The Supreme Court (SC) reiterated the principles of justice and fairness in a nullity of marriage case that was filed by an alleged unsuspecting victim of bigamous marriage and dismissed by the regional trial court (RTC).

“If a person not party to the marriage can challenge a bigamous marriage, there is no reason to foreclose (name of man, who is an Italian citizen and resident of the Philippines, was redacted by Manila Bulletin) action to nullify his alleged bigamous marriage with (name of Filipino woman also redacted).

“If (the man) is indeed an unsuspecting victim of a bigamous marriage, he must be granted the right to seek redress and have the marriage declared null and void, thereby restoring his legal capacity to enter into a valid marriage in the future.

“It ensures that individuals are not left without recourse when they are deceived into entering a marriage that is fundamentally flawed and legally untenable.”

In a decision -- posted at the SC website sc.judiciar.gov.ph, docketed as GR No. 262832, and written by Associate Justice Maria Filomena D. Singh – the High Court said: “However, considering that a petition for review on certiorari is limited to questions of law and the Court is not a trier of facts, the remand of this case to the RTC for the proper resolution of this case on the merits is called for.”

Records of the case showed that the Italian man married the Filipino woman in Italy on Dec. 10, 2011 and their marriage was registered at the Consulate General of the Philippines in Milan on Dec. 29, 2011.

In his nullity of marriage petition filed before the RTC on July 17, 2022, the Italian told the trial court that unknown to him, his Filipino wife had been married twice in the Philippines on Sept. 2, 1979 and on Aug. 12, 1991, and the husbands in the previous marriages are still alive.

Thus, he pleaded the RTC to declare his marriage null and void. Alternatively, he asked the trial court to order the cancellation of their marriage in the records of the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA) for being bigamous.

On Aug. 15, 2022, the RTC dismissed the case with a ruling that since the marriage was contracted in Italy, the court has no jurisdiction over the complaint pursuant to Article 17 of the Civil Code.

The RTC also said that the outcome of the case would have been different if the Filipino woman was the petitioner in the nullity of marriage case since the marriage was contracted in Italy.

On the alternative prayer involving PSA records, the RTC said the plea should have been done on a different case and should not be included in the petition for nullity of marriage.

When his motion for reconsideration was denied by the RTC, he elevated the case directly to the SC.

In granting the petition of the Italian, the SC said:

“Philippine courts have jurisdiction to nullify a bigamous marriage involving a foreigner and a Filipino, even if the marriage was celebrated abroad.”

“This aligns with the principle that the intrinsic validity of a marriage, including its legality, must adhere to Philippine law when one or both of parties are Filipino citizens.

“This approach prevents individuals from circumventing Philippine laws by marrying abroad, and additionally ensures that the family rights and duties of Filipino citizens are consistently applied.

“Consequently, even if a marriage is valid in the country where it was celebrated, it can still be declared void in the Philippines if it contravenes the country's legal provisions, such as those prohibiting bigamy, in express exception to Article 26 of the Family Code which concedes the extrinsic validity of a marriage celebrated abroad in accordance with the laws of the country of celebration.

“Given the foregoing, the RTC erred in dismissing the Complaint filed by (the Italian) by making a distinction between his legal capacity to sue and that of (Filipino woman). By doing so, it failed to address the factual issues necessary to resolve whether the marriage between the parties should be nullified on the ground of bigamy.

“This oversight contradicts the court's duty to invalidate bigamous marriages, which are not only illegal but also undermine the legal and moral foundation of the marital institution.

“Bigamous marriages are so offensive to public policy that, in (a previous case), the Court held that the rule allowing only the husband or the wife to ask for the nullity of a marriage does not prevent the prior spouse from filing a suit if the ground is a bigamous subsequent marriage.

“Accordingly, the Petition for Review on Certiorari filed by (the Italian) is granted. The Orders, dated Aug. 15, 2022 and Aug. 24, 2022, of (the RTC) are reversed. The case is remanded to the RTC for further proceedings, which shall be pursued with utmost dispatch. So ordered.”