ARANES VS OCCIANO A.M. No. MTJ-02-1390
Gross Ignorance of Law
FACTS:
Petitioner
Mercedita Mata Arañes charges respondent judge with Gross Ignorance of
the Law. Respondent is the Presiding Judge of the MTCt of Balatan,
Camarines Sur. Petitioner alleges that respondent judge solemnized her
marriage to her late groom Dominador B. Orobia without the requisite
marriage license and at Nabua, Camarines Sur which is outside his
territorial jurisdiction.
They
lived together as husband and wife on the strength of this marriage
until her husband passed away. However, since the marriage was a
nullity, petitioner's right to inherit the "vast properties" left by
Orobia was not recognized. She was likewise deprived of receiving the
pensions of Orobia.
Petitioner
prays that sanctions be imposed against respondent judge for his
illegal acts and unethical misrepresentations which allegedly caused her
so much hardships, embarrassment and sufferings.
Issue:
Whether or not the respondent Judge acted in gross ignorance of the law when he solemnized the marriage of petitioner
Held:
In
the case at bar, the territorial jurisdiction of respondent judge is
limited to the municipality of Balatan, Camarines Sur. His act of
solemnizing the marriage of petitioner and Orobia in Nabua, Camarines
Sur therefore is contrary to law and subjects him to administrative
liability. His act may not amount to gross ignorance of the law for he
allegedly solemnized the marriage out of human compassion but
nonetheless, he cannot avoid liability for violating the law on
marriage.
Respondent judge should also be faulted for solemnizing a marriage without the requisite marriage license. In People vs. Lara,
the Court held that a marriage which preceded the issuance of the
marriage license is void, and that the subsequent issuance of such
license cannot render valid or even add an iota of validity to the
marriage. Except in cases provided by law, it is the marriage license
that gives the solemnizing officer the authority to solemnize a
marriage. Respondent judge did not possess such authority when he
solemnized the marriage of petitioner. In this respect, respondent judge
acted in gross ignorance of the law.