Republic of the PhilippinesSUPREME COURTManilaTHIRD DIVISIONG.R. No. 165545 March 24, 2006SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM, Petitioner, vs.TERESITA JARQUE !A. !E "AILON, Respondent.D! I S I O NCARPIO MORALES,J.:The !ourt of "ppeals Decision# dated $une %&, %''(% and Resolution dated Septe)ber %*, %''(& reversin+ the Resolution dated "pril %, %''&( and Orderdated $une (, %''&, of the Social Securit- !o))ission .SS!/ in SS! !ase No. (0#,#(10'# are challen+ed in the present petition for revie2 on certiorari.On "pril %,, #1,,, !le)ente 3. 4ailon .4ailon/ and "lice P. Dia5 ."lice/ contracted )arria+e in 4arcelona, Sorso+on.6More than #, -ears later or on October 1, #17', 4ailon 8led before the then !ourt of 9irst Instance .!9I/ of Sorso+on a petition7 to declare "lice presu)ptivel- dead.4- Order of Dece)ber #', #17',* the !9I +ranted the petition, disposin+ as follo2s:;HR9OR, there bein+ no opposition 8led a+ainst the petition not2ithstandin+ the publication of the Notice of Hearin+ in a ne2spaper of +eneral circulation in the countr-, "lice Dia5 is hereb- declared to cept for those of succession, presu)ptivel- dead. SO ORDRD.1 .?nderscorin+ supplied/!lose to #& -ears after his 2ife "lice 2as declared presu)ptivel- dead or on "u+ust *, #1*&, 4ailon contracted )arria+e 2ith Teresita $ar@ue .respondent/in !asi+uran, Sorso+on.#'On $anuar- &', #11*, 4ailon, 2ho 2as a )e)ber of the Social Securit- S-ste) .SSS/ since #16' and a retiree pensioner thereof eAective $ul- #11(, died.##Respondent thereupon 8led a clai) for funeral bene8ts, and 2as +ranted P#%,'''#% b- the SSS.Respondent 8led on March ##, #11* an additional clai) for death bene8ts#& 2hich 2as also +ranted b- the SSS on "pril 6, #11*.#(!ecilia 4ailon0Bap .!ecilia/, 2ho clai)ed to be a dau+hter of 4ailon and one lisa $a-ona .lisa/ contested before the SSS the release to respondent of thedeath and funeral bene8ts. She clai)ed that 4ailon contracted three )arria+es in his lifeti)e, the 8rst 2ith "lice, the second 2ith her )other lisa, and the third 2ith respondent, all of 2ho) are still aliveC she, to+ether 2ith her siblin+s, paid for 4ailonDs )edical and funeral e>pensesC and all the docu)ents sub)itted b- respondent to the SSS in support of her clai)s are spurious. In support of her clai), !ecilia and her sister Nor)a 4ailon !have5 .Nor)a/ sub)itted an "Edavit dated 9ebruar- #&, #111#, averrin+ that the- are t2o of nine children of 4ailon and lisa 2ho cohabited as husband and 2ife as earl- as #1,*C and the- 2ere reservin+ their ri+ht to 8le the necessar- court action to contest the )arria+e bet2een 4ailon and respondent as the- personall- Fno2 that "lice is Gstill ver- )uch alive.G#6In the )eanti)e, on "pril ,, #111, a certain Her)es P. Dia5, clai)in+ to be the brother and +uardian of G"li5 P. Dia5,G 8led before the SSS a clai) for death bene8ts accruin+ fro) 4ailonDs death,#7 he further attestin+ in a s2orn state)ent#* that it 2as Nor)a 2ho defra-ed 4ailonDs funeral e>penses.lisa and seven of her children#1 subse@uentl- 8led clai)s for death bene8ts as 4ailonDs bene8ciaries before the SSS.%'"tt-. Marites !. de la Torre of the He+al ?nit of the SSS 4icol !luster, Na+a !it- reco))ended the cancellation of pa-)ent of death pension bene8ts to respondent and the issuance of an order for the refund of the a)ount paid toher fro) 9ebruar- #11* to Ma- #111 representin+ such bene8tsC the denial of the clai) of "lice on the +round that she 2as not dependent upon 4ailon for support durin+ his lifeti)eC and the pa-)ent of the balance of the 8ve0-ear +uaranteed pension to 4ailonDs bene8ciaries accordin+ to the order of preference provided under the la2, after the a)ount erroneousl- paid to respondent has been collected. The pertinent portions of the Me)orandu) read:#. "li5 > >In this case, it is the deceased )e)ber 2ho 2as the desertin+ spouse and 2ho re)arried, thus his )arria+e to Teresita $ar@ue, for the second ti)e 2as void as it 2as bi+a)ous. To re@uire aEdavit of reappearance to ter)inate the second )arria+e is not necessar- as there is no disappearance of "li5 tra)arital aAairC and 4ailon used to visit her even after their separation.4- Resolution of "pril %, %''&, the SS! found that the )arria+e of respondent to 4ailon 2as void and, therefore, she 2as GIust a co))on0la202ife.G "ccordin+l- it disposed as follo2s, @uoted verbatim:#$ERE%ORE, this !o))ission 8nds, and so holds, that petitioner Teresita $ar@ue04ailon is not the le+iti)ate spouse and pri)ar- bene8ciar- of SSS )e)ber !le)ente 4ailon."ccordin+l-, the petitioner is hereb- ordered to refund to the SSS the a)ountof P%(,'''.'' representin+ the death bene8t she received therefro) for the period 9ebruar- #11* until Ma- #111 as 2ell as P#%,'''.'' representin+ the funeral bene8t.The SSS is hereb- ordered to pa- "lice .a.F.a. "li5/ Dia504ailon the appropriate death bene8t arisin+ fro) the de)ise of SSS )e)ber !le)ente 4ailon in accordance 2ith Section *.e/ and .F/ as 2ell as Section #& of the SSHa2, as a)ended, and its prevailin+ rules and re+ulations and to infor) this !o))ission of its co)pliance here2ith.SO OR!ERE!.

.?nderscorin+ supplied/In so rulin+ a+ainst respondent, the SS! ratiocinated. "fter a thorou+h e>a)ination of the evidence at hand, this !o))ission co)es to the inevitable conclusion that the petitioner is not the le+iti)ate 2ife of the deceased )e)ber.> > > >There is > > > a)ple evidence pointin+ to the fact that, contrar- to the declaration of the then !9I of Sorso+on .#'th $udicial District/, the 8rst 2ife never disappeared as the deceased )e)ber represented in bad faith. This !o))ission accords credence to the 8ndin+s of the SSS contained in its Me)orandu) dated "u+ust 1, #111,&% revealin+ that "lice .a.F.a. "li5/ Dia5 never left 4arcelona, Sorso+on, after her separation fro) !le)ente 4ailon > > >."s the declaration of presu)ptive death 2as e>tracted b- the deceased )e)ber usin+ arti8ce and b- e>ertin+ fraud upon the unsuspectin+ court of la2, > > > it never had the eAect of +ivin+ the deceased )e)ber the ri+ht to )arr- ane2. > > > > > as deter)ined throu+h the investi+ation conducted b- the SSS, !le)ente 4ailon 2as the abandonin+ spouse, not "lice Dia5 4ailon.> > > >It havin+ been established, b- substantial evidence, that the petitioner 2as Iust a co))on0la2 2ife of the deceased )e)ber, it necessaril- follo2s that she is not entitled as a pri)ar- bene8ciar-, to the latterDs death bene8t. > > >> > > > It havin+ been deter)ined that Teresita $ar@ue 2as not the le+iti)ate survivin+ spouse and pri)ar- bene8ciar- of !le)ente 4ailon, it behooves her to refund the total a)ount of death bene8t she received fro) the SSS forthe period fro) 9ebruar- #11* until Ma- #111 pursuant to the principle of solutio indebiti > > >HiFe2ise, it appearin+ that she 2as not the one 2ho actuall- defra-ed the cost of the 2aFe and burial of !le)ente 4ailon, she )ust return the a)ount of P #%,'''.'' 2hich 2as earlier +iven to her b- the SSS as funeral bene8t.&& .?nderscorin+ supplied/RespondentDs Motion for Reconsideration&( havin+ been denied b- Order of $une (, %''&, she 8led a petition for revie2&, before the !ourt of "ppeals .!"/.4- Decision of $une %&, %''(, the !" reversed and set aside the "pril %, %''&Resolution and $une (, %''& Order of the SS! and thus ordered the SSS to pa- respondent all the pension bene8ts due her. Held the !":> > > tend due credence to the decision of the RT! absent of > > > > > ercise of its authorit- to deter)inethe bene8ciaries of the SSS.The t2o )arria+es involved herein havin+ been sole)ni5ed prior to the eAectivit- on "u+ust &, #1** of the 9a)il- !ode, the applicable la2 to deter)ine their validit- is the !ivil !ode 2hich 2as the la2 in eAect at the ti)e of their celebration.(% "rticle *& of the !ivil !ode(& provides:"rt. *&. "n- )arria+e subse@uentl- contracted b- an- person durin+ the lifeti)e of the 8rst spouse of such person 2ith an- person other than such 8rst spouse shall be ille+al and void fro) its perfor)ance, unless:.#/ The 8rst )arria+e 2as annulled or dissolvedC or.%/ The 8rst spouse had been absent for seven consecutive -ears at the ti)e of the second )arria+e 2ithout the spouse present havin+ ne2s of the absentee bein+ alive, or if the absentee, thou+h he has been absent for less than seven -ears, is +enerall- considered as dead and believed to be so b- the spouse present at the ti)e of contractin+ such subse@uent )arria+e, or if the absentee is presu)ed dead accordin+ to "rticles &1' and &1#. The &arr'a() *o co+,rac,)- *ha../) 0a.'-in an- of the three cases until declared null and void b- a co)petent court. .)phasis and underscorin+ supplied/?nder the fore+oin+ provision of the !ivil !ode, a subse@uent )arria+e contracted durin+ the lifeti)e of the 8rst spouse is ille+al and void ab initio unless the prior )arria+e is 8rst annulled or dissolved or contracted under an- of the three e>ceptional circu)stances. It bears notin+ that the )arria+eunder an- of these e>ceptional cases is dee)ed valid Guntil declared null andvoid b- a co)petent court.G It follo2s that the onus probandi in these cases rests on the part- assailin+ the second )arria+e.((In the case at bar, as found b- the !9I, "lice had been absent for #, consecutive -ears(, 2hen 4ailon sou+ht the declaration of her presu)ptive death, 2hich Iudicial declaration 2as not even a re@uire)ent then for purposes of re)arria+e.(6)inent Iurist "rturo M. Tolentino .no2 deceased/ co))ented:;here a person has entered into t2o successive )arria+es, a presu)ption arises in favor of the validit- of the second )arria+e, and the burden is on the part- attacFin+ the validit- of the second )arria+e to prove that the 8rst )arria+e had not been dissolvedC it is not enou+h to prove the 8rst )arria+e,for it )ust also be sho2n that it had not ended 2hen the second )arria+e 2as contracted. The presu)ption in favor of the innocence of the defendant fro) cri)e or 2ron+ and of the le+alit- of his second )arria+e, 2ill prevail over the presu)ption of the continuance of life of the 8rst spouse or of the continuance of the )arital relation 2ith such 8rst spouse.(7 .?nderscorin+ supplied/?nder the C'0'. Co-), a subse@uent )arria+e bein+ voidable,(* it is ter)inated b- 8nal Iud+)ent of annul)ent in a case instituted b- the absentspouse 2ho reappears or b- either of the spouses in the subse@uent )arria+e. ?nder the %a&'.1 Co-), no Iudicial proceedin+ to annul a subse@uent )arria+e is necessar-. Thus "rticle (% thereof provides:"rt. (%. The subse@uent )arria+e referred to in the precedin+ "rticle shall beauto)aticall- ter)inated b- ther)cor-'+( o2 ,h) a3-a0', o2 r)a44)ara+c)of the absent spouse, unless there is a Iud+)ent annullin+ the previous )arria+e or declarin+ it void ab initio." s2orn state)ent of the fact and circu)stances of reappearance shall be recorded in the civil re+istr- of the residence of the parties to the subse@uent)arria+e at the instance of an- interested person,5',h -6) +o,'c) ,o ,h) *4o6*)* o2 ,h) *6/*)76)+, &arr'a() and 2ithout preIudice to the fact of reappearance bein+ Iudiciall- deter)ined in case such fact is disputed. .)phasis and underscorin+ supplied/The ter)ination of the subse@uent )arria+e b- aEdavit provided b- the above0@uoted provision of the 9a)il- !ode does not preclude the 8lin+ of an action in court to prove the reappearance of the absentee and obtain a declaration of dissolution or ter)ination of the subse@uent )arria+e.(1If the absentee reappears, but no step is taFen to ter)inate the subse@uent )arria+e, either b- aEdavit or b- court action, such absenteeDs )ere reappearance, even if )ade Fno2n to the spouses in the subse@uent )arria+e, 2ill not ter)inate such )arria+e.,' Since the second )arria+e has been contracted because of a presu)ption that the for)er spouse is dead, such presu)ption continues inspite of the spouseDs ph-sical reappearance, and b- 8ction of la2, he or she )ust still be re+arded as le+all- an absentee until the subse@uent )arria+e is ter)inated as provided b- la2.,#If the subse@uent )arria+e is not ter)inated b- re+istration of an aEdavit ofreappearance or b- Iudicial declaration but b- -)a,h o2 )',h)r *4o6*) as inthe case at bar, Tolentino sub)its:> > > cept in a direct action for annul)ent.,% .?nderscorin+ supplied/Si)ilarl-, Lapuz v. Eufemio,& instructs:In fact, even if the bi+a)ous )arria+e had not been void ab initio but onl- voidable under "rticle *&, para+raph %, of the !ivil !ode, because the second)arria+e had been contracted 2ith the 8rst 2ife havin+ been an absentee for seven consecutive -ears, or 2hen she had been +enerall- believed dead, still the action for annul)ent beca)e e>tin+uished as soon as one of the three persons involved had died, as provided in "rticle *7, para+raph %, of the !ode, re@uirin+ that ,h) ac,'o+ 2or a++6.&)+, *ho6.- /) /ro6(h, -6r'+( ,h) .'2),'&) o2 a+1 o+) o2 ,h) 4ar,')* '+0o.0)-. "nd further)ore, the li@uidation of an- conIu+al partnership that )i+ht have resulted fro) such voidable )arria+e )ust be carried out Gin the testate or intestate proceedin+s of the deceased spouse,G as e>pressl- provided in Section % of the Revised Rule 7&, and not in the annul)ent proceedin+.,( .)phasis and underscorin+ supplied/It bears reiteratin+ that a voidable )arria+e cannot be assailed collaterall- e>cept in a direct proceedin+. !onse@uentl-, such )arria+es can be assailed onl- durin+ the lifeti)e of the parties and not after the death of either, in 2hich case the parties and their oAsprin+ 2ill be left as if the )arria+e had been perfectl- valid.,, ?pon the death of either, the )arria+e cannot be i)peached, and is )ade +ood ab initio.,6In the case at bar, as no step 2as taFen to nullif-, in accordance 2ith la2, 4ailonDs and respondentDs )arria+e prior to the for)erDs death in #11*, respondent is ri+htfull- the dependent spouse0bene8ciar- of 4ailon.In li+ht of the fore+oin+ discussions, consideration of the other issues raised has been rendered unnecessar-.;HR9OR, the petition is DNID.No costs.SO ORDRD.CONC$ITA CARPIO MORALES "ssociate $ustice; !ON!?R:.ON O99I!I"H H"V/LEONAR!O A. QUISUM"ING"ssociate $ustice!hairpersonANTONIO T. CARPIO"ssociate $ustice"ctin+ !hairperson!ANTE O. TINGA"ssociate $ustice" T TS T " T I O NI attest that the conclusions in the above Decision 2ere reached in consultation before the case 2as assi+ned to the 2riter of the opinion of the !ourtDs Division.ANTONIO T. CARPIO "ssociate $ustice"ctin+ !hairperson!R T I 9 I ! " T I O NPursuant to "rticle VIII, Section #& of the !onstitution, and the Division "ctin+!hairpersonDs "ttestation, it is hereb- certi8ed that the conclusions in the above Decision 2ere reached in consultation before the case 2as assi+ned tothe 2riter of the opinion of the !ourt.ARTEMIO . PANGANI"AN!hief $ustice%oo,+o,)*M On OEcial Heave.# Penned b- $ustice Re)edios ". Sala5ar09ernando and concurred in b- $ustices Mariano !. del !astillo and d+ardo 9. Sundia).% !" rollo, pp. #(70#,7.& Id. at #1,.( Id. at (70,,., Id. at ,6.6 SS! records, p. ##%.7 Id. at 6,067.* !" rollo, pp. 601.1 Id. at *01.#' SS! records, p. #%7.## !" rollo, p. ##.#% SS! records, p. (*.#& Ibid.#( Id. at 16017.#, Id. at ,,.#6 Ibid.#7 Id. at #'1.#* Id. at ##'.#1 Her)inia 4ailon0"r+ente, !ecilia 4ailon0Bap, Nor)a 4ailon0!have5, Rosel-n 4ailon0Hades)a, Susan $. 4ailon, !harito 4ailon0Soriano, and !le)ente $. 4ailon, $r.%' SS! records, pp. ##&0#%'.%# Id. at #&,0#&6.%% Id. at #&7.%& Id. at #%(.%( Id. at #%,.%, Id. at #%10#&'.%6 Id. at #&(.%7 !" rollo, pp. #%0#(.%* SS! records, p. #(1.%1 !" rollo, pp. #,0#1.&' Id. at #((.

Rollo, pp. ,60,7.&% Pertinent portions of the Me)orandu) provide:> > > >#. 4ased on the intervie2 conducted b- our "ccount OEcer, Mr. Rolando 3. 3o)e5 to > >&& Rollo, pp. ,&0,6.&( SS! records, pp. #7%0#7(.&, !" rollo, pp. %0,.&6 Rollo, pp. (#0((.&7 !" rollo, pp. #6#0#7'.&* Rollo, pp. #'0&(.&1 Id. at %%.(' S!. ,. Settlement of Disputes. N .a/ "n- dispute arisin+ under this "ct 2ith respect to covera+e, bene8ts, contributions and penalties thereon or an- other )atter related thereto, shall be co+ni5able b- the !o))ission, and an- case 8led 2ith respect thereto shall be heard b- the !o))ission, or an- of its )e)bers, or b- hearin+ oEcers dul- authori5ed b- the !o))ission and decided 2ithin the )andator- period of t2ent- .%'/ da-s after the sub)ission of the evidence. The 8lin+, deter)ination and settle)ent of disputes shall be +overned b- the rules and re+ulations pro)ul+ated b- the !o))ission.> > > >(# Rollo, p. %*.(% "rticle %,6 of the 9a)il- !ode itself li)ited its retroactive +overnance onl- to cases 2here it thereb- 2ould not preIudice or i)pair vested or ac@uired ri+hts in accordance 2ith the !ivil !ode or other la2s.(& "rticle (# of the 9a)il- !ode no2 provides:"rt. (#. " )arria+e contracted b- an- person durin+ the subsistence of a previous )arria+e shall be null and void, unless before the celebration of the subse@uent )arria+e, the prior spouse had been absent for four consecutive -ears and the spouse present had a 2ell0founded belief that the absent spouse 2as alread- dead. In case of disappearance 2here there is dan+er of death under the circu)stances set forth in the provisions of "rticle &1# of the !ivil !ode, an absence of onl- t2o-ears shall be suEcient.9or the purpose of contractin+ the subse@uent )arria+e under the precedin+ para+raph, the spouse present )ust institute a su))ar- proceedin+ as provided in this !ode for the declaration of presu)ptive death of the absentee, 2ithout preIudice to the eAect of reappearance of the absent spouse. (( Armas v. Calisterio, &*6 Phil. ('%, ('1 .%'''/.(, !" rollo, p. *.(6 ones v. !ortiguela, 6( Phil. #71, #*& .#1&7/.(7 I ". Tolentino, !o))entaries and $urisprudence on the !ivil !ode of the Philippines %*% .#111 ed./. .!itations o)itted/(* "rt. *,. " )arria+e )a- be annulled for an- of the follo2in+ causes, e>istin+ at the ti)e of the )arria+e:> > > >.%/ In a subse@uent )arria+e under "rticle *&, Nu)ber %, that the for)er husband or 2ife believed to be dead 2as in fact livin+and the )arria+e 2ith such for)er husband or 2ife 2as then in forceC> > > > .?nderscorin+ supplied/"rt. *7. The action for annul)ent of )arria+e )ust be co))enced b- the parties and 2ithin the periods as follo2s:> > > >.%/ 9or causes )entioned in nu)ber % of "rticle *,, b- the spouse 2ho has been absent, durin+ his or her lifeti)eC or b- either spouse of the subse@uent )arria+e durin+ the lifeti)e of the otherC> > > >(1 Supra note (7, at %*(.,' Ibid.,# Id. at %*,0%*6.,% Supra note (7, at %*7. ,& #,' Phil. %'( .#17%/.,( Id. at %#&.,, "i#al v. $a%adog, &*( Phil. 66#, 67& .%'''/. .!itations o)itted/ ,6 Id. at 67(.