Inside the 1990, Lucia came back on Philippines and you can proposed so you can petition appellant to join the woman inside Canada

Inside the 1990, Lucia came back on Philippines and you can proposed so you can petition appellant to join the woman inside Canada

MORIGO Vs. Some one

FACTS: One another accessible 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 submitted on the Ontario Legal (General Division) a great petition having separation and divorce up against appellant that has been supplied by the judge 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.

On September 21, 1993, accused recorded a problem having judicial declaration off nullity of relationships in the Local Demo Court out of Bohol, docketed while the Municipal Circumstances Zero. 6020. The fresh complaint search (sic) among others, new report out of nullity of accused’s relationships that have Lucia, on to the floor you to definitely no marriage service actually occurred.

ISSUE: Acquired Morigo need filed statement towards nullity of their relationships which have Barrete ahead of their 2nd y case.

RATIO: In idea away from retroactivity regarding a wedding getting stated emptiness abdominal initio, the two was in fact never ever hitched right from the start. This new contract regarding relationship was null; they holds zero legal effect. Taking so it disagreement to their analytical completion, to have judge motives, petitioner wasn’t married so you can Lucia at that time the guy contracted the marriage having Maria Jececha. The life plus the authenticity of your basic matrimony are an enthusiastic very important section of the offense out of bigamy, it’s but analytical you to definitely a belief for said offense don’t getting sustained in which there isn’t any earliest relationships to speak out-of. This new petitioner, need, perforce getting acquitted of your own quick 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 out-of nullity out of a past relationship will become necessary just before a following one can be legitimately contracted. It concept enforce even when the before connection was described as legislation as the emptiness.

They bears stressing even if you to within the Negocio, the initial matrimony had been solemnized just immediately following, but twice: very first ahead of a court where a married relationship certification is properly provided then once again six months after ahead of an excellent priest when you look at the spiritual rites. Fundamentally, at the least, the lesbian hookup bars Memphis original matrimony appeared to have took place, whether or not afterwards announced gap abdominal initio.

Individual that adopts a consequent wedding versus earliest acquiring instance judicial y

About instantaneous instance, not, no wedding ceremony whatsoever was did by the a properly signed up solemnizing officer. Petitioner and you can Lucia Barrete simply closed a wedding contract on their very own. Brand new simple personal work out of finalizing a wedding deal holds no semblance so you’re able to a legitimate matrimony which means, need no official declaration out-of nullity. Like work alone, as opposed to way more, cannot be deemed in order to create a fundamentally valid relationships which petitioner might possibly be stored responsible for bigamy unless of course he basic protects an official statement away from nullity before he contracts a subsequent 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. Within the things of the establish instance, we held one petitioner has not yet the amount of 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.

Deja una respuesta