A.M. No. 02-11-11-SC, promulgated on March 4, 2003, and officially known as the Rule on Declaration of Absolute Nullity of Void Marriages and Annulment of Voidable Marriages, is the rule that governs petitions for declaration of nullity of null marriages or annulment of voidable marriages. Among its many provisions is the provision on venue, where the petitions may be filed by the parties.
Sec. 4 of the Rules states that the petition shall be filed in the Family Court of the province or city where the petitioner or respondent has been residing for at least six months prior to the date of filing, or in the case of a non-resident respondent, where he may be found in the Philippines, at the election of the petitioner.
Over the years, the provision on venue has been abused repeatedly. Parties would make it appear that they are residents of a particular city or province, where “friendly” judges or courts are bound to render favorable decisions, by making it appear that they are residents of the cities or provinces where these courts exercise territorial jurisdiction, even though in reality, they are not residents of the place. It is common knowledge that some courts have become “annulment factories”, such that the sheer volume of annulment cases decided by them are far more than the average courts.
Some parties also intentionally place fictitious or wrong addresses of their estranged spouses, in order to prevent them from receiving notices from the court and therefore, unable to contest the allegations of the petitioner on their petition.
In order to put a stop to these nefarious practices, the Supreme Court adopted a Resolution on October 2, 2018, approving the Proposed Guidelines to Validate Compliance with the Jurisdictional Requirement Set Forth in A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC. The Resolution mandated documentary requirements to prove the residence of the parties, which should be attached to, and stated in the petition, thus:
- Contents and form of the petition. With reference to the requirements of Section 5 of A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC and Section 2(b) of A.M.No. 02-11-10-Sc, petitioner shall state the complete address of the parties in the petition (i.e. house number, street, purok/village/subdivisions, barangay, zone, town, city and province);
In view of the foregoing, petitioner shall attach the following:
- Sworn certification of residency (with house location sketch) issued by the barangay; (2) sworn statement of counsel of record that he/she has personally verified petitioner’s residency and that the petitioner has been residing thereat for at least six (6) months prior to the filing of the petition; and (3) any but not limited to the following supporting documents:
- Utility bills in the name of the petitioner for at least six (6) months prior to the filing of the petition;
- Government-issued I.D. or Company I.D., bearing the photograph and address of the petitioner and issued at least (6) months prior to the filing of the petition;
- Notarized lease contract, if available and/or receipts for rental payments (bearing the address of the petitioner) for at least six months prior to the filing of the petition;
- Transfer Certificate of Title, or Tax Declaration, or Deed of Sale and the like, in the name of the petitioner where he/she resides;
If the petition is filed by the petitioner without counsel and a counsel subsequently appears, said counsel shall submit, together with the formal entry of appearance, as affidavit of verification of residency of the petitioner.
- Collusion investigation. In cases where the prosecutor is directed to investigate whether collusion exists between the parties, the court shall additionally order the public prosecutor to include in the collusion a determination of the party’s residence.
- Dismissal of the petition for alleging a false address. At any stage of the proceedings where it appears that the address alleged in the verified petition is false or where it appears from the registry return/s that either party is unknown at the given address, the court shall. After notice and hearing, dismiss the petition and require the counsel of record to show cause why no appropriate sanctions be imposed upon him/her for submitting a false affidavit of verification.
- Dismissal of the petition, without prejudice, for failure to prove residency. Failure of the petitioner to comply with the residency requirement shall be a ground for the immediate dismissal of the petition, without prejudice to the refiling of the petition in the proper venue.
- If the petition is filed at the respondent’s place of residence and summons could not be served by reason that the respondent is not actually residing at the given address, then the petition shall be dismissed.
- Sanctions. Officials, parties, or representative who submit a false certification or document shall be held liable for indirect contempt, without prejudice to criminal and/or administrative liabilities.
The above Guidelines shall be addressed prospectively”
The matter should have addressed the pernicious practice of alleging false addresses in the petition, to secure a favorable decision from the court, or by depriving the other party of the right to contest the allegations in the petition, by making the handling lawyer administratively liable in case his sworn certification is found to be untrue. Likewise, the party, his or her representative, or public officials who issued false certifications may be held liable for indirect contempt of court aside from the criminal and administrative liability which may be imposed on them.
The problem with these Guidelines is that it did not take into consideration those parties who are residing abroad who may wish to file petitions. Take note that most of these litigants either have completely separated from their wives or husbands whose whereabouts cannot be located. On the other hand, prospective petitioners residing abroad have not returned home in many years, and even if they return to their place of residence, their stay in the country is only temporary and may not comply with the 6-month minimum requirement for residency.
Thus, on January 24, 2023, the Supreme Court issued another Resolution approving the following:
- 2023 Amended Guidelines to Validate Compliance with the Jurisdictional Requirements in Petitioner for Declaration of Absolute Nullity of Marriage and Annulment of Voidable Marriage or Petitions for Legal Separation;
- 2023 Amendments to Section 4 of A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC (Rule on Declaration of Absolute Nullity of Void Marriages and Annulment of Voidable Marriages) and Section 2( c ) of A.M. No. 02-11-11-SC (Rule on Legal Separation).
With respect to the 2023 Amended Guidelines on compliance with jurisdictional requirements in petitions for declaration of nullity of void marriage/declaration of nullity of void marriage/petition for legal separation, they were amended as follows:
Contents and form of the petition. With reference to requirements of Section 5 of A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC and Section 2(b) of A.M.No. 02-11-11-SC, petitioner shall state the complete address of the parties in the petition (i.e. house number, street, purok/village/subdivisions, barangay, zone, town, city and province);
- For this purpose, the petitioner shall attach the following:
- Sworn certification of residency (with house location sketch) issued by the barangay;
- Sworn statement of counsel of record stating that:
- After a reasonable inquiry, he or she has verified the authenticity of of the petitioner’s proof of barangay residency as mentioned in the preceding paragraph 1(a) showing that the petitioner had been residing in the barangay for at least six (6) months prior to the filing of the petition except when the petitioner is residing abroad, or has left the habitual residence which he or she has established with the respondent spouse for just cause, such as violence against his or her person or their children, drug addiction or other criminal activity, infidelity, and failure to provide support, provided the petitioner cites such reason/s in the verification attached to the petition and details the same in the petition; and
- He or she has sufficiently explained to the petitioner the rationale for the residency requirement for purposes of venue and the consequences of non-compliance therewith.
c)any but not limited to the following supporting documents:
(i) Utility bills in the name of the petitioner for at least six (6) months prior to the filing of the petition;
(ii) Government-issued I.D. or Company I.D., bearing the photograph and address of the petitioner and issued at least (6) months prior to the filing of the petition;
- Notarized lease contract, if available and/or receipts for rental payments (bearing the address of the petitioner) for at least six months prior to the filing of the petition;
- Transfer Certificate of Title, or Tax Declaration, or Deed of Sale and the like, in the name of the petitioner where he/she resides;
If the petition is filed by the petitioner without assistance of counsel but a counsel subsequently enters his or her appearance for the petitioner, said counsel shall submit, together with the formal entry of appearance, the sworn statement required under the preceding paragraph 1(b)
- If, for just cause, such as violence against his or her person or their children, drug addiction or other criminal activity, alcoholism, infidelity, and failure to provide support, the petitioner spouse has left the habitual residence which he or she has established with the respondent spouse, the petitioner spouse shall also be exempt from submitting the documents enumerated under paragraphs 1(a), (b), and (c), provided he or she cites such reason/s in the verification attached to the petition and details the same in the petition.
- If both parties to the petition are residing abroad for employment, business, education, or any other purpose, the following documents shall be attached to the petition, in lieu of those enumerated in the preceding paragraphs 1(a), (b) and (c):
- A sworn certification from the appropriate Philippine consulate that petitioner is temporarily residing abroad for employment, business, education, or any other purpose;
- Any sufficient proof of the habitual place of residence of any of the parties or the place where they last resided as husband and wife; and
- A sworn statement of counsel of record stating that, he or she has sufficiently explained to the petitioner the rationale for residency requirement for purposes of venue and consequences of non-compliance therewith.
Collusion investigation. In cases where the prosecutor is directed to investigate whether collusion exists between the parties, the court shall additionally order the public prosecutor to include in the collusion a determination of the party’s residence.
Dismissal of the petition for alleging a false address or falsely claiming the exemption from the residency requirement. . At any stage of the proceedings where it appears that the address alleged in the verified petition is false or where it appears from the registry return/s that either party is unknown at the given address, or that the reason/s cited in the verification for exemption is/are proven false, the court shall, after notice and hearing, dismiss the petition and require the counsel of record to show cause why no appropriate sanctions be imposed upon him/her for submitting a false affidavit of verification.
Dismissal of the petition, without prejudice, for failure to prove residency. Failure of the petitioner to comply with the residency requirement shall be a ground for the immediate dismissal of the petition, without prejudice to the refiling of the petition in the proper venue.
Dismissal due to non-service of summons, not actual residence. If the petition is filed at the respondent’s place of residence and summons could not be served for the reason that the respondent is not actually residing at the given address, the petition shall be dismissed.
Sanctions. Officials, parties, or representative who submit a false certification or document shall be held liable for indirect contempt, without prejudice to criminal and/or administrative liabilities.
These above Guidelines shall be addressed prospectively”
Section 4 of the Rule on Declaration of Nullity of Void Marriage or Annulment of a Voidable Marriage was also amended to read as follows:
Section 4. Venue. The petition shall be filed in the Family Court of the province or city where the petitioner or the respondent has been residing for at least six (6) months prior to the date of filing or in the case of a non-resident respondent, where he may be found in the Philippines, at the election of the petitioner.
If both petitioner and the respondent are residing abroad for purposes of employment, business, education or any other purpose, the petition shall be filed in the Family Court:
- In the habitual residence of either party, at the election of the petitioner; or
- In the place where the petitioner and respondent last resided as husband and wife in the Philippines.
If only the petitioner is residing abroad, the venue should the place of residence of the respondent in the Philippines.
In sum, and in accordance with the latest guidelines issued by the Supreme Court on jurisdictional compliance with the requirements of venue in annulment/declaration of nullity cases, the following rule applies:
- If both petitioner and respondent are in the Philippines, the minimum residency of at least 6-months prior to the filing of the petition in the Family Court of the place where the petitioner elected to file his or her petition is required. The petition should contain the minimum documentary requirements to prove residence of either the petitioner or respondent;
- If both petitioner and respondent are temporarily residing abroad, the venue is the habitual residence of the parties, or in the place where the parties last resided as husband and wife in the Philippines; they are exempt from the general requirements to proving residence, but must submit a sworn certification from the appropriate Philippine consulate that the petitioner is temporarily out of the country for employment, business, education, or any other purpose.
- If only the petitioner is abroad, the venue shall be the residence of the respondent. What the rule did not discuss is the possibility of the respondent’s whereabouts being unknown or cannot be located.
- For just causes such as violence against his or her person or their children, drug addiction or other criminal activity, alcoholism, infidelity, and failure to provide support, the 6-month rule still applies but the petitioner is exempt from submission of the required proof of residence.
In all cases, the counsel of record is required to submit a sworn attestation that after a reasonable inquiry, he has verified the authenticity of the petitioner’s proof of residency issued by the barangay, except when the exceptions to residency are present; and that he has sufficiently explained to the petitioner the rational for residency requirement for purposes of venue and the consequences of non-compliance therewith.
: