The Supreme Courtroom (SC) has dominated {that a} partner who knowingly entered a bigamous marriage has “no authorized standing” to hunt its nullity.
It emphasizes that “solely the aggrieved or harmless” partner can petition the courtroom to void such a union.
In a determination launched on February 14, the SC En Banc denied a Filipina’s petition to nullify her second marriage, affirming the rulings of the Regional Trial Courtroom and the Courtroom of Appeals.
The Excessive Courtroom stated that she couldn’t use bigamy as a foundation to dissolve her marriage when she willingly entered into it.
“The social gathering who contracted the illicit subsequent marriage can’t be permitted to invoke its bigamous nature to nullify the identical,” the SC said. “[B]igamy might be handled by the erring partner as a matter of comfort.”
READ:
Why the Philippines wants divorce, in keeping with Cebu legal professionals
In Cebu, 122k signal Catholic church marketing campaign vs divorce
Divorce and annulment within the Philippines: An explainer
Case Background
Courtroom data confirmed that the petitioner first married a Chinese language nationwide in Hong Kong and the Philippines. Whereas working as a financial institution teller in Hong Kong, she had an affair with a Filipino shopper, resigned from her job, and returned to the Philippines upon turning into pregnant together with his baby. She later married him within the nation, they usually had two kids collectively.
Her first husband later obtained a divorce in Hong Kong, which a Parañaque courtroom acknowledged, successfully dissolving their marriage.
Fourteen years after separating from her second husband, she filed a petition searching for to nullify their marriage, arguing that it was void from the start on account of bigamy. She additionally sought permission to remarry.
Nonetheless, each the trial and appellate courts dismissed her petition, ruling that she had no authorized proper to problem the validity of a wedding she knowingly entered into.
SC ruling: No authorized standing for the ‘responsible’ partner
Earlier than the SC, the petitioner insisted that since her first marriage had already been dissolved, she alone had the fitting to hunt nullity of her second marriage.
She additional argued that as a result of the second marriage was void from the beginning, the SC had no selection however to declare it null.
The Excessive Courtroom rejected her claims, citing Article 35(4) of the Household Code, which states that bigamous marriages—these contracted whereas a partner continues to be legally married—are void from the start.
Nonetheless, the SC clarified that solely the aggrieved or harmless partner from both the primary or second marriage has the fitting to hunt nullity.
On this case, the petitioner’s first husband may have challenged the validity of the second marriage, however he misplaced that proper after acquiring a divorce. The petitioner, being the responsible partner, can not invoke bigamy for her personal profit.
“The aim of nullifying a bigamous marriage is to guard an current authorized union—to not terminate it,” the SC defined. “For the reason that petitioner’s first marriage had already been dissolved, there isn’t a authorized union left to safeguard.”
The Courtroom additionally famous that the petitioner benefited from the second marriage for 14 years earlier than submitting the petition—to not uphold her first marriage, which not existed, however to realize the fitting to remarry.
“This can’t be allowed,” the SC dominated. “In any other case, it’ll give rise to a ridiculous state of affairs the place bigamy might be handled as a mere technicality to be invoked on the comfort of the erring partner.”
SC: Bigamous marriage stays void, however responsible partner can not search nullity
Whereas the Excessive Courtroom upheld the denial of the petition, it clarified that its ruling doesn’t validate the bigamous marriage.
“The wedding stays void even and not using a courtroom declaration for all different authorized functions,” the SC said, citing points such because the legitimacy of kids, inheritance rights, and authorized succession.
The responsible partner, it added, should face civil and prison legal responsibility for bigamy.
Learn Subsequent
Disclaimer: The feedback uploaded on this website don’t essentially signify or mirror the views of administration and proprietor of Cebudailynews. We reserve the fitting to exclude feedback that we deem to be inconsistent with our editorial requirements.
