PREJUDICIAL QUESTION

 Application of article 40 in relation to the crime of bigamy

 Art40: even if the first marriage is void, if a second marriage is to be celebrated during the
effectivity of the FC, the parties to the second marriage cannot simply contract a marriage without
first securing a judicial declaration of nullity of the prior void marriage. Otherwise, the parties to
the second marriage is guilty of BIGAMY (bobis vs. bobis)
 Nullity of the first marriage is not a defense in the crime of bigamy absent the judicial declaration
of nullity of the void first marriage.

A married B; B married X

B filed judicial declaration of nullity of his first marriage on the ground of lack of ML. Subsequently he was
prosecuted for the crime of bigamy. Can B move for the suspension of the criminal case on the ground
of prejudicial question? NO. Whatever may be the outcome of civil action (whether the fist marriage be
declared void or not), B will be held guilty of the crime of bigamy. Because even if the first marriage is
void, you are required to obtain a judicial declaration of nullity of marriage.

However, if prior to the prosecution for bigamy, B filed a judicial declaration of nullity of his first
marriage on the ground that him and A merely signed a private contract of marriage (meaning no marriage
celebration) and subsequently filed in the civil registry. In the subsequent criminal action, B filed a motion
for suspension on the ground that there was prejudicial question. Is there a PQ? YES. If I were the judge,
I will grant the motion. (Morigo vs. people.) If what transpired is a private act of signing a marriage
contract, there is no marriage to speak of (no marriage celebration that took place). And if there is no
marriage to speak of, article 40 of the FC will not apply.

If there is a marriage that took place, article 40 applies. If there is none, article 40 do not apply.

A married B (1st marriage). B married X (2nd marriage)

A. B filed a declaration of nullity of second marriage in the ground of lack of ML. A discovered the
second marriage and filed a criminal case for Bigamy. B filed a motion for suspension of criminal
case on the ground of PQ. Could the court grant the motion? YES. In order to be held guilty in the
crime of bigamy, it is necessary that the 2nd marriage would have been valid have it not been for
the existence of the first. Thus, if there is a ground for the declaration of 2nd marriage null and
void, that is a defense in the crime of bigamy. (people vs. lara)

However, if the ground for the nullity of the 2nd marriage is article 36 FC, the crime of bigamy is
still committed. Art 36 FC is a unique ground because there is a recognition of certain effects in that kind
of void marriage: children under that marriage are considered as legitimate (tenegro vs.ca)

B. What if the lack of ML in the second marriage was because A and B made it appear that they
cohabited for a 5 years prior to their marriage but in truth they did not, and subsequently they
were prosecuted for the crime of bigamy filed by A, can they raise the defense of lack of ML
(art.34) in the criminal case? NO. Santiago vs. people 2015; in people vs. lara, the parties have no
ML but they did not commit any act of falsification. In Santiago vs. people, the parties made it
appear that they are exempted from the requirement of ML.
C. Capili vs. people: