MORIGO Versus. Anyone
FACTS: Both agreed to wed, thus they were married on August 30, 1990 at the Iglesia de Filipina Nacionalat Catagdaan, Pilar, Bohol.
On August 19, 1991, Lucia recorded towards Ontario Judge (Standard Department) a good petition getting separation and divorce facing appellant which was offered of the courtroom on January 17, 1992 and to take effect on February 17, 1992.
On October 4, 1992, appellant Lucio Morigo married Maria Jececha Lumbago at the Virgen sa Barangay Parish, Tagbilaran City, Bohol.
Delivering this argument so you’re able to their analytical end, having legal purposes, petitioner wasn’t married so you’re able to Lucia during the time he contracted the marriage with Maria Jececha
On September 21, 1993, implicated registered an issue for judicial report away from nullity away from wedding regarding Local Demo Legal out of Bohol, docketed just like the Municipal Circumstances No. 6020. The fresh new criticism search (sic) and others, the statement regarding nullity regarding accused’s relationships having Lucia, on the ground you to no wedding party indeed took place.
ISSUE: Won Morigo should have submitted statement into nullity regarding his marriage with Barrete before his next y case.
RATIO: According to the principle out of retroactivity out of a wedding getting proclaimed void abdominal initio, the 2 was basically never hitched right away. The fresh new deal away from wedding is null; they bears zero court feeling. New existence therefore the legitimacy of one’s earliest wedding being a keen important section of this new offense out of bigamy, it’s but logical one to a belief to have said crime don’t feel sustained where there is no basic relationships to speak out of. The new petitioner, need to, perforce getting acquitted of one’s instantaneous 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 report out of nullity away from a past wedding needs prior to a following one could become legally contracted. One who gets into a subsequent relationships as opposed to basic want Biracial dating app review getting such as for example judicial y. That it principle is applicable even if the prior to union was characterized by regulations as gap.
It holds worrying although one inside Mercado, the initial relationship ended up being solemnized not just shortly after, but double: first just before a judge where a married relationship certificate is duly issued immediately after which once more 6 months afterwards just before a great priest inside the religious rites. Evidently, at the very least, the initial marriage seemed to has actually took place, even though later announced gap ab initio.
Throughout the quick situation, not, no wedding service at all is did by the a duly authorized solemnizing administrator. Petitioner and Lucia Barrete only closed a marriage price to their very own. The fresh new simple private act from finalizing a wedding package carries zero semblance to a legitimate marriage for example, requires zero judicial report away from nullity. Such as for example operate alone, instead of even more, can not be considered so you can make-up an ostensibly valid matrimony where petitioner would-be held responsible for bigamy until the guy very first protects a judicial report off nullity prior to he agreements a following wedding.
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. Under the affairs of your own present case, i held you to definitely petitioner hasn’t committed 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.