Sei sulla pagina 1di 2

NOLLORA v PEOPLE GR No.

1911425 07 September 2011


Topic: Validity of Marriage, Bigamous Marriage

FACTS:
Atilano Nollora Jr a was married to Jesus Nollora. Their marriage was still
subsisting when he contracted a 2nd marriage with Rowena Geraldino, who is herself
aware of his marriage with Jesusa Nollora but still agreed and contracted marriage with
him. Accused Atilano O. Nollora, Jr. admitted having contracted two (2) marriages, the
first with private complainant Jesusa Pinat Nollora and the second with Rowena P.
Geraldino. He, however, claimed that he was a Muslim convert, even before he
contracted the first marriage with the private complainant.

ISSUE:
Whether or not the 2nd marriage is bigamous and void ab initio.

RULING :
Yes. Under Art 349 of the RPC, the marriage is bigamous and pursuant to Art 35
of the Family Code, it is void ab initio. Nollora’s religious affiliation is inapplicable here.
Neither of his marriages were solemnized under the Muslim Law. The SC ruled that his
two marriages were not conducted according to the Code of Muslim. Hence, his religious
affiliation may not be used as a defense.

The Court Of Appeals deny the petition. Petitioner Atilano O. Nollora, Jr. is guilty
beyond reasonable doubt of Bigamy in Criminal Case No. Q-04-129031 and is sentenced
to suffer the penalty of imprisonment with a term of two years, four months and one day
of prision correccional as minimum to eight years and one day of prision mayor as
maximum of his indeterminate sentence, as well as the accessory penalties provided by
law.

Article 13(2) of the Code of Muslim Personal Laws states that "[i]n case of a
marriage between a Muslim and a non-Muslim, solemnized not in accordance with
Muslim law or this Code, the [Family Code of the Philippines, or Executive Order
No. 209, in lieu of the Civil Code of the Philippines] shall apply." Nollora’s religious
affiliation is not an issue here. Neither is the claim that Nollora’s marriages were
solemnized according to Muslim law. Thus, regardless of his professed religion, Nollora
cannot claim exemption from liability for the crime of bigamy.

Art. 41. A marriage contracted by any person during the subsistence of a previous
marriage shall be null and void, unless before the celebration of the subsequent marriage,
the prior spouse had been absent for four consecutive years and the spouse present had
a well-founded belief that the absent spouse was already dead. In case of disappearance
where there is danger of death under the circumstances set forth in the provisions of
Article 391 of the Civil Code, an absence of only two years shall be sufficient.
For the purpose of contracting the subsequent marriage under the preceding paragraph,
the spouse present must institute a summary proceeding as provided in this Code for the
declaration of presumptive death of the absentee, without prejudice to the effect of
reappearance of the absent spouse.

Potrebbero piacerti anche