05 Republic of the Phils. Vs. Ludyson C.
 The CA dismissed the petition, ruling that
Catubag
G.R. NO. 210580; APRIL 18, 2018
PETITIONER: Republic of the Philippines
RESPONDENT: Ludyson Catubag
FACTS:
 Private Respondent Ludyson and Shanaviv
were cohabiting with each other as husband
and wife, and had 2 children together.
 In 2001 respondent took work overseas.
Meanwhile, Shanaviv stayed behind in the
Philippines to tend to the needs of their
children
 Ludyson and Shanaviv eventually married in
2003. The marriage was solemnized by a
Municipal Judge in Rizal, Cagayan.
 Sometime in 2006, while Ludyson was
working abroad, Shanaviv left their house
and never returned (Ludyson’s relatives
took care of the children).
 Ludyson flew back home and proceeded to
look for his wife. He inquired with close
friends and relatives and even travelled as
far as Bicol, where he wife was born and
raised, but to no avail. He also searched
various hospitals and funeral parlors, also to
no avail.
 Ludyson subsequently sought the help of
Bombo Radyo to broadcast the fact of his
wife’s disappearance.
 In 2012, Ludyson filed a petition with the
RTC to have his wife declared presumptively
dead.
 The RTC granted the petition.
 Petitioner, through the office of the SolGen,
elevated the case to the CA via Petition for
Certiorari under Rule 65, contending that
Ludyson failed to establish a well-founded
belief that his wife was already dead.
Petitioner should have filed a MR with the
RTC. The Petitioner filed a MR but the CA
denied the same.
ISSUE:
(1) Whether the Private Respondent has
complied with the requisites of a petition
for declaration of presumptive death under
Art. 41 of the Family Code.
(2) Whether Petitioner’s resort to an appeal to
the CA under Rule 65 is proper.
HELD:
NO.
There are 4 requisites under Art. 41 that must
be complied with for the declaration of
presumptive death to prosper:
1. The absent spouse has been missing for
4 consecutive years, or 2 if such spouse
was in danger of death when the
disappearance occurred;
2. The present spouse wants to remarry;
3. The present spouse has a well-founded
belief that the absentee is dead; and
4. The present spouse files for a summary
proceeding for the declaration of
presumptive death of the absentee.
In this case, Ludyson has complied with the 1st,
2nd, and 4th requisites, nut has not satisfied the
3rd requisite as he has not established a well-
founded belief that the absentee is dead. Such
belief must result from diligent efforts to locate
the absent spouse, Ludyson failed to establish
his allegations;
 He did not present the friends and
family he claims to have made inquiries
to.
 While he did have a certification from
Bombo Radyo’s manager, he did not
 seek help from government agencies Branch 11 and the Resolutions dated
like the police or NBI. September 3, 2013 and December 6, 2013
 Ludyson’s assertion, uncorroborated by rendered by the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. S.P.
evidence, falls short of the diligence No. 131269 are hereby ANNULED and SET
required to engender a well-founded ASIDE. Consequently, the petition of private
belief that the absentee is dead. respondent Ludyson C. Catubag to have his
wife, Shanaviv G. Alvarez Catubag, declared
YES.
presumptively dead is DENIED. SO ORDERED.
 The nature of the proceeding
determines the appropriate remedy or
remedies available. Under Art. 41 of the
Family Code, a petition for declaration
of presumptive death is a summary
proceeding. Art 253 of the same Code
likewise characterizes proceedings
under Art. 41 as summary proceedings.
 As a consequence of this summary
nature, parties cannot seek
reconsideration, nor appeal decision in
summary judicial proceedings under
the Family Code because these
judgments are immediately final and
executory by express mandate of law.
 However, parties may challenge the
decision in such proceedings through a
petition for certiorari to question grave
abuse of discretion amounting to lack of
jurisdiction. As previously held by the
Court in Republic vs. Sareňogon, Jr., in a
summary proceeding for the
declaration for presumptive death, if a
party is aggrieved by the decision of the
RTC, then a Petition for Certiorari under
Rule 65 should be filed with the CA. any
subsequent decision by the CA may be
elevated to the SC via Petition for
Review on Certiorari under Rule 45.

SC Decision:

WHEREFORE the petition is GRANTED.

Accordingly, the Decision dated May 23, 2013 of
the Regional Trial Court of Tuao, Cagayan,