Sei sulla pagina 1di 1

Llave v.

Republic of the Philippines ISSUE:


March 30, 2011
WON the marriage of Estrellita and Tamano was bigamous
FACTS:
HELD: The petition is denied.
1. Around 11 months before the death of the late Sen. Tamano, he married
Estrellita twice. The first one is under the Islamic laws and tradition on
May 27, 1993 in Cotabato City and, afterwards, under a Civil rite RULING:
officiated by an RTC Judge at Malabang, Lanao Del Sur on June 2, 1993.
In their marriage contracts Sen. Tamano’s Civil status was indicated as The marriage between the late Sen. Tamano and Zorayda was conducted in
“Divorced”. 1958, solemnized under Civil and Muslim rites. The only law in force
governing the marriage between Muslims and Non-muslims was the Civil
Since then Estrellita has been representing herself to the whole world as Code of the Philippines of 1950, which does not provide for an absolute
Sen. Tamano’s wife, and upon his death, his widow. divorce.

2. On November 23, 1994 Private respondents Zorayda Tamano and her As far as Estrellita is concerned, Sen. Tamano’s prior marriage to Zorayda
son Adib Tamano, filed a complaint with the RTC of Quezon City for has been severed by way of divorce under P.D. 1083, the law that codified
the declaration of nullity of marriage between Estrellita and Sen. Tamano Muslim personal laws. However, P.D. 1083 cannot benefit Estrellita. Firstly,
for being bigamous. Article 13 (1) thereof provides that the law applies to “ marriage and divorce
wherein both parties are Muslims, or wherein only the male party is a muslim
3. It states that private petitioner Zorayda and the deceased were married and the marriage is solemnized in accordance with Muslim law or this code
when the New Civil Code was already in effect, hence, the marriage to in any part of the Philippines” but we already ruled in G.R. No. 126603 that
Estrellita is void ab initio since Divorce is not allowed under the New “Article 13 of PD 1083 does not provide for a situation where the parties were
Civil Code. Moreover, the deceased could not have divorced married both in civil and Muslim rites.
complainant Zorayda by invoking the provision of P.D. 1083, otherwise
known as the “Code of Muslim Personal laws”, for the reason that the Moreover, the Muslim code took effect only on February 4, 1977, and this
marriage of the deceased with complainant Zorayda was never deemed, law cannot retroactively override the Civil Code which already bestowed
legally and factually, to have been contracted under Muslim Law. certain right on the marriage of Sen. Tamano and Zorayda.

Potrebbero piacerti anche