Iwasawa v.

Custodio
Facts:
Petitioner is a Japanese National who went to visit the Philippines. On his visit he
met private respondent. Private respondent represented herself to be single and
that she have never contracted marriage before. Petitioner left the Philippines, upon
his return, he married private respondent (2002) and since then resided in Japan.
Sometime in 2009, petitioner noticed that something was bothering private
respondent. It was then that he learned, upon confronting private respondent, that
her prior husband died.
This fact, led petitioner to file a petition for the declaration of nullity of his marriage
to private respondent. Petitioner presented the following evidences,
1. Entry in the civil registrar of Petitioners marriage to private respondent
2. Entry in the civil registrar of Private respondents marriage to her prior
husband
3. Death Certificate of private respondents prior husband
4. NSO certification that there are two entries of marriage involving private
respondent.
RTC ruled to dismiss petition.
The Court held that it cannot give credence to the evidences presented as they
were self serving. It was only petitioner who testified as to the fact of the evidences.
The Court held that petitioner is not in the position to testify on the facts contended
by the evidences as he has no personal knowledge of such facts. The testimony
required is that of the custodian of such records who possess personal knowledge as
to the fact of such records.
ISSUE: W/N the testimony of the record custodians is required for the lower court to
give credence to the evidences presented
Ruling:
The Court Held to Grant the Petition setting aside the decision of the lower court.
The Court Held that As public documents, they are admissible in evidence even
without further proof of their due execution and genuineness. Thus, the RTC erred
when it disregarded said documents on the sole ground that the petitioner did not
present the records custodian of the NSO who issued them to testify on their
authenticity and due execution since proof of authenticity and due execution was
not anymore necessary. Moreover, not only are said documents admissible, they
deserve to be given evidentiary weight because they constitute prima facie
evidence of the facts stated therein. And in the instant case, the facts stated therein
remain unrebutted since neither the private respondent nor the public prosecutor
presented evidence to the contrary.
The Court cited the provision of the Civil Code

ART. 410. The books making up the civil register and all documents relating thereto
shall be considered public documents and shall be prima facie evidence of the facts
therein contained.