Rolando Landicho vs Hon Relova

GR no. L-22579 (Feb 23, 1968)

Facts:
Landicho was charged with bigamy by his first wife Makatangay for allegedly contracting a second marriage
with Pasia. Pasia filed a petition for declaration of nullity of her marriage with Landicho on grounds of his alleged
use of force, threats, and intimidation, and for its bigamous character. Landicho thereafter filed a third-party
complaint against Makatangay seeking to have his marriage with her declared null and void on grounds of her
allegedly employing threats, force, and intimidation.
Landicho then moved to suspend the hearing of the criminal case pending the hearing of both annulment
suits. Issue raised as to whether or not those suits constitute a prejudicial question.

Held:
The court ruled in the negative. Supposing the first marriage really was null, said nullity must still be
declared so that the marriage can be held as void. “He who contracts a second marriage before the judicial
declaration of nullity of the first marriage incurs the penalty provided for...” Parties should not be allowed to judge
the nullity of a marriage by themselves.
[As to the petition of the second wife, supposing that the second marriage was declared null, it would still
have no bearing on the resolution of the case because Landicho cannot be allowed to use his own misdeed to defend
himself.]
A prejudicial question is (1) that which arises in a case, the resolution of which is a logical antecedent of the
issue involved therein, and (2) the cognizance of which pertains to another tribunal.