REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES GOVERNMENTSER~CEINSURANCESYSTEM

FINANCIAL CENTER, ROXAS BOULEVARD, PASAY CITY 1308

BOARD OF TRUSTEES .

IN THE MATTER OF THE CLAIM TO BE DECLARED AS THE SURVI~NG SPOUSE OF THE LATE EDUARDO P. REALIST A

SANTAS M. REALISTA, PETITIONER.

){-----------------------------------------------------){

GSIS CASE NO. 012- 12

DECISION

Before the Board is a Petition1 appealing the Resolution2 of the GSIS

Committee on Claims (hereon_, COG for brevity) that denied the

Petitioner's claim for survivorship benefits as the dependent surviving

spouse of deceased GSIS member, Eduardo P. Realista.

FACTS OF THE CASE

Records show that Eduardo P. Realista married Santas S. Matig-a in a

civil ceremony on 18 April 19833 in Tagbilaran City, Bohol. They have two

1 Dated 12 October 2012.

2 COC Resolution No. 009- 2012 dated 10 March 2012.

3 Based on the NSO issued Marriage Certificate.

.· ·'

t,

GS/S Board Case No. 012-12 In the Matter of the Claim to be Declared as

The Surviving Spouse of the Late Eduardo P. Realista.

Santos M. Rea/ista, Petitioner

children, Edna Marie M. Realista and Edison Kendal M. Realista, who were

born 09 December 1983 and 23 November 1984, respectively.

On 16 December 1996, Judge Suceso A. Arcana of Regional Trial

Court (RTC) Branch 46, Larena, Siquijor, issued a Decision4 granting Mr.

Realista's Petition to declare his spouse, Santas M. Realista, presumptively

dead pursuant to Article 41 of the Family Code of the Philippines, to wit:

Art. 41. A marriage contracted by any person during the subsistence of a previous marriage shall be null and void, unless before the celebration of the subsequent marriage, the prior spouse had been absent for four consecutive years and the spouse present had a well- founded belief that the spouse was already dead. In case of disappearance where there is danger of death under the circumstances set forth in the provisions of Article 391 of the Civil Code, an absence of only two years shall be sufficient.

The dispositive portion of the RTC Decision reads:

Based on the foregoing established facts, the Court is convinced that the petition is meritorious and that the absentee wife, Santas Matig-a Realista is presumptively dead by now and considering her disappearance for a considerable period of time without any communication whatsoever to her husband as well as to her mother and relatives.

Wherefore, in accordance with the provisions of Art. 41 of the Family Code of the Philippines, judgment is hereby rendered declaring the absentee, Santas Matig-a Realista for all legal intents and purposes as presumptively dead, without prejudice to her reappearance.

SO ORDERED.

On 25 September 1997,5 Eduardo P. Realista married his second wife,

Carolin B. Vidad in a civil ceremony in Siquijor. The spouses have two

4 Based on the Certified True Copy of the Decision under S.P. Proc. No. 169.

5 Based on the NSO issued Marriage Certificate.

2

" . GSJS Board Case No. 012-12

In the Matter of the Claim to be Declared as

The Surviving Spouse of the Late Eduardo P. Realista.

Santos M. Rea/ista, Petitioner

children, Eddielyn Yemane V. Realista and Eddilyn Switenia V. Realista who

were born on 08 August 1991 and 07 November 1992, respectively.

The Petitioner's Service Record shows that Mr. Realista initially

joined government service on 29 January 1982 in the Bureau of Lands, and

served until 15 September 1988. On 16 September 1988, he transferred to

the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) and served

until his death on 23 April2011.6

On 23 May 2011, Mr. Realista's second wife, Carolin V. Realista,

applied for survivorship benefits as a surviving dependent spouse of Mr.

Realista, declaring that they have two surviving children: Eddilyn Switenia

and Eddielyn Yemane. As the surviving spouse of Mr. Realista, Carotin was

awarded7 survivorship benefits in the amount of Two Hundred Thirty Six

Thousand Five Hundred Sixty One Pesos and Thirty Six Centavos (Php

236,561.36) on 26 October 2011. GSIS also awarded death benefits to

Carotin and her two children on 28 November 2011.

Sometime after Mr. Realista's death, his first wife, Santas M. Realista,

Petitioner herein, reappeared and also filed a claim to be declared as the

dependent surviving spouse of Mr. Realista. In behalf of her children,

Edison Kendal and Edna Marie M. Realista, Petitioner also submitted their

NSO-issued birth certificates, as proof of their affinity to their father, the

deceased, Eduardo.

6 NSO issued Death Certificate.

7 Based on the Survivorship Benefits Voucher .

3

., . . GS/S Board Case No. 012-12

In the Matter of the Claim to be Declared as

The Surviving Spouse of the

Late Eduardo P. Reafista. Santos M. Realista, Petitioner

Pursuant to the submission of the above birth certificates and the

Certificate of Membership Policy of Mr. Realista, identifying the children in

his first marriage as his legal heirs, the two children were also awarded

death benefits on 25 January 2012.

Carolin and all four children were given death benefits in the amount

of P 309,329.82 each.8

The denial of Petitioner's claim was elevated to the COC for review

and on 20 March 2012, the COC issued Resolution No. 009- 2012 with the

following findings:

Resolved, to APPROVE AND CONFIRM, the recommendation of the Regional Manager of the Bacolod Regional Office to deny the request of Ms. Santas Matig-a Realista to be included as legal heir of Eduardo P. Realista for purposes of entitlement to survivorship benefits, on the following grounds:

1. as ruled by the Supreme Court in Re: Application for Survivor's Benefits of Ms. Maylenne G. Manlavi, Daughter of the Late Ernesto R. Manlavi (A.M. No. 10019- Ret., February 22, 2011), 'to be entitled to survivorship benefits under R.A. 8291, the beneficiary must be dependent upon the GSIS member or pensioner for support.'

2. the Supreme Court likewise ruled that the abandonment by the wife of her family as in this case, already indicates that she was not dependent on the deceased for support during such period; and

3. likewise, following the ruling of the Court in SSS vs. Teresita jarque Vda. De Bailon (G.R. No. 1655545, March 24, 2006), the mere reappearance of Ms. Santas Matig-a Realista without the latter recording the reappearance with the Local Civil Registrar in Siquijor does not terminate the marriage of Eduardo and Carolin, hence, said marriage is still valid.

Thus, this petition before the Board of Trustees.

8 Under Check Nos. 943308, 943307, 956289 and 956290 and 943309.

4

. ' \

. . . . .

GSIS Board Case No. 012-12 In the Matter of the Claim to be Declared as

The Surviving Spouse of the

Late Eduardo P. Realista. Santos M. Rea/ista, Petitioner

In her · Petition, Petitioner avers that as a husband and father, Mr.

Realista was legally obliged to give the Petitioner and their children support

for sustenance, education, clothing, etc., as prescribed by the Family Code.

Mr. Realista's legal obligations existed whether or not he actually complied

with the same. Petitioner alleges that she separated from Mr. Realista

because of his tendency to inflict physical violence on her. Hence, she was

forced to relocate to Batangas sometime in 1989 with. their two children.

Petitioner contends that her husband's marriage with Carolin was a

bigamous one because her prior marriage with Mr. Realista had not been

annulled. She believes that there is no need for her to register an affidavit

of reappearance before the local civil registry as required by the Family

Code, since such procedure is not necessitated by the Civil Code, which

governs her marriage as it was celebrated during its effectivity. Hence, as

the dependent surviving spouse of Mr. Realista, she is entitled to

survivorship benefits.

On the other hand, the COC claims that Petitioner is not a "dependent

spouse" within the purview of R.A. No. 8291. Petitioner herself admitted

that she and Mr. Realista separated when she and her two children moved

to Batangas in 1989. Petitioner failed to show proof that she was

dependent on her husband for support or that she demanded support from

him.

ISSUE

5

GSIS Board Case No. 012-12 In the Matter of the Claim to be Declared as

The Surviving Spouse of the Late Eduardo P. Realista.

Santos M. Realista, Petitioner

Whether the Petitioner is the surviving spouse of the late Eduardo P.

Realista entitled to survivorship benefits.

DISCUSSION

Mr. Eduardo P. Realista was a GSIS member who died while he was in

active government service at the DENR, serving for over twenty eight (28)

years in , the government. Pursuant to R.A. No. 8291, his qualified

beneficiaries were entitled to survivorship benefits upon his death. Records

show that Mr. Realista's second wife, Carolin, already received survivorship

and death benefits and the surviving children in both marriages received

death benefits from GSIS.

We proceed to ascertain whether the Petitioner is indeed a surviving

spouse of Mr. Realista within the meaning set forth by R.A. No. 8291 and its

implementing provisions.

Section 2 "f" and "g" of R.A. No. 8291 enumerate who are considered

dependents and primary beneficiaries of members to wit:

"(f) Dependents- Dependents shall be the following: (a) the legitimate spouse dependent for support upon the member or pensioner; (b) the legitimate, legitimated, legally adopted child, including the illegitimate child, who is unmarried, not gainfully employed, not over the age of majority, or is over the age of majority but incapacitated and incapable of self-support due to a mental or physical defect acquired prior to age of majority; and (c) the parents dependent upon the member for support;

"(g) Primary beneficiaries- The legal dependent spouse until he/she remarries and the dependent children;

Thus, pursuant to the definition laid down in Section 2 (f) and (g) of

R.A. No. 8291, for a surviving spouse to be entitled to the survivorship

benefits, the following must be met:

6

... GS/S Board Case No. 012-12

In the Matter of the Claim to be Declared as The Surviving Spouse of the

Late Eduardo P. Rea/ista. Santos M. Rea/ista, Petitioner

1. The surviving spouse must be the legal spouse who was dependent for support on the member; and that-

2. The surviving legal spouse dependent for support has not remarried.

The GSIS takes notice of the 1996 decision rendered by the RTC of

Siquijor declaring the Petitioner's presumptive death. By virtue of such

declaration, Mr. Realista was able to marry his second wife, Carolin, on 25

September 1997. The marriage between Mr. Realista and Carolin remained

valid and subsisting until the former's death on 23 April 2011.

The Petitioner's absence until Mr. Realista's death indisputably shows

that she was not dependent on her husband for support, financial or

otherwise. More importantly, the court's declaration of Petitioner being

declared presumptively dead, suspended, if not dissolved, the marital

relations between the husband and the absentee wife, without prejudice to

her reappearance.

Petitioner assails the validity of the court's declaration of her

presumptive death alleging that the decision was not factually accurate. It

is clear, however, that GSIS cannot review, much less disregard or reverse,

decisions rendered by courts of law. In this particular case, the court's

decision declaring Petitioner's presumptive death, must be respected and

followed.

The facts also show that Petitioner failed to record her affidavit of

reappearance before the local registry. Petitioner reasons that her marriage

7

. . . . •, . GSIS Board Case No. 012-12

In the Matter of the Claim to be Declared as The Surviving Spouse of the

Late Eduardo P. Realista. Santos M . Realista, Petitioner

with Mr. Realista was celebrated during the effectivity of the Civil Code and

the said law, unlike the Family Code, does not require such action.

Indeed, the Civil Code under which the first marriage of Ms. Realista

was celebrated, does not require such recording of the affidavit of her re-

appearance. However, it is not the first marriage that is at issue but the

validity of the second marriage celebrated during the effectivity9 of the

Family Code that is in question. Hence, it is the Family Code which governs

the second marriage that is controlling in resolving the issue, and Section

42 of this Code clearly requires that:

Art. 42. The subsequent marriage referred to in the preceding Article shall be automatically terminated by the recording of the affidavit of reappearance of the absent spouse, unless there is a judgment annulling the previous marriage or declaring it void ah initio.

Accordingly, the statutory requirement of the recording of the

affidavit of reappearance of the absentee wife must be observed in order to

terminate the subsequent marriage. In the absence of compliance with the

foregoing requirement, the court order declaring the Petitioner

presumptively dead subsists.

In the case of SSS vs. Teresita jarque Vda. De Bailon,10 the Supreme

Court held that:

"If the absentee reappears, but no step is taken to terminate the subsequent marriage, either by affidavit or by court action, such

9 Effective on 3 August 1988.

10 March 24, 2006, G.R No. 165545.

8

., . ·• 1

-

" .. GSIS Board Case No. 012-12

In the Matter of the Claim to be Declared as The Surviving Spouse of the

Late Eduardo P. Realista. Santos M. Realista, Petitioner

absentee's mere reappearance, even if made known to the spouses in the subsequent marriage, will not terminate such marriage. Since the second marriage has been contracted because of a presumption that the former spouse is dead, such presumption continues in spite of the spouse's physical reappearance, and by fiction of law, he or she must still be regarded as legally an absentee until the subsequent marriage is terminated as provided by law." Xxx

"It bears reiterating that a voidable marriage cannot be assailed collaterally except in a direct proceeding. Consequently, such marriages can be assailed only during the lifetime of the parties and not after the death of either, in which case the parties and their offspring will be left as if the marriage had been perfectly valid. Upon the death of either, the marriage cannot be impeached, and is made good ah initio."

In the case at bar, as no step was taken by Petitioner to nullify, in

accordance with law, Eduardo's and Carolin's marriage, the latter is

rightfully the spouse of Eduardo entitled to the survivorship benefits.

Wherefore, all the foregoing considered, the Petitioner is not

considered as a surviving spouse of the late Eduardo P. Realista entitled to

survivorship benefits. Accordingly, the Petition is DENIED for lack of merit.

Pasay City, _2_B_N_O_V_2_M_l _ _

L L. LACSON, Jr. Chairman

ROBE TG. VE~ARA

ROMEO M. ALIP Trustee Trustee

9

'. '

. .

' •'

~q .. ~~ ELISEA~. dJ:!j.UN

Trustee

Trustee

FRANCISCO T. DUQUE III Trustee

(did not attend) Copy furnished:

Pizarras and Associates Law Office Counsel for the Petitioner 20th Floor Security Bank Centre 6776 Ayala Avenue, Makati City

Atty. Marianne C. Aningat Prosecution and Quasi- Judicial Cases Department Legal Services Group GSIS Pasay City

10

GS/S Board Case No. 012-12 In the Matter of the Claim to be Declared as

The Surviving Spouse of the Late Eduardo P. Realista.

Santos M. Realista, Petitioner

Trustee

. . ·,

. ' . . ...

. I • • ,

CERTIFICATION

I, CRISTINA V. ASTUDILLO, Attorney V of the GSIS Legal Services Group, having been assigned as Hearing Officer to draft a Decision in GSIS Case No. 012- 12 entitled "'n the Matter of the CJajm to be Declared as the Survjvjng Spouse of the Late Eduardo P. ReaHsta J~ hereby certifies that the statement of facts herein stated and being presented before this Board is accurate and true, based on the records of the case, the pleadings and other documents submitted by the parties.

This certification is issued in compliance with Board Resolution No. 198-A adopted on September 15, 2004.

Pasay City, 25 November 2013.

CRISTir:"~~ ~ /STUDILLO ~~~~~!fficer

... \ ' · . .

G S I S Government Service Insurance System Financial Center, Pasay City, Metro Manila 1308

OFFICE OF THE CORPORATE SECRETARY

EXACT COPY OF RES. NO. 137 ADOPTED BY THE GSIS BOARD OF TRUSTEES IN ITS MEETING NO. 21 HELD ON 28 NOVEMBER 2013

Decision in GSIS Case No. 012-12, In the Matter of the Claim to be Declared as the Surviving Spouse of the Late

Eduardo P. Realista, Santas M. Realista, Petitioner

RESOLUTION NO. 137

WHEREAS, a Petition on the Resolution of the GSIS Committee on Claims regarding the claim of the Petitioner, Santas M. Realista, to be declared as the surviving spouse of the late Eduardo P. Realista, was filed before the GSIS Board of Trustees;

WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 30 of R.A. No. 8291, the GSIS has original and exclusive jurisdiction to settle any dispute arising from the application of the laws administered by the GSIS;

RESOLVED, to APPROVE and CONFIRM the Decision in GSIS Case No. 012-12, In the Matter of the Claim to be Declared as the Surviving Spouse of the Late Eduardo P. Realista, Santas M. Realista, Petitioner, the dispositive portion of which states:

"Wherefore, all the foregoing considered, the Petitioner is not considered as a surviving spouse of the late Eduardo P. Realista entitled to survivorsh ip benefits. Accordingly, the Petition is DENIED for lack of merit."

~ OPGM

" .

BOARD MEETING NO. 21 28 NOVEMBER 2013

Page 2 (Res. No. 137-2013)

A copy of the Decision in GSIS Case No. 012-12 1s attached and made an integral part of this Resolution.

CERTIFIED CORRECT:

ATIY. M~ESAMIS-RAAGAS Corporate Secretary