MORIGO Vs. Some body

FACTS: Each other accessible to wed, thus they were married on August 30, 1990 at the Iglesia de Filipina Nacionalat Catagdaan, Pilar, Bohol.

On August 19, 1991, Lucia submitted into the Ontario Legal (Standard Department) an excellent petition to own breakup facing appellant that has been provided of the court on January 17, 1992 and to take effect on February 17, 1992.

On October 4, 1992, appellant Lucio Morigo hitched Maria Jececha Lumbago at the Virgen sa Barangay Parish, Tagbilaran City, Bohol.

On September 21, 1993, accused filed a problem to possess judicial declaration regarding nullity of relationships from the Local Trial Legal off Bohol, docketed given that Civil Situation No. 6020. The fresh criticism seek (sic) among others, the brand new report off nullity from accused’s relationship with Lucia, on the ground you to definitely no wedding service indeed taken place.

ISSUE: Claimed Morigo have to have submitted declaration toward nullity away from their relationship which have Barrete just before their 2nd y instance.

RATIO: According to the concept out of retroactivity out of a married relationship becoming announced emptiness abdominal initio, the 2 have been never ever married right away. The newest bargain off marriage is null; it carries no judge impression. Providing it dispute in order to their analytical achievement, to have court objectives, petitioner was not partnered so you can Lucia at the time the guy contracted the marriage with Maria Jececha. The new life in addition to validity of your own very first relationship getting an crucial element of the brand new crime out-of bigamy, it is but analytical you to a conviction to have said crime usually do not become suffered where there is no first marriage to speak away from. The petitioner, need to, perforce end up being acquitted of immediate costs.

The present case is analogous to, but must be distinguished from Mercado v. Tan . . In the latter case, the judicial declaration of nullity of the first marriage was likewise obtained after the second marriage was already celebrated. We held therein that:

A judicial declaration of nullity out of an earlier matrimony is necessary just before a subsequent you can feel legally contracted. That it concept can be applied even when the earlier partnership was characterized by legislation because emptiness.

It contains stressing regardless of if that from inside the Mercado, the first matrimony was actually solemnized just shortly after, but twice: first prior to a legal where a married relationship certificate is actually duly issued after which once more 6 months afterwards in advance of a priest into the religious rites. Fundamentally, at least, the original relationship appeared to has actually transpired, even in the event later on declared gap abdominal initio.

Individual that switches into a following relationships without very first acquiring eg judicial y

Throughout the instantaneous case, although not, zero marriage service at all was did because of the a duly authorized solemnizing manager. Petitioner and you can Lucia Barrete simply finalized a married relationship price on their own. The fresh new mere private act away from signing a marriage contract carries zero semblance to a valid relationship and thus, need zero official declaration regarding nullity. Eg work by yourself, rather than alot more, can not be deemed so you’re able to create an ostensibly valid matrimony for which petitioner will be stored accountable for bigamy except if he basic protects a judicial report from nullity in advance of he deals a consequent relationships.

The law abhors an injustice and the Court is mandated to liberally construe a penal statute https://datingranking.net/local-hookup/philadelphia/ in favor of an accused and weigh every circumstance in favor of the presumption of innocence to ensure that justice is done. According to the things of your expose circumstances, we kept you to petitioner have not the time bigamy. Further, we also find that we need not tarry on the issue of the validity of his defense of good faith or lack of criminal intent, which is now moot and academic.