IMELDA MARBELLA-BOBIS, v. ISAGANI D. BOBISGR No. 138509

IMELDA MARBELLA-BOBIS, Petitioner vs.
 ISAGANI D. BOBIS, Respondent
GR No. 138509
July 31, 2000
 
Facts:

• October 21, 1985:Respondent, Isagani Bobis contracted a first marriage with Maria Dulce B. Javier
• January 25, 1996: Respondent contracted a second marriage with Imelda Marbella-Bobis without the first marriage being annulled, nullified or terminated
• February 25, 1998: Isagani Bobis charged with bigamy before Regional Trial Court, Branch 226, Quezon City
• Respondent initiated a civil action for the judicial declaration of absolute nullity of his first marriage
• Regional Trial Court judge suspends criminal case pending decision in civil action

Issue:

1. Does the subsequent filing of a civil action for declaration of nullity of a previous marriage constitute a prejudicial question to a criminal case for bigamy? and
2. Is ignorance of Article 40 of the Family Code a valid defense for contracting second marriage?

 
Ruling:

1. No. He who contracts a second marriage before the judicial declaration of nullity of the first marriage assumes the risk of being prosecuted for bigamy, and in such a case the criminal case may not be suspended on the ground of the pendency of a civil case for declaration of nullity. In a recent case for concubinage, we held that the pendency of a civil case for declaration of nullity of marriage is not a prejudicial question. This ruling applies here by analogy since both crimes presuppose the subsistence of a marriage.
2. No. Ignorance of the existence of Article 40 of the Family Code cannot even be successfully invoked as an excuse. The contracting of a marriage knowing that the requirements of the law have not been complied with or that the marriage is in disregard of a legal impediment is an act penalized by the Revised Penal Code. The legality of a marriage is a matter of law and every person is presumed to know the law.