Practice question
A woman proves in a proper adversarial Rule 108 proceeding that another person used her identity and forged her signature in a marriage record. The parties had an opportunity to contest the evidence, and overwhelming proof shows she never entered that marriage. An objector says Olaybar requires her to annul an actual marriage she never contracted. Which is correct?
- Olaybar distinguishes correcting that false record from declaring an actual marriage void.
- Olaybar requires treating every forged record as a genuine marriage.
- A bare denial alone always proves forgery.
- The woman may erase any other person's genuine marriage at will.
- All adversarial safeguards become unnecessary in forgery cases.
Legal references
- Braza v. City Civil Registrar of Himamaylan City, G.R.181174, December4 2009, main decision; https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2009/dec2009/gr_181174_2009.html
- Republic v. Olaybar, G.R.189538, February10 2014, main decision; https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/feb2014/gr_189538_2014.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.