Republic of the Philippines

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

Quezon City
Branch ______

MICHELLE M. ACLON, SPEC. PROC. CASE NO. ____________

Petitioner, FOR: RECOGNITION OF FOREIGN
DECREE OF DIVORCE & CANCELLATION
- versus - OR CORRECTION OF ENTRIES IN THE
CIVIL REGISTRY
KUNIO AKIMOTO and the
Civil Registrar General duly
Represented by the Civil
Registrar of the Local Civil
Registrar of Quezon City.
Respondents.

PETITION FOR THE RECOGNITION OF A FOREIGN DECREE OF DIVORCE

AND CANCELLATION OR CORRECTION OF ENTRIES IN THE CIVIL
REGISTRY RECORD OF PETITIONER

COMES NOW PETITIONER, thru the undersigned counsel, unto the Honorable Court,
respectfully avers:

I. Parties to the Case

1. Petitioner Michelle M. Aclon is a Filipino Citizen and resident of 182-G Villaruel

Street, Pasay, Metro Manila, Philippines;

2. Respondent Kunio Akimoto is a Japanese national and presently residing at

Osaka Shi Chuoko Shimanouchi 1-11-15 La Fore Nagahoribashi 202 542-0082,
Osaka, Japan;

3. Public respondent Civil Registrar General with office address 17th Floor, Cyber
Pod, Centris Eton Three, EDSA, Quezon City, Philippines, where it may be
served with summons and court processes. The agency is represented by its
Administrator and Civil Registrar General of the National Statistics Office, Lisa
Grace S. Bersales, National Statistician and Civil Registrar General, Philippine
Statistic Authority, is hereby impleaded pursuant to Section 3 of Rules of Court;

4. Public respondent Local Civil Registrar of Quezon City is with office address at
the Office of the Civil Registrar, Quezon City, Metro Manila, is hereby impleaded
pursuant to Section 3 of Rules of Court;

II. Statement of Ultimate Facts

5. Petitioner Michelle M. Aclon and respondent Kunio Akimoto got married on April
21, 2008 before solemnizing officer Rev. Larry Pedroche, and the marriage was
solemnized at Anro Bldg., Room 110, G. Floor # 22 Matalino St., Diliman,

1|Page
 Quezon City, Philippines, and said fact of marriage is evidenced by their
Certificate of Marriage (Annex A – NSO Certificate of Marriage);

6. During the marriage the parties never begot any child, and the relationship of the
parties was besieged with a lot of fight, disagreement and/or quarrel that can be
attributed to the inability of the parties to reconcile their differences mainly
attributable to cultural differences that neither party was willing to give in or
compromise;

7. That on December 15, 2011, respondent initiated a divorce action against herein
petitioner (Annex B – Certificate of Acceptance), and considering that herein
petitioner has no means of paying the legal fees needed to fund a protracted
litigation against the respondent was constrained to agree to enter into a Divorce
by Agreement under Article 763 of Subsection 1 – Divorce Agreement of Section
4 – Divorce of Book IV – Relatives of the Civil Code of Japan ( Annex C –
Certified & Authenticated copy of The Civil Code of Japan);

8. That on August 8, 2013, a Divorce Certificate, duly authenticated by the

Department of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of the Philippines S.N. 15A-
0548581 (Annex D – Authentication Certificate), was issued and duly
registered in the Official Family Register as evidenced by the said certificate
issued by the Head of Joto ku, Osaka City, Osaka fu, Japan (Annex E – Divorce
Certificate);

9. As expressly provided under Article 26 of the Family Code when the foreign
spouse, whose nationality law allows divorce, secured successfully a divorce
decree against the Filipino spouse, the latter shall have capacity to remarry
under Philippine law, to wit:

Where a marriage between a Filipino citizen and a foreigner is

validly celebrated and a divorce is thereafter validly obtained
abroad by the alien spouse capacitating him or her to remarry, the
Filipino spouse shall have capacity to remarry under
Philippine law. (Emphasis supplied)

10. As enunciated by the Honorable Supreme Court in the case of Van Dorn vs.
Romillo, Jr. – G.R. No. L-68470, October 8, 1985, 139 SCRA 139 and Pilapil vs.
Ibay-Somera – G.R. No. 80116, June 30, 1989, 174 SCRA 653, ---- “To maintain
xxx that, under our laws, [the Filipino spouse] has to be considered still
married to [the alien spouse] and still subject to a wife’s obligations xxx
cannot be just. [The Filipino spouse] should not be obliged to live together with,
observe respect and fidelity, and render support to [the alien]. The latter should
not continue to be one of the heirs with possible rights to conjugal property. She
should not be discriminated against in her own country if the ends of
justice are to be served”;

11. That before the Filipina spouse can ever consider contracting any future
marriage with anyone, it is required of her among others to correct her Civil
Registry under Rule 108 of our Rules of Court;

12. As expressly provided under Act No. 3753 or the Law on Registry of Civil Status,
particularly Section 1 – Civil Register – A civil register is established for recording
the civil status of persons, in which shall be entered:

2|Page
 a. Births;
b. Deaths;
c. Marriages;
d. Annulments of marriages;
e. Divorces;
f. Legitimations;
g. Adoptions;
h. Acknowledgment of natural children;
i. Naturalization; and
j. Change of name.

13. Also categorically provided under Act No. 3753, particularly Section 4 – Civil
Register Books, the local registrar shall keep and preserve in their offices the
following books, in which they shall, respectively make the proper entries
concerning the civil status of persons, to wit:

(1) Birth and death register;

(2) Marriage register, in which shall be entered not only the marriage
solemnized but also divorces and dissolved marriages.
(3) Legitimation, acknowledgment, adoption, change of name and
naturalization register.

14. As enunciated by the Honorable Supreme Court in the case of Corpuz vs. Sto.
Tomas et al., G.R. No. 186571, August 11, 2010, although the law on civil registry
allows and recognizes the making of entry on matters of decree of divorce but
the aforecited law does not ipso facto authorizes the decree’s registration, and
that the law should be read in relation with the requirement of a judicial
recognition of the foreign judgment before it can be given res judicata effect;

15. Thus, the present petition is filed with petitioner taking cognizant of the express
provision of Section 48 of Rule 39 of the Rules of Court and the doctrine laid
down by the Honorable Supreme Court in the case of| Republic v. Orbecido III,
G.R. No. 154380, [October 5, 2005], 509 PHIL 108-117 wherein the highest
tribunal enunciated that before a foreign divorce decree can be recognized by
our own courts, the party pleading it must prove the divorce as a fact and
demonstrate its conformity to the foreign law allowing it, and that such foreign law
must also be proved as our courts cannot take judicial notice of foreign laws, to
wit:

“Accordingly, for his plea to prosper, respondent herein must prove

his allegation that his wife was naturalized as an American citizen.
Likewise, before a foreign divorce decree can be recognized by our
own courts, the party pleading it must prove the divorce as a fact
and demonstrate its conformity to the foreign law allowing it. Such
foreign law must also be proved as our courts cannot take judicial
notice of foreign laws. Like any other fact, such laws must be
alleged and proved. Furthermore, respondent must also show that
the divorce decree allows his former wife to remarry as specifically
required in Article 26. Otherwise, there would be no evidence
sufficient to declare that he is capacitated to enter into another
marriage.”

Thus, the present petition is filed.

3|Page
 PRAYER

WHEREFORE, on the basis of the foregoing aforecited facts/evidence, laws and

jurisprudence, and after trial of the case, it is respectfully prayed that:
1. The foreign divorce certificate obtained by respondent be
judicially recognized; and

2. That an order be issued directing the public respondent Civil Registrar

General and the Quezon City Registrar to annotate the divorce/Dissolution of
Status in the parties’ marriage certificate, and the civil registry record of herein
petitioner be updated to reflect the decree of divorce obtained by respondent
from Japan.

Petitioner prays for such other relief and remedies that are just and reasonable
under the premises.

Cebu City (Quezon City), Philippines. September 6, 2016.

BELCIÑA ATUP ENTISE LIMA-LIMA

BANTILAN CONDAT & ASSO.
Counsels for the Petitioner
2F Z. Plaza Building, D. Jakosalem Street
Barangay Zapatera, Cebu City, Philippines
Tel. No. (032) 262-5137 & (032) 253-2801
yani_atup@yahoo.com.ph

By:
BAYANI S. ATUP
Attorney’s Roll No. 41994
MCLE Compliance No.V-0003582
IBP No. 037(temp.) issued on January 19, 2016, Cebu
PTR No. 6660049, issued on Jan. 11, 2016, Cebu Prov.
Notary Public Serial No.088-09

VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION OF NON-FORUM SHOPPING

I, MICHELLE M. ACLON, Filipino of legal age and a resident of 182-G Villaruel

Street, Pasay, Metro Manila, Philippines, subscribing under oath, hereby deposes and
states that:

I am the petitioner of the present case, and I have read the petition and the allegations
therein are all true and correct of my own personal knowledge and/or based on
authentic records.

I certify that:

4|Page
 a. I, have not theretofore commenced any action or filed any
complaint/petition involving the same issue in any court, tribunal or quasi-
judicial agency and;

b. To the best of my knowledge, no such other action or claim or petitition is

pending therein;

c. If I should learn that there is such other pending action or claim or petition, I
undertake to make a complete statement of the present status thereof;

d. If I should thereafter learn that the same or similar action or proceeding has
been filed or is pending before in any court, tribunal or quasi-judicial
agency, I shall report that fact within five (5) days therefrom to the
honorable court wherein this complaint or initiatory pleading is filed.

MICHELLE M. ACLON
Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 6 th day of September 2016 at

Cebu City, Philippines. Affiant exhibited to me her Driver’s License with No. L06-07-
005647 valid until November 26, 2018 as her competent evidence of Identity that bears
her picture.

Doc. No. ___;

Page No. ___;
Book No. ___;
Series of 2016.

5|Page