Civil Code.
] On this score the Court had occasion to state that "a
YAO KEE vs SY-GONZALES
PETITIONERS: YAO KEE, SZE SOOK WAH, SZE LAI CHO,
and SY CHUN YEN
RESPONDENTS: AIDA SY-GONZALES, MANUEL SY,
TERESITA SY-BERNABE, RODOLFO SY, and HONORABLE
COURT OF APPEALS
DOCKET NO.: GR No. L-55960
DATE: November 24, 1988
PONENTE: Cortes, J.
FACTS:
• Sy Kiat, a Chinese national, residing in Caloocan City, died
on January 17, 1977 leaving behind properties here in the
Philippines worth P300,000.00 more or less.
• Thereafter, Aida Sy-Gonzales et al filed a petition for the
grant of letters of administration alleging that;
(a) they are the children of the deceased with Asuncion
Gillego;
(b) to their knowledge Sy Mat died intestate;
(c) they do not recognize Sy Kiat's marriage to Yao Kee
nor the filiation of her children to him; and,
(d) they nominate Aida Sy-Gonzales for appointment
as administratrix of the intestate estate
• The petition was opposed by Yao Kee et al alleging that;
(a) Yao Kee is the lawful wife of Sy Kiat whom he
married on January 19, 1931 in China;
(b) the other oppositors are the legitimate children of
the deceased with Yao Kee; and,
(c) Sze Sook Wah is the eldest among them and is
competent, willing and desirous to become the
administratrix of the estate of Sy Kiat
PROBATE COURT: rendered decision in favor of Yao Kee.
CA: Modified the decision.
(1) Declaring petitioners Aida Sy-Gonzales et. al. as
acknowledged natural children of the deceased with
Asuncion Gillego, an unmarried woman with whom he lived
as husband and wife without benefit of marriage for many
years:
(2) Declaring oppositors Sze Sook Wah et.al. as the
acknowledged natural children of the deceased Sy Kiat with
Yao Kee, since the legality of the alleged marriage of Sy Mat
to Yao Kee in China had not been proven to be valid to the
laws of the Chinese People's Republic of China
(3) Declaring the deed of sale executed by Sy Kiat to be valid
and be excluded from the estate; and
(4) Affirming the appointment by the lower court of Sze Sook
Wah as judicial administratrix of the estate of the deceased.
Both parties moved for recon, questioning paragraphs (3) and (4)
of the dispositive portion of the CA's decision, but subsequently
denied by SC.
This petition questions paragraphs (1) and (2) of the dispositive
portion of the decision of CA. SC initially denied the appeal but
decided to give due course this petition upon motion for recon.
YAO KEE et al: Petitioners argue that the marriage of Sy Kiat to
Yao Kee in accordance with Chinese law and custom was
conclusively proven. To buttress this argument they rely on the
testimonial and documentary evidence of Yao Kee herself, Gan
Ching, a younger brother of Yao Kee, Asuncion Gillego, and
documents which states that Sy Kiat is married.
ISSUE #1: W/N the marriage of Sy Kiat with Yae Kee was duly
proven to be valid in accordance with Laws of China
HELD: These evidence may very well prove the fact of marriage
between Yao Kee and Sy Kiat. However, the same do not suffice
to establish the validity of said marriage in accordance with
Chinese law or custom.
Custom is defined as "a rule of conduct formed by repetition of
acts, uniformly observed (practiced) as a social rule, legally
binding and obligatory”. The law requires that "a custom must be
proved as a fact, according to the rules of evidence" [Article 12,
local custom as a source of right can not be considered by a court
of justice unless such custom is properly established by
competent evidence like any other fact”. The same evidence, if
not one of a higher degree, should be required of a foreign
custom.
The law on foreign marriages is provided by Article 71 of the Civil
Code which states that:
Art. 71. All marriages performed outside the
Philippines in accordance with the laws in force in the
country where they were performed and valid there as
such, shall also be valid in this country, except bigamous,
Polygamous, or incestuous marriages, as determined by
Philippine law.
Construing this provision of law the Court has held that to
establish a valid foreign marriage two things must be proven,
namely: (1) the existence of the foreign law as a question of fact;
and (2) the alleged foreign marriage by convincing evidence.
In proving a foreign law the procedure is provided in the Rules of
Court. With respect to an unwritten foreign law, Rule 130 section
45 states that:
SEC. 45. Unwritten law.—The oral testimony of witnesses,
skilled therein, is admissible as evidence of the unwritten
law of a foreign country, as are also printed and published
books of reports of decisions of the courts of the foreign
country, if proved to be commonly admitted in such courts.
Proof of a written foreign law, on the other hand, is provided for
under Rule 132 section 25, thus:
SEC. 25. Proof of public or official record.—An official
record or an entry therein, when admissible for any
purpose, may be evidenced by an official publication
thereof or by a copy attested by the officer having the legal
custody of the record, or by his deputy, and accompanied,
if the record is not kept in the Philippines, with a certificate
that such officer has the custody. If the office in which the
record is kept is in a foreign country, the certificate may be
made by a secretary of embassy or legation, consul
general, consul, vice consul, or consular agent or by any
officer in the foreign service of the Philippines stationed in
the foreign country in which the record is kept and
authenticated by the seal of his office.
The Court has interpreted section 25 to include competent
evidence like the testimony of a witness to prove the existence of
a written foreign law
In the case at bar petitioners did not present any competent
evidence relative to the law and custom of China on
marriage. The testimonies of Yao and Gan Ching cannot be
considered as proof of China's law or custom on marriage
not only because they are self-serving evidence, but more
importantly, there is no showing that they are competent to
testify on the subject matter.
For failure to prove the foreign law or custom, and
consequently, the validity of the marriage in accordance with
said law or custom, the marriage between Yao Kee and Sy
Kiat cannot be recognized in this jurisdiction.
ISSUE #2: W/N court may take Judicial Notice of Laws of China
HELD: No. Well-established in this jurisdiction is the principle
that Philippine courts cannot take judicial notice of foreign laws.
They must be alleged and proved as any other fact. In the
absence of proof of the Chinese law on marriage, it should be
presumed that it is the same as ours
ISSUE #3: W/N the status of private respondents shall be an
acknowledged natural children or legitimate children.
HELD: Petitioners failed to establish the marriage of Yao Kee
with Sy Mat according to the laws of China, they cannot be
accorded the status of legitimate children but only that of
acknowledged natural children. Petitioners are natural children,
it appearing that at the time of their conception Yao Kee and Sy
Kiat were not disqualified by any impediment to marry one
another [See Art. 269, Civil Code.] And they are acknowledged
children of the deceased because of Sy Kiat's recognition.

Private respondents on the other hand are also the deceased's

acknowledged natural children with Asuncion Gillego, a Filipina
with whom he lived for twenty-five (25) years without the benefit
of marriage.

WHEREFORE, the decision of the Court of Appeals is hereby

AFFIRMED.