MORIGO Vs. Anyone
FACTS: Both offered to get married, 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 (General Department) a great petition to own split up up against appellant that has been offered because of the judge 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.
On September 21, 1993, implicated recorded a grievance having judicial statement of nullity regarding marriage regarding Regional Demonstration Judge off Bohol, docketed since the Municipal Instance Zero. 6020. New complaint search (sic) among others, the latest report out of nullity of accused’s relationships having Lucia, on to the floor one zero wedding party actually taken place.
ISSUE: Claimed Morigo must have recorded declaration into the nullity out-of their relationships having Barrete prior to their next y situation.
RATIO: Under the idea away from retroactivity from a married relationship getting announced gap ab initio, the two were never ever partnered from the beginning. The latest bargain away from relationship are null; it carries zero judge impression. Taking it disagreement so you can their logical conclusion, to have court purposes, petitioner was not married to Lucia at that time he contracted the marriage that have Maria Jececha. The fresh lifetime while the validity of the basic wedding getting an enthusiastic extremely important section of the crime from bigamy, it’s however, analytical you to a www.datingranking.net/local-hookup/nottingham belief to possess told you crime cannot be suffered in which there isn’t any earliest marriage to dicuss from. New petitioner, need to, perforce feel acquitted of the instantaneous charges.
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 declaration out-of nullity regarding an earlier matrimony will become necessary before a consequent you can getting legitimately developed. It concept applies even if the prior to commitment try characterized by legislation as emptiness.
They holds worrying even though you to for the Negocio, the initial marriage was actually solemnized not merely just after, but double: very first prior to a legal in which a marriage certification are properly granted and once more half a year after prior to good priest from inside the religious rites. Basically, at least, the initial relationships seemed to possess took place, even when after stated void abdominal initio.
Individual who enters a following matrimony versus first acquiring like official y
In the quick circumstances, but not, zero wedding ceremony whatsoever try performed by a properly signed up solemnizing manager. Petitioner and Lucia Barrete merely closed a wedding bargain on the very own. New mere personal work out of finalizing a wedding deal contains no semblance so you’re able to a valid matrimony and therefore, demands no official report regarding nullity. Instance work by yourself, as opposed to a whole lot more, can’t be deemed in order to compensate an evidently good relationship in which petitioner will be kept accountable for bigamy until the guy first protects an official statement from nullity before he deals a following relationships.
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 points of the expose case, i held that petitioner has 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.