Divorce abroad can be judicially recognized

Divorce abroad can be judicially recognized | Daily Tribune

We all know that there is no divorce in the Philippines. Even if it is obtained abroad by Filipino couples, the divorce will not be recognized under our laws. However, if it is obtained by a couple where one spouse is a foreigner and the other is a Filipino, then under Article 26 of the Family Code, it can be recognized.

Now, what if the foreigner-Filipino couple jointly obtained the divorce before an administrative, rather than a judicial, authority in a foreign country? Will that divorce still be recognized here?

In one case, the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) objected to the recognition of a foreign divorce when the Filipino spouse sought its recognition in the Philippines. The OSG argued that the divorce was mutually obtained by both spouses and that it was not obtained through judicial proceedings. While the trial court granted the recognition, the OSG remained steadfast in its position.

When the matter reached the Supreme Court, the High Court ruled in favor of the Filipino spouse. It explained that “[a] plain reading of Article 26(2) of the Family Code reveals that it only requires that the divorce be ‘validly obtained abroad.’ To insist that the divorce be obtained through judicial proceedings in a foreign jurisdiction is to insert a condition not provided in the law. Indeed, the law does not distinguish between divorces obtained through judicial proceedings and administrative proceedings; or between those where one spouse files for divorce and the other contests it, and those where the divorce is a product of mutual agreement.”

“The plain meaning rule prohibits this Court from imposing its own distinctions and qualifications on the clear and unambiguous language of Article 26(2). To do so would be tantamount to judicial legislation, an unwarranted overstepping of the Court’s judicial functions. After all, it is also an elementary rule in statutory construction that where the law does not distinguish, the courts should not distinguish. Ubi lex non distinguit nec nos distinguere debemos.”

“Case law further elucidates that ‘the law confers jurisdiction on Philippine courts to extend the effect of a foreign divorce decree to a Filipino spouse without undergoing trial to determine the validity of the dissolution of the marriage.’ As such, before a foreign divorce decree can be recognized by our courts, the party pleading it must prove the divorce as a fact and demonstrate its conformity to the foreign law allowing it. The statutory provision does not direct our courts to ascertain whether the procedure availed of in the foreign jurisdiction is judicial or administrative before granting the Filipino spouse the capacity to remarry.”

This ruling greatly helps unfortunate Filipinos who are trapped in failed marriages with foreign spouses. It relieves them of the burden of having to reinvent the wheel. All they need to do is file for judicial recognition of their foreign divorce in the Philippines. Once granted, they are capacitated to remarry and can start a new chapter in their lives.

It is also an elementary rule in statutory construction that where the law does not distinguish, the courts should not distinguish.

The quoted portion of the decision is from Republic of the Philippines v. Ruby Cuevas Ng (G.R. No. 249238, 27 February 2024).