Imelda Marbella-Bobis (petitioner), vs. Isagani D.

Bobis (respondent)

Facts: Respondent was married to the petitioner on January 25, 1996. Unknown to the petitioner, her other half has contracted his first marriage with a Maria Dulce B. Javier on October 21, 1985 and has not been nullified. The respondent once again entered into marriage with a certain Julia Sally Hernandez. A case of bigamy was filed against the respondent on the Quezon City Regional Trial Court, consequently he initiated a civil action for the judicial declaration of his first marriage on the ground that it was celebrated without a license. Respondent has filed a motion to suspend the trial and has been granted. Petitioner filed for a motion for reconsideration but has been denied.

ISSUE: Whether or not the subsequent declaration of nullity of a previous marriage constitutes a question to a criminal case for bigamy RULING No, respondents subsequent declaration of nullity of a previous marriage constitutes a question to a criminal case for bigamy. During the time when he contracted his second marriage, he was considered already considered as a married man even if it was a marriage without a marriage license. Article 40 of the Family Code, which has already been promulgateSd on his second marriage, requires a prior judicial declaration of nullity of a previous marriage before the respondent could have married for the second time. Whether or not the first marriage was void for lack of a license is a matter of defense because there is still no declaration of its nullity at the time the second marriage was contracted. It is not for the parties, especially the accused to determine if his first marriage was null or void, but of a court. The respondents clear intent is to obtain a judicial declaration of nullity of his first marriage in order to escape the bigamy charge by simply claiming that the first marriage is void and that the subsequent marriage is also void due to the absence of judicial declaration of nullity of the first. Thus, the decision in the civil action has been reversed and may proceed with the criminal case.