RONULO Against. Some body
FACTS: Rosa Catholic Parish Church off San Nicolas, Ilocos Norte. Although not, at the time of your own wedding, the fresh new supposed officiating priest, Fr. Mario Ragaza, refused to solemnize the wedding through to studying that the partners were unsuccessful to secure a married relationship permit. Given that a great recourse, Joey, who had been next wear barong tagalong, and you may Claire, clad during the a wedding gown, with their moms and dads, sponsors and you can subscribers, went on on Independent Chapel out-of Filipino Christians, also known as this new Aglipayan Chapel. They requested new petitioner, an enthusiastic Aglipayan priest, to execute a service that the second concurred despite having already been told by the partners they’d no relationships certificate.
The fresh petitioner waiting their choir and you may arranged a size into partners for a passing fancy big date. He presented the fresh new service about exposure of the bridegroom, the fresh bride-to-be, their dating free sites mothers, the main and you will second sponsors and rest of the desired travelers.
The newest prosecution’s witnesses, Joseph and Mary Anne Yere, affirmed toward occurrences of your own ceremony. Joseph is brand new veil mentor whenever you are Mary Anne is actually the cord mentor on the wedding. Mary Anne affirmed you to definitely she noticed the brand new bride-to-be walk down the new section. She plus noticed the couple change its marriage rings, hug each other, and you can indication a document. She read this new petitioner teaching the primary sponsors to help you signal new wedding deal. After that, they visited the latest reception, got meal and you will got photographs. She saw brand new petitioner truth be told there.
Florida Umadac, the caretaker from Joey, testified you to she read the couple state inside the service you to definitely it bring both since husband and wife. Days pursuing the matrimony, she went along to the new civil local municipal registrar of San Nicolas, Ilocos Norte which have Atty. Mariano R. Nalupta Jr. in which she obtained a certification one no wedding license is actually awarded for the couple.
The fresh petitioner, when you are admitting that he held a ceremony, rejected you to his work out of true blessing the couple try tantamount so you’re able to a beneficial solemnization of one’s wedding because the contemplated by law.
ISSUE: Claimed this new petitioner is actually accountable for violating Article 352 of Changed Penal Code (RPC) getting presumably performing an unlawful wedding party.
She along with known the wedding invite supplied to the girl of the Joey
RATIO: Petitioner used an illegal marriage ceremony. New offense because the taken to during the Art 352 of your own RPC refers to the efficiency out-of ily Code and therefore checks out:
(3) A married relationship ceremony which takes put for the look of the fresh new employing events before solemnizing officer in addition to their private report one it need one another since the wife and husband about exposure out-of no less than several witnesses of judge many years.
Artwork. six. No prescribed setting otherwise spiritual rite on solemnization of one’s relationships required. It are going to be requisite, but not, toward hiring people to appear privately until the solemnizing officer and you may declare in the visibility regarding no less than a couple witnesses from judge ages that they bring each other as spouse and wife. It statement is part of the relationship certification which shall be finalized because of the hiring events as well as their witnesses and you can attested because of the solemnizing manager.
The newest Supreme Legal said one what generated the new petitioner’s work a good wedding and not simply just true blessing is actually one to when you’re there’s no recommended function or religious rite, all that was requisite are “on contracting parties to appear yourself till the solemnizing administrator and you may declare about exposure of no less than one or two witnesses out-of legal many years that they take both while the husband and partner.”
As to the first requisite, the new petitioner acknowledge that the functions looked ahead of him and this truth was testified so you can from the witnesses. To your second requirements, we find one, up against the petitioner’s allegation, the new prosecution seems, from the testimony from witnesses, your hiring functions yourself stated that they simply take one another as couple. Ergo, it is clear you to definitely petitioner held a wedding service and not a mere true blessing.