Guilty spouse cannot seek to nullify bigamous marriage — SC

The Supreme Court (SC) has ruled that a spouse who knowingly entered a bigamous marriage cannot seek to nullify it.

In a 14-page decision, the SC En Banc denied a Filipina’s petition to declare her second marriage void for being bigamous.

“It must be recapitulated that based on the rules and jurisprudence, the aggrieved or injured innocent spouse of either marriage has the sole right to file the petition for the declaration of nullity of the bigamous marriage,” the SC said.

“Otherwise, it will give rise to a ridiculous situation wherein the party who contracted the illicit subsequent marriage is permitted to invoke the bigamous nature thereof in support of the petition to nullify the same. This results in a legal absurdity, as the offending spouse is essentially empowered to dissolve the marriage at will,” it added.

According to the court, the Filipina first married a Chinese national in Hong Kong.

While working as a bank teller in Hong Kong, she formed a relationship with a Filipino client and returned to the Philippines with him after becoming pregnant with his child.

She then married him in the Philippines.

Meanwhile, her first husband obtained a divorce in Hong Kong, which was later recognized by the Parañaque court.

The SC said she later sought to nullify her marriage with the Filipino, saying that it was void for being bigamous. She also requested permission to remarry.

Both the Regional Trial Court and the Court of Appeals denied her petition due to lack of legal standing as she had knowingly entered the union, prompting her to file the present petition before the High Court.

Before the SC, the Filipina reiterated that her second marriage was invalid.

For its part, the SC said that only the aggrieved spouse from either marriage has the right to petition for the annulment of a second marriage.

The SC said that the purpose for nullifying a bigamous marriage is to preserve a marriage, and “not to provide the guilty spouses in the bigamous marriage a convenient means to dissolve their illegitimate union.”

"At this conjuncture, it must be emphasized that in the declaration of nullity of a void marriage, the underlying purpose is the protection of the legitimate institution of marriage," the SC said.

"In fact, the Rationale explicitly declares that the concern of the State is to preserve marriage and not to seek its dissolution."

It said that the court still has to declare a marriage void or the parties to get the right to remarry.

The decision, penned by Associate Justice Ricardo Rosario, was promulgated in January 2025.

Associate Justices Ramon Hernando, Amy Lazaro-Javier, and Rodil Zalameda dissented.

In her dissent, Lazaro-Javier argued that Section 2(a) of the Rule on Declaration of Absolute Nullity of Void Marriages and Annulment of Voidable Marriages states that either husband or wife in the void marriage may file a petition to declare it void.

Aside from this, she argued that the Filipina is not the guilty party, stressing that she sought the advice of a lawyer before marrying the Filipino.

“[L]aypersons who rely on the legal advice or services of those who are supposed to be knowledgeable about the law should never be punished for relying on them in good faith,” she later added.

Lazaro-Javier also said the Filipina should not be denied the protection of the law “because of what is perceived to be her immoral conduct.” — BAP, GMA Integrated News