Text of the provision
Art. 2. No marriage shall be valid, unless these essential requisites are present:
(1) Legal capacity of the contracting parties who must be a male and a female; and
(2) Consent freely given in the presence of the solemnizing officer.
(53a)
Family Code of the Philippines, Executive Order No. 209, approved July 6, 1987. The Code took effect on August 3, 1988 (Republic v. Orbecido III, G.R. No. 154380, October 5, 2005). Reproduced in full.
What this article means
Article 2 sets out the two essential requisites of marriage: legal capacity of the parties, and consent freely given before the solemnizing officer. These are distinct from the formal requisites (authority of the solemnizing officer, a marriage license, and a marriage ceremony), which the Code addresses separately in Article 3.
The distinction matters because the two categories fail differently. Absence of an essential requisite typically renders a marriage void; a defect in a formal requisite can instead make it merely voidable, or void, depending on which requisite and how it failed.
How each requisite can fail
- Legal capacity — age below eighteen makes a marriage void under Article 35(1); a subsisting prior marriage makes it void as bigamous under Article 35(4), subject to the Article 41 presumptive-death exception.
- Consent — consent obtained by fraud, force, intimidation, or undue influence makes a marriage voidable under Article 45, not void; consent given under a genuine mistake as to the other party's identity makes it void under Article 35(5).
Questions about this provision
Related provisions
- Article 1 — the nature of the contract these requisites establish.
- Article 5 — the minimum age of legal capacity.
- Article 35 and Article 45 — the consequences when a requisite is missing or defective.
Cases citing this article
- Jesus Nicardo M. Falcis, III vs. Civil Registrar General, G.R. No. 217910, September 3, 2019 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Rommel Genio y Santos vs. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 261666, January 24, 2024 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Sister Pilar Versoza vs. People of the Philippines, Michelina S. Aguirre-Olondriz, Pedro Aguirre, G.R. No. 184535, September 3, 2019 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Republic of the Philippines vs. Liberty D. Albios, G.R. No. 198780, October 16, 2013 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Syed Azhar Abbas vs. Gloria Goo Abbas, G.R. No. 183896, January 30, 2013 — read the decision on LawPhil →
Compiled automatically from Supreme Court decisions published on LawPhil that expressly cite this article, most frequently cited first. A listing means the decision cites the provision — it is not a statement that the case is the leading authority, and it does not show whether a ruling has since been modified or abandoned. Always read the decision itself.