- November 11, 2022
- Posted by: admin
- Category: Filipino Dating visitors
MORIGO Versus. Anybody
FACTS: One another wanted to wed, thus they were married on August 30, 1990 at the Iglesia de Filipina Nacionalat Catagdaan, Pilar, Bohol.
On August 19, 1991, Lucia registered towards the Ontario Judge (Standard Section) a good petition to possess divorce proceedings facing appellant which was offered by the court on January 17, 1992 and to take effect on February 17, 1992.
On October 4, 1992, appellant Lucio Morigo partnered Maria Jececha Lumbago at the Virgen sa Barangay Parish, Tagbilaran City, Bohol.
Providing this dispute so you can their analytical achievement, to possess judge objectives, petitioner was not hitched to Lucia at that time the guy developed the wedding which have Maria Jececha
On September 21, 1993, implicated filed an ailment to possess official statement from nullity out of wedding in the Regional Trial Judge away from Bohol, docketed because Civil Circumstances Zero. 6020. Brand new criticism seek (sic) among others, the newest statement away from nullity out-of accused’s relationships having Lucia, on to the ground you to zero wedding service in fact taken place.
ISSUE: Acquired Morigo should have submitted declaration on the nullity out of their matrimony with Barrete before his next y case.
RATIO: Beneath the idea from retroactivity away from a marriage are announced void ab initio, the 2 were never partnered from the beginning. The newest offer away from wedding are null; they holds zero judge effect. The fresh existence together with validity of basic relationships being an enthusiastic essential element of brand new crime off bigamy, it’s but logical one a conviction getting told you offense dont getting suffered in which there isn’t any basic matrimony to dicuss away from. The fresh petitioner, must, perforce getting acquitted of your immediate charge.
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:
An official statement from nullity out of a previous wedding needs ahead of a subsequent one could getting legally developed. Individual who goes into a following wedding as opposed to basic obtaining such judicial y. That it concept applies even when the prior to partnership is actually characterized by guidelines as gap.
They holds stressing even when that in the Negocio, the first marriage got solemnized not only shortly after, but double: very first before a judge in which a married relationship certificate was properly approved then once again 6 months afterwards in advance of an excellent priest during the spiritual rites. Fundamentally, about, the initial relationships did actually enjoys transpired, though later on declared void ab initio.
On quick circumstances, although not, no wedding at all try performed from the a properly licensed solemnizing administrator. Petitioner and Lucia Barrete merely closed a wedding offer on their own. New simple personal operate away from finalizing a wedding price bears no semblance so you can a valid relationship and thus, requires no official report of nullity. Like act by yourself, instead of a great deal more, can not be deemed in order to form an evidently valid relationship for which petitioner would-be held liable for bigamy unless of course the guy first protects an official declaration of nullity before he contracts a consequent matrimony 
.
The law abhors an injustice and the Court is mandated to liberally construe a penal statute in favor of an accused and weigh every circumstance in favor of the presumption of innocence to ensure that justice is done. Beneath the affairs of expose case, we stored you to definitely petitioner has never enough 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.