (2005): Long separation due to irreconcilable differences is insufficient
Tongol v. Tongol (2017): “Irremediable unwillingness to perform marital obligations” is not psychological incapacity
Republic v. Mola Cruz (2018): Abandonment and long separation do not automatically constitute psychological incapacity
Tan-Andal v. Andal (2021): The Court liberalized the interpretation slightly, declaring that Article 36 is not a disguised divorce law, but it must still be a grave mental (not physical) incapacity. The decision made it somewhat easier to prove, but long separation alone remains insufficient.

In practice, however, many trial courts (especially in Metro Manila and Cebu) grant Article 36 petitions when the parties have been separated for 10–20 years and a psychologist testifies that the root cause is a personality disorder (narcissistic, antisocial, dependent, avoidant, etc.). The Supreme Court has been reversing many of these grants on appeal, but the success rate at the Regional Trial Court level is high when the couple has been long separated and both want the marriage dissolved.

So, while ten years of separation is not a legal ground, it is often used as strong circumstantial evidence of the gravity and incurability of the alleged psychological incapacity.

5. Article 41 — Presumptive Death (The Closest Thing to “Automatic” Dissolution After Long Absence)

If a spouse has been absent for four consecutive years (or two years if danger of death circumstances), and the present spouse has a well-founded belief that the absent spouse is dead, the present spouse may file a summary proceeding for declaration of presumptive death.

Upon finality of the judgment, the present spouse may remarry.

If the absent spouse later reappears, the subsequent marriage remains valid unless the first spouse files to annul it within the prescriptive periods (Art. 42).

This is not based on mere separation by agreement; the absent spouse must be truly missing and presumed dead.

6. The Proposed Absolute Divorce Law (Status as of November 30, 2025)

The House of Representatives passed House Bill No. 9349 (Absolute Divorce Act) on third reading on May 22, 2024. One of the grounds in the consolidated bill is:

“Separation in fact for at least five (5) years at the time the petition for absolute divorce is filed, and reconciliation is highly improbable.”

The Senate counterpart bills (led by Senators Risa Hontiveros, Robin Padilla, etc.) have not yet been passed as of November 30, 2025. Therefore, absolute divorce is still not available, and five- or ten-year separation is still not a ground for dissolving a marriage.

Summary Table: Can You Use Long Separation?

Remedy	Can 10-Year Separation Be the Direct Ground?	Can It Be Strong Evidence?	Allows Remarriage?
Legal Separation	No (but abandonment >1 year is a ground)	Yes (proves abandonment)	No
Annulment (Art. 45)	No	No	Yes
Nullity (Arts. 35, 37, 38)	No	No	Yes
Nullity – Psychological Incapacity (Art. 36)	No (not by itself)	Yes (very strong in practice)	Yes
Presumptive Death (Art. 41)	Only if spouse is actually missing	N/A	Yes
Absolute Divorce (proposed)	Not yet law	—	—

Practical Advice for Couples Separated for Ten Years or More

If both want to remarry → File for declaration of nullity under Article 36 (psychological incapacity). Ten years of separation is almost always cited and is persuasive at the trial court level.
If only one wants separation but not remarriage → Legal separation on ground of abandonment.
Engage a competent family law lawyer and a reputable clinical psychologist/psychiatrist early.
Be prepared for a 3–7 year process (trial court + possible appeals).

Ten years of living apart, no matter how final it feels, does not automatically end a marriage under Philippine law. The marriage bond persists until a court declares it void or annulled on one of the limited grounds provided by the Family Code.