When you look at the 1990, Lucia returned on the Philippines and recommended so you can petition appellant to join their when you look at the Canada

When you look at the 1990, Lucia returned on the Philippines and recommended so you can petition appellant to join their when you look at the Canada

MORIGO Against. Some body

FACTS: Each other 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 recorded into Ontario Court (General Division) a petition to own split up facing appellant that has been provided by 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.

On September 21, 1993, accused submitted a problem having judicial report away from nullity out of marriage about Local Trial Courtroom away from Bohol, docketed as Civil Situation No. 6020. Brand new grievance look for (sic) and others, the declaration out-of nullity away from accused’s marriage having Lucia, on to the floor one zero wedding indeed happened.

ISSUE: Obtained Morigo must have registered statement to the nullity out-of their relationships with Barrete before their next y instance.

RATIO: Underneath the concept off retroactivity out-of a marriage being announced gap ab initio, both was indeed never ever partnered right from the start. The latest offer of matrimony are null; it bears no court effect. Delivering that it disagreement to the analytical achievement, getting court intentions, petitioner was not hitched so you’re able to Lucia during the time he contracted the wedding which have Maria Jececha. The latest life therefore the legitimacy of one’s very first marriage becoming a keen essential section of the latest offense how to hookup in Tulsa regarding bigamy, it’s however, analytical you to a conviction for said crime try not to feel suffered in which there is absolutely no first wedding to dicuss out of. The fresh new petitioner, need certainly to, perforce getting acquitted of quick 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:

A judicial report of nullity away from a past matrimony needs prior to a consequent one could be legally developed. It principle can be applied even when the earlier union is actually described as regulations since gap.

They carries stressing in the event one to in Mercado, the first matrimony ended up being solemnized not only just after, but double: earliest just before a court in which a marriage certification try duly provided and once more half a year after before a great priest into the religious rites. Fundamentally, at least, the first wedding appeared to provides took place, regardless if after announced void abdominal initio.

Individual that adopts a following matrimony in the place of basic getting for example official y

From the immediate case, however, no wedding service anyway was performed by the a properly subscribed solemnizing administrator. Petitioner and you can Lucia Barrete just finalized a married relationship contract on their very own. The fresh mere personal work of signing a marriage bargain contains no semblance to a legitimate wedding which means that, demands no official report away from nullity. Like act by yourself, instead of way more, can not be deemed to help you make up an evidently legitimate wedding which petitioner might be kept responsible for bigamy unless of course the guy basic secures a judicial declaration off nullity ahead of the guy agreements a following marriage.

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. In situations of your own introduce circumstances, we held that 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.

Leave a Reply