FACTS: In 1988, Arthur
Te and Lilian Choa married in civil rites. Although they did not live together,
they would usually see each other. In 1989, Liliana gave birth to their
daughter. Thereafter, Arthur stopped visiting her. In 1990, Arthur contracted
another marriage while still married to Liliana. Hence, Liliana filed a bigamy
case against Te and administrative case for the revocation of his and his
mistress’ engineering license. Te filed a petition for nullity of marriage. RTC
rendered a decision on the bigamy case even the petition for annulment was
pending.
ISSUE: W/N the
annulment should be resolved first before the criminal and administrative case
be decided upon.
HELD: NO. Outcome The
annulment case had no bearing on Te’s guilt in the bigamy case. The ground
cited by Te for the annulment was for voidable marriage. Hence, he was still
validly married when he committed bigamy.
No comments:
Post a Comment