ANG "RATIFICATION OF COHABITATION" AY ANG PAGPAPAKASAL NG "COMMON LAW HUSBAND AND WIFE" O ANG KARANIWANG TAWAG SA ISANG BABAE AT LALAKI NA PAREHONG SINGLE AT NAGSAMA NG MAHIGIT NA 5 TAON NA TULOY-TULOY NA WALANG THIRD PARTY INVOLVED. ANG GANITONG MAGKAPAREHA AY PWEDENG MAGPAKASAL KAHIT WALANG MARRIAGE LICENSE AT ANG ISA-SUBMIT LAMANG NILA AY AFFIDAVIT OF 5 YEAR COHABITATION UNDER ARTICLE 34 NG FAMILY CODE. ANG 5 YEAR COHABITATION NG "LALAKI AT BABAE" AY KAILANGAN NA SINGLE SILA, "EXCLUSIVE" O WALANG THIRD PARTY NA INVOLVE SA LOOB NG 5 YEARS BAGO SILA IKASAL AT "CONTINUOUS" O TULOY-TULOY NA PAGSASAMA SA IISANG BUBONG. ANG KASAL NA WALANG MARRIAGE LICENSE AT GUMAMIT LAMANG NG AFFIDAVIT OF 5-YEAR COHABITATION NA HINDI TOTOO, O KULANG SA 5 YEARS PARA LANG MAKASAL AY CONSIDERED NA VOID MARRIAGE NA PWEDENG IPA-ANNUL SA KORTE. Marami ang nagtatanong sa E-Lawyers Online tungkol sa annulment of marriage at karaniwan nila na sagot kung nagtanong kung may marriage license, ang sinasabi nila ay wala at gamit lamang nila ay "affidavit of 5 year cohabitation". Ganito ang tanong nila: "Attorney, nagsama kami ng boyfriend ko sa Maynila for three years bilang live-in relationship at dahil aalis na ako papuntang Middle East para magtrabaho, nagkasundo kami na magpakasal agad ng mabilisan at ginamit lamang namin ay "Affidavit of 5 year Cohabitation". Valid ba ang kasal namin?" Karaniwan na sa panahon ngayon ang mga live-in relationships at akala ng iba ay ang tawag sa kanila ay "common law husband and wife." Ang tinatawag na "common law husband and wife" ay patungkol sa isang babae at lalaki na parehong single at nagsasama ng mahigit na limang taon na tuloy-tuloy at walang patid at walang third party silang dalawa na involved. Ang ganitong magkapareha ay pwedeng magpakasal kahit walang marriage license dahil ang required lamang sa kanila ay mag-submit sa solemnizing officer ng Affidavit of 5 Years Cohabitation. Ang tawag sa ganitong kasal ay "ratification of marital cohabitation" kung saan nirecognize ng batas na kasal na sila at naratify lamang ito sa pamamagitan ng kasal. Ang Article 34 ng Family Code ay nagbibigay ng exemption o hindi na kailangan ang marriage license sa lalaki at babaeng single at may legal na kapasidad na magpakasal who have lived together as husband and wife for at least five years. Hindi na sila required kumuha ng marriage license bagkus sila ay magsasubmit lang sa Local Civil Registrar ng "AFFIDAVIT OF 5-YEAR COHABITATION" at pwede na sila magpakasal. Sinabi ng Supreme Court sa kasong Ninal vs. Bayadog [328 SCRA 122 (2000)] na ang 5 taon na pagsasama ng dalawa ay kailangan na pareho silang "single", "exclusive" o walang iba pa silang kinakasama o kapartner at "continuous" o tuloy-tuloy at walang patid na pagsasama sa iisang bubong: “x x x In other words, the five-year common-law cohabitation period, which is counted back from the date of celebration of marriage, should be a period of legal union had it not been for the absence of the marriage. This 5-year period should be the years immediately before the day of the marriage and it should be a period of cohabitation characterized by exclusivity – meaning no third party was involved at any time within the 5 years and continuity – that is unbroken. Otherwise, if that continuous 5-year cohabitation is computed without any distinction as to whether the parties were capacitated to marry each other during the entire five years, then the law would be sanctioning immorality and encouraging parties to have common law relationships and placing them on the same footing with those who lived faithfully with their spouse. Marriage being a special relationship must be respected as such and its requirements must be strictly observed. The presumption that a man and a woman deporting themselves as husband and wife is based on the approximation of the requirements of the law. The parties should not be afforded any excuse to not comply with every single requirement and later use the same missing element as a pre-conceived escape ground to nullify their marriage. There should be no exemption from securing a marriage license unless the circumstances clearly fall within the ambit of the exception. It should be noted that a license is required in order to notify the public that two persons are about to be united in matrimony and that anyone who is aware or has knowledge of any impediment to the union of the two shall make it known to the local civil registrar." Kung ang babae o lalaki ay hindi single ng sila ay nagsama, o kulang sa 5 years ang pagsasama, o hindi exclusive ang pagsasama dahil amy iba pang kapartner sila, o hindi tuloy-tuloy ang 5 years nilang pagsasama at hindi sa iisang bubong, sila ay hindi pwedeng maging exempted sa marriage license. Kalimitan, upang mapabilis ang kasal at upang hindi na kumuha ng marriage license, ang magpapakasal ay nagpapaayos sa fixer at nagpapagawa lang ng "AFFIDAVIT OF 5-YEAR COHABITATION" kahit hindi naman totoo na "live-in couples" or "common law husband and wife" sila at hindi totoo na nagsama sila ng 5 years ng walang third party na involved. Ang kasal na ginanap ang ganitong sitwasyon na hindi totoo ang na "live-in couples" or "common law husband and wife" sila ay isang null and void na marriage na pwedeng ipa-annul sa korte. Ito ang desisyon ng Supreme Court sa case ng Republic vs. Dayot [G.R. No. 175581, March 28, 2008] kung saan sinabi ng Korte Suprema na ang hindi totoo na "affidavit of cohabitation" ay hindi lang isang simpleng iregularidad sa kasal. Ang hindi totoo na "affidavit of cohabitation" ay isang kasinungalingan at nangangahulugan na walang bisa at mere scrap of paper at ang kasal na ginanap na may hindi totoo na "affidavit of cohabitation" ay void dahil ito ay considered na kasal na walang marriage license. Kung gusto nyo na magkonsulta tungkol sa annulment of marriage at kailangan na mga dokumento nito, register at my website at e-lawyersonline. Visit and also like my FB page E-Lawyers Online. Ito ang link facebook/E.Lawyers.Online. All copyright of this post is reserved by Atty. Marlon P. Valderama and E-Lawyers Online. Sharing is allowed provided the author is acknowledged and clearly indicated.
Posted on: Fri, 30 Aug 2013 12:50:06 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015