Cynthia S. Bolos vs Danilo T. Bolos634 SCRA 429, [October 20, 2010]

Facts :Petitioner filed a petition for declaration of nullity of her marriage invoking Article 36 of the Family Code on July 10, 2003. The RTC granted her petition on August 2, 2006. Respondent thereafter filed a motion for reconsideration after respondent received the decision of the lower court. The decision as declared final after a motion to reconsider denial of appeal was denied.

Respondent filed a petition for review before the Court of Appeals and hereby granted. The appellate court ruled that AM no 02-11-10-SC did not apply to the case at bar as their marriage was solemnized Feb 14 1980 before the family code took effect. The said court procedure required a motion for reconsideration as a prerequisite to appeal cases on declaration of absolute nullity on void marriages and annulment of voidable marriages. Petitioner filed her manifestation and a motion for partial reconsideration but was denied by the appellate court as the 15-day reglementary period to file is not extendable.

Petitioner filed this said petition to the Supreme Court contending that the appellate court erred in ruling that their case is not covered by the Family Code; that AM no 02-11-10-SC covers/pertains to the word “petitions” instead of “marriages”; if the Family code covers the case then a motion of reconsideration is a precondition for an appeal; and, since the respondent refused to comply with the precondition of filing a motion for reconsideration, a relaxation on the rules of appeal is not proper.

Issue: Whether or not AM no 02-11-10 SC “Rules on Declaration of Absolute Nullity of void marriages and Annulment of Voidable Marriages” is applicable to the case.

Held: No. the court ruled that AM 02-11-10-SC is strict in its scope wherein section 1 of the rule reads:

“Section 1. Scope – This rule shall govern petitions for declaration of Absolute Nullity of Void Marriages and annulment of voidable marriages under the Family Code of the Philippines.” Applying the rule verba legis, the said section leaves no room for interpretation and is very clear that it would only cover marriages under the Family Code. Also it would only be applied to “marriages” not to “petitions.”