G.R. No. 127406; November 27, 2000
Ofelia P. Ty, petitioner, vs. The Court of Appeals, and Edgardo M. Reyes, respondents.

FACTS

Private respondent Edgardo M. Reyes contracted a civil marriage with Anna Maria Regina Villanueva on March 29, 1977, followed by a church wedding on August 27, 1977. However, on August 4, 1980, the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court of Quezon City declared both ceremonies null and void ab initio due to the lack of a valid marriage license for the civil rite and lack of consent for the church rite. Prior to this judicial declaration, Reyes married petitioner Ofelia P. Ty in a civil ceremony on April 4, 1979. They later had a church wedding on April 4, 1982. In 1991, Reyes filed a petition to declare his marriage to Ty null and void, arguing it was bigamous as his first marriage had not yet been annulled in 1979, and that it lacked a marriage license.
Ty defended the validity of their marriage, presenting Marriage License No. 5739990 issued on April 3, 1979. She argued that Reyes’s first marriage was void from the beginning, thus no judicial decree was necessary to establish its nullity before contracting a subsequent marriage. The Regional Trial Court and the Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Reyes, declaring the marriage to Ty null and void. The appellate court held that a judicial declaration of nullity of the first marriage is a prerequisite for a valid subsequent marriage, even if the first marriage was void ab initio.

ISSUE

The principal issue is whether a judicial decree declaring the nullity of a prior void marriage is required before a party can validly enter into a subsequent marriage.

RULING

The Supreme Court REVERSED the Court of Appeals and declared the marriage between Ty and Reyes VALID and SUBSISTING. The Court held that no judicial declaration of nullity of the first marriage was required prior to the celebration of the second marriage in April 1979, as the applicable law was the Civil Code. Citing established jurisprudence such as People v. Mendoza and People v. Aragon, the Court reiterated the doctrine that a marriage void ab initio, such as one lacking a license, is considered legally non-existent from its inception. Consequently, no judicial decree is necessary to establish its invalidity. A party is therefore free to remarry without first securing a judicial declaration of nullity of the prior void marriage. The Court clarified that the rule requiring a judicial declaration under Article 40 of the Family Code applies only to marriages celebrated after its effectivity on August 3, 1988, and cannot be applied retroactively to the 1979 marriage. Since Reyes’s first marriage was void from the start, he was legally capacitated to marry Ty in 1979. The Court affirmed the award of monthly child support but denied Ty’s claim for damages, noting that such claims between spouses arising from breach of marital obligations are not generally recognized.