annulment, malaking pera ang paguusapan dyan at maraming taon... plus, makikialam pa ang church.
divorce, mabilis at mapaguusapan ng mas maayos kung anong suporta ang dapat na maibigay sa babaeng ididiborsyo. city hall at lawyer lang ang kasama sa equation.
No, this is so very wrong. I know you mean well Gardov, and you just want to be an active part of the discussions and fight for your beliefs, and I admire that. But we have to clarify the erroneous statements you said so as not to confound the issue.
First, you'll probably spend just as much for divorce as you would for annulment, something which we will discuss in detail later on.
Second, the granting of an annulment will probably take just as much time as the granting of a divorce. The determining factor here is not the governing law. It's the speed by which such laws are served... and our justice system isn't really speedy.
Third, there is a separation of church and state. A judicial annulment is different from a church annulment. Just take the church annulment out of the picture... pampagulo lang yon. I used to practice law, and the procedures for church annulment still confuse the hell out of me. Focus on the legal aspect of annulment.
Fourth, the duty of support for the other spouse will cease once the marriage is terminated - whether such termination is through annulment or through divorce. Pag hiwalay na kayo, ng legal, ng asawa mo, di mo na sya kailangang suportahan. Only the common children - provided they are either in the age of minority OR emancipated but have no means of supporting themselves - are entitled to support from BOTH spouses.
Fifth, let's just disregard the statement "city hall lang at lawyer ang kasama dyan" because, as mentioned earlier, both the granting of annulment and the granting of divorce are judicial declarations... they need to go through judicial processes.
Now, back to the original question... which is actually a very good one...
What's the difference between annulment and divorce?Pardon this long answer, but there is no way of shortening it.
Currently, there are 3 ways by which a marriage can be terminated in the Philippines. These are:
1. Via a judicial declaration of ABSOLUTE NULLITY, which is based on the grounds provided by Articles 35, 36, 37 and 38 (and as a matter of procedure, Article 53 as well) of the Family code;
2. Via a judicial declaration of ANNULMENT, which is based on the grounds provided by Article 45 (paragraph 3 thereof should be read with Article 46) of the Family Code.
3. Death of one of the spouses.
For the sake of answering the question, let's just group ABSOLUTE NULLITY and ANNULMENT together, shall we? Di man sila pareho, e pwede naman silang "magkakampi" kumbaga, sa mga usapan tungkol sa necessity ng diborsyo.
Okay lang?
As it currently stands, the grounds for the termination of marriage are EXCLUSIVE. Ano ibig sabihin nito? Yung mga rason lang na sinasabi sa batas (articles 35, 36, 37, 38, 46 and 53 of the Family Code) ang pwedeng kilalanin ng korte para tapusin ang pagsasamahan ng mag-asawa.
So, when a wifee goes to court and seeks an annulment based on the ground "kasi nambabae sya e," the court will not be able to let such a case prosper. Why? It's because infidelity, per se, is not really a ground for dissolving the marriage.
(For the obsessive/compulsive lawyer or law student, he/she would probably say that pathological infidelity can be used as a manifestation of Psychological Incapacity which can be the basis for a petition for Absolute Nullity, but c'mon, let's keep things simple for now.
)
When a couple goes to court and seeks an annulment based on the ground "di kasi kami magkasundo kahit anong gawin namin," the court will immediately junk the petition because such is not a valid ground provided by law.
When a couple goes to court and seeks an annulment based on the ground that both spouses have been physically separated from each other for 10, 20, 30 or even a hundred years, the court will still find no merit on the petition because physical separation, PER SE, is not a ground provided by law.
So, ano ba problema ng Annulment at Absolute Nullity ngayon? Basically, masyadong kaunti ang grounds na pwedeng gamitin para ma-terminate ang isang kasal. Marami ring nagsasabi na ang exclusivity ng mga grounds na ito ay napagiwanan na ng panahon at kailangan nang dagdagan.
THIS is what divorce aims to do... add to the grounds by which marriage can be terminated.
As it stands, the proposed Divorce Law will add 5 new grounds for the termination of a marriage. These are:
1. Physical separation of at least 5 years.
2. Legal separation of at least 2 years.
3. When the grounds for legal separation (currently Article 55 of the Family Code) cause irreparable breakdown of the marriage.
4. When either or both parties are psychologically incapacitated (this will repeal Art. 36 of the Family Code).
5. When the couple suffers irreconcilable differences that result in the irreparable breakdown of the marriage.
The proposed Divorce Law provides grounds that are too open for interpretation, particularly the fifth proposed ground. Irreconcilable differences can mean anything. It can mean a wife who doesn't approve of her husband's fondness for action figures. It can mean a husband who thinks that his wife spends more time in front of the mirror than in the bed. It can mean a wife who feels that his husband's driving is too reckless for her own safety. If any of these shallow reasons will appear to be irreconcilable, and escalate into issues that will cause the irreparable breakdown of the marriage, then ALAS, divorce can be granted.
So...
In a nutshell...
What's the difference between annulment/absolute nullity and divorce?
With annulment/absolute nullity, you can only use specific grounds to terminate the marriage. With divorce, as the proposed bill currently stands, you can practically use any ground to terminate the marriage for as long as such a ground causes irreparable breakdown to the marital union.
Costs will just be the same. You will still retain a lawyer. You will still need a psychologist, if Psychological Incapacity is used as a ground. You will still pay docket fees. You will still pay attorney's fees. You may still be required to hire a private investigator. Pareho lang ang projected na gastos... walang maiiba.
The effects will also be the same. Marital union terminated. Property regime dissolved. Appropriate shares distributed. Presumptive legitimes of the common children secured. Former wife can use her maiden name. Legitimate children will remain legitimate. Nothing will change.
At the very heart of the matter... the proposed divorce law will just expand the grounds for the termination of the marriage.
-----
Since everyone's contributing their say on the matter, please allow me to provide mine.
I am not in favor of Divorce.
Why?
Because it is redundant. Any lawyer - or any law student for that matter - who paid attention to his/her teacher in Persons and Family Relations, a first year first sem subject, will know that Article 36 of the Family Code - the one about Psychological Incapacity - is already a loose way of providing for divorce in the Philippines.
If you can't end a marriage based on this ground, you don't need a divorce law.
You just need a better lawyer.