MAY D. AONUEVO,ALEXANDER BLEE DESANTISANDJOHN DESANTIS NERI, PETITIONERS VS. INTESTATE ESTATE OF RODOLFO G. JALANDONI, REPRESENTED BY BERNARDINO G. JALANDONI AS SPECIAL ADMINISTRATOR, RESPONDENT (FIRS DIVISION, G.R. NO. 178221, O1 DECEMBER 2010)

FACTS:Rodolfo Jalandoni died. His brother filed at the RTC a petition for Issuance of Letters of Administration for the property of Rodolfo.

The petitioners intervened and said that their mother, Sylvia, was the daughter of Isabel and John. Isabel who, at the time of Rodolfos death, was actually legally married to the deceased and is therefore entitled to a share in the latters property. The proof of which is based on a marriage certificate between Isabel and Rodolfo.

Both Sylvia and Isabel are dead at the time of the manifestation. The petitioners pray that they may be allowed to intervene on behalf of Isabel.

Rodolfos brother opposed their intervention because the birth certificate of Sylvia states that Isabel and John were married. Therefore, Isabels marriage to Rodolfo was null and void.

Petitioners argue, however, that such statement in the birth certificate was not enough evidence to prove a valid marriage between Isabel and John. Further, it was only done to save face and is customary.

ISSUE:Do the petitioners have legal standing to intervene in the proceedings?RULING:No, they do not have standing to intervene.

The Birth Certificate of Sylvia, which shows that she and John were married, is sufficient proof that indeed they were married. Although there were no marriage certificates given as proof, it is not considered as the sole source of evidence marriage. Sylvias birth certificate hold prima facie weight and the petitioners showed no contrary evidence. The reason of face saving / customary holds no merit and the courts cannot take judicial notice of a folkway.

Therefore, Isabels marriage to Rodolfo is void seeing that at the time of the marriage, Isabel was still married to John. Thus, the descendants of Isabel have no share in the Estate of Rodolfo.