Marriage | Retroactivity Principle | Vested Rights

Bar Question No. 3 | CIVIL LAW | Bar 2023

“[P]ersons intending to contract a second marriage must first secure a judicial declaration of nullity of their first marriage. If they proceed with the second marriage without the judicial declaration, they are guilty of bigamy regardless of evidence of the nullity of the first marriage.” (Vitangcol v. People, 780 SCRA 598, 600 [2016]).

This holding was 𝗮𝗯𝗮𝗻𝗱𝗼𝗻𝗲𝗱 in the recent case of 𝗣𝘂𝗹𝗶𝗱𝗼 𝘃𝘀. 𝗣𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲, G.R. No. 220149, 27 July 2021. There, the Supreme Court en banc exonerated the accused from criminal liability for bigamy when during the pendency of the bigamy case, a judicial declaration of nullity of his first marriage was entered.

The Court stated that for bigamy to arise, there must have been a 𝗽𝗿𝗶𝗼𝗿 𝘃𝗮𝗹𝗶𝗱 𝗺𝗮𝗿𝗿𝗶𝗮𝗴𝗲. That the "judicial declaration of nullity" was obtained 𝗮𝗳𝘁𝗲𝗿 the accused had contracted the second marriage 𝗱𝗶𝗱 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗺𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿 because a void marriage is inexistent from the very beginning.

The Court held that the requirement of a "prior judicial declaration of nullity" under 𝗔𝗿𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗹𝗲 40 of the Family Code, which is for purposes of remarriage, 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗹𝘆 to a criminal case for bigamy.

Excerpt from the "New Doctrine on Bigamy: Pulido v. People" by Manny Riguera

Continue reading here:

🔗 https://pastepeso.com/447uzj

TAKE NOTE:

The Antecedents.

Here, ..."Pulido's first marriage with Arcon was contracted in [1983 or before] the effectivity of the Family Code [while] his second marriage with Baleda was celebrated in 1995, [during the effectivity] of the said law.

Pulido assails the retroactive application of Article 40 of the Family Code on his case which requires him to obtain a judicial declaration of absolute nullity before he can contract another marriage."

"When the [prior marriage] was contracted [prior to] the effectivity of the Family Code while the subsequent marriage was contracted [during the effectivity] of the said law, we recognize the retroactive application of Article 40 of the Family Code but only insofar as it does not prejudice or impair vested or acquired rights." (Emphasis supplied).

Continue reading:

🔗 https://pste.link/svllrg3t

(Part 8) En Banc Cases Penned by Justice Hernando; Pulido v. People [ G.R. No. 220149, July 27, 2021 ]

Full text of the case:

https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2021/jul2021/gr_220149_2021.html

FOLLOW US!

📎 Bio

🛒 Shop

⚖️ Blog 

🤝 Business