DLSU COLLEGE OF LAW

PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS

ATTY. MCT LEGARDA

STUDENT’S NAME
Nisce, Alyssa Angela R. – G05
& SECTION
TOPIC Binding Effect (Under NCC18)
CASE NAME Zamoranos, Petitioner vs. People of the Philippines
and Pacasum, Respondent

CASE NO. G.R. No. 193902

PETITIONER Atty. Marietta D. Zamoranos

RESPONDENT People of the Philippines and Samson R. Pacasum,
Sr.
PONENTE Nachura, J.
DATE OF
PROMULGATION June 1, 2001

DOCTRINE:
The Regional Trial Courts are vested the exclusive and original jurisdiction in all criminal cases.
Nonetheless, it must be pointed out that even in criminal cases, the trial court must have jurisdiction over
the subject matter of the offense.

FACTS:
• On May 3, 1982, Marietta D. Zamoranos, petitioner wed Jesus de Guzman, a Muslim convert, in
Islamic rites. Subsequently, on July 30, 1982 they also wed in civil rites before the RTC. A little
after a year they decided to part ways and obtained a divorce by talaq.

• Petitioner married anew to a Mr. Samson R. Pacasum, Sr., respondent, under Islamic rites and
renewed their vows under civil ceremony. Despite having three children together, their relationship
turned sour and the two were de facto separated. Petitioner gained primary custody of the children
while respondent retained visiting rights.

• Pacasum filed for an Annulment of Marriage before the RTC, a criminal complaint for bigamy and
separate administrative cases for Zamoranos’ dismissal from service and disbarment before the
Civil Service Commission (CSC). Ironically, soon after, he contracted a second marriage with
Catherine Ang Dingos.
 • Zamoranos filed for a motion for reconsideration which was granted however, posthaste, Pacasum
filed a petition for review assailing the dismissal for criminal complaint for Bigamy against
Zamoranos. Zamoranos filed a second motion for reconsideration however, she and was denied.

• Petitioner then filed a petition for certiorari alleging grave abuse of discretion by the RTC since the
RTC has no jurisdiction to hear and decide the above-entitled case for annulment of marriage
entered under P.D. 1083. It is the Shari’a Circuit Court that has the exclusive original jurisdiction.

ISSUE/S:
1. Does the Civil Code or Family Code apply to the case at hand due to the petitioner’s civil marriage
ceremonies?

2. Does the RTC have jurisdiction to try the case of bigamy against the petitioner?

3. Was the marriage between Zamoranos and Pacasum bigamous?

RULING:
The Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 03525-MIN is REVERSED and SET ASIDE.
Accordingly, the Motion to Quash the Information in Criminal Case No. 06-12305 for Bigamy is
GRANTED.

1. No. The civil marriage was merely surplusage and the Islamic rites will govern, it did not have any
effect on the validity of both Islamic marriage and divorce. NCC 18 states “In matters which are
governed by the Code of Commerce and special laws, their deficiency shall be supplied by the
provisions of this Code.” In this case, the Special Law (Muslim Code) does not have a deficiency,
so the Civil Code should NOT be applied. Article 3 of PD 1083 states: (1) In case of conflict
between any provision of this Code and laws of general application, the former shall prevail.

2. No. Although the Regional Trial Courts have jurisdiction over bigamy as a criminal case, it did not
have jurisdiction over the subject matter of the offense in this specific case. In this case, the charge
of bigamy hinges on Pacasum’s claim that Zamoranos is not a Muslim, and her marriage to De
Guzman was governed by civil law. The RTC should have at least taken cognizance that Zamoranos
was in fact, a Muslim whose first and second marriage was valid and recognized under Muslim
Law and suspended proceedings.

3. No. Bigamy dwells on the accused contracting a second marriage while a prior valid one still
subsists and has yet to be dissolved. Zamoranos presented:
a. Affidavit of Confirmation (executed by the Ustadz, Abdullah Ha-Ja-Utto, who solemnized
the marriage of Zamoranos and De Guzman)
b. Certification by a judge confirming divorce
c. Affidavit by Judge Usman of Zamoranos and de Guzman jointly asking for confirmation
of their Talaq.