Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

This case has been cited 4 times or more.

	GR No. 159031 2014-06-23	NOEL A. LASANAS v. PEOPLE BERSAMIN, J.
The reason for the provision was aptly discussed in Teves v. People:[29]
	GR No. 204169 2013-09-11	YASU IWASAWA v. FELISA CUSTODIO GANGAN VILLARAMA, JR., J.
This Court has consistently held that a judicial declaration of nullity is required before a valid subsequent marriage can be contracted; or else, what transpires is a bigamous marriage,[16] which is void from the beginning as provided in Article 35(4) of the Family Code of the Philippines. And this is what transpired in the instant case.
	GR No. 191566 2013-07-17	PEOPLE v. EDGARDO V. ODTUHAN PERALTA, J.
The issues are not novel and have been squarely ruled upon by this Court in Montañez v. Cipriano,[24] Teves v. People,[25] and Antone v. Beronilla.[26]
	GR No. 183805 2013-07-03	JAMES WALTER P. CAPILI v. PEOPLE PERALTA, J.
Finally, it is a settled rule that the criminal culpability attaches to the offender upon the commission of the offense, and from that instant, liability appends to him until extinguished as provided by law.[13] It is clear then that the crime of bigamy was committed by petitioner from the time he contracted the second marriage with private respondent. Thus, the finality of the judicial declaration of nullity of petitioner's second marriage does not impede the filing of a criminal charge for bigamy against him.