Dear PAO,

After my marriage to Antonieta in 2002, I discovered that she was previously married to a foreign national in 2000, and her alien husband obtained a divorce only in 2003. Sadly, my relationship with Antonieta turned sour which eventually led to our separation. She is now living with someone else and bragging to my relatives that she will marry her paramour after filing a petition to declare our marriage void. She believes that her petition will be certainly granted by the court, otherwise, the latter will be legalizing a bigamous marriage. Is she correct?

Karavis

Dear Karavis,

A bigamous marriage is a void marriage pursuant to Article 35 (4) of the Family Code of the Philippines. Since it is a void marriage, the legal remedy to record such fact is a petition for declaration of absolute nullity of void marriage, which may be filed solely by the husband or the wife. (Section 2 (a) of A. M. 2-11-10-SC, March 4, 2003)

The husband or the wife in the aforestated rule refers to the husband or wife in the subsisting marriage. As explained in the case of Fujiki vs. Marinay, et al., G.R. No. 196049, June 26, 2013, which was penned by Honorable Associate Justice Antonio T. Carpio:

“Section 2(a) of A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC does not preclude a spouse of a subsisting marriage to question the validity of a subsequent marriage on the ground of bigamy. On the contrary, when Section 2(a) states that “[a] petition for declaration of absolute nullity of void marriage may be filed solely by the husband or the wife”—it refers to the husband or the wife of the subsisting marriage. Under Article 35(4) of the Family Code, bigamous marriages are void from the beginning. Thus, the parties in a bigamous marriage are neither the husband nor the wife under the law. The husband or the wife of the prior subsisting marriage is the one who has the personality to file a petition for declaration of absolute nullity of void marriage under Section 2(a) of A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC.” (Emphasis ours)

Thus, the guilty spouse in a bigamous marriage has no legal capacity to file a petition for declaration of nullity of his/her marriage. The reason for this rule was further elucidated in the case of Quirit-Figarido vs. Figarido, G. R. No. 259520, November 5, 2024, penned by Honorable Associate Justice Ricardo R. Rosario, where the Supreme Court stated that:

“First, with respect to her belief that the denial of her petition has the general effect of legalizing bigamous marriages, We hold that this is definitely not the import of this Decision. The denial of Maria Lina’s petition is not a refusal to declare her bigamous marriage void, but rather a repudiation of Maria Lina’s legal personality to file the said petition. Certainly, this is not tantamount to legalizing bigamous marriages, considering that erring and offending parties may still be held civilly and criminally liable for bigamy. In addition, it should be restated that other legal incidents related to the nullity of the marriage, such as the determination of heirship; legitimacy or illegitimacy of a child; settlement of estate; and dissolution of property regime, among others, may still proceed independently and in the absence of a declaration as to the invalidity of the bigamous union.”

Applying the above-quoted decisions to your situation, the claim of Antonieta that her intended petition for declaration of nullity of bigamous marriage will certainly be granted by the court, otherwise, the latter will be legalizing her bigamous marriage with you, has no legal basis. Remember that the petition may be filed by the husband or the wife in the subsisting marriage. She, being the guilty spouse in a subsequent bigamous marriage, has no legal capacity to file the said petition and this is not tantamount to legalizing bigamous marriage because the offending party may still be held civilly and criminally liable for bigamy.

We hope that we are able to answer your queries. This advice is based solely on the facts you have narrated and our appreciation of the same. Our opinion may vary when other facts are changed or elaborated.

We appreciate your trust and support.

Editor’s note: Dear PAO is a daily column of the Public Attorney’s Office. Questions for Chief Acosta may be sent to [email protected]