ENRICO vs HEIRS OF SPS. EULOGIO & TRINIDAD MEDINACELI G.R. No.

173614

FACT:

 This is a petition assailing the RTC’s reinstatement order on the formerly dismissed filed action for the
declaration of nullity of marriage between the petitioner and respondents father. Eulogio Medinaceli and
Trinidad Catli-Medinaceli, were married on June 14, 1962, begotten seven children. Trinidad died on May 1,
2004; Eulogio married another woman named Lolita Enrico on August 26, 2004. Six months later, Eulogio
passed away.
 Respondents filed an action for declaration of nullity of marriage between Petitioner and the respondent’s
late father on two grounds: 1. that the marriage lacks the requisite of marriage license, and; 2. the lack of
marriage ceremony due to respondent’s father serious illness that made its performance impossible.
 Lolita, defend her stand by citing Article 34 of the family code arguing her exemption from getting marriage
license. She sought then the dismissal of the respondent’s filed action by citing the AM-02-11-10-SC, Sec.
2, par. (a) Rule of the family code.
 Pursuant to “AM-02-11-10-SC” embodied the rule on declaration of absolute nullity of void marriages and
annulment of voidable marriages RTC dismissed the respondents filed action. Respondents filed motion for
reconsideration invoking the ruling in the case of Niñal v. Bayadog, holding that the heirs of a deceased
spouse have the standing to assail a voidable marriage even after death of one of the spouses. RTC
granted the motion and issued an order for reinstatement of the case. Petitioner filed motion for
reconsideration but denied, thereby petitioner assailed a petition directly to Supreme Court.

Issue:

WON the heirs may validly file the declaration of nullity of marriage between Eulogio and Lolita.

RULING:

No, the heirs cannot validly file the declaration of nullity of marriage between Eulogio and Lolita.

In pursuant to the rule on “AM 02-11-10-SC”, under the Family Code of the Philippines. Particularly
Sec 2, part (a) Provides that a petition for Declaration of Absolute Nullity of a Void Marriage may be filed solely
by the husband or the wife. Thus, the heirs has no legal standing to assail the validity of the second marriage
of Eulogio.

In the case at bar, the heirs of Eulogio and Trinidad cannot fight for the nullity of the marriage of
Eulogio and Lolita. However, it does not mean that they cannot fight for their rights as heirs under the law.
They can still protect their successional rights, for, as stated in the Rationale of the Rules on Annulment of
Voidable Marriages and Declaration of Absolute Nullity of Void Marriages, Legal Separation and Provisional
Orders, compulsory or intestate heirs can still question the validity of the marriage of the spouses, not in a
proceeding for declaration of nullity, but upon the death of a spouse in a proceeding for the settlement of the
estate of the deceased spouse filed in the regular courts.