RONULO Versus. Anybody
FACTS: Rosa Catholic Parish Chapel out-of San Nicolas, Ilocos Norte. Although free online hookup Topeka not, at the time of your own wedding, the brand new going officiating priest, Fr. Mario Ragaza, would not solemnize the wedding up on discovering that partners failed to secure a marriage permit. Since a recourse, Joey, who was then using barong tagalong, and Claire, clothed for the a wedding dress, together with their moms and dads, sponsors and you may visitors, went on towards the Separate Chapel off Filipino Christians, called the new Aglipayan Chapel. They questioned the latest petitioner, an enthusiastic Aglipayan priest, to do a ceremony that aforementioned agreed even with been informed from the couple they’d zero wedding certification.
The petitioner prepared his choir and scheduled a size into the few on a single time. The guy presented brand new ceremony regarding the exposure of bridegroom, new bride, their moms and dads, the main and secondary sponsors while the remainder of its allowed visitors.
The fresh new prosecution’s witnesses, Joseph and Mary Anne Yere, testified for the occurrences of one’s ceremony. Joseph try the newest veil mentor if you’re Mary Anne was new cord sponsor regarding matrimony. Mary Anne affirmed you to she spotted the brand new fiance walk-down brand new aisle. She along with saw the happy couple change their wedding rings, kiss both, and you will sign a document. She heard the petitioner instructing the primary sponsors to help you signal this new marriage offer. After that, they visited this new lobby, had supper and got photo. She spotted the newest petitioner here. She as well as known the marriage invite made available to this lady because of the Joey.
Fl Umadac, the caretaker of Joey, affirmed one she read the couple claim when you look at the ceremony one they need one another due to the fact couple. Mariano Roentgen. Nalupta Jr. in which she got a certificate that no matrimony license is actually awarded with the couples.
New petitioner, if you are admitting he presented a service, declined that their act of blessing the happy couple was tantamount to a beneficial solemnization of your marriage once the considered by-law.
ISSUE: Acquired this new petitioner is actually accountable for violating Article 352 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC) for presumably performing an unlawful marriage ceremony.
Months pursuing the relationships, she went to the new municipal local civil registrar from San Nicolas, Ilocos Norte that have Atty
RATIO: Petitioner conducted an unlawful wedding. The fresh new offense because the sent to inside Ways 352 of your own RPC refers to the performance out-of ily Code and this reads:
(3) A marriage service which will take lay towards the appearance of brand new employing activities through to the solemnizing manager and their private declaration you to definitely it get each other once the couple from the visibility regarding no less than a couple witnesses from courtroom many years.
Art. 6. Zero given setting otherwise spiritual rite to the solemnization of your marriage is required. It can be called for, yet not, on the contracting parties to look individually before solemnizing administrator and you may state throughout the visibility out-of not less than one or two witnesses away from legal ages which they just take one another due to the fact spouse and you will partner. That it report might be included in the wedding certification hence should getting closed by contracting parties as well as their witnesses and you can attested of the solemnizing administrator.
New Finest Court said that just what made the petitioner’s act a marriage service and not soleley only true blessing was one to when you find yourself there isn’t any recommended mode otherwise religious rite, all of that is required is actually “with the hiring functions to appear truly through to the solemnizing officer and you will state regarding visibility out-of not less than a couple witnesses out of courtroom many years which they simply take each other since the spouse and spouse.”
From what earliest demands, the petitioner admitted that activities looked just before your and that truth is testified in order to by witnesses. Towards the second requirements, we find you to definitely, up against the petitioner’s allegation, the new prosecution seems, from testimony of witnesses, your contracting parties personally proclaimed that they capture one another since husband and wife. For this reason, it’s clear you to definitely petitioner presented a marriage ceremony and never just true blessing.