Case Doctrine:
● Philippine Law does not recognize common law marriages. A man and woman not legally married who cohabit for many years as husband and wife, who represent themselves to the public as husband and wife, and who are reputed to be husband and wife in the community where they live may be considered legally married in common law jurisdictions but not in the Philippines
Facts: Vitaliana died on August 28, 1988. Unaware of Vitaliana's death, her brothers and sisters filed a petition for Habeas Corpus on September 27, 1988 before the RTC of Misamis Oriental, alleging that she was forcible taken from her residence sometime in 1987 and was confined by Tomas in his palacial residence in Jasaan, Misamis Oriental. The trial court issued the writ of habeas corpus, but the writ was returned unsatisfied. Tomas refused to surrender the body of Vitaliana to the sheriff, reasoning that a corpse cannot be the subject of habeas corpus proceedings and besides, he had already obtained a burial permit. Tomas claims that as her common law husband, he has legal custody of her body. The RTC treated the action for custody of a dead body and awarded the custody of Vitaliana's body to her brothers and sisters.

Issue: Whether or not the RTC was correct in its ruling.

Held: The custody of the dead body of Vitaliana was correctly awarded to the surviving brothers and sisters. Section 1103 of the Revised Administrative Code which provides:
      
“Persons charged with duty of burial - if the deceased was an unmarried man or woman or a child and left any kin; the duty of the burial shall devolve upon the nearest kin of the deceased. 

Philippine Law does not recognize common law marriages. A man and woman not legally married who cohabit for many years as husband and wife, who represent themselves to the public as husband and wife, and who are reputed to be husband and wife in the community where they live may be considered legally married in common law jurisdictions but not in the Philippines.

While it is true that our laws do not just brush aside the fact that such relationships are present in our society, and that they produce a community of properties and interests which is governed by law, authority exists in case law to the effect that such form of co-ownership requires that the man and woman living together must not in any way be incapacitated to contract marriage. In any case, Tomas has a subsisting marriage with another woman, a legal impediment which disqualified him from even legally marrying Vitaliana. (Eugenio vs Velez, G.R. No. 85140, May 17, 1990).