The concept of relevance (pertinencia) refers to evidence being offered or ordered by the court on its own motion (ordenada de oficio) to prove facts that are material and directly related to the claim. For example, in a divorce proceeding where only the ground of de facto separation is invoked, it is not relevant to hear the testimony of a witness offered to refer to the fact that one of the spouses has violated the duty of fidelity.
Finally, the concept of timeliness (oportunidad) relates to the principle of procedural fairness (lealtad procesal), according to which there must be sufficient transparency so that the parties know, before they are presented (evacuación), which evidence was offered, which was admitted, which was ordered on the court's own motion (ordenadas de oficio), and which was rejected.
A case such as this one exemplifies the importance of what has just been set forth: The Office of the Attorney General (Procuraduría General de la República) offered as documentary evidence -among other things- the statement given by Mrs. [Name 001] before the Acting Head (Jefa a.i.) of the Local Office (Oficina Local) of Heredia of the Civil Registry (Registro Civil). The trial court (Juzgado de primera instancia) did not indicate whether it admitted or rejected the evidence, thereby evading the obligation to examine its relevance (pertinencia) and its lawfulness, and at the same time, the parties were prevented from exercising the corresponding remedies. However, that evidence was weighed in the judgment, concluding that it was not \"sufficient\" because it had not been possible to subject it to cross-examination (contradictorio). The first thing that must be defined is whether the evidence is admitted or rejected. And if it is admitted, the proper course is to analyze it in the judgment, together with the other evidence that has been ordered to be received, at the request of a party or on the court's own motion (de oficio).
VIII. As can be seen, there was confusion in determining the object of this proceeding. The claim (demanda) filed by Attorney (Procuradora) Marcela Ramírez Jara contains a clear claim (pretensión) for a declaration of non-existence of the marriage (f.35), but, without the facts or the claim (pretensión) having been expanded, the same Attorney introduced the concept of \"simulated marriage\" when she responded during the hearing granted for her to address the opposition raised by the defendant's guardian ad litem (curadora procesal) [Name 005]. (fs. 68 and 69) Later, when the judgment was appealed, Attorney (Procurador) Esteban Alvarado Quesada stated that this had been a material error. (f.83) However, upon appearing before this instance, another Attorney (Procurador), Licenciado Guillermo Fernández Lizano, stated that the marriage is indeed simulated, because it is non-existent. (f.124)
The Court (Tribunal) deems it necessary to clarify that the claim (demanda) is for the declaration of the non-existence of the marriage. It is not for the declaration of relative nullity due to some defect of consent (vicio de consentimiento), nor is it for the declaration of nullity of the marriage due to simulation. As stated before, neither the facts nor the claim (pretensión) were expanded, and therefore the factual framework and the claim were limited to what was set forth and what was requested in the claim (demanda).
It is also necessary for the Office of the Attorney General (Procuraduría General de la República) to clarify whether the claim (demanda) was filed against Mrs. [Name 001], given that she was, rather, the person who requested that the Civil Registry process the annulment of the marriage registration and the correction of the birth records of her daughters and son. In such a circumstance, it would appear that Mrs. [Name 001] -who is not a legal professional- could be joined as an active co-party (litis consorte activa) or as an intervening adhering party (interventora adhesiva). This may have significant implications, because, potentially, Mrs. [Name 001] could testify as a witness or as a party. If the Office of the Attorney General (Procuraduría) considers that she must remain as a defendant, it will please state the corresponding reasons so that the judgment can adequately analyze the issue of passive legal standing (legitimación pasiva).
It is also required that the trial court authority, in exercise of its responsibility in discovering the truth of the facts because a matter of public interest is being determined, order on its own motion (ordene de oficio) the evidence it deems relevant and also rule expressly on the documents offered by the plaintiff in the claim (demanda), indicating which ones it admits and/or which ones it rejects. The observation is respectfully made that the judgment mentioned that the statement given by Mrs. [Name 001] in the administrative venue could not be subjected to cross-examination (contradictorio), so that eventually this evidence, whose absence the Trial Judge (Juzgadora) noted, could be ordered on the court's own motion (de oficio); and, since what was stated in the claim (demanda) is that Mrs. [Name 001] did not express her consent to marry, it might perhaps be relevant to order a forensic handwriting examination (examen grafoscópico) of the signature that may appear on the public deed.
For the reasons explained in detail, the decision of this Court is to annul the judgment and, furthermore, everything done and decided from the resolution issued at one fourteen p.m. on August twenty-six, two thousand fourteen, in which Mrs. [Name 001] was included in the procedural position of defendant. The declared nullity does not include the transfer of the claim (traslado de la demanda) against Mr. [Name 005], nor the appointment of Licenciada Karla Vanessa López Silva as his guardian ad litem (curadora procesal), nor the acceptance and corresponding response to the claim (contestación de demanda) filed by the said guardian ad litem. These pieces remain valid in application of the principle of preservation of procedural acts (principio de conservación de los actos procesales).”