Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 1

Republic of the Philippines,

vs
Court of Appeals and Roridel Olaviano Molina, respondents
G.R. No. 108763, February 13, 1997
FACTS:
The case at bar challenges the decision of CA affirming the marriage of the respondent Roridel Molina to
Reynaldo Molina void in the ground of psychological incapacity. The couple got married in 1985, after a
year, Reynaldo manifested signs of immaturity and irresponsibility both as husband and a father
preferring to spend more time with friends whom he squandered his money, depends on his parents for aid
and assistance and was never honest with his wife in regard to their finances. In 1986, the couple had an
intense quarrel and as a result their relationship was estranged. Roridel quit her work and went to live
with her parents in Baguio City in 1987 and a few weeks later, Reynaldo left her and their child. Since
then he abandoned them.
ISSUE: Whether or not the marriage is void on the ground of psychological incapacity.
HELD:
The marriage between Roridel and Reynaldo subsists and remains valid. What constitutes psychological
incapacity is not mere showing of irreconcilable differences and confliction personalities. It is
indispensable that the parties must exhibit inclinations which would not meet the essential marital
responsibilites and duties due to some psychological illness. Reynaldos action at the time of the
marriage did not manifest such characteristics that would comprise grounds for psychological incapacity.
The evidence shown by Roridel merely showed that she and her husband cannot get along with each other
and had not shown gravity of the problem neither its juridical antecedence nor its incurability. In
addition, the expert testimony by Dr Sison showed no incurable psychiatric disorder but only
incompatibility which is not considered as psychological incapacity.
The following are the guidelines as to the grounds of psychological incapacity laid set forth in this case:
burden of proof to show nullity belongs to the plaintiff
root causes of the incapacity must be medically and clinically inclined
such incapacity should be in existence at the time of the marriage
such incapacity must be grave so as to disable the person in complying with the essentials of
marital obligations of marriage
such incapacity must be embraced in Art. 68-71 as well as Art 220, 221 and 225 of the Family
Code
decision of the National Matrimonial Appellate Court or the Catholic Church must be respected
court shall order the prosecuting attorney and the fiscal assigned to it to act on behalf of the state.