Buccat v. Mangonon de Buccat, 72 Phil 19 (1941) Translated Text by Paolo Celeridad [No.

47101 April 25, 1941] GODOFREDO BUCCAT, plaintiff-appellant, v. LUIDA MANGONON DE BUCCAT, defendant-appellee Marriage; Validity Marriage is a most sacred institution. It is the foundation upon which society rests. To nullify it would need clear and authentic proof. In this case no such proof exists. Appeal from a decision of the Court of First Instance of Baguio. Carlos, J. Feliciano Leviste, Toms P. Paganiban and Sotera, N. Megia for appellants Luida Mangonon de Buccat on her own behalf. The facts are stated in the decision of the court. Horrilleno, J.: This case has been elevated to this court from the Court of First Instance of Baguio, since it only raises a question purely of law. On March 20, 1939 the plaintiff initiated the present case, in which the defendant did not appear, despite being duly summoned. On account of this, plaintiff was permitted to present his proof, and the lower court decided in favor of the defendant. Thus this appeal. The plaintiff prays for the annulment of his marriage to Luida Mangonon de Buccat on November 26, 1938 in the City of Baguio, on the grounds that when agreeingto the marriage promise, he did so because the defendant assured him that she was a virgin. From the decision of the lower court, the following facts are given: The plaintiff met the defendant in March 1938. After several meetings, they became engaged in September 19 of the same year. In November 26, the plaintiff married the defendant in the Catholic cathedral of Baguio City. After living together for eighty-nine days, the defendant gave birth to a son (of nine months) in February 23, 1939. As a result of this event, the plaintiff left the defendant and never returned to married life with her. We see no reason to revoke the appealed sentence. In effect, it is unlikely that the allegation of the plaintiff- appellant that he did not even suspect the serious situation of the defendant, being as it is proven, an advanced pregnant condition. On account of this, there is no reason to consider the fraud of which the plaintiff-appellant speaks. The

allegation that it is not rare to find persons with developed abdomens, seems to us childish to deserve our consideration, all the more that the plaintiff is a first-year student of law. Marriage is a most sacred institution. It is the foundation upon which society rests. To nullify it would need clear and authentic proof. In this case no such proof exists. Finding the appealed sentence reconciled to law, it must be affirmed, and we hereby affirm it in toto . Costs to plaintiff-appellant. So ordered. Avancea, C.J., Imperial, Daz, and Laurel, JJ., concur. Decision affirmed. Facts: Godofredo Buccat and Luida Mangonon de Buccat met in March 1938, became engaged in September, and got married in Nov 26. On Feb 23, 1939 (89 days after getting married) Luida, who was 9 months pregnant, gave birth to a son. Godofredo left Luida and on March 23, 1939, he filed for an annulment of their marriage on the grounds that when he agreed to married Luida, she assured him that she was a virgin. The Lower court decided in favor of Luida. Issue: WON Luidas concealment of her pregnancy constituted a ground for the annulment of marriage (fraud) Held: No. Clear and authentic proof is needed in order to nullify a marriage, a sacred institution in which the State is interested. In this case, the court did not find any proof that there was concealment of pregnancy constituting a ground for annulment; it was unlikely that Godofredo, a first- year law student, did not suspect anything about Luidas condition considering that she was in an advanced stage of pregnancy when they got married. Decision: SC affirmed the lower courts decision. Z h a i Gar