Wrong remedy

In order to terminate the effects of a subsequent marriage contracted after a court has wrongfully declared the presumptive death of a spouse of the first marriage, what is the proper remedy of the first spouse? Is the mere filing of an affidavit of reappearance enough? This is answered in this case of Gina.

Gina has been married to Dick for almost 27 years when the latter left their conjugal dwelling to cohabit with another woman. Five months later, she learned that Dick had already remarried the woman. On further verification she also discovered that Dick filed a petition in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) for declaration of her absence and presumptive death, in order to remarry.

In the petition, Gina found out that Dick made the following false allegations: that after their marriage they first resided in San Juan City but later moved to Tarlac City where they engaged in buy-and-sell business; that when the business did not prosper, Gina convinced Dick to allow her to work in Hong Kong as a domestic helper; that while he initially refused, he allowed her to work because of her insistence; that she supposedly left Tarlac after living together as husband and wife for almost 15 years and was never heard from again; that he exerted efforts to locate her by inquiring from her parents but they too did not know her whereabouts; that he also inquired about her from other relatives and friends but no one gave him any information and that it is only after almost 12 years since she left that he filed the petition.

Gina also discovered that the notice of hearing of the petition was never published in a newspaper of general circulation and that the RTC already rendered a decision declaring her as presumptively dead only one month after filing the petition, thus enabling Dick to remarry another woman three months after the RTC decision.

Gina learned about Dick’s petition and the RTC decision more than a year later when she could no longer avail of the remedies of new trial, appeal or petition for relief from judgment. So what she did was to file a petition before the Court of Appeals (CA) for annulment of the RTC decision on the ground of extrinsic fraud and lack of