Special Case Digest: Van Dorn vs. Romillo

ALICE REYES VAN DORN, petitioner,

vs.

HON. MANUEL V. ROMILLO, JR., as Presiding Judge of Branch CX, Regional Trial Court of the National Capital Region Pasay City and RICHARD UPTON, respondents.

G.R. No. L-68470 October 8, 1985

MELENCIO-HERRERA, J.:

Facts: In 1972, Alicia Reyes Van Dorn, a Filipino Citizen and Richard Upton, a US citizen was married in Hongkong. They had 2 children and established their residence in the Philippines.

In 1982, they were divorced in Nevada, USA. Petitioner has re-married also in Nevada, this time to Theodore Van Dorn.

On June 8, 1983, respondent filed a suit against petitioner stating that the business of the latter in Ermita Manila, the Galleon Shop is conjugal property. Upton prayed therein that petitioner be ordered to render an accounting of the business and that he be declared as the administrator of the said property. Petitioner moved to dismiss the case, respondent acknowledged before Nevada Court that they had no “community property”.

Issue: Whether or not the respondent as petitioner’s husband is entitled to exercise control over conjugal assets.

Held: No. In this case, the divorce in Nevada released private respondent from the marriage from the standards of American law, under which divorce dissolved the marriage.

Private respondent was no longer the husband of petitioner. He would have no standing to sue as petitioner's husband entitled to exercise control over conjugal assets. The private respondent should not continue to be one of her heirs with possible rights to conjugal property. Petitioner should not be discriminated against in her own country if the ends of justice are to be served.