Voidable Marriages Because of Under-Age Parties in Philippine Law
I. Overview
In Philippine family law a voidable marriage is valid and produces full civil effects until it is annulled by a court.1 The classic example is a marriage celebrated without the required parental consent when one or both parties are 18 – 20 years old. This narrow ground—found in Article 45(1) of the Family Code—lies midway between:
- Void marriages (e.g., parties below 18, Art. 35[1]; bigamy, Art. 35[4]), which are treated as if they never existed, and
- Valid marriages, which are indissoluble except by death or judicial decree under the Constitution and the Family Code.
Because the defect is curable, Philippine courts treat the union as “susceptible of confirmation or ratification.”2
II. Statutory Foundations
| Instrument | Key Provisions on Age & Consent |
|---|---|
| Family Code of the Philippines (E.O. No. 209, 1987) | Art. 5 – Minimum age: 18. Art. 14 – 18–20 yrs: parental consent. Art. 45(1) – Marriage voidable if consent lacking. Art. 47(1) – Who may sue & prescriptive periods. Art. 50–55 – Effects after annulment (children, property, successional rights). |
| Rep. Act No. 6809 (1989) | Lowered age of majority from 21 → 18. Did not repeal Art. 14; thus parental consent still required for 18–20-year-olds to marry. |
| Rep. Act No. 11596 (2021) | Criminalizes facilitation or solemnization of child marriages (< 18). Reinforces Art. 35(1) void rule; does not amend voidable-marriage regime. |
III. Conceptual Distinctions
| Point of Comparison | Void (Art. 35, 37, 38) | Voidable (Art. 45) |
|---|---|---|
| Civil effects before decree | None (ex tunc) | Full, until annulled |
| Imprescriptibility of action | Yes | No – time-bar applies |
| Ratification | Impossible | Possible by free cohabitation after defect ceases |
| Legitimate status of children | Legitimate only if putative marriage doctrine applies (Art. 36) | Legitimate even after annulment (Art. 54[1]) |
| Property regime after decree | Generally separate; donations propter nuptias revoked | Liquidation under Arts. 50–51; equal shares unless bad faith |
IV. Elements of the Ground under Art. 45(1)
Age at Solemnization Party(ies) were 18, 19, or 20.
Absence of Written Parental Consent Consent must be personal and in writing, accompanied by an affidavit of the parent(s) or legal guardian (Art. 15 & IRR). Oral permission is insufficient.
No Subsequent Ratification Ratification occurs if, after attaining 21, the party freely cohabits with the spouse (Art. 45, last clause).
Timely Court Action under Art. 47(1) Who may sue:
- (a) The under-age party → within 5 years after reaching 21;
- (b) The parent, surviving parent, or guardian → before the party turns 21.
After lapse of the periods, or upon ratification, the marriage becomes unassailable on this ground.
V. Procedure for Annulment
- Petition filed under A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC (Rules on Declaration of Nullity/Annulment of Marriage).
- Venue: Regional Trial Court (Family Court) where either party resides for at least 6 months.
- Parties: Only the plaintiff (and the Solicitor General/OCP as State counsel).
- Burden of Proof: Clear and convincing evidence of lack of parental consent; age is usually established via live birth certificate.
VI. Effects of Decree of Annulment
Status of Children (Art. 54) Legitimate children conceived or born before the decree retain legitimacy.
Property Relations Liquidation under Art. 50:
- Equal division of net profits unless one spouse in bad faith.
- Donations by reason of marriage revoked.
- Reinstatement of exclusive properties.
Successional Rights Spouses forfeit rights from each other as intestate heirs (Art. 52), but rights already vested in children remain.
Use of Surname Annulled wife may—not must—resume her maiden name (Art. 63).
VII. Ratification by Free Cohabitation
Requires two elements:
- Reaching 21 years; and
- Voluntary cohabitation as husband and wife thereafter.
The effect is retroactive validation; the ground for annulment is extinguished ipso jure. No formal document is necessary, but continued cohabitation must be “voluntary, knowing, and free.”3
VIII. Interaction with Criminal Statutes
- Republic Act 11596 (2021) makes it a crime to cause, arrange, or solemnize a marriage where either party is below 18.
- For 18–20-year-olds, no criminal liability attaches in the absence of consent—civil remedies under the Family Code suffice.
IX. Key Jurisprudence
| Case | G.R. No. | Ratio / Take-Away |
|---|---|---|
| Antonio v. Reyes (2006) | 155800 | Distinguishes void vs voidable; emphasized that failure to question voidable marriage within prescriptive period bars action. |
| Domingo v. Court of Appeals (1996) | 104818 | Affirmed legitimacy of children despite annulment; underscored constitutional policy to protect children. |
| Navarro v. Cecilio-Pe (2010) | 151384 | Clarified that ratification need not be express; cohabitation after 21 is sufficient. |
| People v. Dionaldo (2014) | 209221 | Held that criminal liability for child marriage (then under RPC Art. 350) does not apply when parties are 18+. |
(These cases do not alter the statutory text but illuminate procedural and evidentiary nuances.)
X. Comparative and Policy Notes
- The Philippines remains one of the few jurisdictions that still voids—rather than voids or conditionally validates—marriages of parties under 18.
- International instruments (e.g., CEDAW, CRC) urge abolition of child marriage; RA 11596 aligns the penal aspect but the civil void rule already existed since 1987.
- The parental-consent regime (18–20) balances emerging adulthood with parental interest. Legislative reform proposals (e.g., raising consent threshold to 21 again, or abolishing consent altogether) have repeatedly stalled in Congress.
XI. Practical Guidance for Lawyers & Clients
- Due diligence: Verify parties’ age and secure notarized parental consent before filing marriage licence.
- Timelines: Advise clients that the window to annul on this ground is narrow—five years—and that passivity may result in irrevocable ratification.
- Evidence gathering: Preserve civil registry documents; obtain testimony of parents/guardians where consent is disputed.
- Child & property protection: Even if annulment is contemplated, ensure property inventories and child-support measures are in place.
XII. Conclusion
Voidable marriages due to under-age parties occupy a small but significant niche in Philippine family law. Rooted in Articles 45–47 of the Family Code, the doctrine reflects a compromise: acknowledging youthful vulnerability while honoring the constitutional sanctity of marriage by allowing validation through ratification. Mastery of its elements—age bracket, lack of written parental consent, prescriptive periods, and ratificatory acts—is essential for practitioners, policy-makers, and families alike.
Notes
1 Art. 39, Family Code (action to annul prescribed); see also Antonio v. Reyes, supra. 2 Tolentino, Commentaries and Jurisprudence on the Civil Code, Vol. 1, 1990 ed. 3 Navarro v. Cecilio-Pe, supra.
This article reflects statutes and jurisprudence up to August 7 2025.