Scribd
Upload
141 views1 page

Nollora V People (Digest) Nollora V People

Atilano Nollora Jr was already married to Jesus Nollora when he entered into a second marriage with Rowena Geraldino, who was aware of his existing marriage. The Supreme Court ruled that Nollora's second marriage was bigamous and void from the beginning, as per Articles 349 of the Revised Penal Code and 35 of the Family Code. His claim that his religious affiliation allowed multiple marriages was rejected, as neither marriage was conducted under Muslim law.

Uploaded by

Ron Ace
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
141 views1 page

Nollora V People (Digest) Nollora V People

Atilano Nollora Jr was already married to Jesus Nollora when he entered into a second marriage with Rowena Geraldino, who was aware of his existing marriage. The Supreme Court ruled that Nollora's second marriage was bigamous and void from the beginning, as per Articles 349 of the Revised Penal Code and 35 of the Family Code. His claim that his religious affiliation allowed multiple marriages was rejected, as neither marriage was conducted under Muslim law.

Uploaded by

Ron Ace
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

NOLLORA v PEOPLE (Digest)

NOLLORA v PEOPLE

GR No. 1911425

07 September 2011

Topic: Validity of Marriage, Bigamous Marriage

FACTS:

Atilano Nollora Jr was married to Jesus Nollora. Their marriage was still subsisting when he contracted a
2nd marriage with Rowena Geraldino, who is herself aware of his marriage with Jesusa but still agreed
and contracted marriage with him.

ISSUE:

Whether or not the 2nd marriage is bigamous and void ab initio.

RULING:

Yes. Under Art 349 of the RPC, the marriage is bigamous and pursuant to Art 35 of the Family Code, it is
void ab initio. Nollora’s religious affiliation is inapplicable here. Neither of his marriages were
solemnized under the Muslim Law. The SC ruled that his two marriages were not conducted according
to the Code of Muslim. Hence, his religious affiliation may not be used as a defense.

You might also like