G.R. No. L-5877 Case Digest

G.R. No. L-5877, September 28, 1954

People of the Philippines

vs Arturo Mendoza

Ponente: Paras

Facts:

August 1936, Jovita de Asis and Arturo Mendoza got married in Marikina. During their marriage, Arturo was marred to Olga Lema in Manila. When Jovita died, Arturo contracted another marriage with Carmencita Panlillio in Laguna. This last marriage gave rise to his prosecution for bigamy.

Arturo contends that his marriage with Lema is null and void, therefore non-existent at the time he married Jovita. Then his 3rd marriage was valid also because it occurred after the death of Jovita.

Solicitor General argues that, even assuming that Arturo's marriage to Lema is void, he is not exempt from criminal liability in the absence of judicial annulment of said bigamous marriage.

Ruling:

 it is admitted that appellant's second marriage with Olga Lema was contracted during the existence of his first marriage with Jovita de Asis. Section 29 of the marriage law (act 3613), in force at the time the appellant contracted his second marriage in 1941, provides as follows:

Illegal marriages. — Any marriage subsequently contracted by any person during the lifetime of the first spouse of such person with any person other than such first spouse shall be illegal and void from its performance, unless:

(a) The first marriage was annulled or dissolved;

(b) The first spouse had been absent for seven consecutive years at the time of the second marriage without the spouse present having news of the absentee being alive, or the absentee being generally considered as dead and believed to be so by the spouse present at the time of contracting such subsequent marriage, the marriage so contracted being valid in either case until declared null and void by a competent court.

This statutory provision plainly makes a subsequent marriage contracted by any person during the lifetime of his first spouse illegal and void from its performance, and no judicial decree is necessary to establish its invalidity, as distinguished from mere annullable marriages. There is here no pretence that appellant's second marriage with Olga Lema was contracted in the belief that the first spouse, Jovita de Asis, has been absent for seven consecutive years or generally considered as dead, so as to render said marriage valid until declared null and void by a competent court.

Wherefore, the appealed judgment is reversed and the defendant-appellant acquitted, with costs de officio so ordered.