Short answer. Yes, absolutely. Article 35 of the Family Code declares void from the beginning those marriages contracted by any party below eighteen years of age — and it explicitly adds that this applies even with the consent of parents or guardians. Parental consent cannot cure this defect.
What the law says
Those contracted by any party below eighteen years of age even with the consent of parents or guardians
Family Code, Article 35 — Void Marriages. Read the full provision →
Age 18 is the absolute floor — no exceptions
Article 35 of the Family Code lists marriages that are void from the very beginning — with no possibility of ratification or validation. The first item on that list is marriages contracted by any party below eighteen years of age. The article adds a phrase that removes the most common question people raise: even with the consent of parents or guardians. This language is deliberate. Before the Family Code, parental consent played a role in enabling younger marriages. That role is gone. Under the Family Code, no parent, guardian, or authority can authorize a marriage where either party is under 18.
Void, not voidable
The distinction between a void and a voidable marriage is significant. A voidable marriage has legal effect until a court annuls it — during that time, the parties are legally married, children are legitimate, and the marriage produces legal consequences. A void marriage, by contrast, has no legal effect from the moment it was celebrated. A marriage where one party was under 18 is not voidable — it is void. No court action is needed to render it without effect, although a judicial declaration of nullity is typically sought to correct civil registry records and settle property and status questions.
Why the law draws a hard line at 18
The Family Code's minimum marriage age of 18 reflects a judgment that anyone below that age lacks the maturity to make a lifelong commitment — and that no consent from a parent or guardian substitutes for that maturity. This is not just about protecting minors from exploitation; it reflects a baseline assessment of capacity. A 16-year-old who wanted to marry and whose parents enthusiastically approved is still considered to lack the legal capacity for marriage under the Family Code. The law is not flexible on this point.
Practical implications if this applies
If a marriage was celebrated when either party was below 18, that marriage is void regardless of how many years ago it happened, whether there are children, or what property the parties have accumulated. Obtaining a judicial declaration of nullity is typically necessary to correct civil registry records, establish the parties' legal freedom to remarry, determine the status of any children, and address property accumulated during the void marriage. The fact that both parties are now adults and the marriage has subsisted for years does not change its void status — but a lawyer can walk you through what the declaration proceeding requires and what its effects will be.
Cases citing this provision
These Supreme Court decisions cite the provision above. We list them so you can read them yourself; the summaries of what each decided are not ours to give.
- Abbas v. Abbas, G.R. No. 183896, January 30, 2013 (Velasco, Jr., J.) — the leading modern authority on paragraph (3). The marriage licence is a formal requisite; where the licence number on the certificate belongs to no licence actually issued to the parties, the licence is absent and the marriage is void ab initio. Decided under the Family Code (marriage celebrated 1992).
- Republic v. Dayot, G.R. Nos. 175581 and 179474, March 28, 2008 — a false affidavit of five years' cohabitation cannot exempt a marriage from the licence requirement; the marriage is void for want of a licence. Decided under Civil Code Article 76 (marriage celebrated 1986, before the Family Code took effect), but it is the leading authority on the cohabitation exception now carried into Article 34, and so on when a marriage is void under Article 35(3).