Scribd
Upload
103 views2 pages

Maria Apiag, Et - Al., Vs Judge Esmeraldo G. Cantero, A.M. No. MTJ-95-1070, February

Maria Apiag filed a complaint against Judge Esmeraldo Cantero, her legally married husband, claiming he had another wife and family. Judge Cantero denied the validity of his marriage to Maria, claiming they were forced into it by their parents when he was 20. However, Maria and Judge Cantero had engaged in a relationship prior which resulted in a child. While the parents agreed to an arranged marriage to avoid shame, Judge Cantero and Maria never lived together or communicated in the 40 years since. The court ruled that while Judge Cantero's first marriage was valid and required annulment, the doctrine at the time of his second marriage excused this since family code rules had not taken effect yet. Charges of fals

Uploaded by

Scyte Holiday
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
103 views2 pages

Maria Apiag, Et - Al., Vs Judge Esmeraldo G. Cantero, A.M. No. MTJ-95-1070, February

Maria Apiag filed a complaint against Judge Esmeraldo Cantero, her legally married husband, claiming he had another wife and family. Judge Cantero denied the validity of his marriage to Maria, claiming they were forced into it by their parents when he was 20. However, Maria and Judge Cantero had engaged in a relationship prior which resulted in a child. While the parents agreed to an arranged marriage to avoid shame, Judge Cantero and Maria never lived together or communicated in the 40 years since. The court ruled that while Judge Cantero's first marriage was valid and required annulment, the doctrine at the time of his second marriage excused this since family code rules had not taken effect yet. Charges of fals

Uploaded by

Scyte Holiday
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Maria Apiag, et.al., vs Judge Esmeraldo G. Cantero, A.M. No.

MTJ-95-1070, February

12, 1997

FACTS

Maria Apiag, a public school teacher at Hinundayan, Southern Leyte, is legally married to
Judge Esmeraldo Cantero on August 11, 1947. They have two daughters namely Teresita A.
Cantero and Glicerio Cantero. 
On September 21, 1993, complainants, through Atty. Redentor G. Guyala, wrote a letter to
Judge Cantero however there is no action or response from the respondent. Subsequently,
complainants learned that respondent Judge had another family: the wife’s name is Nieves
C. Ygay, a Public School teacher from Tagao, Pinamungajan, Cebu with five (5) children
namely: Noralyn Y. Cantero; Ellen Y. Cantero; Erwin Y. Cantero; Onofre Y. Cantero; and
Desirie Vic Y. Cantero wherein in all of the public documents, Judge Cantero
misrepresented himself as being married to Nieves C. Ygay, with whom he contracted a
second marriage.
Judge Cantero denied the validity of his marriage to Maria Apiag because it was only
dramatized just to shot the wishes and purpose of their parents without his free will. He
added “As a matter of fact, I was only called by my parents to go home to our town at
Hinundayan, Southern Leyte to attend party celebration of my sister’s birthday from Iligan
City, without patently knowing I was made to appear (in) a certain drama marriage and we
were forced to acknowledge our signatures appearing in the duly prepared marriage
contract(.) That was 46 years ago when I was yet 20 years of age, and at my second-year
high school days.” 
However, before the marriage, they were engaged in a lovely affair which resulted in Maria
Apiag’s pregnancy in the name of Teresita Apiag now Mrs. Teresita Sacurom, one of the
complainants. In order to save the name and shame, the parents of both the respondent and
the complainant came to an agreement to allow them to get married in the name, but not to
live together as husband and wife. In addition, after the said affair, both will be immediately
separated from each other without living together as husband and wife even for a day, nor
having established a conjugal home. Afterwhich, they have never met each other nor having
communication for the last forty years (40) years.

ISSUE

Whether or not a judicial declaration of nullity of marriage is necessary to declare the prior
marriage void.

RULING

Yes, as per current jurisprudence, “a marriage though void still needs a judicial declaration
of such fact” before any party thereto “can marry again; otherwise, the second marriage will
also be void.” This was expressly provided under Article 40 of the Family Code.  
However, the marriage of Judge Cantero to Nieves Ygay took place and all their children
were born before the promulgation of Wiegel vs. SempioDiy and before the effectivity of
the Family Code. Hence, the doctrine in Odayat vs. Amante applies in favor of the
respondent. 
On the other hand, the charge of falsification will not prosper either because it is based on a
finding of guilt in the bigamy charge. Since, as shown in the preceding discussion, the
bigamy charge cannot stand, so too must the accusation of falsification fail. Furthermore,
the respondent judge’s belief in good faith that his first marriage was void shows his lack of
malice in filling up these public documents, a valid defense in a charge of falsification of
public documents, which must be appreciated in his favor.

You might also like