Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 1

in the afternoon until early morning regularly.

This went on until 1994

Topic Persons / Molina Doctrine when Lorna decided to leave Zosimo for good and she also filed a
Case No. G.R. No. 136921 | April 17, 2001 petition for the declaration of the nullity of their marriage on the
Case Pesca vs. Pesca ground that Zosimo is psychologically incapacitated by reason of his
Name emotional immaturity and irresponsibility.
Full Case LORNA GUILLEN PESCA, petitioner, vs. ZOSIMO A. The trial court granted the petition but the Court of Appeals
Name PESCA, respondent. reversed the said ruling. The CA ratiocinated that based on the earlier
cases of Santos vs CA and Republic vs Court of Appeals and Molina,
Ponente Vitug, J.:
the allegations of Lorna failed to prove Zosimo’s psychological
Doctrine Molina Doctrine

Nature Submitted for review is the decision of the Court of Appeals,

promulgated on 27 May 1998, in C.A. G.R. CV. No. 52374, ISSUE
reversing the decision of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Whether or not emotional incapacity and immaturity can be equated to
Caloocan City, Branch 130, which has declared the marriage psychological incapacity and subsequently be a ground of annulment
between petitioner and respondent to be null and void ab based on the Article 36 of the Family Code.
initio on the ground of psychological incapacity on the part of
respondent. No. Emotional immaturity and irresponsibility, invoked by the
petitioner, cannot be equated with psychological incapacity.
RELEVANT FACTS As the Court of Appeals observed, Lorna was not able to establish the
Sometime in 1975, Lorna Guillen and Zosima Pesca met each following: (1) That Zosimo showed signs of mental incapacity that would
other. They decided to get married in March of the same year. cause him to be truly incognitive of the basic marital covenant, as so
Initially, the young couple did not live together as petitioner was still provided for in Article 68 of the Family Code; (2) that the incapacity is
a student in college and respondent, a seaman, had to leave the grave, has preceded the marriage and is incurable; (3) that his incapacity
country on board an ocean-going vessel barely a month after the to meet his marital responsibility is because of a psychological, not
marriage. Six months later, the young couple established their physical illness; (4) that the root cause of the incapacity has been
residence in Quezon City until they were able to build their own identified medically or clinically, and has been proven by an expert; and
house in Caloocan City where they finally resided. It was blissful (5) that the incapacity is permanent and incurable in nature.
marriage for the couple during the two months of the year that they The burden of proof to show the nullity of marriage lies in the plaintiff
could stay together when respondent was on vacation. The union and any doubt should be resolved in favor of the existence and
begot four children, 19-year old Ruhem, 17-year old Rez, 11-year old continuation of the marriage and against its dissolution and nullity.
Ryan, and 9-year old Richie.
However, in 1988, Lorna noticed some changes in Zosimo as The herein petition is DENIED. No costs.
the latter became cruel, violent, and a habitual drinker. He would
hurt her and the children. He would have drinking sessions from late