G.R. No. 186571 August 11, 2010GERBERT R. CORPUZ, Petitioner, vs.DAISYLYN TIROL STO. TOMAS and The SOLICITOR GENERAL, Respondents.

Facts: Petitioner was a former Filipino citizen who acquired Canadian citizenship through naturalization. He was married to the respondent but was shocked of the infidelity on the part of his wife. He went back to Canada and filed a petition for divorce and was granted. Desirous to marry another woman he now loved, he registered the divorce decree in the Civil Registry Office and was informed that the foreign decree must first be judicially recognized by a competent Philippine court. Petitioner filed for judicial recognition of foreign divorce and declaration of marriage as dissolved with the RTC where respondent failed to submit any response. The RTC denied the petition on the basis that the petitioner lacked locus standi. Thus, this case was filed before the Court.Issues: WON the second paragraph of Art 26 of the FC extends to aliens the right to petition a court of this jurisdiction fro the recognition of a foreign divorce decree.Decision: The alien spouse cannot claim under the second paragraph of Art 26 of the Family Code because the substantive right it establishes is in favour of the Filipino spouse. Only the Filipino spouse can invoke the second par of Art 26 of the Family Code.The unavailability of the second paragraph of Art 26 of the Family Code to aliens does not necessarily strip the petitioner of legal interest to petition the RTC for the recognition of his foreign divorce decree. The petitioner, being a naturalized Canadian citizen now, is clothed by the presumptive evidence of the authenticity of foreign divorce decree with conformity to aliens national law.The Pasig City Civil Registry acted out of line when it registered the foreign decree of divorce on the petitioner and respondents marriage certificate without judicial order recognizing the said decree. The registration of the foreign divorce decree without the requisite judicial recognition is void.The petition for review on certiorari is granted, the RTC decision is reversed and Court ordered t6he remand of the case to the trial court for further proceedings in light of the ruling.