Llave vs. Republic GR 169766 dated March 30, 2011 FACTS: Around 11 months before his death, Sen.

. Tamano married Estrelita twiceinitially under the Islamic laws and tradition in Cotobato City and subsequently, under a civil ceremony officiated by an RTC Judge in Lanao del Sur. In their marriage contracts, Sen. Tamanos civil status was indicated as divorced. In 1994, private respondents Zorayda Tamano and her son Adib Tamano, in their own behalf and in behalf of the rest of Sen. Tamanos legitimate children with Zorayda, filed a complaint with the RTC of Quezon City for the declaration of nullity of marriage between Estrelita and Sen. Tamano for being bigamous alleging that Zoraydas marriage under civil rites remained subsisting. Respondent also posit that based on Article 35 (4) of the Family Code, the subsequent marriage into by the deceased with Defendant Llave is void ab initio because he contracted the same while his prior marriage was still subsisting and his status being declared as divorced has no factual or legal basis, because the deceased never divorced Zorayda in his lifetime and the deceased could not have done so because divorce is not allowed under the New Civil Code. The respondent also alleged that the deceased did not and could not have divorced her by invoking the provision of PD 1083 (Code of the Muslim Personal Laws), for the simple reason that the former marriage of the deceased was never deemed, legally, and factually, to have been one contracted under Muslim law because they did not register their mutual desire to be thus covered by the said law. After various motion for postponement and subsequent rescheduling both by the petitioner and of the courts including a motion with SC regarding the jurisdiction of the RTC, the RTC rendered a decision prior to the final resolution of the SC, that the marriage of petitioner with Sen. Tamano is void ab initio for being bigamous under Article 35 of the Family Code of the Philippines and under Article 83 of the Civil Code of the Philippines. Estrelita filed a petition with the Court of Appeals which was denied because the petitioner can no longer be allowed to file her answer as she was given ample opportunity to be heard but ignored it. In addition, the CA adjudged that Estrelitas marriage to Sen. Tamano is void ab initio for being bigamous. The CA noted that the marriage is governed by the Civil Code and that the subsequent Muslim celebration was only ceremonial. The CA also ruled that Zorayda has legal standing to file the action as she is Sen. Tamanos wife and hence, the injured party. CA denied her motion fore recommendation hence, the petition with this court.