CASE DIGEST NO.

20

G.R. No. 145226

February 6, 2004
LUCIO MORIGO y CACHO, petitioner,
vs
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES , Respondent.

FACTS OF THE CASE:

Lucio Morigo and Lucia Barrete were boardmates at the house of one Catalina Tortor at Tagbilaran City,
Bohol for four years. Their communication was broken after school year 1977-1978. In  1984, Lucio
received a letter from Lucia from Singapore. After an exchange of letters, the two became sweethearts.
Lucia later returned to the Philippines but left again for Canada to work there. Nonetheless, the
sweethearts maintained a constant communication. Lucia, later came back to the Philippines. The two
agreed to get married, thus, they were married at Iglesia de Filipina Nacional at Catagdaan, Pilar, Bohol.
Lucia reported back to her work in Canada leaving Lucio behind. Barely a year, Lucia filed with Ontario
Court a petition for divorce which was granted and took effect in February of 1992. On October that
year Lucio married Maria Jechecha Lumbago. Lucio filed a complaint for nullity of marriage in Regional
Trial Court of Bohol on the ground that there was no marriage ceremony actually took place. He was
later charge with Bigamy filed by City Prosecutor of the Regional Trial Court of Bohol.
The Regional Trial Court of Bohol held Lucio guilty beyond reasonable doubt of bigamy.
He filed an appeal to the Court of Appeals. While the case was pending in Court of Appeals, the trial
court granted the petition for nullity of marriage since no marriage ceremony took place. No appeal was
taken from this decision, thus, became final and executory. But the Court of Appeals denied the petition
for lack of merit. Hence, the petition was elevated to the Supreme Court.
ISSUE:
1. Whether or petitioner is committed bigamy and if so, whether his defense of good faith is valid.
RULING:
No, the petitioner is not guilty of bigamy. Under the law, the first element of bigamy crime
requires that the accused must have been legally married. The trial court found that there was no actual
marriage ceremony performed between Lucio and Lucia by a solemnizing officer. Instead, what
transpired was a mere signing of the marriage contract by the two, rendering the marriage void ab initio,
in accordance with Article 3 and 4 of the Family Code. Under the principle of retroactivity of marriage
being declared as void ab initio, the two were never married “from the beginning”. The existence and
the validity of the first marriage being an essential element of a crime of bigamy, it is but logical that a
conviction for the said offense cannot be sustained where there is no marriage to speak of.
Upon the foregoing, the validity of his defense of good faith or lack of intent becomes moot.

Eric M. Recomendable
Arellano University School of Law