REPUBLIC v.
OLAYBAR
G.R. No. 189538. February 10, 2014.
Proceedings under Rule 108 can be both summary and adversarial. Even substantial changes in the registry may be corrected through
a petition filed under Rule 108, with the true facts established and the parties aggrieved by the error availing themselves of the
appropriate adversarial proceeding.
Overview
Petitioner Merlinda Olaybar went to the NSO to request for a CENOMAR to be married to her boyfriend. Upon receipt, she was already
married to a certain Ye Son Sune. She then filed a petition for cancellation of entries in the wife portion thereof. She impleaded the
Local Civil Husband as well the alleged husband. She testified that at the time of the alleged marriage, she was working in Makati.
Further, the stenographer present in the celebration of the marriage with the alleged husband testified that petitioner was not the wife
present. Lastly, a document examiner declared the signature in the marriage certificate a forgery.
RTC rendered a decision in favor of the petitioner ordering the canceling of the WIFE portion in the alleged marriage contract.
The OSG directly appealed the case to the SC.
The SC upheld the RTC decision. It ruled that Rule 108 cannot be availed of to determine the validity of a marriage, the same cannot
be applied in this case as there was no marriage in the first place. Proceedings under Rule 108 can be summary and adversarial. The
procedures for adversarial proceeding were followed and evidence had already been admitted and examined. Hence, the entries of the
wife portion can be validly corrected.
Facts
Petitioner Merlinda L. Olaybar requested from the NSO a CENOMAR, one of the requirements necessary to marry her boyfriend of 5
years. Upon receipt of the same, petitioner found out that she was already married to a certain Ye Sun Sone. Thus, the filed a petition
for Cancellation of Entries in the Marriage Contract and impleaded the Local Civil Registrar and the alleged husband.
Petitioner testified on her own behalf that at the time of alleged marriage, she was working in Makati. The stenographer of the alleged
marriage during its celebration also testified that the woman that appeared in the marriage was not the petitioner. Lastly, a document
examiner declared the signatures in the marriage contract was a forgery.
Lower Court’s Ruling
RTC: Granted the petition.
The RTC directed to cancel all the entries in the wife portion of the alleged marriage contract of the petitioner. In finding that the
marriage contract was not of the petitioner’s, it was proper to set her record straight.
The OSG directly appealed to the SC through Rule 45.
Issue: W/N cancellations of entries in the marriage contract which, in effect, nullifies the marriage may be undertaken in a
Rule 108 petition.
Ruling: Yes.
Rule 108 for correction of entries in the civil registry may be summary or adversarial. If the correction is clerical, the procedure to be
adopted is summary. If it affects the civil statues, citizenship or nationality of a party, it is deemed substantial, and the procedure to be
adopted is adversarial.
An appropriate adversarial suit is where the trial court has conducted proceedings where al relevant facts have been fully and properly
developed, where the opposing counsel have been given opportunity to demolish the opposite party’s case, and where the evidence
has been thoroughly weighed and considered.
In the filing of the petitioner, the procedural requirements set forth in Rule 108 were complied with. Evidence was able to establish that
no such marriage was celebrated. Further, no evidence was presented to prove the existence of the marriage.
The court maintains that Rule 108 cannot be availed to determine the validity of marriage, it cannot nullify proceedings before a trial
court where all the parties had been given the opportunity to contest the allegations of the respondent; the procedures were followed,
and all the evidence of the parties had already been admitted and examined.
The order of the RTC in canceling the entries of the marriage contract did not declare the marriage void as there was no marriage in the
first place.
Disposition: Petition, denied.
