GR No. 217910 Digest

Kezea Katrina Andrada LPS 3101 Group 2
Jesus Nicardo Falcis petitioner, VS. Civil Registrar General, respondent

GR No. 217910, September 3, 2019
FACTS:
A self-identified LGBTQIA+ member, Jesus Falcis filed a petition on May 18, 20015, directly to the
Supreme Court for Certiorari and Prohibition.
Petitioner’s Point/s:
➢ Articles 1 and 2 of the Family Code are unconstitutional. It denies the existence of individuals
belonging to religious denominations in support of same-sex marriage and the right to found a
family in accordance with religious convictions.
➢ Articles 46(4) and 55(6) of the Family Code shall be nullified.
➢ There has a normative impact on the status of same-sex relationships in the country, where
the state interest of marriage protection in Article XV, Section 2 of the Constitution does not
involve the protection of heterosexual relationships. Moreover, the Family Code violates the
equal protection clause due to absence of substantial distinction between same-sex and
opposite sex.
Respondent’s Point/s:
• There was a failure to show injury-in-fact and actual controversy.
• With the laid points, it was an inquiry to legislative policies and should implead the Congress
and not the Civil Registrar General.
• Questions are political; therefore, it is the prerogative of the Congress to determine.
Petitioners-intervenors, LGBT Christian Church, Reverend Agbayani, Felipe and Ibañez, filed a Motion
for Leave to intervene in the proceedings, however there was an allegation of denied marriage license.
Therefore, allowed the controversy of the case.
ISSUE/S:
1. Whether or not mere passage of the Family Code has an actual case or controversy
subject for review by this Court.
2. Whether or not Falcis and his self-identification as member of the LGBTQIA+ community
gives standing to challenge the Family Code.
3. Whether or not the Petition-in-Intervention is a remedy to the procedural issues of the
Petition.
4. Whether or not the application of the doctrine of transcendental importance is warranted.
RULING/S:
• NO. The assailed act must show a direct adverse effect on the parties coming to Court. A
question is subject for adjudication when the act being questioned or challenged proves
to have a direct adverse effect on the individual challenging or filing the complaint.
• NO. In order to possess a legal standing, parties must show “a personal and substantial
interest in the case such that [they have] sustained or will sustain direct injury as a result
of the governmental act that is being challenged”. A petitioner’s supposed “personal stake
in the outcome of this case” does not pertain to direct injury that would endow Falcis such
Kezea Katrina Andrada LPS 3101 Group 2
standing. Assertions cannot suffice interest and the desires set by the petitioner does not
legally constitute demandable rights requiring judicial enforcement. Moreover, there has
no immediate, inextricable danger of proof that the Family Code poses to Falcis. The
definitive cause of the petitioner’s inability to find a partner is indicatively non sequitur.
• NO. The requirements for intervention are: (a) a movant’s legal interest in the matter being
litigated; (b) a showing that the intervention will not delay the proceedings’; (c) a claim by
the intervenor that is incapable of being properly decided in a separate proceeding. There
has a confusion to the purpose of the Petition-in-Intervention. The ultimate remedy to what
petitioners-intervenors have stated is a directive to marriage licenses that should be
issued to them, as revealed in a discerning reading. However, the petition is not identified
as a petition for mandamus, but a seek for the same relief to the original Petition by having
the same nature of that of Falcis.
• NO. In Gios-Samar, the Court emphasized that transcendental importance is originally
cited to relax rules on legal standing but not on exception to the doctrine of hierarchy of
courts where there must be pure legal issues on cases for it to be applied.

GR No. 217910 Digest

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

GR No. 217910 Digest

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

GR No. 217910 Digest

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Kezea Katrina Andrada LPS 3101 Group 2

Jesus Nicardo Falcis petitioner, VS. Civil Registrar General, respondent

You might also like