Who Can Annul a Bigamous Marriage in the Philippines? SC Explains

The Supreme Court has settled an important question about bigamous marriages in the Philippines: who has the legal right to ask a court to declare such a marriage void? In Maria Lina P. Quirit-Figarido v. Edwin L. Figarido (G.R. No. 259520, November 5, 2024), the Court ruled that only the aggrieved or injured innocent spouse may file a petition to nullify a bigamous marriage. A person who knowingly contracted a second marriage while still married to someone else cannot later ask the courts to void that marriage just to regain the right to remarry.

The Facts of the Case

Maria Lina married Ho Kar Wai in Hong Kong in 1989 and again in the Philippines in 1994. In 2003, while still lawfully married to Ho Kar Wai, she married Edwin Figarido. She knew her first marriage had not been dissolved at that time.

In 2007, Ho Kar Wai obtained a divorce decree in Hong Kong. A Philippine court recognized this foreign divorce judgment in 2009. Years later, in 2017, Maria Lina filed a petition to declare her marriage to Edwin void for being bigamous under Article 35(4) of the Family Code. She wanted the court to declare her free to remarry.

Both the family court and the Court of Appeals denied her petition. The Supreme Court affirmed these rulings.

The Issue

The central question was whether Maria Lina, as the spouse who knowingly contracted a bigamous marriage, had the legal personality to file the petition for declaration of nullity.

The Ruling

The Supreme Court denied Maria Lina's petition. The Court explained that the applicable rules on declaration of absolute nullity of void marriages provide that only the husband or the wife may file such a petition, and the Court has interpreted this to mean the aggrieved or injured spouse.

Citing Juliano-Llave v. Republic (662 Phil. 203) and Fujiki v. Marinay (712 Phil. 524), the Court emphasized that in a bigamous marriage, the injured spouse is the one in the prior subsisting marriage—not the party who committed bigamy. The Court reasoned:

• Maria Lina was the one who contracted the second marriage while her first marriage was still valid.
• She cannot be considered an aggrieved or injured innocent spouse.
• Even though her first husband obtained a divorce and lost his standing to file the petition, that did not transfer the right to Maria Lina.
• Allowing the guilty spouse to nullify a bigamous marriage would treat bigamy as a "matter of convenience" rather than a transgression.

The Court also rejected Maria Lina's plea for equity. Citing Alcantara v. Alcantara (558 Phil. 192), the Court applied the principle that "he who comes to court must come with clean hands." A person who knowingly and voluntarily entered a prohibited marriage cannot later use the courts to escape it when the situation no longer suits them.

Important Distinctions

The Court clarified that denying Maria Lina's petition does not "legalize" bigamous marriages. A bigamous marriage remains void from the beginning under Article 35(4) of the Family Code. For purposes other than remarriage—such as determining heirship, legitimacy of children, settlement of estate, or dissolution of property regime—the nullity of the marriage may be raised independently. But the right to remarry requires a judicial declaration, and only the injured innocent spouse can obtain that declaration.

Practical Takeaways

• Only the innocent spouse can sue. If you are the prior spouse in a subsisting marriage, you may file a petition to nullify your spouse's subsequent bigamous marriage.
• The guilty spouse has no standing. A person who knowingly contracted a bigamous marriage cannot petition to have it declared void, even if the prior marriage has since been dissolved by divorce or death.
• A divorce decree does not transfer the right. If the injured prior spouse obtains a divorce or dies, the right to petition does not automatically pass to the guilty party in the bigamous marriage.
• Void does not mean automatically dissolved. A bigamous marriage is void from the beginning, but a judicial declaration is still required before the parties can remarry.
• Criminal liability remains. The offending spouse may still be held criminally liable for bigamy under the Revised Penal Code, regardless of any civil proceedings.

This article is general information and not legal advice. For your specific situation, consult a lawyer or ask ASG Legal AI.