ESTRELLITA TADEO-MATIAS v.

REPUBLIC OF THE AUTHOR: Reyes, Brixton

PHILIPPINES
G.R. No. 230751 April 25, 2018
TOPIC: Judicial Declaration of Presumptive Death
PONENTE: J. Velasco
CASE LAW/ DOCTRINE:
 Judicial declaration of presumptive death is only applicable for the purpose of contracting a valid
subsequent marriage under Art. 41 of the Family Code.

 Articles 390 and 391 of the Civil Code involve a presumption of death already established by law.
There is no need to file such petition under said provisions before the court.
FACTS:
1. Estrellita Tadeo-Matias (Petitioner) was married to Wilfredo Matias who was a member of the
Philippine Constabulary and assigned in Araya, Pampanga. They were married on January 7, 1968.

2. On September 15, 1979, Wilfredo left their conjugal home at San Miguel, Tarlac City in order to serve
his duties. He was never seen or heard from again and has never made contact with any of his or
Petitioner’s relatives. Petitioner constantly sought updates from the Philippine Constabulary
regarding the whereabouts of her husband to no avail.

3. After 3 decades of waiting, Petitioner sought for a claim of death benefits under P.D. 1638 from the
Philippine Veteran’s Affair Office (PVAO) of the AFP. One of its requirements is a judicial declaration
of presumptive death.

4. RTC: Affirmed Petitioner and declared Petitioner’s husband presumptively dead under Art. 41 of the
Family Code.

5. CA: Reversed RTC ruling since Art. 41only allows such declaration in cases of remarriage which
Petitioner did not seek.
ISSUE(S): Whether Petitioner can validly be granted the judicial declaration of presumptive death.

HELD: No. Petitioner erred in filing for judicial declaration of presumptive death which is not a viable suit.
RATIO:
 Article 41 of the FC involves that presumption of death established therein is only applicable for the
purpose of contracting a valid subsequent marriage.

 The RTC erred in considering said petition because it was not filed for the purpose of remarriage
under the FC but Art. 390 and 391 of the Civil Code.

Art. 390. After an absence of seven years, it being unknown whether or not the absence still lives, he
shall be presumed dead for all purposes except for those of succession. The absentee shall not be
presumed dead for the purpose of opening his succession till after an absence of five years shall be
sufficient in order that his succession may be opened

Art. 391. The following shall be presumed dead for all purposes, including the division of the estate
among the heirs:
(1) A person on board a vessel lost during a sea voyage, or an aeroplane which is missing, who has not
been heard of for four years since the loss of the vessel or aeroplane;
(2) A person in the armed forces who has taken part in war, and has been missing for four
years;
(3) a person who has been in danger of death under other circumstances and his
existence has not been known for four years.
 Since Articles 390 and 391 of the Civil Code merely express rules of evidence, an action brought
exclusively to declare a person presumptively dead under either of the said articles actually presents
no actual controversy that a court could decide. The presumption in the said articles is already
established by law. In short, the petition is not authorized by law.

 It is unnecessary for Petitioner to file for judicial declaration of presumptive death to claim death
benefits from the PVAO or the AFP. What is only required is evidence of the claimant that the
concerned soldier had been missing for a number of years and or under the circumstance prescribed
under Art. 390 and 391 of the Civil Code.