Why Your Canadian Certificate of Divorce Is Not Enough

The document you were given

When a Canadian court grants a divorce, the court registry issues a certificate of divorce: one short page, sealed, signed by the registrar. It is what almost every Filipino client brings to our office. The Supreme Court has reproduced one in full — the certificate issued to a Filipina nurse who divorced in British Columbia:

In the Supreme Court of British Columbia

Certificate of Divorce

This is to certify that Ma. Socorro Negrete SARTO and Redante M SARTO who were married at ANGONO, RIZAL, PHILIPPINES on August 31, 1984 were divorced under the Divorce Act (Canada) by an order of this Court which took effect and dissolved the marriage on November 1, 1988.

Given under my hand and the Seal of this Court January 14, 2008

Nothing about that document is irregular. It names the governing statute, bears the seal of the court and the registrar's signature. It was still not enough — and the husband who relied on it was convicted.

Sarto: the certificate failed on three separate grounds

In Redante Sarto y Misalucha v. People of the Philippines (G.R. No. 206284, February 28, 2018, Third Division), Redante married Maria Socorro in 1984; she later acquired Canadian citizenship and obtained a divorce that dissolved the marriage on 1 November 1988. Believing himself free, he remarried in Naga City in 1998. Charged with bigamy, his defence rested entirely on the certificate above:

This certificate of divorce, however, is utterly insufficient to rebut the charge against Redante. First, the certificate of divorce is not the divorce decree required by the rules and jurisprudence. As discussed previously, the divorce decree required to prove the fact of divorce is the judgment itself as rendered by the foreign court and not a mere certification. Second, assuming the certificate of divorce may be considered as the divorce decree, it was not accompanied by a certification issued by the proper Philippine diplomatic or consular officer stationed in Canada, as required under Section 24 of Rule 132. Lastly, no copy of the alleged Canadian law was presented by the defense. Thus, it could not be reasonably determined whether the subject divorce decree was in accord with Maria Socorro's national law.

Read those three defects as a checklist of what you will actually need: the order or judgment of the Canadian court, not the registry's summary of it; that document authenticated in the manner our evidence rules require; and a properly proven copy of the Canadian law under which the divorce was granted. Missing any one of them is fatal, and Redante was missing all three.

The consequence was not an inconvenience. The petition was denied, the conviction was affirmed, and Redante was sentenced to an indeterminate penalty running to eight years and one day of prisión mayor as maximum. The Solicitor General had actually filed a manifestation asking for his acquittal. The Court rejected it. Without proof of the divorce and the law behind it, the Court could not even tell what kind of divorce Maria Socorro had obtained:

Further, since neither the divorce decree nor the alleged Canadian law was satisfactorily demonstrated, the type of divorce supposedly secured by Maria Socorro - whether an absolute divorce which terminates the marriage or a limited divorce which merely suspends it - and whether such divorce capacitated her to remarry could not also be ascertained. As such, Redante failed to prove his defense that he had the capacity to remarry when he contracted a subsequent marriage to Fe. His liability for bigamy is, therefore, now beyond question.

Nothing happens automatically

The underlying rule, stated in the same decision, is the one most people get wrong:

A divorce decree obtained abroad by an alien spouse is a foreign judgment relating to the status of a marriage. As in any other foreign judgment, a divorce decree does not have an automatic effect in the Philippines. Consequently, recognition by Philippine courts may be required before the effects of a divorce decree could be extended in this jurisdiction.

Recognition of the divorce decree, however, need not be obtained in a separate petition filed solely for that purpose. Philippine courts may recognize the foreign divorce decree when such was invoked by a party as an integral aspect of his claim or defense.

The foundational Canadian case says the same thing from the front end. In Corpuz v. Sto. Tomas (G.R. No. 186571, August 11, 2010, Third Division), a former Filipino naturalized in Canada obtained an Ontario divorce and tried to have it given effect here:

The starting point in any recognition of a foreign divorce judgment is the acknowledgment that our courts do not take judicial notice of foreign judgments and laws.

This means that the foreign judgment and its authenticity must be proven as facts under our rules on evidence, together with the alien's applicable national law to show the effect of the judgment on the alien himself or herself.

Gerbert Corpuz did better — he filed his decree with the authentication certificates — and still lost the round. The Court noted what his Canadian paper actually contained: it only stated that the marriage between Gerbert and Daisylyn was dissolved by the Canadian court. The full text of the court's judgment was not included. He also had not filed a copy of the Canadian divorce law, and the case was sent back to the trial court rather than decided.

What to do with the certificate you are holding

Keep it — it is a real record and it is useful. But treat it as the receipt, not the judgment. Before anything else, go back to the court registry that issued it and ask for a certified copy of the divorce order or judgment itself, then have both that and the certificate authenticated for use here. Separately, you need admissible proof of the Canadian law that governed the divorce; that is a distinct exercise, and it is where both Canadian cases in our Supreme Court came apart. The document checklist and the page on proving Canadian law set out both jobs, and the step-by-step process explains where a Philippine court fits in.

Until a Philippine court rules, your PSA record still shows you as married: you cannot get a marriage licence here, and remarrying anyway is what put Redante Sarto in the dock. Book a consultation, bring everything Canada gave you, and let us tell you what is missing while it is still fixable.

Frequently asked questions

Related reading