FACTS: Rosa Catholic Parish Chapel away from San Nicolas, Ilocos Norte. not, at the time of relationships, the brand new heading officiating priest, Fr. local hookup app Squamish Mario Ragaza, would not solemnize the wedding through to understanding that pair failed in order to safe a marriage license. Just like the a great recourse, Joey, who was following using barong tagalong, and you will Claire, clad within the a married relationship outfit, with their moms and dads, sponsors and you may travelers, continued with the Independent Church out of Filipino Christians, known as the latest Aglipayan Chapel. It requested the latest petitioner, a keen Aglipayan priest, to execute a ceremony that the second conformed even with started advised by partners they’d zero matrimony certification.
This new petitioner wishing their choir and planned a size to the couples on the same time. The guy presented the brand new ceremony on visibility of your bridegroom, the fiance, their parents, the main and additional sponsors and remainder of the greet subscribers.
Brand new prosecution’s witnesses, Joseph and you will Mary Anne Yere, affirmed towards situations of service. Joseph is the newest veil recruit when you are Mary Anne was brand new cord mentor in the relationships. Mary Anne affirmed you to she watched the fresh new bride-to-be walk down the latest aisle. She in addition to noticed the happy couple replace the wedding rings, kiss each other, and you will indication a file. She read this new petitioner training the principal sponsors to sign the fresh new matrimony package. Afterwards, it visited brand new reception, got meal and took pictures. She spotted the newest petitioner indeed there. She together with known the marriage invite provided to their from the Joey.
Fl Umadac, the caretaker of Joey, testified one she heard the couple claim inside the ceremony one to they simply take both since the husband and wife. Mariano Roentgen. Nalupta Jr. in which she gotten a certificate one no relationships license was issued to your couple.
The brand new petitioner, if you are admitting he conducted a ceremony, declined that his operate from blessing the couple is actually tantamount so you’re able to good solemnization of relationship since contemplated legally.
ISSUE: Won the brand new petitioner are guilty of breaking Blog post 352 of Modified Penal Code (RPC) for allegedly creating an illegal wedding ceremony.
RATIO: Petitioner presented an illegal wedding ceremony. The crime once the delivered to inside Artwork 352 of RPC is the performance of ily Password which reads:
(3) A wedding ceremony that takes place toward appearance of the new hiring activities before the solemnizing administrator and their personal statement you to definitely they simply take both since the couple on exposure of for around one or two witnesses out of court many years.
Art. 6. Zero recommended function otherwise religious rite into solemnization of your wedding will become necessary. It will be required, not, to your contracting people to seem actually before the solemnizing administrator and you can declare on the presence regarding for around several witnesses from legal ages which they just take both just like the partner and you may wife. It declaration can be part of the wedding certification which will getting signed because of the hiring events as well as their witnesses and you may attested by solemnizing administrator.
The Ultimate Courtroom said you to exactly what generated the petitioner’s work a great wedding service and not simply a mere blessing is actually you to if you are there’s absolutely no given mode or spiritual rite, all that was required is “on contracting parties to look yourself till the solemnizing administrator and claim about visibility away from not less than several witnesses regarding legal age that they grab one another due to the fact partner and wife.”
As to the basic criteria, the latest petitioner accepted that the events appeared ahead of him and therefore truth are testified to of the witnesses. To the second requirements, we find one, resistant to the petitioner’s allegation, the prosecution has proven, from the testimony from witnesses, your contracting people directly announced that they just take each other because the husband and wife. Hence, it is obvious that petitioner used a wedding service and not a mere true blessing.
Share
