Alcantara v. Alcantara, G.R. No. 167746, Aug. 28, 2007

FACTS: On 8 December 1982 he and respondent, without securing the required marriage license, went to the Manila City Hall for the purpose of looking for a person who could arrange a marriage for them.  They met a person who, for a fee, arranged their wedding. They got married on the same day. Another marriage was held in a church in Tondo. The marriage was likewise celebrated without the parties securing a marriage license.  The alleged marriage license, procured in Carmona, Cavite, appearing on the marriage contract, is a sham, as neither party was a resident of Carmona, and they never went to Carmona to apply for a license with the local civil registrar of the said place. A petition for annulment of marriage was filed by petitioner against respondent. Rosita however asserts the validity of their marriage and maintains that there was a marriage license issued as evidenced by a certification from the Office of the Civil Registry of Carmona, Cavite.    Restituto has a mistress with whom he has three children. Restituto only filed the annulment of their marriage to evade prosecution for concubinage. Rosita, in fact, has filed a case for concubinage against Restituto.

ISSUE: Whether or not their marriage is valid.

HELD: A valid marriage license is a requisite of marriage under Art 53 of NCC. Their marriage contract reflects a marriage license number. A certification was also issued by the local civil registrar of Carmona, Cavite. The certification is precise since it specifically identified the parties to whom the marriage license was issued. Issuance of a marriage license where none of the parties is resident, is just an irregularity. Marriage is still valid even if the marriage license is issued in a place not the domicile of the parties.