As a rule, an absolute divorce decree obtained abroad is not recognized as valid in this jurisdiction, the same being contrary to our concept of public policy and morality. But this rule was not applied in this case of Harold and Linda. Let’s see why.
In April, 1994, Harold, an American, married Linda, a Filipina here in Manila. They have one daughter Sheila born on September 21, 1995. After only five years of marriage, or in June 1999, Linda sought and obtained a divorce decree against Harold from the Circuit Court, 19th Judicial Circuit, Lake County, Illinois, USA. In its ruling the Illinois court dissolved the marriage of Harold and Linda, awarded to Linda the custody of Sheila and retained jurisdiction over the case for enforcement purposes.
On January 28, 2002, while here in Manila, Harold and Linda executed an agreement for joint custody of Sheila, then still below seven years old. The parties chose the Philippine courts as exclusive forum to adjudicate disputes arising from the agreement. Linda undertook to obtain from the Illinois court an order relinquishing jurisdiction to Philippine courts.
But, aside from failing to obtain the said order from the Illinois court, Linda also violated the agreement by exercising sole custody of Sheila. So in 2004 Harold sued Linda in the Regional Trial Court of Makati City to enforce the agreement on joint custody.
Linda sought the dismissal of the complaint for, among others, lack of jurisdiction because of the Illinois court’s retention of jurisdiction to enforce the divorce decree granting her sole custody of Sheila. Harold however opposed the dismissal by contending that the said divorce decree is not valid in this jurisdiction. So it is the agreement executed between them which should be enforced and recognized by the Philippine courts. Was Harold correct?
No. Harold cannot rely on the divorce decree’s invalidity here to support the agreement’s enforceability. An alien spouse of a Filipino is bound by the divorce decree obtained abroad provided they are valid according to the alien’s national law. A foreign divorce decree carries as much validity against the alien divorcee in this jurisdiction as it does in the jurisdiction of the alien’s nationality irrespective of who obtained the divorce. So, as far as Harold, an American citizen, is concerned, the divorce decree obtained by Linda in the Illinois court may be recognized in the Philippines since it is obviously according to the law in the USA.
But considering that Sheila is now nearly 15 years old, the case should not be dismissed but should be remanded to the RTC so that the parties can submit evidence on the custodial arrangement best serving Sheila’s interest as basis of the judgment. This disposition is consistent with the settled doctrine that in child custody proceedings, equity may be invoked to serve the child’s best interest (Dacasin vs. Dacasin, G.R. 168785, February 5, 2010, 611 SCRA, 657).
* * *
E-mail: jcson@pldtdsl.net.