The Philippines remains one of the only two sovereign states in the world (along with Vatican City) that does not allow absolute divorce. Under Philippine law, marriage is an inviolable social institution and is indissoluble except through declaration of nullity or annulment on grounds existing at the time of the celebration of the marriage, or through legal separation which does not dissolve the marital bond. This absolute prohibition on divorce applies to all Filipino citizens wherever they may be, by virtue of the nationality principle enshrined in Article 15 of the Civil Code: “Laws relating to family rights and duties, or to the status, condition and legal capacity of persons are binding upon citizens of the Philippines, even though living abroad.”

Because divorce is contrary to Philippine public policy and is expressly prohibited by the Constitution and the Family Code, a divorce obtained abroad by or between Filipino citizens is, as a general rule, not recognized in the Philippines. The Filipino party remains legally married, and any subsequent marriage contracted in the Philippines or abroad will be considered bigamous and void.

However, Philippine law and jurisprudence have carved out important exceptions, primarily through paragraph 2 of Article 26 of the Family Code, as expansively interpreted by the Supreme Court in a series of landmark decisions. These exceptions now allow many Filipinos who have obtained foreign divorces to have such divorces recognized judicially and thereby regain capacity to remarry under Philippine law.

Legal Framework: Article 26, Family Code of the Philippines

Article 26 of the Family Code provides:

“Where a marriage between a Filipino citizen and a foreigner is validly celebrated and a divorce is thereafter validly obtained abroad by the alien spouse capacitating him or her to remarry, the Filipino spouse shall likewise have capacity to remarry under Philippine law.”

As amended by Executive Order No. 227 (1987), a second paragraph was added (now the present paragraph 2) that extends the same rule to cases where the divorce is obtained by the Filipino spouse:

“In case a marriage between a Filipino citizen and a foreigner is validly celebrated and a divorce is thereafter validly obtained abroad by either the alien spouse or the Filipino spouse capacitating the other to remarry, the Filipino spouse shall likewise have capacity to remarry under Philippine law.” (The amendment is now uniformly accepted in jurisprudence even if the text in some codifications still shows only one paragraph.)

The clear intent of the provision is to avoid the “absurd situation” of a Filipino being chained to a marriage that, from the perspective of the foreign spouse’s national law, no longer exists.

Scope of Application of Article 26, Paragraph 2 (As Interpreted by the Supreme Court)

1. Mixed Marriages (Filipino + Foreigner) – Divorce Obtained by the Foreign Spouse

This is the original core situation contemplated by the law.

Classic cases: Van Dorn v. Romillo (1985), Pilot v. Republic (1988), Bayot v. Court of Appeals (2008).

Effect: The moment the foreign spouse validly obtains a divorce decree abroad that capacitates him/her to remarry, the Filipino spouse is automatically capacitated to remarry under Philippine law. Early jurisprudence (Corpuz v. Sto. Tomas, 2010) declared that no judicial action is required for the Filipino to regain capacity to remarry, though judicial recognition is still advisable for civil registry annotation and to avoid future disputes.

2. Mixed Marriages – Divorce Obtained by the Filipino Spouse

Before 2018, it was debatable whether the provision applied when it was the Filipino who initiated and obtained the divorce abroad.

Republic v. Manalo (G.R. No. 221029, April 24, 2018; promulgated en banc) definitively settled the issue: YES, it applies even if the Filipino spouse is the one who obtained the divorce, provided:

The marriage was between a Filipino and a foreigner,
The divorce was validly obtained abroad according to the foreign spouse’s national law,
The divorce decree capacitates the foreign spouse (or both parties) to remarry.

The Supreme Court ruled that the phrase “obtained abroad by the alien spouse capacitating him or her to remarry” must be interpreted disjunctively, and that the provision’s beneficent purpose would be defeated by a restrictive reading that penalizes the Filipino for taking the initiative to dissolve an irreparably broken marriage.

Manalo is now the controlling doctrine. All subsequent cases (Galado v. Republic, 2020; Tan-Andal v. Andal, G.R. No. 196359, May 11, 2021) follow it without qualification.

3. Marriages Between Two Filipinos at the Time of Celebration

General rule remains: A divorce obtained abroad by two persons who were both Filipino citizens at the time of the marriage is NOT recognized in the Philippines, even if valid under foreign law.

Leading cases:

Tenchavez v. Escaño (1965)
Roehr v. Rodriguez (2003)
Medina v. Makabali (2014)
Dela Cruz v. Dela Cruz (G.R. No. 250359, March 9, 2022)

The Supreme Court has consistently held that since divorce violates Philippine public policy and both parties were bound by Philippine law at the time of marriage, the foreign court lacked jurisdiction to dissolve the marital bond.

Exception (the “Orbecido loophole,” now firmly entrenched): If, after the celebration of the marriage, one spouse becomes a naturalized citizen of a foreign country and thereafter validly obtains a divorce abroad as a citizen of that country, capacitating him/her to remarry, then the Filipino spouse left behind shall likewise have capacity to remarry under Philippine law.

Landmark case: Republic v. Orbecido III (G.R. No. 154380, October 5, 2005).

Subsequent cases (Fujiki v. Marinay, 2013; Corpuz v. Sto. Tomas, 2010; Macalaguing v. Macalaguing, G.R. No. 193836, November 9, 2021) have reaffirmed this.

Important clarification in Tan-Andal v. Andal (2021): The conversion to foreign citizenship must be bona fide and not merely for the purpose of obtaining an easy divorce. If the Court finds the naturalization was fraudulent or solely for divorce purposes, recognition will be denied.

Procedure for Judicial Recognition of Foreign Divorce

Even in cases where capacity to remarry arises “automatically” (divorce obtained by the foreign spouse), it is now standard practice—and strongly recommended—to file a petition for judicial recognition of the foreign divorce decree. This is because:

The Civil Registry (PSA) will not annotate the foreign divorce on the Philippine marriage certificate without a Philippine court order.
Local civil registrars and solemnizing officers require a court order or PSA-annotated certificate of finality before allowing remarriage.
Without judicial recognition, future issues on legitimacy of children, property regime, inheritance, and bigamy prosecutions may arise.

The petition is filed under Rule on Recognition of Foreign Judgment (A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC, as supplemented by A.M. No. 19-10-20-SC on the Rule on Facilitation of Recognition of Foreign Divorce).

Venue: Regional Trial Court of the place of residence of the petitioner (or Manila if non-resident).

Nature of proceeding: Summary judicial proceeding (no full trial, decided on pleadings and documentary evidence).

Requisites for recognition (consolidated from Manalo, Tan-Andal, and A.M. No. 19-10-20-SC):

Proof of the foreign divorce decree (authenticated and with official translation if not in English);
Proof of the foreign nationality of the spouse who obtained the divorce at the time the divorce was obtained;
Proof of the foreign law allowing absolute divorce (authentication/apostille required; usually via expert affidavit or certification from the embassy);
Proof that the divorce capacitates the divorce-seeking spouse to remarry (the decree itself usually states this);
Proof of the marriage celebrated in the Philippines (PSA marriage certificate).

If the petitioner is the Filipino spouse who obtained the divorce abroad, additional requirement: proof that the foreign court validly acquired jurisdiction over the parties (usually via service of summons and participation of the other spouse).

The Office of the Solicitor General and the Provincial/City Prosecutor must be impleaded as respondents.

Once the RTC decision becomes final and executory, the petitioner submits it to the Local Civil Registrar and to the PSA for annotation on the marriage certificate. Only after annotation is the remarriage completely free from legal risk.

Effects of Recognition

Dissolution of the marriage from the date the foreign decree became final.
Restoration of full capacity of the Filipino spouse to remarry.
Termination of the property regime (absolute community or conjugal partnership) as of the date of finality of the foreign decree (Tan-Andal v. Andal, 2021). Liquidation and partition follow Philippine law unless a foreign judgment on property division is also recognized.
Children remain legitimate (Article 54, Family Code).
Custody and support arrangements in the foreign decree are not automatically binding but may be given res judicata effect if separately recognized.

Special Cases

Muslim Filipinos governed by the Code of Muslim Personal Laws (P.D. 1083): Divorce (talaq, faskh, etc.) is allowed. A foreign divorce valid under Muslim law may be recognized even between two Muslim Filipinos.

Same-sex marriages celebrated abroad: Not recognized in the Philippines (marriage under Philippine law is only between man and woman). Consequently, no need for “divorce recognition” since the union has no legal existence here.

Dual citizens: The Supreme Court looks at the nationality at the time of the divorce decree. If the divorce-obtaining spouse was already a foreign citizen (whether by birth, naturalization, or reacquisition under R.A. 9225), the divorce may be recognized.

Practical Realities as of December 2025

Despite the passage of the Absolute Divorce Bill by the House of Representatives in 2024, the Senate has not concurred, and no absolute divorce law exists in the Philippines as of this writing. Recognition of foreign divorce under Article 26, as expanded by Manalo, Orbecido, and Tan-Andal, remains the only practical remedy for most Filipinos trapped in irretrievably broken marriages.

The procedure, while summary, typically takes 8–18 months in Metro Manila RTCs and longer in provinces. Costs range from PHP 150,000–400,000 including authentication, publication, and legal fees.

In conclusion, while the Philippines continues to prohibit divorce for its citizens, the Supreme Court’s progressive interpretation of Article 26 has significantly liberalized the recognition of foreign divorces in mixed marriages and in cases where one spouse has genuinely acquired foreign citizenship. For pure Filipino-Filipino marriages, however, the doors remain largely closed—absent naturalization abroad, the only remedies remain declaration of nullity, annulment, or legal separation.