Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
208790 January 21, 2015 Glenn likewise alleged that Mary Grace was not In drawing her conclusions, Dr. Tayag explained essence of morality [and] has certainly learned set
remorseful about the death of the infant whom she that: of unconstructive traits that further made her too
delivered. She lived as if she were single and was futile to assume mature roles. Morals and values
GLENN VIÑAS, Petitioner,
unmindful of her husband’s needs. She was self- were not instilled in her young mind that as she
vs. The said disorder [of Mary Grace] is considered to
centered, selfish and immature. When Glenn went on with her life, she never learned to restrain
MARY GRACE PAREL-VIÑAS, Respondent. be severe, serious, grave, permanent and chronic
confronted her about her behavior, she showed herself from doing ill-advised things even if she
in proportion and is incurable by any form of
indifference. She eventually left their home without isamply aware of the depravity of her actions.
clinical intervention. It has already been deeply
RESOLUTION informing Glenn. Glenn later found out that she left
embedded within her system as it was found to
for an overseas employment in Dubai.7
have started as early as her childhood years. The psychological incapacity of [Mary Grace] is of
REYES, J.: Because of such, it has caused her to be inflexible, a juridical antecedence as it was already inher
Before Glenn decided to file a petition for the maladaptive and functionally[-]impaired especially system even prior to the solemnization of her
declaration of nullity of his marriage with Mary with regards to heterosexual dealings. marriage with [Glenn]. x x x.13 (Underlining ours)
For review is the Decision1 rendered on January Grace, he consulted the latter’s friends. They
29, 2013 and Resolution2 issued on August 7,
informed him that Mary Grace came from a broken
2013 by the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CV Such disorder of [Mary Grace]is mainly On February 18, 2009, Glenn filed before the RTC
family and was left to be cared for by her aunts and
No. 96448. The CA set aside the Decision3 dated nannies. The foregoing circumstance must have
characterized by grandiosity, need for admiration a Petition for the Declaration of Nullity of his
January 29, 2010 of the Regional Trial Court and lack of empathy[,] along with her pattern of marriage with Mary Grace. Substituted service of
contributed to her sense of insecurity and difficulty
(RTC) of San Pablo City, Branch 30, in Civil Case disregard for and violation of the rights of others[,] summons was made upon Mary Grace through
in adjusting to married life.8
No. SP-6564(09), which declared the marriage which utterly distorted her perceptions and views her aunt, Susana Rosita.14 Mary Grace filed no
between Glenn Vifias (Glenn) and Mary Grace especially in terms of a fitting marital relationship. answer and did not attend any of the proceedings
Parel-Vifias (Mary Grace) as null and void. To ease their marital problems, Glenn sought Such disorder manifested in [Mary Grace] through before the RTC.
professional guidance and submitted himself to a her unrelenting apathy, sense of entitlement and
psychological evaluation by Clinical Psychologist arrogance. Throughout her union with [Glenn], she
Antecedents During the trial, the testimonies of Glenn, Dr.
Nedy Tayag (Dr. Tayag). Dr. Tayag found him as has exhibited a heightened sense of self as seen
Tayag and Rodelito were offered as evidence.
"amply aware of his marital roles" and "capable of in her marked inability to show proper respect for
Glenn and Rodelito described Mary Grace as
On April 26, 1999, Glenn and Mary Grace, then 25 maintaining a mature and healthy heterosexual her husband. x x x She is too headstrong that most
outgoing, carefree, and irresponsible. She is the
and 23 years old, respectively, got married in civil relationship."9 of the time[,] she would do things her own way and
exact opposite of Glenn, who is conservative and
rites held in Lipa City, Batangas.4 Mary Grace was would not pay close attention to what her husband
preoccupied with his work.15 On her part, Dr.
already pregnant then. The infant, however, died needed. She had been a wife who constantly
On the other hand, Dr. Tayag assessed Mary Tayag reiterated her findings in the psychological
at birth due to weakness and malnourishment. struggled for power and dominance in their
Grace’s personality through the data she had report dated December 29, 2008.
Glenn alleged that the infant’s death was caused gathered from Glenn and his cousin, Rodelito
relationship and [Glenn], being too considerate to
by Mary Grace’s heavy drinking and smoking Mayo (Rodelito), who knew Mary Graceway back
her, was often subjected to her control.x x x She is
during her pregnancy. into many vices and loved hanging out with her Ruling of the RTC
in college.
friends at night[,] and she even got involved in an
illicit relationship[,] which was still going on up to
The couple lived together under one roof. Glenn the present time. x x x. On January 29, 2010, the RTC rendered its
Mary Grace is the eldest among four siblings. She
worked as a bartender, while Mary Grace was a Decision16 declaring the marriage between Glenn
is a college graduate. She belongs to a middle
production engineer. and Mary Grace as null and void on account of the
class family. Her father is an overseas contract
The root cause of [Mary Grace’s]personality latter’s psychological incapacity. The RTC cited
worker, while her mother is a housewife. At the
aberration can be said to have emanated from the the following as grounds:
Sometime in March of 2006, Mary Grace left the time Dr. Tayag prepared her report, Mary Grace
various forms of unfavorable factors in her milieu
home which she shared with Glenn. Glenn was employed in Dubai and romantically involved
way back as early as her childhood years[,] which
subsequently found out that Mary Grace went to with another man.10 The totality of the evidence presented by [Glenn]
is the crucial stage in the life of a person as thisis
work in Dubai. At the time the instant petition was the time when the individual’s character and warrants [the] grant of the petition. Reconciliation
filed, Mary Grace had not returned yet. between the parties under the circumstances is nil.
According to Rodelito, Mary Grace verbally behavior are shaped. [Mary Grace] came from a
dysfunctional family with lenient and tolerating For the best interest of the parties, it is best that
abused and physically harmed Glenn during the
the legal bond between them be severed.
On February 18, 2009, Glenn filed a Petition5 for couple’s fights. Mary Grace is also ill-tempered parents[,] who never impose any restrictions
the declaration of nullity of his marriage with Mary and carefree, while Glenn is jolly, kind and family- [upon] their children. Considering such fact, she
Grace.He alleged that Mary Grace was insecure, oriented.11 apparently failed to feel the love and affection of The testimonies of [Glenn] and his witness
extremely jealous, outgoing and prone to regularly the nurturing figures that she had[,] who were [Rodelito] portray the miserable life [Glenn] had
resorting to any pretext to be able to leave the supposed to bethe first to show concern [for] her. with [Mary Grace] who is a Narcissistic Personality
Dr. Tayag diagnosed Mary Grace to be suffering x x x She has acquired a domineering character as
house. She thoroughly enjoyed the night life, and Disordered person with anti[-]social traits and who
from a Narcissistic Personality Disorder with anti- she was not taught to have boundaries in her
drank and smoked heavily even whenshe was does not treat him as her husband. [Glenn] and
social traits. Dr. Tayag concluded that Mary Grace
pregnant. Further, Mary Grace refused to perform actions because of the laxity she had from her [Mary Grace] are separated in fact since the year
and Glenn’s relationship is not founded on mutual caregivers and also because she grew up to be the
even the most essential household chores of 2006. [Mary Grace] abandoned [Glenn] without
love, trust, respect, commitment and fidelity to eldest in the brood. She sees to it that she is the
cleaning and cooking. According to Glenn, Mary telling the latter where to go. x x x Had it not for the
each other. Hence, Dr. Tayag recommended the
Grace had not exhibited the foregoing traits and one always followed with regards to making insistence of[Glenn] that he would not know the
propriety of declaring the nullity of the couple’s decisions and always mandates people to submit
behavior during their whirlwind courtship.6 whereabouts of his wife. The law provides that [a]
marriage.12 to her wishes. She has not acquired the very husband and [a] wife are obliged to live together,
[and] observe mutual love, respect and fidelity. x x Glenn, on the other hand, sought the dismissal of suffering from Narcissistic Personality Disorder, confused with a divorce law that cuts the marital
x For all intents and purposes, however, [Mary the OSG’s appeal. she did not fully explain the root cause of the bond at the time the causes therefore manifest
Grace] was in a quandary on what it really means. disorder nor did she makea conclusion as to its themselves". It refers to a serious psychological
x x x. gravity or permanence. Moreover, she admitted illness afflicting a party evenbefore the celebration
On January 29, 2013, the CA rendered the herein
that she was not able to examine the respondent[,] of the marriage. It is a malady so grave and
assailed decision reversing the RTC ruling and
hence, the information provided to her may be permanent as to deprive one of awareness of the
From the testimony of [Glenn], it was established declaring the marriage between Glenn and Mary
subjective and self-serving. Essential in this duties and responsibilities of the matrimonial bond
that [Mary Grace] failed to comply with the basic Grace as valid and subsisting. The CA stated the
petition is the allegation of the root causeof the one is about to assume." Psychological incapacity
marital obligations of mutual love, respect, mutual reasons below:
spouse’s psychological incapacity which should should refer to no less than a mental (not physical)
help and support. [Glenn] tried his best to have
also be medically or clinically identified, sufficiently incapacity that causes a party to be truly
their marriage saved but [Mary Grace] did not
In Santos vs. Court of Appeals, the Supreme Court proven by experts and clearly explained in the incognitive of the basic marital covenants that
cooperate with him. [Mary Grace] is x x x,
held that "psychological incapacity" should refer to decision. The incapacity must be proven to be concomitantly must be assumed and discharged
unmindful of her marital obligations.
no less than a mental (not physical) incapacity that existing at the time of the celebration of the by the parties to the marriage.
causes a party to be truly incognitive of the basic marriageand shown to be medically or clinically
The Court has no reason to doubt the testimony of marital covenants that concomitantly must be permanent or incurable. It must also be grave
From the foregoing, We cannot declare the
[Dr. Tayag], a clinical psychologist with sufficient assumed and discharged by the parties to the enough to bring about the disability of the parties
dissolution of the marriage of the parties for the
authority to speak on the subject of psychological marriage which, asso expressed by Article 68 of to assume the essential obligations of marriage as
obvious failure of [Glenn] to show that the alleged
incapacity. She examined [Glenn], and was able to the Family Code, include their mutual obligations set forth in Articles 68 to 71 and Articles 220 to 225
psychological incapacity of [Mary Grace] is
gather sufficient data and information about [Mary to live together, observe love, respect and fidelity of the Family Code and such non-complied marital
characterized by gravity, juridical antecedence
Grace]. x x x This [Narcissistic] personality and render help and support. There is hardly any obligations must similarly be alleged in the petition,
and incurability; and for his failure to observe the
disorder of[Mary Grace] is ingrained in her doubt that the intendment of the law has been to established by evidence and explained in the
guidelines outlined in the afore-cited cases.
personality make-up, so grave and so permanent, confine the meaning of "psychological incapacity" decision.
incurable and difficult to treat. It is conclusive that to the most serious cases of personality disorders
this personal incapacity leading to psychological clearly demonstrative of an utter insensitivity or Verily, the burden of proof to show the nullity of the
Unfortunately for [Glenn], the expert testimony of
incapacity is already pre-existing before the inability to give meaning and significance to the marriage belongs to [Glenn]. Any doubt should be
his witness did not establish the root cause of the
marriage and was only manifested after. It has marriage. This psychological condition must exist resolved in favor of the existence and continuation
psychological incapacity of [Mary Grace] nor was
become grave, permanent and at the time the marriage is celebrated. The of the marriage and against its dissolution and
such ground alleged in the complaint. We reiterate
incurable.17 (Underlining ours and italics in the psychological condition must be characterized by nullity. This is rooted from the fact that both our
the ruling of the Supreme Court on this score, to
original) (a) gravity, (b) juridical antecedence, and (c) Constitution and our laws cherish the validity of
wit: the root cause of the psychological incapacity
incurability. marriage and unity of the family.20 (Citations
must be: a) medically or clinically identified; b)
omitted, underlining ours and emphasis and italics
The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) moved alleged in the complaint; c) sufficiently proven by
in the original)
for reconsideration but it was denied by the RTC In the instant case, [Glenn] tried to prove that experts; and d) clearly explained in the decision.
in its Order18dated December 1, 2010. [Mary Grace] was carefree, outgoing, immature,
and irresponsible which made her unable to The CA, through the herein assailed
Discoursing on this issue, the Supreme Court, in
perform the essential obligations of marriage. He Resolution21 dated August 7, 2013, denied the
The Appeal of the OSG and the Ruling of the CA Republic of the Philippines vs. Court of Appeals
likewise alleged that she refused to communicate Motion for Reconsideration22filed by Glenn.
and Molina, has this to say:
with him to save the marriage and eventually left
On appeal before the CA, the OSG claimed that no him to work abroad. To Our mind, the above
Issue
competent evidence exist proving that Mary Grace actuations of [Mary Grace] do not make out a case "Article 36 of the Family Code requires that the
indeed suffers from a Narcissistic Personality of psychological incapacity on her part. incapacity must be psychological– not physical,
Disorder, which prevents her from fulfilling her although its manifestations and/or symptoms may Unperturbed, Glenn now raises before this Court
marital obligations. Specifically, the RTC decision be physical. The evidence must convince the court the issue of whether or not sufficient evidence exist
While it is true that [Glenn’s] testimony was
failed to cite the root cause of Mary Grace’s that the parties, or one of them, was mentally or justifying the RTC’s declaration of nullity of his
corroborated by [Dr. Tayag], a psychologist who
disorder. Further, the RTC did not state its own physically ill to such an extent that the person marriage with Mary Grace.
conducted a psychological examination on
findings and merely relied on Dr. Tayag’s could not have known the obligations he was
[Glenn], however, said examination was
statements anent the gravity and incurability of assuming, or knowing them, could not have given
conducted only on him and no evidence was In support thereof, Glenn points out that each
Mary Grace’s condition. The RTC resorted to mere valid assumption thereof. Although no example of
shown that the psychological incapacity of [Mary petition for the declaration of nullity of marriage
generalizations and conclusions sansdetails. such incapacity need be given here so as not to
Grace] was characterized by gravity, juridical should be judged according to its own set of facts,
Besides, what psychological incapacity limit the application of the provision under the
antecedence, and incurability. and not on the basis of assumptions, predilections
contemplates is downright incapacity to assume principle of ejusdem generis x x x[,] nevertheless[,]
suchroot cause must be identified as a or generalizations. The RTC judge should pains
marital obligations. In the instant case,
psychological illness and its incapacitating nature takingly examine the factual milieu, while the CA
irreconcilable differences, sexual infidelity, Certainly, the opinion of a psychologist would be
must refrain from substituting its own judgment for
emotional immaturity and irresponsibility were of persuasive value in determining the fully explained. Expert evidence may be given by
qualified psychiatrists and clinical psychologists." that of the trial court.23 Further, Glenn argues that
shown, but these do not warrant the grant of psychological incapacity of a person as she would
in Marcos v. Marcos,24 the Court ruled that it is not
Glenn’s petition. Mary Grace may be unwilling to be in the best position to assess and evaluate the
a sine qua non requirement for the respondent
assume her marital duties, but this does not psychological condition of the couple, she being
The Supreme Court further went on to proclaim, spouse to be personally examined by a physician
translate into a psychological illness.19 an expert in this field of study of behavior. Although
that"Article 36 of the Family Code is not to be or psychologist before a marriage could be
the psychologist stated that respondent was
declared as a nullity.25 However, if the opinion of In the present case, the respondent’s stubborn on the antecedence of Mary Grace’s alleged incurable" – is an unfounded statement, not a
an expert is sought, his or her testimony should be refusal to cohabit with the petitioner was incapacity. Glenn even testified that, six months necessary inference from her previous
considered as decisive evidence.26 Besides, the doubtlessly irresponsible, but it was never proven before they got married, they saw each other characterization and portrayal of the respondent.
findings of the trial court regarding the credibility of to be rooted in some psychological illness. x x x almost everyday.32 Glenn saw "a loving[,] caring While the various tests administered on the
the witnesses should be respected.27 Likewise, the respondent’s act of living with and well[-]educated person"33 in Mary Grace. petitioner could have been used as a fair gauge to
another woman four years into the marriage assess her own psychological condition, this same
cannot automatically be equated with a statement cannot be made with respect to the
In seeking the denial of the instant petition, the Anent Dr. Tayag’s assessment of Mary Grace’s
psychological disorder, especially when no respondent’s condition. To make conclusions and
OSG emphasizes that the arguments Glenn raise condition, the Court finds the same as
specific evidence was shown that promiscuity was generalizations on the respondent’s psychological
for our consideration are mere reiterations of the unfounded.1âwphi1 Rumbaua34provides some
a trait already existing at the inception of marriage. condition based on the information fed by only one
matters already resolved by the CA.28 guidelines on how the courts should evaluate the
In fact, petitioner herself admitted that respondent side is, to our mind, not different from admitting
testimonies of psychologists or psychiatrists in
was caring and faithful when they were going hearsay evidence as proof of the truthfulness of
petitions for the declaration of nullity of marriage,
Ruling of the Court steady and for a time after their marriage; their the content of such evidence.
viz:
problems only came in later.
The instant petition lacks merit. xxxx
We cannot help but note that Dr. Tayag’s
x x x To use the words of Navales v. Navales:
conclusions about the respondent’s psychological
The lack of personal examination orassessment of incapacity were based on the information fed to A careful reading of Dr. Tayag’s testimony reveals
the respondent by a psychologist or psychiatrist is Article 36 contemplates downright incapacity or her by only one side – the petitioner – whose bias that she failed to establish the fact that at the time
not necessarily fatal in a petition for the declaration inability to take cognizance ofand to assume basic in favor of her cause cannot be doubted. While this the parties were married, respondent was already
of nullity of marriage. "If the totality of evidence marital obligations. Mere "difficulty," "refusal" or circumstance alone does notdisqualify the suffering from a psychological defect that deprived
presented is enough to sustain a finding of "neglect" in the performance of marital obligations psychologist for reasons of bias, her report, him of the ability to assume the essential duties
psychological incapacity, then actual medical or "ill will" on the part of the spouse is different from testimony and conclusions deserve the application and responsibilities of marriage. Neither did she
examination of the person concerned need not be "incapacity" rooted on some debilitating of a more rigid and stringent set of standards in the adequately explain howshe came to the
resorted to."29 psychological condition or illness. Indeed, manner we discussed above. For, effectively, Dr. conclusion that respondent’s condition was grave
irreconcilable differences, sexual infidelity or Tayag only diagnosed the respondent from the and incurable. x x x
perversion, emotional immaturity and prism of a third party account; she did not actually
In the instant petition, however, the cumulative irresponsibility, and the like, do not by themselves hear, see and evaluate the respondent and how he
testimonies of Glenn, Dr. Tayag and Rodelito, and xxxx
warrant a finding of psychological incapacity under would have reacted and responded to the doctor’s
the documentary evidence offered do not Article 36, as the same may only be due to a probes.
sufficiently prove the root cause, gravity and person’s refusal or unwillingness to assume the First, what she medically described was not
incurability of Mary Grace’s condition. The essential obligations of marriage and not due to related or linked to the respondent’s exact
evidence merely shows that Mary Grace is Dr. Tayag, in her report, merely summarized the
some psychological illness that is contemplated by condition except in a very general way. In short,
outgoing, strong-willed and not inclined to perform petitioner’s narrations, and on this basis
said rule.31 (Citations omitted, underlining ours her testimony and report were rich in generalities
household chores. Further, she is employed in characterized the respondent to be a self-
and emphasis in the original) but disastrously short on particulars, most notably
Dubai and is romantically-involved with another centered, egocentric, and unremorseful person
on how the respondent can besaid to be suffering
man. She has not been maintaining lines of who "believes that the world revolves around him";
from narcissistic personality disorder; why and to
communication with Glenn at the time the latter It is worth noting that Glenn and Mary Grace lived and who "used love as a…deceptive tactic for
what extent the disorder is grave and incurable;
filed the petition before the RTC. Glenn, on the with each other for more or less seven years from exploiting the confidence [petitioner] extended
how and why it was already present at the time of
other hand, is conservative, family-oriented and is 1999 to 2006. The foregoing established fact towards him." x x x.
the marriage; and the effects of the disorder on the
the exact opposite of Mary Grace. While Glenn shows that living together as spouses under one
respondent’s awareness of and his capability to
and Mary Grace possess incompatible roof is not an impossibility. Mary Grace’s departure
We find these observations and conclusions undertake the duties and responsibilities of
personalities, the latter’s acts and traits do not from their home in 2006 indicates either a refusal
insufficiently in-depth and comprehensive to marriage. All these are critical to the success of the
necessarily indicate psychological incapacity. or mere difficulty, but not absolute inability to
warrant the conclusion that a psychological petitioner’s case.
Rumbaua v. Rumbaua30 is emphatic that: comply with her obligation to live with her husband.
incapacity existed that prevented the respondent
from complying with the essential obligations of
Second, her testimony was short on factual basis
In Bier v. Bier, we ruled that it was not enough that Further, considering that Mary Grace was not marriage. It failed to identify the root cause of the
for her diagnosis because it was wholly based on
respondent, alleged to be psychologically personally examined by Dr. Tayag, there arose a respondent’s narcissistic personality disorder and
what the petitioner related toher. x x x If a
incapacitated, had difficulty in complying with his greater burden to present more convincing to prove that it existed at the inception of the
psychological disorder can be proven by
marital obligations, or was unwilling toperform evidence to prove the gravity, juridical marriage. Neither did it explain the incapacitating
independent means, no reason exists why such
these obligations. Proof of a natal or supervening antecedence and incurability of the former’s nature of the alleged disorder, nor show that the
independent proof cannot be admitted and given
disabling factor – an adverse integral element in condition. Glenn, however, failed in this respect. respondent was really incapable of fulfilling his
credit. No such independent evidence, however,
the respondent’s personality structure that Glenn’s testimony is wanting in material details. duties due to some incapacity of a psychological,
appears on record to have been gathered in this
effectively incapacitated him from complying with Rodelito, on the other hand, is a blood relative of not physical, nature. Thus, we cannot avoid but
case, particularly about the respondent’s early life
his essential marital obligations – had to be shown Glenn. Glenn’s statements are hardly objective. conclude that Dr. Tayag’s conclusion in her Report
and associations, and about events on orabout the
and was not shown in this cited case. Moreover, Glenn and Rodelito both referred to – i.e., that the respondent suffered "Narcissistic
time of the marriage and immediately thereafter.
Mary Grace’s traits and acts, which she exhibited Personality Disorder with traces of Antisocial
Thus, the testimony and report appearto us to be
during the marriage. Hence, there isnary a proof Personality Disorder declared to be grave and
no more than a diagnosis that revolves around the
one-sided and meagre facts that the petitioner BIENVENIDO L. REYES
related, and were all slanted to support the Associate Justice
conclusion that a ground exists to justify the
nullification of the marriage. We say this because
only the baser qualities of the respondent’s life
were examined and given focus; none of these
qualities were weighed and balanced with the
better qualities, such as his focus on having a job,
his determination to improve himself through
studies, his care and attention in the first six
months of the marriage, among others. The
evidence fails to mention also what character and
qualities the petitioner brought into her marriage,
for example, why the respondent’s family opposed
the marriage and what events led the respondent
to blame the petitioner for the death of his mother,
if this allegation is at all correct. To be sure, these
are important because not a few marriages have
failed, not because of psychological incapacity of
either or both of the spouses, but because of basic
incompatibilities and marital developments that do
not amount to psychological incapacity. x x
x.35 (Citations omitted and underlining ours)
SO ORDERED.
[G.R. No. 109975. February 9, 2001] Jail Warden Orlando S. Limon. Avelino remains at- Marriage this declaration after this decision shall divorce (See: Sempio Diy, New Family Code, p.
large to date. have become final and executory. 36) in order to dissolve marriages that exist only in
name.
On July 3, 1990, Erlinda filed with the
Regional Trial Court of Olongapo City a petition for SO ORDERED.
judicial declaration of nullity of marriage on the WHEREFORE, and the foregoing considered, the
REPUBLIC OF THE ground of psychological incapacity under Article motion for Reconsideration aforecited is DENIED
On January 29, 1991, the investigating
PHILIPPINES, petitioner, vs. ERLINDA 36 of the Family Code.[8] Since Avelino could not prosecutor filed a Motion to Set Aside Judgment
for lack of merit.
MATIAS DAGDAG, respondent. be located, summons was served by publication in on the ground that the decision was prematurely
the Olongapo News, a newspaper of general rendered since he was given until January 2, 1991 SO ORDERED
DECISION circulation, on September 3, 10, and 17, to manifest whether he was presenting
1990.[9] Subsequently, a hearing was conducted to controverting evidence.
QUISUMBING, J.: establish jurisdictional facts. Thereafter, on The Solicitor General appealed to the Court
December 17, 1990, the date set for presentation The Office of the Solicitor General likewise of Appeals, raising the sole assignment of error
of evidence, only Erlinda and her counsel filed a Motion for Reconsideration of the decision that:
For review on certiorari is the decision[1]of appeared. Erlinda testified and presented her on the ground that the same is not in accordance
the Court of Appeals dated April 22, 1993, in CA- sister-in-law, Virginia Dagdag, as her only witness. with the evidence and the law. After requiring
G.R. CV No. 34378, which affirmed the decision of THE LOWER COURT ERRED IN DECLARING
Erlinda to comment, the trial court denied the APPELLEES MARRIAGE TO AVELINO DAGDAG
the Regi onal Trial Court of Olongapo City in Civil Virginia testified that she is married to the Motion for Reconsideration in an Order dated
Case No. 380-0-90 declaring the marriage of NULL AND VOID ON THE GROUND OF
brother of Avelino. She and her husband live in August 21, 1991 as follows:[13]
Erlinda Matias Dagdag and Avelino Dagdag void PSYCHOLOGICAL INCAPACITY OF THE
Olongapo City but they spend their vacations at
under Article 36 of the Family Code. LATTER, PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 36 OF THE
the house of Avelinos parents in Cuyapo, Nueva
This resolves the Motion for Reconsideration of FAMILY CODE, THE PSYCHOLOGICAL
Ecija. She testified that Erlinda and Avelino always
On September 7, 1975, Erlinda Matias, 16 the Decision of this Honorable Court dated INCAPACITY OF THE NATURE
quarrelled, and that Avelino never stayed for long
years old, married Avelino Parangan Dagdag, 20 December 27, 1990 filed by the Solicitor-General. CONTEMPLATED BY THE LAW NOT HAVING
at the couples house. She knew that Avelino had
years old, at the Iglesia Filipina Independent The observation of the movant is to the effect that BEEN PROVEN TO EXIST.[14]
been gone for a long time now, and that she pitied
Church in Cuyapo, Nueva Ecija.[2] The marriage Erlinda and the children.[10] Mere alcoholism and abusiveness are not enough
certificate was issued by the Office of the Local to show psychological incapacity. Nor is On April 22, 1993, the Court of Appeals
Civil Registrar of the Municipality of Cuyapo, Thereafter, Erlinda rested her case. The trial abandonment. These are common in marriage. rendered a decision[15] affirming the decision of the
Nueva Ecija, on October 20, 1988. court issued an Order giving the investigating There must be showing that these traits, stemmed trial court, disposing thus:
prosecutor until January 2, 1991, to manifest in from psychological incapacity existing at the time
Erlinda and Avelino begot two children, writing whether or not he would present of celebration of the marriage.
namely: Avelyn M. Dagdag, born on January 16, controverting evidence, and stating that should he Avelino Dagdag is psychologically incapacitated
1978; and Eden M. Dagdag, born on April 21, fail to file said manifestation, the case would be not only because he failed to perform the duties
1982.[3] Their birth certificates were issued by the In the case at bar, the abandonment is prolonged and obligations of a married person but because
deemed submitted for decision.
Office of the Local Civil Registrar of the as the husband left his wife and children since he is emotionally immature and irresponsible, an
Municipality of Cuyapo, Nueva Ecija, also on In compliance with the Order, the 1983. The defendant, while in jail escaped and alcoholic, and a criminal. Necessarily, the plaintiff
October 20, 1988. investigating prosecutor conducted an whose present whereabouts are unknown. He is now endowed with the right to seek the judicial
investigation and found that there was no collusion failed to support his family for the same period of declaration of nullity of their marriage under Article
Erlinda and Avelino lived in a house in between the parties. However, he intended to time, actuations clearly indicative of the failure of 36 of the Family Code. Defendants constant non-
District 8, Cuyapo, Nueva Ecija, located at the intervene in the case to avoid fabrication of the husband to comply with the essential marital fulfillment of any of such obligations is continously
back of the house of their in-laws.[4] A week after evidence.[11] obligations of marriage defined and enumerated (sic) destroying the integrity or wholeness of his
the wedding, Avelino started leaving his family under Article 68 of the Family Code. These marriage with the plaintiff. (Pineda, The Family
without explanation. He would disappear for On December 27, 1990, without waiting for findings of facts are uncontroverted. Code of the Philippines Annotated, 1992 Ed., p.
months, suddenly reappear for a few months, then the investigating prosecutors manifestation dated 46).[16]
disappear again. During the times when he was December 5, 1990, the trial court rendered a
with his family, he indulged in drinking sprees with Defendants character traits, by their nature,
decision[12] declaring the marriage of Erlinda and
friends and would return home drunk. He would existed at the time of marriage and became Hence, the present petition for
Avelino void under Article 36 of the Family Code,
force his wife to submit to sexual intercourse and manifest only after the marriage. In rerum natura, review,[17] filed by the Solicitor General.
disposing thus:
if she refused, he would inflict physical injuries on these traits are manifestations of lack of marital
her.[5] responsibility and appear now to be incurable. The Solicitor General contends that the
WHEREFORE, and viewed from the foregoing Nothing can be graver since the family members alleged psychological incapacity of Avelino
On October 1993, he left his family again considerations, the Court hereby declares the are now left to fend for themselves. Contrary to the Dagdag is not of the nature contemplated by
and that was the last they heard from him. Erlinda marriage celebrated at Cuyapo, Nueva Ecija opinion of the Solicitor-General, these are not Article 36 of the Family Code. According to him,
was constrained to look for a job in Olongapo City between Erlinda Matias and Avelino Dagdag on 7 common in marriage. the Court of Appeals made an erroneous and
as a manicurist to support herself and her September 1975 to be null and void. incorrect interpretation of the phrase psychological
children. Finally, Erlinda learned that Avelino was incapacity and an incorrect application thereof to
Let it be said that the provisions of Article 36 of the
imprisoned for some crime,[6] and that he escaped the facts of the case. Respondent, in her
The Local Civil Registrar of Cuyapo, Nueva Ecija New Family Code, to assuage the sensibilities of
from jail on October 22, 1985.[7] A certification Comment, insists that the facts constituting
is hereby ordered to enter into his Book of the more numerous church, is a substitute for
therefor dated February 14, 1990, was issued by
psychological incapacity were proven by psychically ill to such an extent that the person Code[21] in regard to parents and their children. autonomous social institution and marriage as the
preponderance of evidence during trial. could not have known the obligations he was Such non-complied marital obligation(s) must also foundation of the family. (Art. II, Sec. 12, Art. XV,
assuming, or knowing them, could not have given be stated in the petition, proven by evidence and Secs. 1-2) Thus, any doubt should be resolved in
At issue is whether or not the trial court and valid assumption thereof. Although no example of included in the text of the decision. favor of the validity of the marriage. (citing
the Court of Appeals correctly declared the such incapacity need be given here so as not to Republic of the Philippines v. Court of
marriage as null and void under Article 36 of the limit the application of the provision under the Appeals, supra.)[24]
Family Code, on the ground that the husband (7) Interpretations given by the National Appellate
principle of ejusdem generis (Salita vs. Magtolis,
suffers from psychological incapacity as he is Matrimonial Tribunal of the Catholic Church in the
233 SCRA 100, June 13, 1994), nevertheless such
emotionally immature and irresponsible, a habitual Philippines, while not controlling or decisive, WHEREFORE, the present petition is
root cause must be identified as a psychological
alcoholic, and a fugitive from justice. should be given great respect by our courts. x x x GRANTED. The assailed Decision of the Court of
illness and its incapacitating nature fully explained.
Appeals dated April 22, 1993, in CA-G.R. CV No.
Expert evidence may be given by qualified
Article 36 of the Family Code provides - 34378 is REVERSED and SET ASIDE.
psychiatrists and clinical psychologists. (8) The trial court must order the prosecuting
attorney or fiscal and the Solicitor General to No pronouncement as to costs.
A marriage contracted by any party who, at the appear as counsel for the state. No decision shall
(3) The incapacity must be proven to be existing at
time of the celebration, was psychologically be handed down unless the Solicitor General SO ORDERED.
the time of the celebration of the marriage. The
incapacitated to comply with the essential marital issues a certification, which will be quoted in the
evidence must show that the illness was existing
obligations of marriage, shall likewise be void even decision, briefly stating therein his reasons for his
when the parties exchanged their I dos. The
if such incapacity becomes manifest only after its agreement or opposition, as the case may be, to
manifestation of the illness need not be
solemnization. the petition. The Solicitor-General, along with the
perceivable at such time, but the illness itself must
prosecuting attorney, shall submit to the court
have attached at such moment, or prior thereto.
such certification within fifteen (15) days from the
Whether or not psychological incapacity date the case is deemed submitted for resolution
exists in a given case calling for annulment of a (4) Such incapacity must also be shown to be of the court. The Solicitor-General shall discharge
marriage, depends crucially, more than in any field
medically or clinically permanent or incurable. the equivalent function of the defensor
of the law, on the facts of the case. Each case Such incurability may be absolute or even relative vinculi contemplated under Canon 1095.[22]
must be judged, not on the basis of a only in regard to the other spouse, not necessarily
priori assumptions, predilections or
absolutely against everyone of the same sex.
generalizations but according to its own facts. In Taking into consideration these guidelines,
Furthermore, such incapacity must be relevant to
regard to psychological incapacity as a ground for it is evident that Erlinda failed to comply with the
the assumption of marriage obligations, not
annulment of marriage, it is trite to say that no case above-mentioned evidentiary requirements.
necessarily to those not related to marriage, like
is on all fours with another case. The trial judge Erlinda failed to comply with guideline No. 2 which
the exercise of a profession or employment in a
must take pains in examining the factual milieu and requires that the root cause of psychological
job. Hence, a pediatrician may be effective in
the appellate court must, as much as possible, incapacity must be medically or clinically identified
diagnosing illnesses of children and prescribing
avoid substituting its own judgment for that of the and sufficiently proven by experts, since no
medicine to cure them but may not be
trial court.[18] psychiatrist or medical doctor testified as to the
psychologically capacitated to procreate, bear and
alleged psychological incapacity of her husband.
In Republic v. Court of Appeals and raise his/her own children as an essential
Further, the allegation that the husband is a
Molina,[19] the Court laid down the following obligation of marriage.
fugitive from justice was not sufficiently proven. In
GUIDELINES in the interpretation and application fact, the crime for which he was arrested was not
of Article 36 of the Family Code: (5) Such illness must be grave enough to bring even alleged. The investigating prosecutor was
about the disability of the party to assume the likewise not given an opportunity to present
(1) The burden of proof to show the nullity of the essential obligations of marriage. Thus, mild controverting evidence since the trial courts
marriage belongs to the plaintiff. Any doubt should characteriological peculiarities, mood changes, decision was prematurely rendered.
be resolved in favor of the existence and occasional emotional outbursts cannot be
accepted as root causes. The illness must be In the case of Hernandez v. Court of
continuation of the marriage and against its
shown as downright incapacity or inability, not a Appeals,[23] we affirmed the dismissal of the trial
dissolution and nullity. This is rooted in the fact that court and Court of Appeals of the petition for
both our Constitution and our laws cherish the refusal, neglect or difficulty, much less ill will. In
other words, there is a natal or supervening annulment on the ground of dearth of the evidence
validity of marriage and unity of the family. x x x
disabling factor in the person, an adverse integral presented. We further explained therein that -
element in the personality structure that effectively
(2) The root cause of the psychological incapacity incapacitates the person from really accepting and Moreover, expert testimony should have been
must be: (a) medically or clinically identified, (b) thereby complying with the obligations essential to presented to establish the precise cause of private
alleged in the complaint, (c) sufficiently proven by marriage. respondents psychological incapacity, if any, in
experts and (d) clearly explained in the decision. order to show that it existed at the inception of the
Article 36 of the Family Code requires that the
(6) The essential marital obligations must be those marriage. The burden of proof to show the nullity
incapacity must be psychological - not physical, of the marriage rests upon petitioner. The Court is
although its manifestations and/or symptoms may embraced by Articles 68 up to 71 of the Family
Code[20] as regards the husband and wife as well mindful of the policy of the 1987 Constitution to
be physical. The evidence must convince the court
as Articles 220, 221 and 225 of the same protect and strengthen the family as the basic
that the parties, or one of them, was mentally or
The Facts rests on the sound exercise of the [trial] The Petition is meritorious.
courts discretion.[16] Further, the [p]etitioner
failed to show that the issues in the court
Petitioner and respondent were below [had] been resolved arbitrarily or
married on March 15, 1981. Out of this without basis.[17] First Issue:
[G.R. No. 143376. November 26, 2002] Resort to Certiorari
union, two children were born, Cheryl Lynne Hence, this Petition. [18]
and Albryan. On October 27, 1993,
respondent filed before the Regional Trial
Court (RTC) of Negros Occidental, Branch Petitioner argues that the RTC denied
51, a Complaint[5] for the annulment of his her Demurrer to Evidence despite the patent
LENI O. CHOA, petitioner, vs. ALFONSO The Issues
marriage to petitioner. The Complaint was weakness and gross insufficiency of
C. CHOA, respondent.
docketed as Civil Case No. 93- respondents evidence. Thus, she was
8098.Afterwards he filed an Amended entitled to the immediate recourse of the
DECISION Complaint[6] dated November 8, 1993 for the In her Memorandum,[19] petitioner extraordinary remedy of certiorari. Echoing
declaration of nullity of his marriage to submits the following issues for our the CA, respondent counters that appeal in
PANGANIBAN, J.: petitioner based on her alleged consideration: due course, not certiorari, is the proper
psychological incapacity. remedy.
Though interlocutory in character, an The case went to trial with respondent 1) Upon the denial of petitioners demurrer
We clarify. In general, interlocutory
order denying a demurrer to evidence may presenting his evidence in chief. After his to evidence under Rule 33 of the 1997
orders are neither appealable nor subject to
be the subject of a certiorari proceeding, last witness testified, he submitted his Rules of Civil Procedure, is she under
certiorari proceedings.
provided the petitioner can show that it was Formal Offer of Exhibits[7] dated February obligation, as a matter of inflexible rule, as
issued with grave abuse of discretion; and 20, 1998. Instead of offering any objection what the Court of Appeals required of her, However, this rule is not
that appeal in due course is not plain, to it, petitioner filed a Motion to Dismiss to present her evidence, and when an absolute. In Tadeo v. People,[21] this Court
adequate or speedy under the (Demurrer to Evidence)[8] dated May 11, unfavorable [verdict] is handed down, declared that appeal -- not certiorari -- in due
circumstances. Indeed, when the plaintiffs 1998. The lower court then allowed a number appeal therefrom in the manner authorized time was indeed the proper
evidence is utterly and patently insufficient to of pleadings to be filed thereafter. by law, despite the palpably and patently remedy, provided there was no grave abuse
prove the complaint, it would be capricious weak and grossly insufficient or so of discretion or excess of jurisdiction or
for a trial judge to deny the demurrer and to Finally, the RTC issued its December inadequate evidence of the private oppressive exercise of judicial authority.
require the defendant to present evidence to 2, 1998 Order[9] denying petitioners respondent as plaintiff in the annulment of
controvert a nonexisting case. Verily, the Demurrer to Evidence. It held that marriage case, grounded on psychological In fact, Rules 41 and 65 of the Rules
denial constitutes an unwelcome imposition [respondent] established a quantum of incapacity under Art. 36 of The Family of Court expressly recognize this exception
on the courts docket and an assault on the evidence that the [petitioner] must Code? Or under such circumstances, can and allow certiorari when the lower court
defendants resources and peace of mind. In controvert.[10] After her Motion for the extraordinary remedy of certiorari be acts with grave abuse of discretion in the
short, such denial needlessly delays and, Reconsideration[11] was denied in the March directly and immediately resorted to by the issuance of an interlocutory order. Rule 41
thus, effectively denies justice. 22, 1999 Order,[12] petitioner elevated the petitioner; and provides:
case to the CA by way of a Petition for
Certiorari,[13] docketed as CA-GR No. 2) In upholding the lower courts denial of No appeal may be taken from:
53100. petitioners demurrer to evidence, did the
The Case
Court of Appeals wantonly violate, ignore
xxxxxxxxx
or disregard in a whimsical manner the
doctrinal pronouncements of this Court in
Before us is a Petition for Review on Ruling of the Court of Appeals Molina (G.R. No. 108763, February 13, (c) An interlocutory order;
Certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of 1997, 268 SCRA 198) and Santos (G.R.
Court, assailing the March 16, 2000 No. 112019, January 14, 1995, 58 SCRA
Decision[1] and the May 22, 2000 17)?[20] xxxxxxxxx
The CA held that the denial of the
Resolution[2] of the Court of Appeals (CA) in demurrer was merely interlocutory; hence,
CA-GR SP No. 53100. The decretal portion certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of In all the above instances where the
of the Decision reads as follows: Simply stated, the issues are: (1) is
Court was not available. The proper remedy certiorari available to correct an order judgment or final order is not appealable,
was for the defense to present evidence; the aggrieved party may file an appropriate
denying a demurrer to evidence? and (2) in
WHEREFORE, the instant Petition is and if an unfavorable decision was handed its denial, did the RTC commit grave abuse special civil action under Rule 65. [22]
hereby DISMISSED for lack of merit.[3] down later, to take an appeal of discretion by violating or ignoring the
therefrom.[14] In any event, no grave abuse
applicable law and jurisprudence? In turn, Section 1 of Rule 65 reads as
of discretion was committed by respondent
The assailed Resolution denied follows:
judge in issuing the assailed Orders.[15]
petitioners Motion for Reconsideration.[4]
The CA also ruled that the propriety of SEC. 1. Petition for certiorari -- When any
granting or denying a demurrer to evidence The Courts Ruling
tribunal, board or officer exercising judicial
or quasi-judicial functions has acted thereafter was deemed waived -- the her to go needlessly through a protracted
without or in excess of its or his jurisdiction, Supreme Court has already ruled on the trial, which would further clog the court
or with grave abuse of discretion matter. It held that although the question of dockets with another futile case.[55]
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction, admissibility of evidence could not be raised
and there is no appeal, nor any plain, for the first time on appeal, hearsay or WHEREFORE, the Petition is
speedy, and adequate remedy in the unreliable evidence should be disregarded hereby GRANTED and the assailed CA
ordinary course of law, a person aggrieved whether objected to or not, because it has Decision REVERSED and SET
thereby may file a verified petition in the no probative value.[51] ASIDE. Respondents Demurrer to Evidence
proper court, alleging the facts with is GRANTED, and the case for declaration
certainty and praying that judgment be We are, of course, mindful of the of nullity of marriage based on the alleged
rendered annulling or modifying the ruling that a medical examination is not psychological incapacity of petitioner
proceedings of such tribunal, board or a conditio sine qua non to a finding of is DISMISSED. No pronouncement as to
officer, and granting such incidental reliefs psychological incapacity, so long as the costs.
as law and justice may require.[23] totality of evidence presented is enough to
establish the incapacity SO ORDERED.
adequately.[52] Here, however, the totality of
Thus, a denial of a demurrer that is evidence presented by respondent was
tainted with grave abuse of discretion completely insufficient to sustain a finding of
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction psychological incapacity -- more so without
may be assailed through a petition for any medical, psychiatric or psychological
certiorari.[24] In Cruz v. People, this examination.
exception was stressed by the Court in this
wise: The trial court should have carefully
studied and assessed the evidence
presented by respondent and taken into
Admittedly, the general rule that the
account the prevailing jurisprudence on the
extraordinary writ of certiorari is not
matter. It could then have easily concluded,
available to challenge interlocutory orders
as we conclude now, that it was useless to
of the trial court may be subject to
proceed further with the tedious process of
exceptions. When the assailed
hearing contravening proof. His evidence
interlocutory orders are patently erroneous
was obviously, grossly and clearly
or issued with grave abuse of discretion,
insufficient to support a declaration of nullity
the remedy of certiorari lies.[25]
of marriage based on psychological
incapacity. Withal, it was grave abuse of
Obviously, Dr. Gauzon had no discretion for the RTC to deny the Demurrer
personal knowledge of the facts he testified and to violate or ignore this Courts rulings in
to, as these had merely been relayed to him point. Indeed, continuing the process of
by respondent. The former was working on litigation would have been a total waste of
pure suppositions and secondhand time and money for the parties and an
information fed to him by one unwelcome imposition on the trial courts
side. Consequently, his testimony can be docket.
dismissed as unscientific and unreliable.
We have already ruled that grave
Dr. Gauzon tried to save his credibility abuse of discretion may arise when a lower
by asserting that he was able to assess court or tribunal violates or contravenes the
petitioners character, not only through the Constitution, the law or existing
descriptions given by respondent, but also jurisprudence.[53] Any decision, order or
through the formers at least fifteen resolution of a lower court tantamount to
hours[50] of study of the voluminous overruling a judicial pronouncement of the
transcript of records of this case. Even if it highest Court is unmistakably a very grave
took the good doctor a whole day or a whole abuse of discretion.[54]
week to examine the records of this case,
we still find his assessment of petitioners There is no reason to believe that an
psychological state sorely insufficient and appeal would prove to be a plain, speedy or
methodologically flawed. adequate remedy in the case at bar. An
appeal would not promptly relieve petitioner
As to respondents argument -- that from the injurious effects of the patently
because Dr. Gauzons testimony had never mistaken Orders maintaining the baseless A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC March 4,
been objected to, the objection raised action of respondent. It would only compel 2003
RE: PROPOSED RULE ON (b) Where to file. - The petition shal be filed (3) The injured party whose consent was between the parties, the
DECLARATION OF ABSOLUTE NULLITY in the Family Court. obtained by fraud, within five years after the petitioner may apply for a
OF VOID MARRIAGES AND discovery of the fraud, provided that said provisional order for spousal
ANNULMENT OF VOIDABLE party, with full knowledge of the facts support, the custody and support
(c) Imprecriptibility ofaction or defense. -
MARRIAGES constituting the fraud, has not freely of common children, visitation
An Action or defense for the declaration of
cohabited with the other as husband or wife; rights, administration of
absolute nullity of void marriage shall not
community or conjugal property,
RESOLUTION prescribe.
and other matters similarly
(4) The injured party whose consent was
requiringurgent action.
obtained by force, intimidation, or undue
Acting on the letter of the Chairman of (d) What to allege. - A petition under Article
influence, within five years from the time the
the Committee on Revision of the Rules of 36 of Family Code shall specially allege te
force intimidation, or undue influence (3) It must be verified and
Court submitting for this Court's complete facts showing the either or both
disappeared or ceased, provided that the accompanied celebration of
consideration and approval the Proposed parties were psychologically incapacitated
force, intimidation, or undue influence marriage. (b) Where to file.-The
Rule on Declaration of Absolute Nullity of from complying with the essential marital
having disappeared or ceased, said party petition shall be filed in the Family
Void Marriages and Annulment of Voidable obligations of marriages at the time of the
has not thereafter freely cohabited with the Court.
Marriages, the Court Resolved to celebration of marriage even if such
other as husband or wife;
APPROVE the same. incapacity becomes manifest only after its
celebration. Section 4. Venue. - The petition shall be
(5) The injured party where the other spouse filed in the Family Court of the province or
The Rule shall take effect on March
is physically incapable of consummating the city where the petitioner or the respondent
15, 2003 following its publication in a The complete facts should allege the
marriage with the other and such has been residing for at least six months
newspaper of general circulation not later physical manifestations, if any, as are
incapability continues and appears to be prior to the date of filing, or in the case of a
than March 7, 2003 indicative of psychological incapacity at the
incurable, within five years after the non-resident respondent, where he may be
time of the celebration of the marriage but
celebration of marriage; and found in the Philippines at the election of the
expert opinion need not be alleged.
March 4, 2003 petitioner.
(6) Te injured party where the other party
Section 3. Petition for annulment of
Davide, C.J. Bellosillo, Puno, Vitug was afflicted with a sexually-transmissible Section 5. Contents and form of petition. -
voidable marriages. -
Mendoza, Panganiban, Quisumbing, disease found to be serious and appears to (1) The petition shall allege the complete
Sandoval-Gutierrez, Carpio, Austria- be incurable, within five years after the facts constituting the cause of action.
Martinez, Carpio Morales, Callejo, Sr. and (a) Who may file. - The following persons celebration of marriage.
Azcuna may file a petition for annulment of voidable
(2) it shall state the names and
Ynares-Santiago, on leave marriage based on any of the grounds under
(b) Where to file. - The petition ages of the common children of
Corona, on official leave article 45 of the Family Code and within the
shall be filed in the Family Court. the parties and specify the regime
period herein indicated:
governing their property relations,
RULE ON DECLARATION OF ABSOLUTE as well as the properties involved.
Section 4. Venue. - The Petition shall be
NULLITY OF VOID MARIAGES AND (1) The contracting party whose parent, or
filed in the Family Court of the province or
ANNULMENT OF VOIDABLE guardian, or person exercising substitute
city where the petitioner or the respondent If there is no adequate
MARRIAGES parental authority did not give his or her
has been residing for at least six months provision in a written agreement
consent, within five years after attaining the
prior to the date of filing. Or in the case of between the parties, the
age of twenty-one unless, after attaining the
Section 1. Scope - This Rule shall govern non-resident respondent, where he may be petitioner may apply for a
age of twenty-one, such party freely
petitions for declaration of absolute nullity of found in the Philippines, at the election of provisional order for spousal
cohabitated with the other as husband or
void marriages and annulment of voidable the petitioner. support, custody and support of
wife; or the parent, guardian or person
marriages under the Family Code of te common children, visitation
having legal charge of the contracting party
Philippines. rights, administration of
, at any time before such party has reached Section 5. Contents and form of petition. -
community or conjugal property,
the age of twenty-one; (1) The petition shall allege the complete
and other matters similarly
The Rules of Court shall apply facts constituting the cause of action.
requiring urgent action.
suppletorily.
(2) The sane spouse who had no knowledge
of the other's insanity; or by any relative, (2) It shall state the names and
(3) it must be verified and
Section 2. Petition for declaration of guardian, or person having legal charge of ages of the common children of
accompanied by a certification
absolute nullity of void marriages. the insane, at any time before the death of the parties and specify the regime
against forum shopping. The
either party; or by the insane spouse during governing their property relations,
verification and certification must
the a lucid interval or after regaining sanity, as well as the properties involved.
(a) Who may file. - A petition for be signed personally by me
provided that the petitioner , after coming to
declaration of absolute nullity of void petitioner. No petition may be
reason, has not freely cohabited with the
marriage may be filed solely by the If there is no adequate filed solely by counsel or through
other as husband or wife;
husband or the wife. (n) provision in a written agreement an attorney-in-fact.
If the petitioner is in a and (e) a directive for the shall set the case for pre-trial. It (a) A statement of the willingness
foreign country, the verification respondent to answer within thirty shall be the duty of the public of the parties to enter into
and certification against forum days from the last issue of prosecutor to appear for the State agreements as may be allowed
shopping shall be authenticated publication. at the pre-trial. by law, indicating the desired
by the duly authorized officer of terms thereof;
the Philippine embassy or
Section 7. Motion to dismiss. - No motion to Section 10. Social worker. - The court may
legation, consul general, consul
dismiss the petition shall be allowed except require a social worker to conduct a case (b) A concise statement of their
or vice-consul or consular agent
on the ground of lack of jurisdiction over the study and submit the corresponding report respective claims together with
in said country.
subject matter or over the parties; provided, at least three days before the pre-trial. The the applicable laws and
however, that any other ground that might court may also require a case study at any authorities;
(4) it shall be filed in six copies. warrant a dismissal of the case may be stage of the case whenever necessary.
The petitioner shall serve a copy raised as an affirmative defense in an
(c) Admitted facts and proposed
of the petition on the Office of the answer.
Section 11. Pre-trial. - stipulations of facts, as well as the
Solicitor General and the Office of
disputed factual and legal issues;
the City or Provincial Prosecutor,
Section 8. Answer. - (1) The respondent
within five days from the date of (1) Pre-trial mandatory. - A pre-
shall file his answer within fifteen days from
its filing and submit to the court trial is mandatory. On motion (d) All the evidence to be
service of summons, or within thirty days
proof of such service within the or motu proprio, the court shall presented, including expert
from the last issue of publication in case of
same period. set the pre-trial after the last opinion, if any, briefly stating or
service of summons by publication. The
pleading has been served and describing the nature and
answer must be verified by the respondent
filed, or upon receipt of the report purpose thereof;
Failure to comply with any himself and not by counsel or attorney-in-
of the public prosecutor that no
of the preceding requirements fact.
collusion exists between the
may be a ground for immediate (e) The number and names of the
parties.
dismissal of the petition. witnesses and their respective
(2) If the respondent fails to file an
affidavits; and
answer, the court shall not
(2) Notice of pre-trial. - (a) The
Section 6. Summons. - The service of declare him or her in default.
notice of pre-trial shall contain:
summons shall be governed by Rule 14 of (f) Such other matters as the court
the Rules of Court and by the following may require.
(3) Where no answer is filed or if
rules: (1) the date of pre-trial conference;
the answer does not tender an
and
issue, the court shall order the Failure to file the pre-trial brief or to
(1) Where the respondent cannot public prosecutor to investigate comply with its required contents shall have
be located at his given address or whether collusion exists between (2) an order directing the parties to file the same effect as failure to appear at the
his whereabouts are unknown the parties. and serve their respective pre-trial pre-trial under the succeeding paragraphs.
and cannot be ascertained by briefs in such manner as shall ensure
diligent inquiry, service of the receipt thereof by the adverse
Section 9. Investigation report of public Section 13. Effect of failure to appear at the
summons may, by leave of court, party at least three days before the
prosecutor. - (1) Within one month after pre-trial. - {a) If the petitioner fails to appear
be effected upon him by date of pre-trial.
receipt of the court order mentioned in personally, the case shall be dismissed
publication once a week for two
paragraph (3) of Section 8 above, the public unless his counsel or a duly authorized
consecutive weeks in a
prosecutor shall submit a report to the court (b) The notice shall be served representative appears in court and proves
newspaper of general circulation
stating whether the parties are in collusion separately on the parties and their a valid excuse for the non-appearance of
in the Philippines and in such
and serve copies thereof on the parties and respective counsels as well as on the the petitioner.
places as the court may order In
their respective counsels, if any. public prosecutor. It shall be their duty
addition, a copy of the summons
shall be served on the respondent to appear personally at the pre-trial.
(b) If the respondent has filed his
at his last known address by (2) If the public prosecutor finds answer but fails to appear, the
registered mail or any other that collusion exists, he shall (c) Notice of pre-trial shall be sent to court shall proceed with the pre-
means the court may deem state the on the finding of the respondent even if he fails to file trial and require the public
sufficient. collusion within ten days from an answer. In case of summons by prosecutor to investigate the non-
receipt of a copy of a report The publication and the respondent failed appearance of the respondent
court shall set the report for to file his answer, notice of pre-trial and submit within fifteen days
(2) The summons to be published
hearing and If convinced that the shall be sent to respondent at his last thereafter a report to the court
shall be contained in an order of
parties are in collusion, it shall known address. stating whether his non-
the court with the following data:
dismiss the petition. appearance is due to any
(a) title of the case; (b) docket
number; (c) nature of the petition; collusion between the parties. If
Section 12. Contents of pre-trial brief. - The
there Is no collusion, the court
(d) principal grounds of the (3) If the public prosecutor reports pre-trial brief shall contain the following:
petition and the reliefs prayed for; shall require the public prosecutor
that no collusion exists, the court
to intervene for the State during (2) Factual and legal (c) Any ground for legal memoranda support of their claims within
the trial on the merits to prevent issues to be litigated; separation; fifteen days from the date the trial is
suppression or fabrication of terminated. It may require the Office of the
evidence. Solicitor General to file its own
(3) Evidence, including (d) Future support;
memorandum if the case is of significant
objects and
interest to the State. No other pleadings or
Section 14. Pre-trial conference. -At the documents, that have
(e) The jurisdiction of courts; and papers may be submitted without leave of
pre-trial conference, the court: been marked and will
court. After the lapse of the period herein
be presented;
provided, the case will be considered
(f) Future legitime. submitted for decision, with or without the
(a) May refer the issues to a
mediator who shall assist the (4) Names of witnesses memoranda.
parties in reaching an agreement who will be presented Section 17. Trial. - (1) The presiding judge
on matters not prohibited by law. and their testimonies in shall personally conduct the trial of the case. Section 19. Decision. - (1) If the court
the form of affidavits; No delegation of the reception of evidence
renders a decision granting the petition, it
and to a commissioner shall be allowed except
The mediator shall render a shall declare therein that the decree of
as to matters involving property relations of absolute nullity or decree of annulment shall
report within one month from
the spouses.
referral which, for good reasons, (5) Schedule of the be issued by the court only after compliance
the court may extend for a period presentation of with Article 50 and 51 of the Family Code as
not exceeding one month. evidence. (2) The grounds for declaration of implemented under the Rule on Liquidation,
absolute nullity or annulment of Partition and Distribution of Properties.
marriage must be proved. No
(b) In case mediation is not (c) The pre-trial order shall also
judgment on the pleadings, (2) The parties, including the
availed of or where it fails, the contain a directive to the public
summary judgment, or
court shall proceed with the pre- prosecutor to appear for the State Solicitor General and the public
confession of judgment shall be prosecutor, shall be served with
trial conference, on which and take steps to prevent
allowed. copies of the decision personally
occasion it shall consider the collusion between the parties at
advisability of receiving expert any stage of the proceedings and or by registered mail. If the
testimony and such other makers fabrication or suppression of (3) The court may order the respondent summoned by
as may aid in the prompt evidence during the trial on the exclusion from the courtroom of publication failed to appear in the
disposition of the petition. merits. all persons, including members of action, the dispositive part of the
the press, who do not have a decision shall be published once
direct interest in the case. Such in a newspaper of general
Section 15. Pre-trial order. - {a) The (d) The parlies shall not be
an order may be made if the court circulation.
proceedings in the pre-trial shall be allowed to raise issues or present
determines on the record that
recorded. Upon termination of the pre-trial, witnesses and evidence other
requiring a party to testify in open (3) The decision becomes final
the court shall Issue a pre-trial order which than those stated in the pre-trial
court would not enhance the upon the expiration of fifteen days
shall recite in detail the matters taken up In order.
ascertainment of truth; would from notice to the parties. Entry of
the conference, the action taken thereon,
cause to the party psychological
the amendments allowed on the pleadings, judgment shall be made if no
The order shall control the trial of harm or inability to effectively motion for reconsideration or new
and except as to the ground of declaration
the case, unless modified by the communicate due to trial, or appeal Is filed by any of
of nullity or annulment, the agreements or
court to prevent manifest embarrassment, fear, or timidity;
admissions made by the parties on any of the parties the public prosecutor,
injustice. would violate the right of a party or the Solicitor General.
the matters considered, including any
to privacy; or would be offensive
provisional order that may be necessary or
to decency or public morals.
agreed upon by the parties. (e) The parties shall have five
(4) Upon the finality of the
days from receipt of the pre-trial decision, the court shall forthwith
order to propose corrections or (4) No copy shall be taken nor any issue the corresponding decree if
(b) Should the action proceed to
modifications. examination or perusal of the
trial, the order shall contain a the parties have no properties.
records of the case or parts
recital of the following;
thereof be made by any person
Section 16. Prohibited compromise. - The
other than a party or counsel of a If the parties have properties, the court
court-shall not allow compromise on
(1) Facts undisputed, party, except by order of the shall observe the procedure prescribed in
prohibited matters, such as the following: Section 21 of this Rule.
admitted, and those court.
which need not be
proved subject to (a) The civil status of persons;
Section 18. Memoranda. - The court may The entry of judgment shall be
Section 16 of this Rule;
require the parties and the public registered in the Civil Registry where the
(b) The validity of a marriage or of prosecutor, in consultation with the Office of marriage was recorded and In the Civil
a legal separation; the Solicitor General, to file their respective Registry where the Family Court'granting
the petition for declaration of absolute nullity place where the Family petitioner and respondent as well
or annulment of marriage is located. Court is located; as the properties or presumptive
legitimes delivered to their
common children.
Section 20. Appeal. - (2) Registration of the
approved partition and
distribution of the Section 24. Effect of death of a party; duty
(1) Pre-condition. - No appeal
properties of the of the Family Court or Appellate Court. - (a)
from the decision shall be allowed
spouses, in the proper In case a party dies at any stage of the
unless the appellant has filed a
Register of Deeds proceedings before the entry of judgment,
motion for reconsideration or new
where the real the court shall order the case closed and
trial within fifteen days from notice
properties are located; terminated, without prejudice to the
of judgment.
and settlement of the estate in proper
proceedings in the regular courts.
(2) Notice of appeal. - An
(3) The delivery of the
aggrieved party or the Solicitor
children's presumptive (b) If the party dies after the entry
General may appeal from the
legitimes in cash, of judgment of nullity or
decision by filing a Notice of
property, or sound annulment, the judgment shall be
Appeal within fifteen days from
securities. binding upon the parties and their
notice of denial of the motion for
successors in interest in the
reconsideration or new trial. The
settlement of the estate in the
appellant shall serve a copy of the (b) The court shall quote in the
regular courts.
notice of appeal on the adverse Decree the dispositive portion of
parties. the judgment entered and attach
to the Decree the approved deed Section 25. Effectlvity. - This Rule shall
of partition. take effect on March 15, 2003 following its
Section 21. Liquidation, partition and
publication in a newspaper of general
distribution, custody, support of common
circulation not later than March 7, 2003.
children and delivery of their presumptive Except in the case of children under
iegltimes. - Upon entry of the judgment Articles 36 and 53 of the Family Code, the
granting the petition, or, in case of appeal, court shall order the Local Civil Registrar to
upon receipt of the entry of judgment of the issue an amended birth certificate indicating
appellate court granting the petition, the the new civil status of the children affected.
Family Court, on motion of either party, shall
proceed with the liquidation, partition and
Section 23. Registration and publication of
distribution of the properties of the spouses,
the decree; decree as best evidence. - (a)
including custody, support of common
The prevailing party shall cause the
children and delivery of their presumptive
registration of the Decree in the Civil
legitimes pursuant to Articles 50 and 51 of
Registry where the marriage was
the Family Code unless such matters had
registered, the Civil Registry of the place
been adjudicated in previous judicial
where the Family Court is situated, and in
proceedings.
the National Census and Statistics Office.
He shall report td the court compliance with
Section 22. Issuance of Decree of this requirement within thirty days from CARLOS V SANDOVAL
Declaration of Absolute Nullity or Annulment receipt of the copy of the Decree.
of Marriage." (a) The court shall issue the GR 179922, DECEMBER 16, 2008
Decree after; Doctrine: ONLY a spouse can initiate an
(b) In case service of summons action to sever the marital bond for
was made by publication, the marriages solemnized during the effectivity
(1) Registration of the parties shall cause the publication of the Family Code, except cases
entry of judgment of the Decree once in a commenced prior to March 15, 2003. The
granting the petition for newspaper of general circulation. nullity and annulment of a marriage cannot
declaration of nullity or be declared in a judgment on the pleadings,
annulment of marriage summary judgment, or confession of
(c) The registered Decree shall
in the Civil Registry judgment.
be the best evidence to prove the
where the marriage
declaration of absolute nullity or
was celebrated and in FACTS:
annulment of marriage and shall
the Civil Registry of the · Spouses Felix Carlos and Felipa Elemia
serve as notice to third persons
concerning the properties of died intestate. They left six
parcels of land to their compulsory proved. Neither judgment on the appear at the pre-trial. (b) x x x If there is no estate of the deceased spouse filed in the
heirs, Teofilo Carlos and petitioner Juan De pleadings nor summary judgment is collusion, the court shall require the public regular courts.
Dios Carlos. allowed. So is confession of judgment prosecutor to intervene for the State during
· Teofilo died intestate. He was survived by disallowed. the trial on the merits to prevent suppression It is emphasized, however, that the Rule
respondents Felicidad and their son. Upon or fabrication of evidence. does not apply to cases already
Teofilo’s death, Parcel Nos. 5 & 6 With the advent of A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC, commenced before March 15,
(registered in the name of Teofilo) were known as Rule on Declaration of Absolute Truly, only the active participation of the 2003 although the marriage involved is
registered in the name of respondent Nullity of Void Marriages and Annulment of public prosecutor or the Solicitor General within the coverage of the Family
Felicidad. Voidable Marriages, the question on the will ensure that the interest of the State is Code. This is so, as the new Rule which
· In August 1995, petitioner commenced an application of summary judgments or even represented and protected in proceedings became effective on March 15, 2003 is
action against respondents for the judgment on the pleadings in cases of nullity for declaration of nullity of marriages by prospective in its application.
declaration of nullity of marriage. Petitioner or annulment of marriage has been stamped preventing the fabrication or suppression of
asserted that the marriage between his late with clarity. The significant principle laid evidence. Petitioner commenced the nullity of
brother Teofilo and respondent Felicidad down by the said Rule, which took effect marriage case against respondent Felicidad
was a nullity in view of the absence of the on March 15, 2003 is found in Section II. A petition for declaration of absolute in 1995. The marriage in controversy was
required marriage license. 17, viz.: nullity of void marriage may be filed celebrated on May 14, 1962. Which law
· On the grounds of lack of cause of action solely by the husband or would govern depends upon when the
and lack of jurisdiction over the subject SEC. 17. Trial. (1) The presiding wife. Exceptions: (1) Nullity of marriage marriage took place. The marriage
matter, respondents prayed for the judge shall personally conduct the trial of the cases commenced before the effectivity having been solemnized
dismissal of the case before the trial case. No delegation of evidence to a of A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC; and (2) prior to the effectivity of the Family Code,
court. But before the parties could even commissioner shall be allowed except as to Marriages celebrated during the the applicable law is the Civil Code which
proceed to pre-trial, respondents moved for matters involving property relations of the effectivity of the Civil Code. was the law in effect at the time of its
summary judgment. spouses. celebration. But the Civil Code is silent as to
· Petitioner opposed the motion for Under the Rule on Declaration of who may bring an action to declare the
summary judgment and lodged his own (2) The grounds for declaration of Absolute Nullity of Void Marriages and marriage void. Does this mean that any
motion for summary judgment. absolute nullity or annulment of marriage Annulment of Voidable Marriages, the person can bring an action for the
· RTC rendered judgment: defendants must be proved. No judgment on the petition for declaration of absolute nullity of declaration of nullity of marriage? NO. The
(respondents) Motion for Summary pleadings, summary judgment, or marriage may not be filed by any party absence of a provision in the Civil Code
Judgment is hereby denied. Plaintiffs confession of judgment shall be allowed. outside of the marriage. The Rule made it cannot be construed as a license for any
(petitioners) Counter-Motion for Summary exclusively a right of the spouses [Sec. person to institute a nullity of marriage
Judgment is hereby granted and summary By issuing said summary judgment, the trial 2(a)]. The innovation incorporated in A.M. case. Such person must appear to be the
judgment is hereby rendered in favor of court has divested the State of its lawful No. 02-11-10-SC sets forth a demarcation party who stands to be benefited or injured
plaintiff as follows: Declaring the marriage right and duty to intervene in the case. The line between marriages covered by the by the judgment in the suit, or the party
between defendant Felicidad Sandoval and participation of the State is not terminated Family Code and those solemnized under entitled to the avails of the suit. Plaintiff must
Teofilo Carlos null and void ab initio for lack by the declaration of the public the Civil Code. The Rule extends only to be the real party-in-interest.
of the requisite marriage license. prosecutor that no collusion exists between marriages entered into during the effectivity
· In the appeal, respondents argued that the the parties. The State should have been of the Family Code which took effect
trial court acted without or in excess of given the opportunity to present on August 3, 1988. The advent of the Rule
jurisdiction in rendering summary judgment controverting evidence before the judgment on Declaration of Absolute Nullity of Void
annulling the marriage of Teofilo, Sr. and was rendered. Marriages marks
Felicidad. the beginning of the end of the right of the
· CA reversed and set aside Both the Civil Code and the Family Code heirs of the deceased spouse to bring a
the RTC ruling. ordain that the court should order the nullity of marriage case against the surviving
prosecuting attorney to appear and spouse.
ISSUES: intervene for the State. It is at this stage
1) Whether a marriage may be declared when the public prosecutor sees to it that While A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC declares that a
void ab initio through a judgment on the there is no suppression of petition for declaration of absolute nullity
pleadings or a summary judgment and evidence. Concomitantly, even if there is no of marriage may be filed solely by the DIANA M. BARCELONA, petitioner, vs.
without the benefit of a trial. NO suppression of evidence, the public husband or the wife, it does not mean that COURT OF APPEALS and
2) Whether one who is not a spouse may bring prosecutor has to make sure that the the compulsory or intestate heirs are TADEO R.
an action for nullity of marriage. Yes if the evidence to be presented or laid down without any recourse under the law. They BENGZON, respondents.
marriage was celebrated prior to the before the court is not fabricated. can still protect their successional right, for,
effectivity of the Family code and the plaintiff compulsory or intestate heirs can still
DECISION
is a real party-in-interest. To further bolster its role towards the question the validity of the marriage of the
preservation of marriage, the Rule on spouses, not in a proceeding for declaration CARPIO, J.:
HELD: Declaration of Absolute Nullity of Void of nullity but upon the death of a spouse in
I. The grounds for declaration of Marriages reiterates the duty of the public a proceeding for the settlement of the
absolute nullity of marriage must be prosecutor, viz.: SEC. 13. Effect of failure to
The Case the Motion until the parties ventilate their The Court of Appeals also held that Petitioner Dianas contention that the
arguments in a hearing. Petitioner Diana there was no violation of Circular No. 04- second petition fails to state a cause of
filed a motion for reconsideration. However, 94. To determine the existence of forum action is untenable. A cause of action is an
The Petition for Review before us the trial court, through Pairing Judge shopping, the elements of litis act or omission of the defendant in violation
assails the 30 May 1997 Decision[1] as well Rosalina L. Luna Pison, issued on 21 pendentia must exist or a final judgment in of the legal right of the plaintiff.[5] A
as the 7 August 1997 Resolution of the January 1997 an Order (second order) one case must amount to res judicata in the complaint states a cause of action when it
Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. denying the motion. In denying the motion other. In this case, there is no litis contains three essential elements: (1) a
43393. The Court of Appeals affirmed the for reconsideration, Judge Pison explained pendentia because respondent Tadeo had right in favor of the plaintiff by whatever
Order[2] dated 21 January 1997 of the that when the ground for dismissal is the caused the dismissal without prejudice of means and under whatever law it arises; (2)
Regional Trial Court of Quezon City, Branch complaints failure to state a cause of action, the first petition before filing the second an obligation of the defendant to respect
106, in Civil Case No. Q-95-24471. The the trial court determines such fact solely petition. Neither is there res such right; and (3) the act or omission of the
Regional Trial Court refused to dismiss from the petition itself. Judge Pison held that judicata because there is no final decision defendant violates the right of the plaintiff.[6]
private respondents Petition for Annulment contrary to petitioner Dianas claim, a on the merits.
perusal of the allegations in the petition We find the second petition
of Marriage for failure to state a cause of
shows that petitioner Diana has violated sufficiently alleges a cause of action. The
action and for violation of Supreme Court petition sought the declaration of nullity of
Administrative Circular No. 04-94. The respondent Tadeos right, thus giving rise to
a cause of action. Judge Pison also rejected Issues the marriage based on Article 36 of the
assailed Resolution denied petitioners
petitioner Dianas claim that respondent Family Code.[7] The petition alleged that
motion for reconsideration. respondent Tadeo and petitioner Diana
Tadeo is guilty of forum shopping in filing the
second petition. Judge Pison explained that were legally married at the Holy Cross
In her Memorandum, petitioner Diana Parish after a whirlwind courtship as shown
when respondent Tadeo filed the second
raises the following issues: by the marriage contract attached to the
petition, the first petition (Civil Case No. Q-
The Facts petition. The couple established their
95-23445) was no longer pending as it had
been earlier dismissed without prejudice. I. WHETHER THE residence in Quezon City. The union begot
ALLEGATIONS OF five children, Ana Maria, born on 8
On 29 March 1995, private Petitioner Diana filed a Petition THE SECOND November 1964; Isabel, born on 28 October
respondent Tadeo R. Bengzon (respondent for Certiorari, Prohibition PETITION FOR 1968; Ernesto Tadeo, born on 31 March
Tadeo) filed a Petition for Annulment of and Mandamus before the Court of Appeals ANNULMENT OF 1970; Regina Rachelle born on 7 March
Marriage against petitioner Diana M. assailing the trial courts first order deferring MARRIAGE 1974; and Cristina Maria born in February
Barcelona (petitioner Diana). The case was action on the Motion and the second order SUFFICIENTLY 1978. The petition further alleged that
docketed as Civil Case No. Q-95-23445 denying the motion for reconsideration on STATE A CAUSE OF petitioner Diana was psychologically
(first petition) before the Regional Trial 14 February 1997. The Court of Appeals ACTION; incapacitated at the time of the celebration
Court of Quezon City, Branch 87.[3] On 9 dismissed the petition and denied the of their marriage to comply with the
May 1995, respondent Tadeo filed a Motion motion for reconsideration. essential obligations of marriage and such
to Withdraw Petition which the trial court II. WHETHER RESPONDENT incapacity subsists up to the present time.
granted in its Order dated 7 June 1995. Hence, this petition. TADEO VIOLATED The petition alleged the non-
SUPREME COURT complied marital obligations in this manner:
On 21 July 1995, respondent Tadeo ADMINISTRATIVE
filed anew a Petition for Annulment of CIRCULAR NO. 04-94
Marriage against petitioner Diana. This Ruling of the Court of Appeals IN FAILING TO xxx
time, the case was docketed as Civil Case STATE THE FILING
No. Q-95-24471 (second petition) before OF A PREVIOUS 5. During their marriage, they had frequent
the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City, PETITION FOR quarrels due to their varied
The Court of Appeals agreed with
Branch 106 (trial court). ANNULMENT OF upbringing. Respondent, coming from a
petitioner Diana that the trial court in its first
MARRIAGE, ITS rich family, was a disorganized
Petitioner Diana filed a Motion to order erred in deferring action on the Motion
TERMINATION AND housekeeper and was frequently out of the
Dismiss the second petition on two grounds. until after a hearing on whether the
STATUS.[4] house. She would go to her sisters house
First, the second petition fails to state a complaint states a cause of
action. Nevertheless, the Court of Appeals or would play tennis the whole day.
cause of action. Second, it violates
Supreme Court Administrative Circular No. pointed out that the trial courts second order
04-94 (Circular No. 04-94) on forum corrected the situation since in denying the 6. When the family had crisis due to
motion for reconsideration, the trial court in The Courts Ruling
shopping. Respondent Tadeo opposed the several miscarriages suffered by
Motion to which petitioner Diana filed effect denied the Motion. The appellate respondent and the sickness of a child,
Additional Arguments in Support of the court agreed with the trial court that the respondent withdrew to herself and
Motion. allegations in the second petition state a The petition has no merit. eventually refused to speak to her
cause of action sufficient to sustain a valid husband.
The trial court, through Judge Julieto judgment if proven to be true.
P. Tabiolo, issued on 18 September 1996
an Order (first order) deferring resolution of Sufficiency of Cause of Action
7. On November 1977, the respondent, xxx.[8] incurable. Further, the second petition is Science continues to explore,
who was five months pregnant with Cristina devoid of any reference of the grave nature examine and explain how our brains work,
Maria and on the pretext of re-evaluating of the illness to bring about the disability of respond to and control the human body.
The second petition states the
her feelings with petitioner, requested the the petitioner to assume the essential Scientists still do not understand everything
ultimate facts on which respondent bases
latter to temporarily leave their conjugal obligations of marriage. Lastly, the second there is to know about the root causes of
his claim in accordance with Section 1, Rule
dwelling. She further insisted that she petition did not even state the marital psychological disorders. The root causes of
8 of the old Rules of Court.[9] Ultimate facts
wanted to feel a little freedom from obligations which petitioner Diana allegedly many psychological disorders are still
refer to the principal, determinative,
petitioners marital authority and failed to comply due to psychological unknown to science even as their outward,
constitutive facts upon the existence of
influences. The petitioner argued that he incapacity. physical manifestations are evident. Hence,
which the cause of action rests. The term
could occupy another room in their what the new Rules require the petition to
does not refer to details of probative matter Subsequent
conjugal dwelling to accommodate allege are the physical manifestations
or particulars of evidence which establish to Santos and Molina, the Court adopted
respondents desire, but no amount of plea indicative of psychological
the material elements.[10] the new Rules on Declaration of Absolute
and explanation could dissuade her from incapacity. Respondent Tadeos second
demanding that the petitioner leave their Nullity of Void Marriages and Annulment of petition complies with this requirement.
Petitioner Diana relies mainly[11] on
conjugal dwelling. Voidable Marriages (new
the rulings in Santos v. Court of
Rules).[15]Specifically, Section 2, paragraph The second petition states a cause of
Appeals[12] as well as in Republic v. Court
(d) of the new Rules provides: action since it states the legal right of
8. In his desire to keep peace in the family of Appeals and Molina.[13] Santos gave
respondent Tadeo, the correlative obligation
and to safeguard the respondents life to the phrase psychological incapacity, a
of petitioner Diana, and the act or omission
pregnancy, the petitioner was compelled to novel provision in the Family Code, by SEC. 2. Petition for declaration of
of petitioner Diana in violation of the legal
leave their conjugal dwelling and reside in defining the term in this wise: absolute nullity of void marriages
right. In Dulay v. Court of Appeals,[17] the
a condominium located in Greenhills. Court held:
xxx psychological incapacity should refer to x x x.
9. This separation resulted in complete no less than mental (not physical)
In determining whether the allegations of a
estrangement between the petitioner and incapacity that causes a party to be truly
(d) What to allege. A petition under Article 36 of complaint are sufficient to support a cause
the respondent. The petitioner waived his incognitive of the basic marital covenants
the Family Code shall specifically allege of action, it must be borne in mind that the
right to the conjugal dwelling in that concomitantly must be assumed and
the complete facts showing that either or complaint does not have to establish or
respondents favor through an extrajudicial discharged by the parties to the marriage
both parties were psychologically allege the facts proving the existence of a
dissolution of their conjugal partnership of which, as so expressed by Article 68 of the
incapacitated from complying with the cause of action at the outset; this will have
gains. The separation in fact between the Family Code, include their mutual
essential marital obligations of marriage at to be done at the trial on the merits of the
petitioner and the respondent still subsists obligations to live together, observe love,
the time of the celebration of marriage case (Del Bros Hotel Corporation v. CA,
to the present time. respect and fidelity and render help and
even if such incapacity becomes manifest supra). If the allegations in a complaint can
support. There is hardly any doubt that the
only after its celebration. furnish a sufficient basis by which the
intendment of the law has been to confine
10. The parties likewise agreed on the complaint can be maintained, the same
the meaning of psychological incapacity to
custody and support of the children. The should not be dismissed regardless of the
the most serious cases of personality The complete facts should allege the
extrajudicial dissolution of conjugal defenses that may be assessed by the
disorders clearly demonstrative of an utter physical manifestations, if any, as are
partnership of gains is hereto attached as defendants (Rava Devt Corp. v. CA, 211
insensitivity or inability to give meaning and indicative of psychological incapacity at
Annex C and taken as an integral part SCRA 152 [1992] citing Consolidated Bank
significance to the marriage. This the time of the celebration of the
hereof. & Trust Corporation v. Court of Appeals,
psychologic condition must exist at the time marriage but expert opinion need not be 197 SCRA 663 [1991]). To sustain a
the marriage is celebrated. xxx. alleged. (Emphasis supplied)
motion to dismiss for lack of cause of
11. The respondent at the time of the action, the complaint must show that
celebration of their marriage was Molina additionally provided procedural Procedural rules apply to actions the claim for relief does not exist rather
psychologically incapacitated to comply guidelines to assist the courts and the pending and unresolved at the time of their than that a claim has been defectively
with the essential obligation of marriage parties in cases for annulment of marriages passage.[16] The obvious effect of the new stated or is ambiguous, indefinite or
and such incapacity subsisted up to and grounded on psychological incapacity.[14] Rules providing that expert opinion need uncertain (Azur v. Provincial Board, 27
until the present time. Such incapacity was not be alleged in the petition is that there is SCRA 50 [1969]). xxx. (Emphasis supplied)
conclusively found in the psychological Petitioner Diana argues that the also no need to allege the root cause of the
examination conducted on the relationship second petition falls short of the guidelines psychological incapacity. Only experts in
between the petitioner and the respondent. set forth A defendant moving to dismiss a
the fields of neurological and behavioral
in Santos and Molina. Specifically, she complaint on the ground of lack of cause of
sciences are competent to determine the action hypothetically admits all the factual
contends that the second petition is root cause of psychological incapacity.
12. Under Article 36 of the Family Code, averments in the complaint.[18] Given the
defective because it fails to allege the root Since the new Rules do not require the
the marriage between the petitioner and hypothetically admitted facts in the second
cause of the alleged psychological petition to allege expert opinion on the
the respondent is void ab initio and needs petition, the trial court could render
incapacity. The second petition also fails to psychological incapacity, it follows that
to be annulled. This petition is in judgment over the case.
state that the alleged psychological there is also no need to allege in the petition
accordance with Article 39 thereof.
incapacity existed from the celebration of the root cause of the psychological
the marriage and that it is permanent or incapacity.
Forum Shopping requirement. Such violation can result in the Circular No. 04-94,[23] now Section 5,
dismissal of the complaint or Rule 7 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure,
petition. However, the Court has also must be interpreted and applied to achieve
Similarly untenable is petitioner previously held that the rule of substantial its purpose. The Supreme Court
Dianas contention that the second petitions compliance applies to the contents of the promulgated the Circular to promote and
certificate of non-forum shopping which certification.[21] facilitate the orderly administration of
does not mention the filing of the first justice. The Circular should not be
In Roxas v. Court of Appeals,[22] the interpreted with such absolute literalness as
petition and its dismissal without prejudice
Court squarely addressed the issue of to subvert its own ultimate and legitimate
violates Circular No. 04-94.[19] Petitioner whether the omission of a statement on the
Diana refers to this portion of Circular No. objective or the goal of all rules of procedure
prior filing and dismissal of a case involving which is to achieve substantial justice as
04-94-
the same parties and issues merits expeditiously as possible.[24]
dismissal of the petition. In Roxas, the
1. The plaintiff, petitioner, applicant or Court ruled: A final word. We are ever mindful of
principal party seeking relief in the the principle that marriage is an inviolable
complaint, petition, application or other social institution and the foundation of the
xxx an omission in the certificate of non-
initiatory pleading shall certify under oath in family that the state cherishes and
forum shopping about any event that would
such original pleading, or in a sworn protects.[25] In rendering this Decision, this
not constitute res judicata and litis
certification annexed thereto and Court is not prejudging the main issue of
pendentia as in the case at bar, is not fatal
simultaneously filed therewith, to the truth whether the marriage is void based on
as to merit the dismissal and nullification of
of the following facts and Article 36 of the Family Code. The trial court
the entire proceedings considering that the
undertakings: (a) he has not theretofore must resolve this issue after trial on the
evils sought to be prevented by the said
commenced any other action or merits where each party can present
certificate are not present. It is in this light
proceeding involving the same issues in evidence to prove their respective
that we ruled in Maricalum Mining Corp. v.
the Supreme court, the Court of allegations and defenses. We are merely
National Labor Relations Commission that
Appeals, or any other tribunal or holding that, based on the allegations in the
a liberal interpretation of Supreme Court
agency; (b) to the best of his knowledge, second petition, the petition sufficiently
Circular No. 04-94 on non-forum shopping
no action or proceeding is pending in the alleges a cause of action and does not
would be more in keeping with the
Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or violate the rule on forum shopping. Thus,
objectives of procedural rules which is to
any other tribunal or agency; (c) if there is the second petition is not subject to attack
secure a just, speedy and inexpensive
any such action or proceeding which is by a motion to dismiss on these grounds.
disposition of every action and proceeding.
either pending or may have been
terminated, he must state the status WHEREFORE, we DENY the
thereof; and (d) if he should thereafter The dismissal of the first petition petition. The assailed Decision dated 30
learn that a similar action or proceeding precluded the eventuality of litis May 1997 as well as the Resolution dated 7
has been filed or is pending before the pendentia. The first petitions dismissal did August 1997 of the Court of Appeals in CA-
Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or not also amount to res judicata. Thus, there G.R. SP No. 43393 is AFFIRMED. Costs
any other tribunal or agency, he is no need to state in the certificate of non- against petitioner.
undertakes to report that fact within five (5) forum shopping in the second petition (Civil
SO ORDERED.
days therefrom to the court or agency Case No. Q-95-24471) about the prior filing
wherein the original pleading and sworn and dismissal of the first petition (Civil Case Davide, Jr., C.J., (Chairman),
certification contemplated herein have No. Q-95-23445). Vitug, and Ynares-Santiago, JJ., concur.
been filed.[20] Azcuna, J., on leave.
The first petition was dismissed
without prejudice at the instance of
Petitioner Diana points out that respondent Tadeo to keep the peace
respondent Tadeo did not disclose in his between him and his grown up children. The
certificate of non-forum shopping that he dismissal happened before service of
had previously commenced a similar action answer or any responsive pleading. Clearly,
based on the same grounds with the same there is no litis pendentia since respondent
prayer for relief. The certificate of non-forum Tadeo had already withdrawn and caused
shopping should have stated the fact of the dismissal of the first petition when he Iyoy vs. Iyoy
termination of the first petition or its status. subsequently filed the second
petition. Neither is there res
The Court has consistently held that a In this Petition for Review
judicata because the dismissal order was
certificate of non-forum shopping not not a decision on the merits but a dismissal on Certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of
attached to the petition or one belatedly filed without prejudice. Court, petitioner Republic of the Philippines,
or one signed by counsel and not the party represented by the Office of the Solicitor
himself constitutes a violation of the General, prays for the reversal of the
Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. respondent Crasus, and there was no more respondent Crasus of misusing the amount Not long after, on 30 October 1998, the RTC
CV No. 62539, dated 30 July possibility of reconciliation between them. of ₱90,000.00 which she advanced to him promulgated its Judgment declaring the
2001,1 affirming the Judgment of the Respondent Crasus finally alleged in his to finance the brain operation of their son, marriage of respondent Crasus and Fely
Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Cebu City, Complaint that Fely’s acts brought danger Calvert. On the basis of the foregoing, Fely null and void ab initio, on the basis of the
Branch 22, in Civil Case No. CEB-20077, and dishonor to the family, and clearly also prayed that the RTC declare her following findings –
dated 30 October 1998,2 declaring the demonstrated her psychological incapacity marriage to respondent Crasus null and
marriage between respondent Crasus L. to perform the essential obligations of void; and that respondent Crasus be
The ground bearing defendant’s
Iyoy and Fely Ada Rosal-Iyoy null and void marriage. Such incapacity, being incurable ordered to pay to Fely the ₱90,000.00 she
psychological incapacity deserves a
on the basis of Article 36 of the Family Code and continuing, constitutes a ground for advanced to him, with interest, plus, moral
reasonable consideration. As observed,
of the Philippines. declaration of nullity of marriage under and exemplary damages, attorney’s fees,
plaintiff’s testimony is decidedly credible.
Article 36, in relation to Articles 68, 70, and and litigation expenses.
The Court finds that defendant had indeed
72, of the Family Code of the Philippines.
The proceedings before the RTC exhibited unmistakable signs of
commenced with the filing of a After respondent Crasus and Fely had filed psychological incapacity to comply with her
Complaint3 for declaration of nullity of Fely filed her Answer and their respective Pre-Trial Briefs,5 the RTC marital duties such as striving for family
marriage by respondent Crasus on 25 Counterclaim4 with the RTC on 05 June afforded both parties the opportunity to unity, observing fidelity, mutual love,
March 1997. According to the said 1997. She asserted therein that she was present their evidence. Petitioner Republic respect, help and support. From the
Complaint, respondent Crasus married Fely already an American citizen since 1988 and participated in the trial through the evidence presented, plaintiff adequately
on 16 December 1961 at Bradford Memorial was now married to Stephen Micklus. While Provincial Prosecutor of Cebu.6 established that the defendant practically
Church, Jones Avenue, Cebu City. As a she admitted being previously married to abandoned him. She obtained a divorce
result of their union, they had five children – respondent Crasus and having five children decree in the United States of America and
Respondent Crasus submitted the following
Crasus, Jr., Daphne, Debbie, Calvert, and with him, Fely refuted the other allegations married another man and has establish [sic]
pieces of evidence in support of his
Carlos – who are now all of legal ages. After made by respondent Crasus in his another family of her own. Plaintiff is in an
Complaint: (1) his own testimony on 08
the celebration of their marriage, Complaint. She explained that she was no anomalous situation, wherein he is married
September 1997, in which he essentially
respondent Crasus discovered that Fely more hot-tempered than any normal person, to a wife who is already married to another
reiterated the allegations in his
was "hot-tempered, a nagger and and she may had been indignant at man in another country.
Complaint;7 (2) the Certification, dated 13
extravagant." In 1984, Fely left the respondent Crasus on certain occasions but
April 1989, by the Health Department of
Philippines for the United States of America it was because of the latter’s drunkenness,
Cebu City, on the recording of the Marriage Defendant’s intolerable traits may not have
(U.S.A.), leaving all of their five children, the womanizing, and lack of sincere effort to find
Contract between respondent Crasus and been apparent or manifest before the
youngest then being only six years old, to employment and to contribute to the
Fely in the Register of Deeds, such marriage, the FAMILY CODE nonetheless
the care of respondent Crasus. Barely a maintenance of their household. She could
marriage celebration taking place on 16 allows the annulment of the marriage
year after Fely left for the U.S.A., not have been extravagant since the family
December 1961;8 and (3) the invitation to provided that these were eventually
respondent Crasus received a letter from hardly had enough money for basic needs.
the wedding of Crasus, Jr., their eldest son, manifested after the wedding. It appears to
her requesting that he sign the enclosed Indeed, Fely left for abroad for financial
wherein Fely openly used her American be the case in this instance.
divorce papers; he disregarded the said reasons as respondent Crasus had no job
husband’s surname, Micklus.9
request. Sometime in 1985, respondent and what she was then earning as the sole
Crasus learned, through the letters sent by breadwinner in the Philippines was Certainly defendant’s posture being an
Fely to their children, that Fely got married insufficient to support their family. Although Fely’s counsel filed a Notice,10 and, later on, irresponsible wife erringly reveals her very
to an American, with whom she eventually she left all of her children with respondent a Motion,11 to take the deposition of low regard for that sacred and inviolable
had a child. In 1987, Fely came back to the Crasus, she continued to provide financial witnesses, namely, Fely and her children, institution of marriage which is the
Philippines with her American family, support to them, as well as, to respondent Crasus, Jr. and Daphne, upon written foundation of human society throughout the
staying at Cebu Plaza Hotel in Cebu City. Crasus. Subsequently, Fely was able to interrogatories, before the consular officers civilized world. It is quite evident that the
Respondent Crasus did not bother to talk to bring her children to the U.S.A., except for of the Philippines in New York and defendant is bereft of the mind, will and
Fely because he was afraid he might not be one, Calvert, who had to stay behind for California, U.S.A, where the said witnesses heart to comply with her marital obligations,
able to bear the sorrow and the pain she had medical reasons. While she did file for reside. Despite the Orders12 and such incapacity was already there at the
caused him. Fely returned to the Philippines divorce from respondent Crasus, she Commissions13 issued by the RTC to the time of the marriage in question is shown by
several times more: in 1990, for the wedding denied having herself sent a letter to Philippine Consuls of New York and defendant’s own attitude towards her
of their eldest child, Crasus, Jr.; in 1992, for respondent Crasus requesting him to sign California, U.S.A., to take the depositions of marriage to plaintiff.
the brain operation of their fourth child, the enclosed divorce papers. After securing the witnesses upon written interrogatories,
Calvert; and in 1995, for unknown reasons. a divorce from respondent Crasus, Fely not a single deposition was ever submitted
Fely continued to live with her American married her American husband and In sum, the ground invoked by plaintiff which
to the RTC. Taking into account that it had
family in New Jersey, U.S.A. She had been acquired American citizenship. She argued is defendant’s psychological incapacity to
been over a year since respondent Crasus
comply with the essential marital obligations
openly using the surname of her American that her marriage to her American husband had presented his evidence and that Fely
husband in the Philippines and in the U.S.A. was legal because now being an American which already existed at the time of the
failed to exert effort to have the case
For the wedding of Crasus, Jr., Fely herself citizen, her status shall be governed by the marriage in question has been satisfactorily
progress, the RTC issued an Order, dated
proven. The evidence in herein case
had invitations made in which she was law of her present nationality. Fely also 05 October 1998,14 considering Fely to have
named as "Mrs. Fely Ada Micklus." At the pointed out that respondent Crasus himself establishes the irresponsibility of defendant
waived her right to present her evidence.
time the Complaint was filed, it had been 13 was presently living with another woman Fely Ada Rosal Iyoy, firmly.
The case was thus deemed submitted for
years since Fely left and abandoned who bore him a child. She also accused decision.
Going over plaintiff’s testimony which is SHALL LIKEWISE HAVE CAPACITY TO In his Comment19 to the Petition, incapacity that causes a party to be truly
decidedly credible, the Court finds that the REMARRY UNDER PHILIPPINE LAW." respondent Crasus maintained that Fely’s cognitive of the basic marital covenants that
defendant had indeed exhibited psychological incapacity was clearly concomitantly must be assumed and
unmistakable signs of such psychological established after a full-blown trial, and that discharged by the parties to the marriage
The rationale behind the second paragraph
incapacity to comply with her marital paragraph 2 of Article 26 of the Family Code which, as so expressed by Article 68 of the
of the above-quoted provision is to avoid the
obligations. These are her excessive of the Philippines was indeed applicable to Family Code, include their mutual
absurd and unjust situation of a Filipino
disposition to material things over and the marriage of respondent Crasus and obligations to live together, observe love,
citizen still being married to his or her alien
above the marital stability. That such Fely, because the latter had already respect and fidelity and render help and
spouse, although the latter is no longer
incapacity was already there at the time of become an American citizen. He further support. There is hardly any doubt that the
married to the Filipino spouse because he
the marriage in question is shown by questioned the personality of petitioner intendment of the law has been to confine
or she has obtained a divorce abroad. In the
defendant’s own attitude towards her Republic, represented by the Office of the the meaning of "psychological incapacity" to
case at bench, the defendant has
marriage to plaintiff. And for these reasons Solicitor General, to institute the instant the most serious cases of personality
undoubtedly acquired her American
there is a legal ground to declare the Petition, because Article 48 of the Family disorders clearly demonstrative of an utter
husband’s citizenship and thus has become
marriage of plaintiff Crasus L. Iyoy and Code of the Philippines authorizes the insensitivity or inability to give meaning and
an alien as well. This Court cannot see why
defendant Fely Ada Rosal Iyoy null and prosecuting attorney or fiscal assigned to significance to the marriage. This
the benefits of Art. 26 aforequoted can not
void ab initio.15 the trial court, not the Solicitor General, to psychological condition must exist at the
be extended to a Filipino citizen whose
intervene on behalf of the State, in time the marriage is celebrated…21
spouse eventually embraces another
proceedings for annulment and declaration
Petitioner Republic, believing that the afore- citizenship and thus becomes herself an
of nullity of marriages.
quoted Judgment of the RTC was contrary alien. The psychological incapacity must be
to law and evidence, filed an appeal with the characterized by –
Court of Appeals. The appellate court, After having reviewed the records of this
It would be the height of unfairness if, under
though, in its Decision, dated 30 July 2001, case and the applicable laws and
these circumstances, plaintiff would still be (a) Gravity – It must be grave or serious
affirmed the appealed Judgment of the jurisprudence, this Court finds the instant
considered as married to defendant, given such that the party would be incapable of
RTC, finding no reversible error therein. It Petition to be meritorious.
her total incapacity to honor her marital carrying out the ordinary duties required in a
even offered additional ratiocination for
covenants to the former. To condemn marriage;
declaring the marriage between respondent
plaintiff to remain shackled in a marriage I
Crasus and Fely null and void, to wit –
that in truth and in fact does not exist and to
(b) Juridical Antecedence – It must be
remain married to a spouse who is
The totality of evidence presented during rooted in the history of the party antedating
Defendant secured a divorce from plaintiff- incapacitated to discharge essential marital
trial is insufficient to support the finding of the marriage, although the overt
appellee abroad, has remarried, and is now covenants, is verily to condemn him to a
psychological incapacity of Fely. manifestations may emerge only after the
permanently residing in the United States. perpetual disadvantage which this Court
marriage; and
Plaintiff-appellee categorically stated this as finds abhorrent and will not countenance.
one of his reasons for seeking the Justice dictates that plaintiff be given relief Article 36, concededly one of the more
declaration of nullity of their marriage… by affirming the trial court’s declaration of controversial provisions of the Family Code (c) Incurability – It must be incurable or,
the nullity of the marriage of the parties.16 of the Philippines, reads – even if it were otherwise, the cure would be
beyond the means of the party involved.22
…
After the Court of Appeals, in a Resolution, ART. 36. A marriage contracted by any
dated 08 March 2002,17 denied its Motion party who, at the time of the celebration, More definitive guidelines in the
Article 26 of the Family Code provides:
for Reconsideration, petitioner Republic was psychologically incapacitated to comply interpretation and application of Article 36 of
filed the instant Petition before this Court, with the essential marital obligations of the Family Code of the Philippines were
"Art. 26. All marriages solemnized outside based on the following arguments/grounds marriage, shall likewise be void even if such handed down by this Court in Republic v.
the Philippines in accordance with the laws – incapacity becomes manifest only after its Court of Appeals and Molina,23 which,
in force in the country where they were solemnization. although quite lengthy, by its significance,
solemnized, and valid there as such, shall deserves to be reproduced below –
I. Abandonment by and sexual infidelity of
also be valid in this country, except those
respondent’s wife do not per se constitute Issues most commonly arise as to what
prohibited under Articles 35(1), (4), (5) and
psychological incapacity. constitutes psychological incapacity. In a (1) The burden of proof to show the nullity of
(6), 36, 37 and 38.
series of cases, this Court laid down the marriage belongs to the plaintiff. Any
guidelines for determining its existence. doubt should be resolved in favor of the
II. The Court of Appeals has decided
"WHERE A MARRIAGE BETWEEN A existence and continuation of the marriage
questions of substance not in accord with
FILIPINO CITIZEN AND A FOREIGNER IS and against its dissolution and nullity. This
law and jurisprudence considering that the In Santos v. Court of Appeals,20 the term
VALIDLY CELEBRATED AND A DIVORCE is rooted in the fact that both our
Court of Appeals committed serious errors psychological incapacity was defined, thus
IS THEREAFTER VALIDLY OBTAINED Constitution and our laws cherish the
of law in ruling that Article 26, paragraph 2 –
ABROAD BY THE ALIEN SPOUSE validity of marriage and unity of the family.
of the Family Code is inapplicable to the
CAPACITATING HIM OR HER TO Thus, our Constitution devotes an entire
case at bar.18
REMARRY, THE FILIPINO SPOUSE ". . . [P]sychological incapacity" should refer Article on the Family, recognizing it "as the
to no less than a mental (not physical) foundation of the nation." It decrees
marriage as legally "inviolable," thereby (5) Such illness must be grave enough to the declaration of nullity of marriage based confused with a divorce law that cuts the
protecting it from dissolution at the whim of bring about the disability of the party to on psychological incapacity. Such marital bond at the time the causes
the parties. Both the family and marriage are assume the essential obligations of psychological incapacity, however, must be therefore manifest themselves. It refers to a
to be "protected" by the state. marriage. Thus, "mild characteriological established by the totality of the evidence serious psychological illness afflicting a
peculiarities, mood changes, occasional presented during the trial. party even before the celebration of
emotional outbursts" cannot be accepted as marriage. It is a malady so grave and so
The Family Code echoes this constitutional
root causes. The illness must be shown as permanent as to deprive one of awareness
edict on marriage and the family and Using the guidelines established by the
downright incapacity or inability, not a of the duties and responsibilities of the
emphasizes their permanence, inviolability afore-mentioned jurisprudence, this Court
refusal, neglect or difficulty, much less ill matrimonial bond one is about to assume."28
and solidarity. finds that the totality of evidence presented
will. In other words, there is a natal or
by respondent Crasus failed miserably to
supervening disabling factor in the person,
establish the alleged psychological The evidence may have proven that Fely
(2) The root cause of the psychological an adverse integral element in the
incapacity of his wife Fely; therefore, there committed acts that hurt and embarrassed
incapacity must be (a) medically or clinically personality structure that effectively
is no basis for declaring their marriage null respondent Crasus and the rest of the
identified, (b) alleged in the complaint, (c) incapacitates the person from really
and void under Article 36 of the Family Code family. Her hot-temper, nagging, and
sufficiently proven by experts and (d) clearly accepting and thereby complying with the
of the Philippines. extravagance; her abandonment of
explained in the decision. Article 36 of the obligations essential to marriage.
respondent Crasus; her marriage to an
Family Code requires that the incapacity
American; and even her flaunting of her
must be psychological - not physical, The only substantial evidence presented by
(6) The essential marital obligations must be American family and her American
although its manifestations and/or respondent Crasus before the RTC was his
those embraced by Articles 68 up to 71 of surname, may indeed be manifestations of
symptoms may be physical. The evidence testimony, which can be easily put into
the Family Code as regards the husband her alleged incapacity to comply with her
must convince the court that the parties, or question for being self-serving, in the
and wife as well as Articles 220, 221 and marital obligations; nonetheless, the root
one of them, was mentally or psychically ill absence of any other corroborating
225 of the same Code in regard to parents cause for such was not identified. If the root
to such an extent that the person could not evidence. He submitted only two other
and their children. Such non-complied cause of the incapacity was not identified,
have known the obligations he was pieces of evidence: (1) the Certification on
marital obligation(s) must also be stated in then it cannot be satisfactorily established
assuming, or knowing them, could not have the recording with the Register of Deeds of
the petition, proven by evidence and as a psychological or mental defect that is
given valid assumption thereof. Although no the Marriage Contract between respondent
included in the text of the decision. serious or grave; neither could it be proven
example of such incapacity need be given Crasus and Fely, such marriage being
to be in existence at the time of celebration
here so as not to limit the application of the celebrated on 16 December 1961; and (2)
of the marriage; nor that it is incurable.
provision under the principle of ejusdem (7) Interpretations given by the National the invitation to the wedding of Crasus, Jr.,
While the personal examination of Fely by a
generis, nevertheless such root cause must Appellate Matrimonial Tribunal of the their eldest son, in which Fely used her
psychiatrist or psychologist is no longer
be identified as a psychological illness and Catholic Church in the Philippines, while not American husband’s surname. Even
mandatory for the declaration of nullity of
its incapacitating nature fully explained. controlling or decisive, should be given considering the admissions made by Fely
their marriage under Article 36 of the Family
Expert evidence may be given by qualified great respect by our courts… herself in her Answer to respondent
Code of the Philippines, by virtue of this
psychiatrists and clinical psychologists. Crasus’s Complaint filed with the RTC, the
Court’s ruling in Marcos v.
evidence is not enough to convince this
(8) The trial court must order the Marcos,29 respondent Crasus must still
Court that Fely had such a grave mental
(3) The incapacity must be proven to be prosecuting attorney or fiscal and the have complied with the requirement laid
illness that prevented her from assuming the
existing at "the time of the celebration" of the Solicitor General to appear as counsel for down in Republic v. Court of Appeals and
essential obligations of marriage.
marriage. The evidence must show that the the state. No decision shall be handed down Molina30 that the root cause of the
illness was existing when the parties unless the Solicitor General issues a incapacity be identified as a psychological
exchanged their "I do's." The manifestation certification, which will be quoted in the It is worthy to emphasize that Article 36 of illness and that its incapacitating nature be
of the illness need not be perceivable at decision, briefly stating therein his reasons the Family Code of the Philippines fully explained.
such time, but the illness itself must have for his agreement or opposition, as the case contemplates downright incapacity or
attached at such moment, or prior thereto. may be, to the petition. The Solicitor inability to take cognizance of and to
In any case, any doubt shall be resolved in
General, along with the prosecuting assume the basic marital obligations; not a
favor of the validity of the marriage.31 No
attorney, shall submit to the court such mere refusal, neglect or difficulty, much
(4) Such incapacity must also be shown to less than the Constitution of 1987 sets the
certification within fifteen (15) days from the less, ill will, on the part of the errant
be medically or clinically permanent or policy to protect and strengthen the family
date the case is deemed submitted for spouse.26 Irreconcilable differences,
incurable. Such incurability may be absolute as the basic social institution and marriage
resolution of the court. The Solicitor General conflicting personalities, emotional
or even relative only in regard to the other as the foundation of the family.32
shall discharge the equivalent function of immaturity and irresponsibility, physical
spouse, not necessarily absolutely against
the defensor vinculi contemplated under abuse, habitual alcoholism, sexual infidelity
everyone of the same sex. Furthermore,
Canon 1095.24 or perversion, and abandonment, by II
such incapacity must be relevant to the
themselves, also do not warrant a finding of
assumption of marriage obligations, not
psychological incapacity under the said
necessarily to those not related to marriage, A later case, Marcos v. Marcos,25 further Article 26, paragraph 2 of the Family Code
Article.27
like the exercise of a profession or clarified that there is no requirement that the of the Philippines is not applicable to the
employment in a job… defendant/respondent spouse should be case at bar.
personally examined by a physician or As has already been stressed by this Court
psychologist as a condition sine qua non for in previous cases, Article 36 "is not to be
According to Article 26, paragraph 2 of the General had no personality to file the instant Office of the Solicitor General takes over Finally, the issuance of this Court of the
Family Code of the Philippines – Petition on behalf of the State. Article 48 when the case is elevated to the Court of Rule on Declaration of Absolute Nullity of
provides – Appeals or this Court. Since it shall be Void Marriages and Annulment of Voidable
eventually responsible for taking the case to Marriages,38 which became effective on 15
Where a marriage between a Filipino citizen
the appellate courts when circumstances March 2003, should dispel any other doubts
and a foreigner is validly celebrated and a ART. 48. In all cases of annulment or
demand, then it is only reasonable and of respondent Crasus as to the authority of
divorce is thereafter validly obtained abroad declaration of absolute nullity of marriage,
practical that even while the proceeding is the Solicitor General to file the instant
by the alien spouse capacitating him or her the Court shall order the prosecuting
still being held before the RTC, the Office of Petition on behalf of the State. The Rule
to remarry, the Filipino spouse shall likewise attorney or fiscal assigned to it to appear on
the Solicitor General can already exercise recognizes the authority of the Solicitor
have capacity to remarry under Philippine behalf of the State to take steps to prevent
supervision and control over the conduct of General to intervene and take part in the
law. collusion between the parties and to take
the prosecuting attorney or fiscal therein to proceedings for annulment and declaration
care that the evidence is not fabricated or
better guarantee the protection of the of nullity of marriages before the RTC and
suppressed.
As it is worded, Article 26, paragraph 2, interests of the State. on appeal to higher courts. The pertinent
refers to a special situation wherein one of provisions of the said Rule are reproduced
the couple getting married is a Filipino That Article 48 does not expressly mention below –
In fact, this Court had already recognized
citizen and the other a foreigner at the time the Solicitor General does not bar him or his
and affirmed the role of the Solicitor General
the marriage was celebrated. By its plain Office from intervening in proceedings for
in several cases for annulment and Sec. 5. Contents and form of petition. –
and literal interpretation, the said provision annulment or declaration of nullity of
declaration of nullity of marriages that were
cannot be applied to the case of respondent marriages. Executive Order No. 292,
appealed before it, summarized as follows
Crasus and his wife Fely because at the otherwise known as the Administrative …
in the case of Ancheta v. Ancheta36 –
time Fely obtained her divorce, she was still Code of 1987, appoints the Solicitor General
a Filipino citizen. Although the exact date as the principal law officer and legal
(4) It shall be filed in six copies. The
was not established, Fely herself admitted defender of the Government.33 His Office is In the case of Republic v. Court of
petitioner shall serve a copy of the petition
in her Answer filed before the RTC that she tasked to represent the Government of the Appeals [268 SCRA 198 (1997)], this Court
on the Office of the Solicitor General and the
obtained a divorce from respondent Crasus Philippines, its agencies and laid down the guidelines in the interpretation
Office of the City or Provincial Prosecutor,
sometime after she left for the United instrumentalities and its officials and agents and application of Art. 48 of the Family
within five days from the date of its filing and
States in 1984, after which she married her in any litigation, proceeding, investigation or Code, one of which concerns the role of the
submit to the court proof of such service
American husband in 1985. In the same matter requiring the services of lawyers. The prosecuting attorney or fiscal and the
within the same period.
Answer, she alleged that she had been an Office of the Solicitor General shall Solicitor General to appear as counsel for
American citizen since 1988. At the time she constitute the law office of the Government the State:
filed for divorce, Fely was still a Filipino and, as such, shall discharge duties …
citizen, and pursuant to the nationality requiring the services of lawyers.34
(8) The trial court must order the
principle embodied in Article 15 of the Civil
Code of the Philippines, she was still bound
prosecuting attorney or fiscal and the Sec. 18. Memoranda. – The court may
The intent of Article 48 of the Family Code Solicitor General to appear as counsel for require the parties and the public
by Philippine laws on family rights and
of the Philippines is to ensure that the the state. No decision shall be handed down prosecutor, in consultation with the Office of
duties, status, condition, and legal capacity,
interest of the State is represented and unless the Solicitor General issues a the Solicitor General, to file their respective
even when she was already living abroad.
protected in proceedings for annulment and certification, which will be quoted in the memoranda in support of their claims within
Philippine laws, then and even until now, do
declaration of nullity of marriages by decision, briefly stating therein his reasons fifteen days from the date the trial is
not allow and recognize divorce between
preventing collusion between the parties, or for his agreement or opposition, as the case terminated. It may require the Office of the
Filipino spouses. Thus, Fely could not have
the fabrication or suppression of evidence; may be, to the petition. The Solicitor Solicitor General to file its own
validly obtained a divorce from respondent
and, bearing in mind that the Solicitor General, along with the prosecuting memorandum if the case is of significant
Crasus.
General is the principal law officer and legal attorney, shall submit to the court such interest to the State. No other pleadings or
defender of the land, then his intervention in certification within fifteen (15) days from the papers may be submitted without leave of
III such proceedings could only serve and date the case is deemed submitted for court. After the lapse of the period herein
contribute to the realization of such intent, resolution of the court. The Solicitor General provided, the case will be considered
rather than thwart it. shall discharge the equivalent function of submitted for decision, with or without the
The Solicitor General is authorized to
the defensor vinculi contemplated under memoranda.
intervene, on behalf of the Republic, in
Canon 1095. [Id., at 213]
proceedings for annulment and declaration Furthermore, the general rule is that only the
of nullity of marriages. Solicitor General is authorized to bring or Sec. 19. Decision. –
defend actions on behalf of the People or This Court in the case of Malcampo-Sin v.
the Republic of the Philippines once the Sin [355 SCRA 285 (2001)] reiterated its
Invoking Article 48 of the Family Code of the
case is brought before this Court or the pronouncement in Republic v. Court of …
Philippines, respondent Crasus argued that
Court of Appeals.35While it is the Appeals [Supra.] regarding the role of the
only the prosecuting attorney or fiscal
prosecuting attorney or fiscal who actively prosecuting attorney or fiscal and the (2) The parties, including the Solicitor
assigned to the RTC may intervene on
participates, on behalf of the State, in a Solicitor General to appear as counsel for General and the public prosecutor, shall be
behalf of the State in proceedings for
proceeding for annulment or declaration of the State…37 served with copies of the decision
annulment or declaration of nullity of
nullity of marriage before the RTC, the personally or by registered mail. If the
marriages; hence, the Office of the Solicitor
respondent summoned by publication failed The marriage of respondent Crasus L. Iyoy
to appear in the action, the dispositive part and Fely Ada Rosal-Iyoy remains valid and
of the decision shall be published once in a subsisting.
newspaper of general circulation.
SO ORDERED.
(3) The decision becomes final upon the
expiration of fifteen days from notice to the
parties. Entry of judgment shall be made if
no motion for reconsideration or new trial, or
appeal is filed by any of the parties, the
public prosecutor, or the Solicitor General.
NACHURA, J.:
Far from novel is the issue involved in this On April 23, 1996, Rowena’s uncle brought the incapacitated, and made the following findings that they would somehow manage because
petition. Psychological incapacity, since its two to a court to get married. He was then 25 and conclusions: petitioner is rich. In the last week of March 1996,
incorporation in our laws, has become a clichéd years old, and she, 20.6 The two then continued respondent seriously brought the idea of eloping
subject of discussion in our jurisprudence. The to stay at her uncle’s place where Edward was and she already bought tickets for the boat going
BACKGROUND DATA & BRIEF MARITAL
Court treats this case, however, with much ado, treated like a prisoner—he was not allowed to go to Cebu. Petitioner reluctantly agreed to the idea
HISTORY:
it having realized that current jurisprudential out unaccompanied. Her uncle also showed and so they eloped to Cebu. The parties are
doctrine has unnecessarily imposed a Edward his guns and warned the latter not to supposed to stay at the house of a friend of
perspective by which psychological incapacity leave Rowena.7 At one point, Edward was able to EDWARD KENNETH NGO TE is a [29-year-old] respondent, but they were not able to locate her,
should be viewed, totally inconsistent with the call home and talk to his brother who suggested Filipino male adult born and baptized Born Again so petitioner was compelled to rent an apartment.
way the concept was formulated—free in form that they should stay at their parents’ home and Christian at Manila. He finished two years in The parties tried to look for a job but could not
and devoid of any definition. live with them. Edward relayed this to Rowena college at AMA Computer College last 1994 and find any so it was suggested by respondent that
who, however, suggested that he should get his is currently unemployed. He is married to and they should go back and seek help from
inheritance so that they could live on their own. separated from ROWENA GUTIERREZ YU-TE. petitioner’s parents. When the parties arrived at
For the resolution of the Court is a petition for
Edward talked to his father about this, but the He presented himself at my office for a the house of petitioner, all of his whole family was
review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of
patriarch got mad, told Edward that he would be psychological evaluation in relation to his petition all out of the country so respondent decided to go
Court assailing the August 5, 2003 Decision1 of
disinherited, and insisted that Edward must go for Nullification of Marriage against the latter by back to her home for the meantime while
the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CV No.
home.8 the grounds of psychological incapacity. He is petitioner stayed behind at their home. After a
71867. The petition further assails the January
now residing at 181 P. Tuazon Street, Quezon few days of separation, respondent called
19, 2004 Resolution2 denying the motion for the
City. petitioner by phone and said she wanted to talk
reconsideration of the challenged decision. After a month, Edward escaped from the house
to him. Petitioner responded immediately and
of Rowena’s uncle, and stayed with his parents.
when he arrived at their house, respondent
His family then hid him from Rowena and her Petitioner got himself three siblings who are now
The relevant facts and proceedings follow. confronted petitioner as to why he appeared to be
family whenever they telephoned to ask for him.9 in business and one deceased sister. Both his
cold, respondent acted irrationally and even
parents are also in the business world by whom threatened to commit suicide. Petitioner got
Petitioner Edward Kenneth Ngo Te first got a he [considers] as generous, hospitable, and scared so he went home again. Respondent
In June 1996, Edward was able to talk to
glimpse of respondent Rowena Ong Gutierrez patient. This said virtues are said to be handed to
Rowena. Unmoved by his persistence that they would call by phone every now and then and
Yu-Te in a gathering organized by the Filipino- each of the family member. He generally became angry as petitioner does not know what
should live with his parents, she said that it was
Chinese association in their college. Edward was considers himself to be quiet and simple. He to do. Respondent went to the extent of
better for them to live separate lives. They then
then initially attracted to Rowena’s close friend; clearly remembers himself to be afraid of meeting
parted ways.10 threatening to file a case against petitioner and
but, as the latter already had a boyfriend, the people. After 1994, he tried his luck in being a scandalize his family in the newspaper. Petitioner
young man decided to court Rowena. That was Sales Executive of Mansfield International asked her how he would be able to make amends
in January 1996, when petitioner was a After almost four years, or on January 18, 2000, Incorporated. And because of job incompetence, and at this point in time[,] respondent brought the
sophomore student and respondent, a Edward filed a petition before the Regional Trial as well as being quiet and loner, he did not stay idea of marriage. Petitioner[,] out of frustration in
freshman.3 Court (RTC) of Quezon City, Branch 106, for the long in the job until 1996. His interest lie[s] on
life[,] agreed to her to pacify her. And so on April
annulment of his marriage to Rowena on the becoming a full servant of God by being a priest 23, 1996, respondent’s uncle brought the parties
basis of the latter’s psychological incapacity. This or a pastor. He [is] said to isolate himself from his to Valenzuela[,] and on that very same day[,]
Sharing similar angst towards their families, the
was docketed as Civil Case No. Q-00-39720.11 friends even during his childhood days as he only
two understood one another and developed a petitioner was made to sign the Marriage
loves to read the Bible and hear its message. Contract before the Judge. Petitioner actually
certain degree of closeness towards each other.
In March 1996, or around three months after their As Rowena did not file an answer, the trial court, never applied for any Marriage License.
first meeting, Rowena asked Edward that they on July 11, 2000, ordered the Office of the City Respondent is said to come from a fine family
elope. At first, he refused, bickering that he was Prosecutor (OCP) of Quezon City to investigate despite having a lazy father and a disobedient Respondent decided that they should stay first at
young and jobless. Her persistence, however, whether there was collusion between the wife. She is said to have not finish[ed] her their house until after arrival of the parents of
made him relent. Thus, they left Manila and sailed parties.12 In the meantime, on July 27, 2000, the collegiate degree and shared intimate sexual
petitioner. But when the parents of petitioner
to Cebu that month; he, providing their travel Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) entered its moments with her boyfriend prior to that with arrived, respondent refused to allow petitioner to
money and she, purchasing the boat ticket.4 appearance and deputized the OCP to appear on petitioner. go home. Petitioner was threatened in so many
its behalf and assist it in the scheduled
ways with her uncle showing to him many guns.
hearings.13
However, Edward’s ₱80,000.00 lasted for only a In January of 1996, respondent showed her Respondent even threatened that if he should
month. Their pension house accommodation and kindness to petitioner and this became the persist in going home, they will commission their
daily sustenance fast depleted it. And they could On August 23, 2000, the OCP submitted an foundation of their intimate relationship. After a military friends to harm his family. Respondent
not find a job. In April 1996, they decided to go investigation report stating that it could not month of dating, petitioner mentioned to even made petitioner sign a declaration that if he
back to Manila. Rowena proceeded to her uncle’s determine if there was collusion between the respondent that he is having problems with his should perish, the authorities should look for him
house and Edward to his parents’ home. As his parties; thus, it recommended trial on the family. Respondent surprisingly retorted that she at his parents[ ]ۥand relatives[ ]ۥhouses.
family was abroad, and Rowena kept on merits.14 also hates her family and that she actually Sometime in June of 1996, petitioner was able to
telephoning him, threatening him that she would wanted to get out of their lives. From that [time escape and he went home. He told his parents
commit suicide, Edward agreed to stay with on], respondent had insisted to petitioner that about his predicament and they forgave him and
The clinical psychologist who examined
Rowena at her uncle’s place.5 they should elope and live together. Petitioner supported him by giving him military escort.
petitioner found both parties psychologically Petitioner, however, did not inform them that he
hesitated because he is not prepared as they are
both young and inexperienced, but she insisted signed a marriage contract with respondent.
When they knew about it[,] petitioner was them was motivated by different notions on The trial court, on July 30, 2001, rendered its psychological incapacity was likewise not alleged
referred for counseling. Petitioner[,] after the marriage. Decision16 declaring the marriage of the parties in the petition; neither was it medically or clinically
counseling[,] tried to contact respondent. null and void on the ground that both parties were identified. The purported incapacity of both
Petitioner offered her to live instead to[sic] the psychologically incapacitated to comply with the parties was not shown to be medically or clinically
Edward Kenneth Ngo Te, the petitioner in this
home of petitioner’s parents while they are still essential marital obligations.17 The Republic, permanent or incurable. And the clinical
case[,] is said to be still unsure and unready so
studying. Respondent refused the idea and represented by the OSG, timely filed its notice of psychologist did not personally examine the
as to commit himself to marriage. He is still
claimed that she would only live with him if they appeal.18 respondent. Thus, the OSG concludes that the
founded to be on the search of what he wants in
will have a separate home of their own and be requirements in Molina29 were not satisfied.30
life. He is absconded as an introvert as he is not
away from his parents. She also intimated to
really sociable and displays a lack of interest in On review, the appellate court, in the assailed
petitioner that he should already get his share of
social interactions and mingling with other August 5, 2003 Decision19 in CA-G.R. CV No. The Court now resolves the singular issue of
whatever he would inherit from his parents so
individuals. He is seen too akin to this kind of 71867, reversed and set aside the trial court’s whether, based on Article 36 of the Family Code,
they can start a new life. Respondent demanded
lifestyle that he finds it boring and uninteresting ruling.20 It ruled that petitioner failed to prove the the marriage between the parties is null and
these not knowing [that] the petitioner already
to commit himself to a relationship especially to psychological incapacity of respondent. The void.31
settled his differences with his own family. When
that of respondent, as aggravated by her clinical psychologist did not personally examine
respondent refused to live with petitioner where
dangerously aggressive moves. As he is more of respondent, and relied only on the information
he chose for them to stay, petitioner decided to I.
the reserved and timid type of person, as he provided by petitioner. Further, the psychological
tell her to stop harassing the home of his parents.
prefer to be religiously attached and spend a incapacity was not shown to be attended by
He told her already that he was disinherited and
solemn time alone. gravity, juridical antecedence and incurability. In We begin by examining the provision, tracing its
since he also does not have a job, he would not
sum, the evidence adduced fell short of the origin and charting the development of
be able to support her. After knowing that
requirements stated in Republic v. Court of jurisprudence interpreting it.
petitioner does not have any money anymore, ROWENA GUTIERREZ YU-TE, the respondent,
Appeals and Molina21 needed for the declaration
respondent stopped tormenting petitioner and is said to be of the aggressive-rebellious type of
of nullity of the marriage under Article 36 of the
informed petitioner that they should live separate woman. She is seen to be somewhat exploitative Article 36 of the Family Code32 provides:
Family Code.22 The CA faulted the lower court for
lives. in her [plight] for a life of wealth and glamour. She
rendering the decision without the required
is seen to take move on marriage as she thought
certification of the OSG briefly stating therein the Article 36. A marriage contracted by any party
that her marriage with petitioner will bring her
The said relationship between Edward and OSG’s reasons for its agreement with or who, at the time of the celebration, was
good fortune because he is part of a rich family.
Rowena is said to be undoubtedly in the wreck opposition to, as the case may be, the psychologically incapacitated to comply with the
In order to have her dreams realized, she used
and weakly-founded. The break-up was caused petition.23 The CA later denied petitioner’s motion essential marital obligations of marriage, shall
force and threats knowing that [her] husband is
by both parties[’] unreadiness to commitment and for reconsideration in the likewise assailed likewise be void even if such incapacity becomes
somehow weak-willed. Upon the realization that
their young age. He was still in the state of finding January 19, 2004 Resolution.24 manifest only after its solemnization.
there is really no chance for wealth, she gladly
his fate and fighting boredom, while she was still
finds her way out of the relationship.
egocentrically involved with herself.
Dissatisfied, petitioner filed before this Court the As borne out by the deliberations of the Civil
instant petition for review on certiorari. On June Code Revision Committee that drafted the Family
REMARKS:
TESTS ADMINISTERED: 15, 2005, the Court gave due course to the Code, Article 36 was based on grounds available
petition and required the parties to submit their in the Canon Law. Thus, Justice Flerida Ruth P.
Before going to marriage, one should really get to respective memoranda.25 Romero elucidated in her separate opinion in
Revised Beta Examination
know himself and marry himself before Santos v. Court of Appeals:33
submitting to marital vows. Marriage should not
In his memorandum,26 petitioner argues that the
Bender Visual Motor Gestalt Test be taken out of intuition as it is profoundly a
CA erred in substituting its own judgment for that However, as a member of both the Family Law
serious institution solemnized by religious and
of the trial court. He posits that the RTC declared Revision Committee of the Integrated Bar of the
law. In the case presented by petitioner and
Draw A Person Test the marriage void, not only because of Philippines and the Civil Code Revision
respondent[,] (sic) it is evidently clear that both
respondent’s psychological incapacity, but rather Commission of the UP Law Center, I wish to add
parties have impulsively taken marriage for
due to both parties’ psychological incapacity. some observations. The letter dated April 15,
Rorschach Psychodiagnostic Test granted as they are still unaware of their own
Petitioner also points out that there is no 1985 of then Judge Alicia V. Sempio-Diy written
selves. He is extremely introvert to the point of
requirement for the psychologist to personally in behalf of the Family Law and Civil Code
weakening their relationship by his weak
Sach’s Sentence Completion Test examine respondent. Further, he avers that the Revision Committee to then Assemblywoman
behavioral disposition. She, on the other hand[,]
OSG is bound by the actions of the OCP because Mercedes Cojuangco-Teodoro traced the
is extremely exploitative and aggressive so as to
the latter represented it during the trial; and it had background of the inclusion of the present Article
MMPI be unlawful, insincere and undoubtedly uncaring
been furnished copies of all the pleadings, the 36 in the Family Code.
in her strides toward convenience. It is apparent
trial court orders and notices.27
that she is suffering the grave, severe, and
TEST RESULTS & EVALUATION: incurable presence of Narcissistic and Antisocial "During its early meetings, the Family Law
Personality Disorder that started since childhood For its part, the OSG contends in its Committee had thought of including a chapter on
Both petitioner and respondent are dubbed to be and only manifested during marriage. Both memorandum,28 that the annulment petition filed absolute divorce in the draft of a new Family
emotionally immature and recklessly impulsive parties display psychological incapacities that before the RTC contains no statement of the Code (Book I of the Civil Code) that it had been
upon swearing to their marital vows as each of made marriage a big mistake for them to take.15 essential marital obligations that the parties failed tasked by the IBP and the UP Law Center to
to comply with. The root cause of the prepare. In fact, some members of the
Committee were in favor of a no-fault divorce of marriage on grounds similar to the Canon Law, work that a lot of machismo among husbands are As to the proposal of Justice Caguioa to use the
between the spouses after a number of years of the two Committees now working as a Joint manifestations of their sociopathic personality term "psychological or mental impotence,"
separation, legal or de facto. Justice J.B.L. Reyes Committee in the preparation of a New Family anomaly, like inflicting physical violence upon Archbishop Oscar Cruz opined in the earlier
was then requested to prepare a proposal for an Code decided to consolidate the present their wives, constitutional indolence or laziness, February 9, 1984 session that this term "is an
action for dissolution of marriage and the effects provisions on void marriages with the proposals drug dependence or addiction, and psychosexual invention of some churchmen who are moralists
thereof based on two grounds: (a) five continuous of Justice Reyes. The result was the inclusion of anomaly.34 but not canonists, that is why it is considered a
years of separation between the spouses, with or an additional kind of void marriage in the weak phrase." He said that the Code of Canon
without a judicial decree of legal separation, and enumeration of void marriages in the present Law would rather express it as "psychological or
In her separate opinion in Molina,35 she
(b) whenever a married person would have Civil Code, to wit: mental incapacity to discharge . . ." Justice
expounded:
obtained a decree of absolute divorce in another Ricardo C. Puno opined that sometimes a person
country. Actually, such a proposal is one for may be psychologically impotent with one but not
‘(7) those marriages contracted by any party who,
absolute divorce but called by another name. At the Committee meeting of July 26, 1986, the with another.
at the time of the celebration, was wanting in the
Later, even the Civil Code Revision Committee draft provision read:
sufficient use of reason or judgment to
took time to discuss the proposal of Justice
understand the essential nature of marriage or One of the guidelines enumerated in the majority
Reyes on this matter.
was psychologically or mentally incapacitated to "(7) Those marriages contracted by any party opinion for the interpretation and application of
discharge the essential marital obligations, even who, at the time of the celebration, was wanting Art. 36 is: "Such incapacity must also be shown
Subsequently, however, when the Civil Code if such lack or incapacity is made manifest after in the sufficient use of reason or judgment to to be medically or clinically permanent or
Revision Committee and Family Law Committee the celebration. understand the essential nature of marriage or incurable. Such incurability may be absolute or
started holding joint meetings on the preparation was psychologically or mentally incapacitated to even relative only in regard to the other spouse,
of the draft of the New Family Code, they agreed discharge the essential marital obligations, even not necessarily absolutely against everyone of
as well as the following implementing provisions:
and formulated the definition of marriage as — if such lack of incapacity is made manifest after the same sex."
the celebration."
‘Art. 32. The absolute nullity of a marriage may
‘a special contract of permanent partnership The Committee, through Prof. Araceli T. Barrera,
be invoked or pleaded only on the basis of a final
between a man and a woman entered into in The twists and turns which the ensuing considered the inclusion of the phrase "and is
judgment declaring the marriage void, without
accordance with law for the establishment of discussion took finally produced the following incurable" but Prof. Esteban B. Bautista
prejudice to the provision of Article 34.’
conjugal and family life. It is an inviolable social revised provision even before the session was commented that this would give rise to the
institution whose nature, consequences, and over: question of how they will determine curability and
incidents are governed by law and not subject to ‘Art. 33. The action or defense for the declaration Justice Caguioa agreed that it would be more
stipulation, except that marriage settlements may of the absolute nullity of a marriage shall not problematic. Yet, the possibility that one may be
"(7) That contracted by any party who, at the time
fix the property relations during the marriage prescribe.’ cured after the psychological incapacity becomes
within the limits provided by law.’ of the celebration, was psychologically manifest after the marriage was not ruled out by
incapacitated to discharge the essential marital Justice Puno and Justice Alice Sempio-Diy.
xxxxxxxxx obligations, even if such lack or incapacity Justice Caguioa suggested that the remedy was
With the above definition, and considering the becomes manifest after the celebration."
to allow the afflicted spouse to remarry.
Christian traditional concept of marriage of the
Filipino people as a permanent, inviolable, It is believed that many hopelessly broken
indissoluble social institution upon which the marriages in our country today may already be Noticeably, the immediately preceding For clarity, the Committee classified the bases for
dissolved or annulled on the grounds proposed formulation above has dropped any reference to
family and society are founded, and also realizing determining void marriages, viz.:
the strong opposition that any provision on by the Joint Committee on declaration of nullity "wanting in the sufficient use of reason or
absolute divorce would encounter from the as well as annulment of marriages, thus judgment to understand the essential nature of
rendering an absolute divorce law unnecessary. marriage" and to "mentally incapacitated." It was 1. lack of one or more of the essential
Catholic Church and the Catholic sector of our
In fact, during a conference with Father Gerald explained that these phrases refer to "defects in requisites of marriage as contract;
citizenry to whom the great majority of our people
belong, the two Committees in their joint Healy of the Ateneo University, as well as another the mental faculties vitiating consent, which is not
meeting with Archbishop Oscar Cruz of the the idea . . . but lack of appreciation of one's
meetings did not pursue the idea of absolute 2. reasons of public policy;
divorce and, instead, opted for an action for Archdiocese of Pampanga, the Joint Committee marital obligation." There being a defect in
judicial declaration of invalidity of marriage based was informed that since Vatican II, the Catholic consent, "it is clear that it should be a ground for
Church has been declaring marriages null and voidable marriage because there is the 3. special cases and special situations.
on grounds available in the Canon Law. It was
thought that such an action would not only be an void on the ground of "lack of due discretion" for appearance of consent and it is capable of
acceptable alternative to divorce but would also causes that, in other jurisdictions, would be clear convalidation for the simple reason that there are
The ground of psychological incapacity was
grounds for divorce, like teen-age or premature lucid intervals and there are cases when the
solve the nagging problem of church annulments subsumed under "special cases and special
of marriages on grounds not recognized by the marriages; marriage to a man who, because of insanity is curable . . . Psychological incapacity
situations," hence, its special treatment in Art. 36
civil law of the State. Justice Reyes was, thus, some personality disorder or disturbance, cannot does not refer to mental faculties and has nothing
in the Family Code as finally enacted.
support a family; the foolish or ridiculous choice to do with consent; it refers to obligations
requested to again prepare a draft of provisions
on such action for celebration of invalidity of of a spouse by an otherwise perfectly normal attendant to marriage."
marriage. Still later, to avoid the overlapping of person; marriage to a woman who refuses to Nowhere in the Civil Code provisions on Marriage
cohabit with her husband or who refuses to have is there a ground for avoiding or annulling
provisions on void marriages as found in the My own position as a member of the Committee
present Civil Code and those proposed by children. Bishop Cruz also informed the marriages that even comes close to being
then was that psychological incapacity is, in a
Justice Reyes on judicial declaration of invalidity Committee that they have found out in tribunal psychological in nature.
sense, insanity of a lesser degree.
Where consent is vitiated due to circumstances sanctions, some persons contract new marriages by so doing, it might limit the applicability of the valid and sufficient. The psychological act,
existing at the time of the marriage, such or enter into live-in relationships. provision under the principle of ejusdem generis. however, is directed towards an object which is
marriage which stands valid until annulled is The Committee desired that the courts should not available. Urbano Navarrete summarizes this
capable of ratification or convalidation. interpret the provision on a case-to-case basis; distinction: the third paragraph deals not with the
It was precisely to provide a satisfactory solution
guided by experience, the findings of experts and positing of consent but with positing the object of
to such anomalous situations that the Civil Law
researchers in psychological disciplines, and by consent. The person may be capable of positing
On the other hand, for reasons of public policy or Revision Committee decided to engraft the
decisions of church tribunals which, although not a free act of consent, but he is not capable of
lack of essential requisites, some marriages are Canon Law concept of psychological incapacity
binding on the civil courts, may be given fulfilling the responsibilities he assumes as a
void from the beginning. into the Family Code—and classified the same as
persuasive effect since the provision itself was result of the consent he elicits.
a ground for declaring marriages void ab initio or
taken from the Canon Law.37 The law is then so
totally inexistent from the beginning.
With the revision of Book I of the Civil Code, designed as to allow some resiliency in its
Since the address of Pius XII to the auditors of
particularly the provisions on Marriage, the application.38
the Roman Rota in 1941 regarding psychic
drafters, now open to fresh winds of change in A brief historical note on the Old Canon Law
incapacity with respect to marriage arising from
keeping with the more permissive mores and (1917). This Old Code, while it did not provide
Yet, as held in Santos,39 the phrase pathological conditions, there has been an
practices of the time, took a leaf from the directly for psychological incapacity, in effect,
"psychological incapacity" is not meant to increasing trend to understand as ground of
relatively liberal provisions of Canon Law. recognized the same indirectly from a
comprehend all possible cases of psychoses. It nullity different from others, the incapacity to
combination of three old canons: "Canon #1081
refers to no less than a mental (not physical) assume the essential obligations of marriage,
required persons to be ‘capable according to law’
Canon 1095 which states, inter alia, that the incapacity that causes a party to be truly especially the incapacity which arises from
in order to give valid consent; Canon #1082
following persons are incapable of contracting noncognitive of the basic marital covenants that sexual anomalies. Nymphomania is a sample
required that persons ‘be at least not ignorant’ of
marriage: "3. (those) who, because of causes of concomitantly must be assumed and discharged which ecclesiastical jurisprudence has studied
the major elements required in marriage; and
a psychological nature, are unable to assume the by the parties to the marriage which, as under this rubric.
Canon #1087 (the force and fear category)
essential obligations of marriage" provided the expressed by Article 6840 of the Family Code,
required that internal and external freedom be
model for what is now Art. 36 of the Family Code: include their mutual obligations to live together,
present in order for consent to be valid. This line The problem as treated can be summarized,
"A marriage contracted by any party who, at the observe love, respect and fidelity; and render
of interpretation produced two distinct but related thus: do sexual anomalies always and in every
time of the celebration, was psychologically help and support. The intendment of the law has
grounds for annulment called ‘lack of due case imply a grave psychopathological condition
incapacitated to comply with the essential marital been to confine it to the most serious of cases of
discretion’ and ‘lack of due competence.’ Lack of which affects the higher faculties of intellect,
obligations of marriage, shall likewise be void personality disorders clearly demonstrative of an
due discretion means that the person did not discernment, and freedom; or are there sexual
even if such incapacity becomes manifest only utter insensitivity or inability to give meaning and
have the ability to give valid consent at the time anomalies that are purely so – that is to say, they
after its solemnization." significance to the marriage.41 This interpretation
of the wedding and, therefore, the union is arise from certain physiological dysfunction of the
is, in fact, consistent with that in Canon Law, thus:
invalid. Lack of due competence means that the hormonal system, and they affect the sexual
It bears stressing that unlike in Civil Law, Canon person was incapable of carrying out the condition, leaving intact the higher faculties
Law recognizes only two types of marriages with obligations of the promise he or she made during 3.5.3.1. The Meaning of Incapacity to Assume. A however, so that these persons are still capable
respect to their validity: valid and void. Civil Law, the wedding ceremony." sharp conceptual distinction must be made of free human acts. The evidence from the
however, recognizes an intermediate state, the between the second and third paragraphs of empirical sciences is abundant that there are
voidable or annullable marriages. When the C.1095, namely between the grave lack of certain anomalies of a sexual nature which may
Favorable annulment decisions by the Roman
Ecclesiastical Tribunal "annuls" a marriage, it discretionary judgment and the incapacity to impel a person towards sexual activities which
Rota in the 1950s and 1960s involving sexual
actually declares the marriage null and void, i.e., assume the essential obligation. Mario are not normal, either with respect to its
disorders such as homosexuality and
it never really existed in the first place, for a valid Pompedda, a rotal judge, explains the difference frequency [nymphomania, satyriasis] or to the
nymphomania laid the foundation for a broader
sacramental marriage can never be dissolved. by an ordinary, if somewhat banal, example. Jose nature of the activity itself [sadism, masochism,
approach to the kind of proof necessary for
Hence, a properly performed and consummated wishes to sell a house to Carmela, and on the homosexuality]. However, these anomalies
psychological grounds for annulment. The Rota
marriage between two living Roman Catholics assumption that they are capable according to notwithstanding, it is altogether possible that the
had reasoned for the first time in several cases
can only be nullified by the formal annulment positive law to enter such contract, there remains higher faculties remain intact such that a person
that the capacity to give valid consent at the time
process which entails a full tribunal procedure the object of the contract, viz, the house. The so afflicted continues to have an adequate
of marriage was probably not present in persons
with a Court selection and a formal hearing. house is located in a different locality, and prior understanding of what marriage is and of the
who had displayed such problems shortly after
to the conclusion of the contract, the house was gravity of its responsibilities. In fact, he can
the marriage. The nature of this change was
gutted down by fire unbeknown to both of them. choose marriage freely. The question though is
Such so-called church "annulments" are not nothing short of revolutionary. Once the Rota
This is the hypothesis contemplated by the third whether such a person can assume those
recognized by Civil Law as severing the marriage itself had demonstrated a cautious willingness to
paragraph of the canon. The third paragraph responsibilities which he cannot fulfill, although
ties as to capacitate the parties to enter lawfully use this kind of hindsight, the way was paved for
does not deal with the psychological process of he may be able to understand them. In this latter
into another marriage. The grounds for nullifying what came after 1970. Diocesan Tribunals began
giving consent because it has been established a hypothesis, the incapacity to assume the
civil marriage, not being congruent with those laid to accept proof of serious psychological problems
priori that both have such a capacity to give essential obligations of marriage issues from the
down by Canon Law, the former being more that manifested themselves shortly after the
consent, and they both know well the object of incapacity to posit the object of consent, rather
strict, quite a number of married couples have ceremony as proof of an inability to give valid
their consent [the house and its particulars]. than the incapacity to posit consent itself.
found themselves in limbo—freed from the consent at the time of the ceremony.36
Rather, C.1095.3 deals with the object of the
marriage bonds in the eyes of the Catholic
consent/contract which does not exist. The
Church but yet unable to contract a valid civil Ecclesiastical jurisprudence has been hesitant, if
Interestingly, the Committee did not give any contract is invalid because it lacks its formal
marriage under state laws. Heedless of civil law not actually confused, in this regard. The initial
examples of psychological incapacity for fear that object. The consent as a psychological act is both
steps taken by church courts were not too clear
whether this incapacity is incapacity to posit 3.5.3.3 Incapacity as Incapacity to Posit the conjugum. A spouse who is capable only of spouses and of the children. Serious psychic
consent or incapacity to posit the object of Object of Consent. From the selected rotal realizing or contributing to the good of the other anomalies, which do not have to be necessarily
consent. A case c. Pinna, for example, arrives at jurisprudence cited, supra, it is possible to see a party qua persona rather than qua conjunx would incurable, may give rise to the incapacity to
the conclusion that the intellect, under such an certain progress towards a consensus doctrine be deemed incapable of contracting marriage. assume any, or several, or even all of these
irresistible impulse, is prevented from properly that the incapacity to assume the essential Such would be the case of a person who may be rights. There are some cases in which
deliberating and its judgment lacks freedom. This obligations of marriage (that is to say, the formal quite capable of procuring the economic good interpersonal relationship is impossible. Some
line of reasoning supposes that the intellect, at object of consent) can coexist in the same person and the financial security of the other, but not characteristic features of inability for
the moment of consent, is under the influence of with the ability to make a free decision, an capable of realizing the bonum conjugale of the interpersonal relationships in marriage include
this irresistible compulsion, with the inevitable intelligent judgment, and a mature evaluation and other. These are general strokes and this is not affective immaturity, narcissism, and antisocial
conclusion that such a decision, made as it was weighing of things. The decision coram Sabattani the place for detained and individual description. traits.
under these circumstances, lacks the necessary concerning a nymphomaniac affirmed that such
freedom. It would be incontrovertible that a a spouse can have difficulty not only with regard
A rotal decision c. Pinto resolved a petition where Marriage and Homosexuality. Until 1967, it was
decision made under duress, such as this to the moment of consent but also, and
the concrete circumstances of the case concerns not very clear under what rubric homosexuality
irresistible impulse, would not be a free act. But especially, with regard to the matrimonium in
a person diagnosed to be suffering from serious was understood to be invalidating of marriage –
this is precisely the question: is it, as a matter of facto esse. The decision concludes that a person
sociopathy. He concluded that while the that is to say, is homosexuality invalidating
fact, true that the intellect is always and in such a condition is incapable of assuming the
respondent may have understood, on the level of because of the inability to evaluate the
continuously under such an irresistible conjugal obligation of fidelity, although she may
the intellect, the essential obligations of marriage, responsibilities of marriage, or because of the
compulsion? It would seem entirely possible, and have no difficulty in understanding what the
he was not capable of assuming them because inability to fulfill its obligations. Progressively,
certainly more reasonable, to think that there are obligations of marriage are, nor in the weighing
of his "constitutional immorality." however, rotal jurisprudence began to
certain cases in which one who is sexually and evaluating of those same obligations.
understand it as incapacity to assume the
hyperaesthetic can understand perfectly and
obligations of marriage so that by 1978, Parisella
evaluate quite maturely what marriage is and Stankiewicz clarifies that the maturity and
Prior to the promulgation of the Code of Canon was able to consider, with charity, homosexuality
what it implies; his consent would be juridically capacity of the person as regards the fulfillment
Law in 1983, it was not unusual to refer to this as an autonomous ground of nullity. This is to say
ineffective for this one reason that he cannot of responsibilities is determined not only at the
ground as moral impotence or psychic that a person so afflicted is said to be unable to
posit the object of consent, the exclusive jus in moment of decision but also and especially
impotence, or similar expressions to express a assume the essential obligations of marriage. In
corpus to be exercised in a normal way and with during the moment of execution of decision. And
specific incapacity rooted in some anomalies and this same rotal decision, the object of matrimonial
usually regularity. It would seem more correct to when this is applied to constitution of the marital
disorders in the personality. These anomalies consent is understood to refer not only to the jus
say that the consent may indeed be free, but is consent, it means that the actual fulfillment of the
leave intact the faculties of the will and the in corpus but also the consortium totius vitae. The
juridically ineffective because the party is essential obligations of marriage is a pertinent
intellect. It is qualified as moral or psychic, third paragraph of C.1095 [incapacity to assume
consenting to an object that he cannot deliver. consideration that must be factored into the
obviously to distinguish it from the impotence that the essential obligations of marriage] certainly
The house he is selling was gutted down by fire. question of whether a person was in a position to
constitutes the impediment dealt with by C.1084. seems to be the more adequate juridical structure
assume the obligations of marriage in the first
Nonetheless, the anomalies render the subject to account for the complex phenomenon that
place. When one speaks of the inability of the
3.5.3.2. Incapacity as an Autonomous Ground. incapable of binding himself in a valid homosexuality is. The homosexual is not
party to assume and fulfill the obligations, one is
Sabattani seems to have seen his way more matrimonial pact, to the extent that the anomaly necessarily impotent because, except in very few
not looking at matrimonium in fieri, but also and
clearly through this tangled mess, proposing as renders that person incapable of fulfilling the exceptional cases, such a person is usually
especially at matrimonium in facto esse. In [the]
he did a clear conceptual distinction between the essential obligations. According to the principle capable of full sexual relations with the spouse.
decision of 19 Dec. 1985, Stankiewicz collocated
inability to give consent on the one hand, and the affirmed by the long tradition of moral theology: Neither is it a mental infirmity, and a person so
the incapacity of the respondent to assume the
inability to fulfill the object of consent, on the nemo ad impossibile tenetur. afflicted does not necessarily suffer from a grave
essential obligations of marriage in the psychic
other. It is his opinion that nymphomaniacs lack of due discretion because this sexual
constitution of the person, precisely on the basis
usually understand the meaning of marriage, and anomaly does not by itself affect the critical,
xxxx of his irresponsibility as regards money and his
they are usually able to evaluate its implications. volitive, and intellectual faculties. Rather, the
apathy as regards the rights of others that he had
They would have no difficulty with positing a free homosexual person is unable to assume the
violated. Interpersonal relationships are
and intelligent consent. However, such persons, 3.5.3.5 Indications of Incapacity. There is responsibilities of marriage because he is unable
invariably disturbed in the presence of this
capable as they are of eliciting an intelligent and incapacity when either or both of the contractants to fulfill this object of the matrimonial contract. In
personality disorder. A lack of empathy (inability
free consent, experience difficulty in another are not capable of initiating or maintaining this other words, the invalidity lies, not so much in the
to recognize and experience how others feel) is
sphere: delivering the object of the consent. consortium. One immediately thinks of those defect of consent, as in the defect of the object of
common. A sense of entitlement, unreasonable
Anne, another rotal judge, had likewise treated cases where one of the parties is so self-centered consent.
expectation, especially favorable treatment, is
the difference between the act of consenting and [e.g., a narcissistic personality] that he does not
usually present. Likewise common is
the act of positing the object of consent from the even know how to begin a union with the other,
interpersonal exploitativeness, in which others 3.5.3.6 Causes of Incapacity. A last point that
point of view of a person afflicted with let alone how to maintain and sustain such a
are taken advantage of in order to achieve one’s needs to be addressed is the source of incapacity
nymphomania. According to him, such an relationship. A second incapacity could be due to
ends. specified by the canon: causes of a psychological
affliction usually leaves the process of knowing the fact that the spouses are incapable of
nature. Pompedda proffers the opinion that the
and understanding and evaluating intact. What it beginning or maintaining a heterosexual
clause is a reference to the personality of the
affects is the object of consent: the delivering of consortium, which goes to the very substance of Authors have made listings of obligations
contractant. In other words, there must be a
the goods. matrimony. Another incapacity could arise when considered as essential matrimonial obligations.
reference to the psychic part of the person. It is
a spouse is unable to concretize the good of One of them is the right to the communio vitae.
only when there is something in the psyche or in
himself or of the other party. The canon speaks, This and their corresponding obligations are
the psychic constitution of the person which
not of the bonum partium, but of the bonum basically centered around the good of the
impedes his capacity that one can then affirm that in favor of the existence and illness itself must have attached at Tribunal of the Catholic Church in the
the person is incapable according to the continuation of the marriage and such moment, or prior thereto. Philippines, while not controlling or
hypothesis contemplated by C.1095.3. A person against its dissolution and nullity. This decisive, should be given great respect
is judged incapable in this juridical sense only to is rooted in the fact that both our by our courts. It is clear that Article 36
(4) Such incapacity must also be
the extent that he is found to have something Constitution and our laws cherish the was taken by the Family Code
shown to be medically or clinically
rooted in his psychic constitution which impedes validity of marriage and unity of the Revision Committee from Canon 1095
permanent or incurable. Such
the assumption of these obligations. A bad habit family. Thus, our Constitution devotes of the New Code of Canon Law, which
incurability may be absolute or even
deeply engrained in one’s consciousness would an entire Article on the Family, became effective in 1983 and which
relative only in regard to the other
not seem to qualify to be a source of this recognizing it "as the foundation of the provides:
spouse, not necessarily absolutely
invalidating incapacity. The difference being that nation." It decrees marriage as legally
against everyone of the same sex.
there seems to be some freedom, however "inviolable," thereby protecting it from
Furthermore, such incapacity must be "The following are incapable of
remote, in the development of the habit, while dissolution at the whim of the parties.
relevant to the assumption of marriage contracting marriage: Those who are
one accepts as given one’s psychic constitution. Both the family and marriage are to be
obligations, not necessarily to those unable to assume the essential
It would seem then that the law insists that the "protected" by the state.
not related to marriage, like the obligations of marriage due to causes
source of the incapacity must be one which is not
exercise of a profession or of psychological nature."
the fruit of some degree of freedom.42
The Family Code echoes this employment in a job. Hence, a
constitutional edict on marriage and pediatrician may be effective in
Since the purpose of including such
Conscious of the law’s intention that it is the the family and emphasizes their diagnosing illnesses of children and
provision in our Family Code is to
courts, on a case-to-case basis, that should permanence, inviolability and prescribing medicine to cure them but
harmonize our civil laws with the
determine whether a party to a marriage is solidarity. may not be psychologically
religious faith of our people, it stands to
psychologically incapacitated, the Court, in capacitated to procreate, bear and
reason that to achieve such
sustaining the lower court’s judgment of raise his/her own children as an
(2) The root cause of the psychological harmonization, great persuasive
annulment in Tuason v. Court of Appeals,43 ruled essential obligation of marriage.
incapacity must be (a) medically or weight should be given to decisions of
that the findings of the trial court are final and
clinically identified, (b) alleged in the such appellate tribunal. Ideally—
binding on the appellate courts.44
complaint, (c) sufficiently proven by (5) Such illness must be grave enough subject to our law on evidence—what
experts and (d) clearly explained in the to bring about the disability of the party is decreed as canonically invalid
Again, upholding the trial court’s findings and decision. Article 36 of the Family Code to assume the essential obligations of should also be decreed civilly void.
declaring that its decision was not a judgment on requires that the incapacity must be marriage. Thus, "mild
the pleadings, the Court, in Tsoi v. Court of psychological—not physical, although characterological peculiarities, mood
This is one instance where, in view of
Appeals,45 explained that when private its manifestations and/or symptoms changes, occasional emotional
the evident source and purpose of the
respondent testified under oath before the lower may be physical. The evidence must outbursts" cannot be accepted as root
Family Code provision,
court and was cross-examined by the adverse convince the court that the parties, or causes. The illness must be shown as
contemporaneous religious
party, she thereby presented evidence in the one of them, was mentally or downright incapacity or inability, not a
interpretation is to be given persuasive
form of testimony. Importantly, the Court, aware psychically ill to such an extent that the refusal, neglect or difficulty, much less
effect. Here, the State and the
of parallel decisions of Catholic marriage person could not have known the ill will. In other words, there is a natal
Church—while remaining
tribunals, ruled that the senseless and protracted obligations he was assuming, or or supervening disabling factor in the
independent, separate and apart from
refusal of one of the parties to fulfill the marital knowing them, could not have given person, an adverse integral element in
each other—shall walk together in
obligation of procreating children is equivalent to valid assumption thereof. Although no the personality structure that
synodal cadence towards the same
psychological incapacity. example of such incapacity need be effectively incapacitates the person
goal of protecting and cherishing
given here so as not to limit the from really accepting and thereby
marriage and the family as the
application of the provision under the complying with the obligations
The resiliency with which the concept should be inviolable base of the nation.
principle of ejusdem generis, essential to marriage.
applied and the case-to-case basis by which the
nevertheless such root cause must be
provision should be interpreted, as so intended
identified as a psychological illness (8) The trial court must order the
by its framers, had, somehow, been rendered (6) The essential marital obligations
and its incapacitating nature fully prosecuting attorney or fiscal and the
ineffectual by the imposition of a set of strict must be those embraced by Articles 68
explained. Expert evidence may be Solicitor General to appear as counsel
standards in Molina,46 thus: up to 71 of the Family Code as regards
given by qualified psychiatrists and for the state. No decision shall be
the husband and wife as well as
clinical psychologists. handed down unless the Solicitor
Articles 220, 221 and 225 of the same
From their submissions and the Court's own General issues a certification, which
Code in regard to parents and their
deliberations, the following guidelines in the will be quoted in the decision, briefly
(3) The incapacity must be proven to children. Such non-complied marital
interpretation and application of Art. 36 of the stating therein his reasons for his
be existing at "the time of the obligation(s) must also be stated in the
Family Code are hereby handed down for the agreement or opposition, as the case
celebration" of the marriage. The petition, proven by evidence and
guidance of the bench and the bar: may be, to the petition. The Solicitor
evidence must show that the illness included in the text of the decision.
General, along with the prosecuting
was existing when the parties
attorney, shall submit to the court such
(1) The burden of proof to show the exchanged their "I do's." The
(7) Interpretations given by the certification within fifteen (15) days
nullity of the marriage belongs to the manifestation of the illness need not be
National Appellate Matrimonial from the date the case is deemed
plaintiff. Any doubt should be resolved perceivable at such time, but the
submitted for resolution of the court. annulled marriages on account of the personality or generalizations but according to its own facts. contract to that of a covenant. The result of this
The Solicitor General shall discharge disorders of the said individuals.51 And, to repeat for emphasis, courts should was that it could no longer be assumed in
the equivalent function of the defensor interpret the provision on a case-to-case basis; annulment cases that a person who could
vinculi contemplated under Canon guided by experience, the findings of experts and intellectually understand the concept of marriage
The Court need not worry about the possible
1095.47 researchers in psychological disciplines, and by could necessarily give valid consent to marry.
abuse of the remedy provided by Article 36, for
decisions of church tribunals. The ability to both grasp and assume the real
there are ample safeguards against this
obligations of a mature, lifelong commitment are
Noteworthy is that in Molina, while the majority of contingency, among which is the intervention by
now considered a necessary prerequisite to valid
the Court’s membership concurred in the the State, through the public prosecutor, to guard II.
matrimonial consent.
ponencia of then Associate Justice (later Chief against collusion between the parties and/or
Justice) Artemio V. Panganiban, three justices fabrication of evidence.52 The Court should rather
We now examine the instant case.
concurred "in the result" and another three— be alarmed by the rising number of cases Rotal decisions continued applying the concept
including, as aforesaid, Justice Romero—took involving marital abuse, child abuse, domestic of incipient psychological incapacity, "not only to
pains to compose their individual separate violence and incestuous rape. The parties’ whirlwind relationship lasted more or sexual anomalies but to all kinds of personality
opinions. Then Justice Teodoro R. Padilla even less six (6) months. They met in January 1996, disorders that incapacitate a spouse or both
emphasized that "each case must be judged, not eloped in March, exchanged marital vows in May, spouses from assuming or carrying out the
In dissolving marital bonds on account of either
on the basis of a priori assumptions, predelictions and parted ways in June. The psychologist who essential obligations of marriage. For marriage .
party’s psychological incapacity, the Court is not
or generalizations, but according to its own facts. provided expert testimony found both parties . . is not merely cohabitation or the right of the
demolishing the foundation of families, but it is
In the field of psychological incapacity as a psychologically incapacitated. Petitioner’s spouses to each other's body for heterosexual
actually protecting the sanctity of marriage,
ground for annulment of marriage, it is trite to say behavioral pattern falls under the classification of acts, but is, in its totality the right to the
because it refuses to allow a person afflicted with
that no case is on ‘all fours’ with another case. dependent personality disorder, and community of the whole of life; i.e., the right to a
a psychological disorder, who cannot comply with
The trial judge must take pains in examining the respondent’s, that of the narcissistic and developing lifelong relationship. Rotal decisions
or assume the essential marital obligations, from
factual milieu and the appellate court must, as antisocial personality disorder.56 since 1973 have refined the meaning of
remaining in that sacred bond. It may be stressed
much as possible, avoid substituting its own psychological or psychic capacity for marriage as
that the infliction of physical violence,
judgment for that of the trial court."48 presupposing the development of an adult
constitutional indolence or laziness, drug By the very nature of Article 36, courts, despite personality; as meaning the capacity of the
dependence or addiction, and psychosexual having the primary task and burden of decision-
spouses to give themselves to each other and to
Predictably, however, in resolving subsequent anomaly are manifestations of a sociopathic making, must not discount but, instead, must accept the other as a distinct person; that the
cases,49 the Court has applied the aforesaid personality anomaly.53 Let it be noted that in consider as decisive evidence the expert opinion spouses must be ‘other oriented’ since the
standards, without too much regard for the law’s Article 36, there is no marriage to speak of in the on the psychological and mental temperaments obligations of marriage are rooted in a self-giving
clear intention that each case is to be treated first place, as the same is void from the very of the parties.57 love; and that the spouses must have the
differently, as "courts should interpret the beginning.54 To indulge in imagery, the
capacity for interpersonal relationship because
provision on a case-to-case basis; guided by declaration of nullity under Article 36 will simply
Justice Romero explained this in Molina, as marriage is more than just a physical reality but
experience, the findings of experts and provide a decent burial to a stillborn marriage.
follows: involves a true intertwining of personalities. The
researchers in psychological disciplines, and by
fulfillment of the obligations of marriage depends,
decisions of church tribunals."
The prospect of a possible remarriage by the according to Church decisions, on the strength of
freed spouses should not pose too much of a Furthermore, and equally significant, the this interpersonal relationship. A serious
In hindsight, it may have been inappropriate for concern for the Court. First and foremost, professional opinion of a psychological expert incapacity for interpersonal sharing and support
became increasingly important in such cases. is held to impair the relationship and
the Court to impose a rigid set of rules, as the one because it is none of its business. And second,
in Molina, in resolving all cases of psychological because the judicial declaration of psychological Data about the person's entire life, both before consequently, the ability to fulfill the essential
incapacity. Understandably, the Court was then incapacity operates as a warning or a lesson and after the ceremony, were presented to these marital obligations. The marital capacity of one
experts and they were asked to give professional spouse is not considered in isolation but in
alarmed by the deluge of petitions for the learned. On one hand, the normal spouse would
dissolution of marital bonds, and was sensitive to have become vigilant, and never again marry a opinions about a party's mental capacity at the reference to the fundamental relationship to the
the OSG’s exaggeration of Article 36 as the "most person with a personality disorder. On the other time of the wedding. These opinions were rarely other spouse.
challenged and tended to be accepted as
liberal divorce procedure in the world."50 The hand, a would-be spouse of the psychologically
unintended consequences of Molina, however, incapacitated runs the risk of the latter’s disorder decisive evidence of lack of valid consent.
Fr. Green, in an article in Catholic Mind, lists six
has taken its toll on people who have to live with recurring in their marriage.
elements necessary to the mature marital
deviant behavior, moral insanity and sociopathic The Church took pains to point out that its new relationship:
personality anomaly, which, like termites, openness in this area did not amount to the
Lest it be misunderstood, we are not suggesting
consume little by little the very foundation of their addition of new grounds for annulment, but rather
the abandonment of Molina in this case. We
families, our basic social institutions. Far from was an accommodation by the Church to the "The courts consider the following elements
simply declare that, as aptly stated by Justice
what was intended by the Court, Molina has advances made in psychology during the past crucial to the marital commitment: (1) a
Dante O. Tinga in Antonio v. Reyes,55 there is
become a strait-jacket, forcing all sizes to fit into decades. There was now the expertise to provide permanent and faithful commitment to the
need to emphasize other perspectives as well
and be bound by it. Wittingly or unwittingly, the the all-important connecting link between a marriage partner; (2) openness to children and
which should govern the disposition of petitions
Court, in conveniently applying Molina, has marriage breakdown and premarital causes. partner; (3) stability; (4) emotional maturity; (5)
for declaration of nullity under Article 36. At the
allowed diagnosed sociopaths, schizophrenics, financial responsibility; (6) an ability to cope with
risk of being redundant, we reiterate once more
nymphomaniacs, narcissists and the like, to the ordinary stresses and strains of marriage,
the principle that each case must be judged, not During the 1970s, the Church broadened its
continuously debase and pervert the sanctity of etc."
on the basis of a priori assumptions, predilections whole idea of marriage from that of a legal
marriage. Ironically, the Roman Rota has
Fr. Green goes on to speak about some of the This is not to mention, but we mention for their problems. Other individuals with abnormality. A study of borderline patients
psychological conditions that might lead to the nevertheless for emphasis, that the presentation personality disorders are not unpleasant or reported that 38 percent had at least marginal
failure of a marriage: of expert proof presupposes a thorough and in- difficult to work with but tend to be lonely, isolated EEG abnormalities, compared with 19 percent in
depth assessment of the parties by the or dependent. Such traits can lead to a control group.
psychologist or expert, for a conclusive diagnosis interpersonal difficulties, reduced self-esteem
"At stake is a type of constitutional impairment
of a grave, severe and incurable presence of and dissatisfaction with life.
precluding conjugal communion even with the Types of Disorders According to the American
psychological incapacity.62 Parenthetically, the
best intentions of the parties. Among the psychic Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and
Court, at this point, finds it fitting to suggest the
factors possibly giving rise to his or her inability Causes of Personality Disorders Different mental Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (3d ed.,
inclusion in the Rule on Declaration of Absolute
to fulfill marital obligations are the following: (1) health viewpoints propose a variety of causes of rev., 1987), or DSM-III-R, personality disorders
Nullity of Void Marriages and Annulment of
antisocial personality with its fundamental lack of personality disorders. These include Freudian, are categorized into three major clusters:
Voidable Marriages,63 an option for the trial judge
loyalty to persons or sense of moral values; (2) genetic factors, neurobiologic theories and brain
to refer the case to a court-appointed
hyperesthesia, where the individual has no real wave activity.
psychologist/expert for an independent Cluster A: Paranoid, schizoid and schizotypal
freedom of sexual choice; (3) the inadequate
assessment and evaluation of the psychological personality disorders. Individuals who have these
personality where personal responses
state of the parties. This will assist the courts, Freudian Sigmund Freud believed that fixation at disorders often appear to have odd or eccentric
consistently fall short of reasonable expectations.
who are no experts in the field of psychology, to certain stages of development led to certain habits and traits.
arrive at an intelligent and judicious personality types. Thus, some disorders as
xxxx determination of the case. The rule, however, described in the Diagnostic and Statistical
does not dispense with the parties’ prerogative to Cluster B: Antisocial, borderline, histrionic and
Manual of Mental Disorders (3d ed., rev.) are
narcissistic personality disorders. Individuals who
present their own expert witnesses. derived from his oral, anal and phallic character
The psychological grounds are the best approach have these disorders often appear overly
types. Demanding and dependent behavior
for anyone who doubts whether he or she has a emotional, erratic and dramatic.
(dependent and passive-aggressive) was
case for an annulment on any other terms. A Going back, in the case at bench, the
thought to derive from fixation at the oral stage.
situation that does not fit into any of the more psychological assessment, which we consider as
Characteristics of obsessionality, rigidity and Cluster C: Avoidant, dependent, obsessive-
traditional categories often fits very easily into the adequate, produced the findings that both parties
emotional aloofness were thought to derive from compulsive and passive-aggressive personality
psychological category. are afflicted with personality disorders—to
fixation at the anal stage; fixation at the phallic disorders. Individuals who have these disorders
repeat, dependent personality disorder for
stage was thought to lead to shallowness and an often appear anxious or fearful.
petitioner, and narcissistic and antisocial
As new as the psychological grounds are, inability to engage in intimate
personality disorder for respondent. We note that
experts are already detecting a shift in their use. relationships.lawphil.net However, later
The Encyclopedia of Mental Health discusses The DSM-III-R also lists another category,
Whereas originally the emphasis was on the researchers have found little evidence that early
personality disorders as follows— "personality disorder not otherwise specified,"
parties' inability to exercise proper judgment at childhood events or fixation at certain stages of
development lead to specific personality that can be used for other specific personality
the time of the marriage (lack of due discretion),
A group of disorders involving behaviors or traits patterns. disorders or for mixed conditions that do not
recent cases seem to be concentrating on the
that are characteristic of a person’s recent and qualify as any of the specific personality
parties' incapacity to assume or carry out their
disorders.
responsibilities and obligations as promised (lack long-term functioning. Patterns of perceiving and
Genetic Factors Researchers have found that
of due competence). An advantage to using the thinking are not usually limited to isolated
there may be a genetic factor involved in the
ground of lack of due competence is that at the episodes but are deeply ingrained, inflexible, Individuals with diagnosable personality
etiology of antisocial and borderline personality
time the marriage was entered into civil divorce maladaptive and severe enough to cause the disorders usually have long-term concerns, and
disorders; there is less evidence of inheritance of
and breakup of the family almost always is proof individual mental stress or anxieties or to thus therapy may be long-term.64
other personality disorders. Some family,
of someone's failure to carry out marital interfere with interpersonal relationships and
adoption and twin studies suggest that
responsibilities as promised at the time the normal functioning. Personality disorders are
schizotypal personality may be related to genetic Dependent personality disorder is characterized
marriage was entered into."581avvphi1 often recognizable by adolescence or earlier,
factors. in the following manner—
continue through adulthood and become less
obvious in middle or old age. An individual may
Hernandez v. Court of Appeals59 emphasizes the have more than one personality disorder at a Neurobiologic Theories In individuals who have A personality disorder characterized by a pattern
importance of presenting expert testimony to time. borderline personality, researchers have found of dependent and submissive behavior. Such
establish the precise cause of a party’s
that low cerebrospinal fluid 5-hydroxyindoleacetic individuals usually lack self-esteem and
psychological incapacity, and to show that it
acid (5-HIAA) negatively correlated with frequently belittle their capabilities; they fear
existed at the inception of the marriage. And as The common factor among individuals who have
Marcos v. Marcos60 asserts, there is no personality disorders, despite a variety of
measures of aggression and a past history of criticism and are easily hurt by others’ comments.
suicide attempts. Schizotypal personality has At times they actually bring about dominance by
requirement that the person to be declared character traits, is the way in which the disorder
been associated with low platelet monoamine others through a quest for overprotection.
psychologically incapacitated be personally leads to pervasive problems in social and
oxidase (MAO) activity and impaired smooth
examined by a physician, if the totality of occupational adjustment. Some individuals with
pursuit eye movement.
evidence presented is enough to sustain a finding personality disorders are perceived by others as Dependent personality disorder usually begins in
of psychological incapacity.61 Verily, the overdramatic, paranoid, obnoxious or even early adulthood. Individuals who have this
evidence must show a link, medical or the like, criminal, without an awareness of their behaviors. Brain Wave Activity Abnormalities in disorder may be unable to make everyday
between the acts that manifest psychological Such qualities may lead to trouble getting along electroencephalograph (EEG) have been decisions without advice or reassurance from
incapacity and the psychological disorder itself. with other people, as well as difficulties in other reported in antisocial personality for many years; others, may allow others to make most of their
areas of life and often a tendency to blame others slow wave is the most widely reported important decisions (such as where to live), tend
to agree with people even when they believe they essential marital obligations of living together,
are wrong, have difficulty starting projects or observing love, respect and fidelity and rendering
doing things on their own, volunteer to do things help and support, for he is unable to make
that are demeaning in order to get approval from everyday decisions without advice from others,
other people, feel uncomfortable or helpless allows others to make most of his important
when alone and are often preoccupied with fears decisions (such as where to live), tends to agree
of being abandoned.65 and antisocial personality with people even when he believes they are
disorder described, as follows— wrong, has difficulty doing things on his own,
volunteers to do things that are demeaning in
order to get approval from other people, feels
Characteristics include a consistent pattern of
uncomfortable or helpless when alone and is
behavior that is intolerant of the conventional
often preoccupied with fears of being
behavioral limitations imposed by a society, an
abandoned.67 As clearly shown in this case,
inability to sustain a job over a period of years,
petitioner followed everything dictated to him by
disregard for the rights of others (either through
the persons around him. He is insecure, weak
exploitiveness or criminal behavior), frequent
and gullible, has no sense of his identity as a
physical fights and, quite commonly, child or
person, has no cohesive self to speak of, and has
spouse abuse without remorse and a tendency to
no goals and clear direction in life.
blame others. There is often a façade of charm
and even sophistication that masks disregard,
lack of remorse for mistreatment of others and Although on a different plane, the same may also
the need to control others. be said of the respondent. Her being afflicted with
antisocial personality disorder makes her unable
to assume the essential marital obligations. This
Although characteristics of this disorder describe
finding takes into account her disregard for the
criminals, they also may befit some individuals
rights of others, her abuse, mistreatment and
who are prominent in business or politics whose
control of others without remorse, her tendency
habits of self-centeredness and disregard for the
to blame others, and her intolerance of the
rights of others may be hidden prior to a public
conventional behavioral limitations imposed by
scandal.
society.68 Moreover, as shown in this case,
respondent is impulsive and domineering; she
During the 19th century, this type of personality had no qualms in manipulating petitioner with her
disorder was referred to as moral insanity. The threats of blackmail and of committing suicide.
term described immoral, guiltless behavior that
was not accompanied by impairments in
Both parties being afflicted with grave,
reasoning.lawphil.net
severe and incurable psychological G.R. No. 161793 February 13, 2009
incapacity, the precipitous marriage which
According to the classification system used in the they contracted on April 23, 1996 is thus,
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental declared null and void. EDWARD KENNETH NGO TE, Petitioner,
Disorders (3d ed., rev. 1987), anti-social vs.
personality disorder is one of the four "dramatic" ROWENA ONG GUTIERREZ YU-
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the TE, Respondent,
personality disorders, the others being
petition for review on certiorari is REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, Oppositor.
borderline, histrionic and narcissistic.66
GRANTED. The August 5, 2003 Decision
and the January 19, 2004 Resolution of the
The seriousness of the diagnosis and the gravity Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CV No. 71867 DECISION
of the disorders considered, the Court, in this are REVERSED and SET ASIDE, and the
case, finds as decisive the psychological Decision, dated July 30, 2001, NACHURA, J.:
evaluation made by the expert witness; and, thus, REINSTATED.
rules that the marriage of the parties is null and
void on ground of both parties’ psychological Far from novel is the issue involved in this
SO ORDERED. petition. Psychological incapacity, since its
incapacity. We further consider that the trial
court, which had a first-hand view of the incorporation in our laws, has become a clichéd
witnesses’ deportment, arrived at the same ANTONIO EDUARDO B. NACHURA subject of discussion in our jurisprudence. The
conclusion. Associate Justice Court treats this case, however, with much ado,
it having realized that current jurisprudential
doctrine has unnecessarily imposed a
Indeed, petitioner, who is afflicted with dependent perspective by which psychological incapacity
personality disorder, cannot assume the should be viewed, totally inconsistent with the
way the concept was formulated—free in form that they should stay at their parents’ home and college at AMA Computer College last 1994 and find any so it was suggested by respondent that
and devoid of any definition. live with them. Edward relayed this to Rowena is currently unemployed. He is married to and they should go back and seek help from
who, however, suggested that he should get his separated from ROWENA GUTIERREZ YU-TE. petitioner’s parents. When the parties arrived at
inheritance so that they could live on their own. He presented himself at my office for a the house of petitioner, all of his whole family was
For the resolution of the Court is a petition for
Edward talked to his father about this, but the psychological evaluation in relation to his petition all out of the country so respondent decided to go
review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of
patriarch got mad, told Edward that he would be for Nullification of Marriage against the latter by back to her home for the meantime while
Court assailing the August 5, 2003 Decision1 of
disinherited, and insisted that Edward must go the grounds of psychological incapacity. He is petitioner stayed behind at their home. After a
the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CV No.
home.8 now residing at 181 P. Tuazon Street, Quezon few days of separation, respondent called
71867. The petition further assails the January
City. petitioner by phone and said she wanted to talk
19, 2004 Resolution2 denying the motion for the
to him. Petitioner responded immediately and
reconsideration of the challenged decision. After a month, Edward escaped from the house
when he arrived at their house, respondent
of Rowena’s uncle, and stayed with his parents. Petitioner got himself three siblings who are now
confronted petitioner as to why he appeared to be
His family then hid him from Rowena and her in business and one deceased sister. Both his
The relevant facts and proceedings follow. cold, respondent acted irrationally and even
family whenever they telephoned to ask for him.9 parents are also in the business world by whom
threatened to commit suicide. Petitioner got
he [considers] as generous, hospitable, and
scared so he went home again. Respondent
Petitioner Edward Kenneth Ngo Te first got a patient. This said virtues are said to be handed to
In June 1996, Edward was able to talk to would call by phone every now and then and
glimpse of respondent Rowena Ong Gutierrez each of the family member. He generally
Rowena. Unmoved by his persistence that they became angry as petitioner does not know what
Yu-Te in a gathering organized by the Filipino- considers himself to be quiet and simple. He
should live with his parents, she said that it was to do. Respondent went to the extent of
Chinese association in their college. Edward was clearly remembers himself to be afraid of meeting
better for them to live separate lives. They then threatening to file a case against petitioner and
then initially attracted to Rowena’s close friend; people. After 1994, he tried his luck in being a
parted ways.10 scandalize his family in the newspaper. Petitioner
but, as the latter already had a boyfriend, the Sales Executive of Mansfield International
asked her how he would be able to make amends
young man decided to court Rowena. That was Incorporated. And because of job incompetence,
and at this point in time[,] respondent brought the
in January 1996, when petitioner was a After almost four years, or on January 18, 2000, as well as being quiet and loner, he did not stay
idea of marriage. Petitioner[,] out of frustration in
sophomore student and respondent, a Edward filed a petition before the Regional Trial long in the job until 1996. His interest lie[s] on
life[,] agreed to her to pacify her. And so on April
freshman.3 Court (RTC) of Quezon City, Branch 106, for the becoming a full servant of God by being a priest
23, 1996, respondent’s uncle brought the parties
annulment of his marriage to Rowena on the or a pastor. He [is] said to isolate himself from his
to Valenzuela[,] and on that very same day[,]
basis of the latter’s psychological incapacity. This friends even during his childhood days as he only
petitioner was made to sign the Marriage
Sharing similar angst towards their families, the
was docketed as Civil Case No. Q-00-39720.11 loves to read the Bible and hear its message.
Contract before the Judge. Petitioner actually
two understood one another and developed a
certain degree of closeness towards each other. never applied for any Marriage License.
In March 1996, or around three months after their As Rowena did not file an answer, the trial court, Respondent is said to come from a fine family
first meeting, Rowena asked Edward that they on July 11, 2000, ordered the Office of the City despite having a lazy father and a disobedient
Respondent decided that they should stay first at
elope. At first, he refused, bickering that he was Prosecutor (OCP) of Quezon City to investigate wife. She is said to have not finish[ed] her
their house until after arrival of the parents of
young and jobless. Her persistence, however, whether there was collusion between the collegiate degree and shared intimate sexual
petitioner. But when the parents of petitioner
made him relent. Thus, they left Manila and sailed parties.12 In the meantime, on July 27, 2000, the moments with her boyfriend prior to that with
arrived, respondent refused to allow petitioner to
to Cebu that month; he, providing their travel Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) entered its petitioner.
go home. Petitioner was threatened in so many
money and she, purchasing the boat ticket.4 appearance and deputized the OCP to appear on ways with her uncle showing to him many guns.
its behalf and assist it in the scheduled
In January of 1996, respondent showed her Respondent even threatened that if he should
hearings.13
However, Edward’s ₱80,000.00 lasted for only a kindness to petitioner and this became the persist in going home, they will commission their
month. Their pension house accommodation and foundation of their intimate relationship. After a military friends to harm his family. Respondent
daily sustenance fast depleted it. And they could On August 23, 2000, the OCP submitted an month of dating, petitioner mentioned to even made petitioner sign a declaration that if he
not find a job. In April 1996, they decided to go investigation report stating that it could not respondent that he is having problems with his should perish, the authorities should look for him
back to Manila. Rowena proceeded to her uncle’s determine if there was collusion between the family. Respondent surprisingly retorted that she at his parents[ ]ۥand relatives[ ]ۥhouses.
house and Edward to his parents’ home. As his parties; thus, it recommended trial on the also hates her family and that she actually Sometime in June of 1996, petitioner was able to
family was abroad, and Rowena kept on merits.14 wanted to get out of their lives. From that [time escape and he went home. He told his parents
telephoning him, threatening him that she would on], respondent had insisted to petitioner that about his predicament and they forgave him and
commit suicide, Edward agreed to stay with they should elope and live together. Petitioner supported him by giving him military escort.
The clinical psychologist who examined
Rowena at her uncle’s place.5 hesitated because he is not prepared as they are Petitioner, however, did not inform them that he
petitioner found both parties psychologically both young and inexperienced, but she insisted signed a marriage contract with respondent.
incapacitated, and made the following findings that they would somehow manage because When they knew about it[,] petitioner was
On April 23, 1996, Rowena’s uncle brought the and conclusions: referred for counseling. Petitioner[,] after the
petitioner is rich. In the last week of March 1996,
two to a court to get married. He was then 25 respondent seriously brought the idea of eloping counseling[,] tried to contact respondent.
years old, and she, 20.6 The two then continued and she already bought tickets for the boat going Petitioner offered her to live instead to[sic] the
BACKGROUND DATA & BRIEF MARITAL
to stay at her uncle’s place where Edward was home of petitioner’s parents while they are still
HISTORY: to Cebu. Petitioner reluctantly agreed to the idea
treated like a prisoner—he was not allowed to go and so they eloped to Cebu. The parties are studying. Respondent refused the idea and
out unaccompanied. Her uncle also showed supposed to stay at the house of a friend of claimed that she would only live with him if they
Edward his guns and warned the latter not to EDWARD KENNETH NGO TE is a [29-year-old] will have a separate home of their own and be
respondent, but they were not able to locate her,
leave Rowena.7 At one point, Edward was able to Filipino male adult born and baptized Born Again so petitioner was compelled to rent an apartment. away from his parents. She also intimated to
call home and talk to his brother who suggested Christian at Manila. He finished two years in The parties tried to look for a job but could not petitioner that he should already get his share of
whatever he would inherit from his parents so individuals. He is seen too akin to this kind of 71867, reversed and set aside the trial court’s The Court now resolves the singular issue of
they can start a new life. Respondent demanded lifestyle that he finds it boring and uninteresting ruling.20 It ruled that petitioner failed to prove the whether, based on Article 36 of the Family Code,
these not knowing [that] the petitioner already to commit himself to a relationship especially to psychological incapacity of respondent. The the marriage between the parties is null and
settled his differences with his own family. When that of respondent, as aggravated by her clinical psychologist did not personally examine void.31
respondent refused to live with petitioner where dangerously aggressive moves. As he is more of respondent, and relied only on the information
he chose for them to stay, petitioner decided to the reserved and timid type of person, as he provided by petitioner. Further, the psychological
I.
tell her to stop harassing the home of his parents. prefer to be religiously attached and spend a incapacity was not shown to be attended by
He told her already that he was disinherited and solemn time alone. gravity, juridical antecedence and incurability. In
since he also does not have a job, he would not sum, the evidence adduced fell short of the We begin by examining the provision, tracing its
be able to support her. After knowing that requirements stated in Republic v. Court of origin and charting the development of
ROWENA GUTIERREZ YU-TE, the respondent,
petitioner does not have any money anymore, Appeals and Molina21 needed for the declaration jurisprudence interpreting it.
is said to be of the aggressive-rebellious type of
respondent stopped tormenting petitioner and of nullity of the marriage under Article 36 of the
woman. She is seen to be somewhat exploitative
informed petitioner that they should live separate Family Code.22 The CA faulted the lower court for
in her [plight] for a life of wealth and glamour. She Article 36 of the Family Code32 provides:
lives. rendering the decision without the required
is seen to take move on marriage as she thought
certification of the OSG briefly stating therein the
that her marriage with petitioner will bring her
OSG’s reasons for its agreement with or Article 36. A marriage contracted by any party
The said relationship between Edward and good fortune because he is part of a rich family.
opposition to, as the case may be, the who, at the time of the celebration, was
Rowena is said to be undoubtedly in the wreck In order to have her dreams realized, she used
petition.23 The CA later denied petitioner’s motion psychologically incapacitated to comply with the
and weakly-founded. The break-up was caused force and threats knowing that [her] husband is
for reconsideration in the likewise assailed essential marital obligations of marriage, shall
by both parties[’] unreadiness to commitment and somehow weak-willed. Upon the realization that
January 19, 2004 Resolution.24 likewise be void even if such incapacity becomes
their young age. He was still in the state of finding there is really no chance for wealth, she gladly
his fate and fighting boredom, while she was still finds her way out of the relationship. manifest only after its solemnization.
egocentrically involved with herself. Dissatisfied, petitioner filed before this Court the
instant petition for review on certiorari. On June As borne out by the deliberations of the Civil
REMARKS:
15, 2005, the Court gave due course to the Code Revision Committee that drafted the Family
TESTS ADMINISTERED:
petition and required the parties to submit their Code, Article 36 was based on grounds available
Before going to marriage, one should really get to respective memoranda.25 in the Canon Law. Thus, Justice Flerida Ruth P.
Revised Beta Examination know himself and marry himself before Romero elucidated in her separate opinion in
submitting to marital vows. Marriage should not
In his memorandum,26 petitioner argues that the Santos v. Court of Appeals:33
be taken out of intuition as it is profoundly a
Bender Visual Motor Gestalt Test CA erred in substituting its own judgment for that
serious institution solemnized by religious and
of the trial court. He posits that the RTC declared However, as a member of both the Family Law
law. In the case presented by petitioner and
the marriage void, not only because of Revision Committee of the Integrated Bar of the
Draw A Person Test respondent[,] (sic) it is evidently clear that both
respondent’s psychological incapacity, but rather Philippines and the Civil Code Revision
parties have impulsively taken marriage for
due to both parties’ psychological incapacity. Commission of the UP Law Center, I wish to add
granted as they are still unaware of their own
Rorschach Psychodiagnostic Test Petitioner also points out that there is no some observations. The letter dated April 15,
selves. He is extremely introvert to the point of
requirement for the psychologist to personally 1985 of then Judge Alicia V. Sempio-Diy written
weakening their relationship by his weak
examine respondent. Further, he avers that the in behalf of the Family Law and Civil Code
Sach’s Sentence Completion Test behavioral disposition. She, on the other hand[,]
OSG is bound by the actions of the OCP because Revision Committee to then Assemblywoman
is extremely exploitative and aggressive so as to
the latter represented it during the trial; and it had Mercedes Cojuangco-Teodoro traced the
be unlawful, insincere and undoubtedly uncaring
MMPI been furnished copies of all the pleadings, the background of the inclusion of the present Article
in her strides toward convenience. It is apparent
trial court orders and notices.27 36 in the Family Code.
that she is suffering the grave, severe, and
TEST RESULTS & EVALUATION: incurable presence of Narcissistic and Antisocial
Personality Disorder that started since childhood For its part, the OSG contends in its "During its early meetings, the Family Law
and only manifested during marriage. Both memorandum,28 that the annulment petition filed Committee had thought of including a chapter on
Both petitioner and respondent are dubbed to be parties display psychological incapacities that before the RTC contains no statement of the absolute divorce in the draft of a new Family
emotionally immature and recklessly impulsive made marriage a big mistake for them to take.15 essential marital obligations that the parties failed Code (Book I of the Civil Code) that it had been
upon swearing to their marital vows as each of to comply with. The root cause of the tasked by the IBP and the UP Law Center to
them was motivated by different notions on psychological incapacity was likewise not alleged prepare. In fact, some members of the
marriage. The trial court, on July 30, 2001, rendered its
in the petition; neither was it medically or clinically Committee were in favor of a no-fault divorce
Decision16 declaring the marriage of the parties
identified. The purported incapacity of both between the spouses after a number of years of
null and void on the ground that both parties were
Edward Kenneth Ngo Te, the petitioner in this parties was not shown to be medically or clinically separation, legal or de facto. Justice J.B.L. Reyes
psychologically incapacitated to comply with the
case[,] is said to be still unsure and unready so permanent or incurable. And the clinical was then requested to prepare a proposal for an
essential marital obligations.17 The Republic,
as to commit himself to marriage. He is still psychologist did not personally examine the action for dissolution of marriage and the effects
represented by the OSG, timely filed its notice of
founded to be on the search of what he wants in respondent. Thus, the OSG concludes that the thereof based on two grounds: (a) five continuous
appeal.18
life. He is absconded as an introvert as he is not requirements in Molina29 were not satisfied.30 years of separation between the spouses, with or
really sociable and displays a lack of interest in without a judicial decree of legal separation, and
social interactions and mingling with other On review, the appellate court, in the assailed (b) whenever a married person would have
August 5, 2003 Decision19 in CA-G.R. CV No. obtained a decree of absolute divorce in another
country. Actually, such a proposal is one for ‘(7) those marriages contracted by any party who, At the Committee meeting of July 26, 1986, the Ricardo C. Puno opined that sometimes a person
absolute divorce but called by another name. at the time of the celebration, was wanting in the draft provision read: may be psychologically impotent with one but not
Later, even the Civil Code Revision Committee sufficient use of reason or judgment to with another.
took time to discuss the proposal of Justice understand the essential nature of marriage or
"(7) Those marriages contracted by any party
Reyes on this matter. was psychologically or mentally incapacitated to
who, at the time of the celebration, was wanting One of the guidelines enumerated in the majority
discharge the essential marital obligations, even
in the sufficient use of reason or judgment to opinion for the interpretation and application of
if such lack or incapacity is made manifest after
Subsequently, however, when the Civil Code understand the essential nature of marriage or Art. 36 is: "Such incapacity must also be shown
the celebration.
Revision Committee and Family Law Committee was psychologically or mentally incapacitated to to be medically or clinically permanent or
started holding joint meetings on the preparation discharge the essential marital obligations, even incurable. Such incurability may be absolute or
of the draft of the New Family Code, they agreed as well as the following implementing provisions: if such lack of incapacity is made manifest after even relative only in regard to the other spouse,
and formulated the definition of marriage as — the celebration." not necessarily absolutely against everyone of
the same sex."
‘Art. 32. The absolute nullity of a marriage may
‘a special contract of permanent partnership be invoked or pleaded only on the basis of a final The twists and turns which the ensuing
between a man and a woman entered into in judgment declaring the marriage void, without discussion took finally produced the following The Committee, through Prof. Araceli T. Barrera,
accordance with law for the establishment of prejudice to the provision of Article 34.’ revised provision even before the session was considered the inclusion of the phrase "and is
conjugal and family life. It is an inviolable social over: incurable" but Prof. Esteban B. Bautista
institution whose nature, consequences, and commented that this would give rise to the
‘Art. 33. The action or defense for the declaration
incidents are governed by law and not subject to question of how they will determine curability and
of the absolute nullity of a marriage shall not "(7) That contracted by any party who, at the time
stipulation, except that marriage settlements may Justice Caguioa agreed that it would be more
prescribe.’ of the celebration, was psychologically
fix the property relations during the marriage problematic. Yet, the possibility that one may be
incapacitated to discharge the essential marital
within the limits provided by law.’ cured after the psychological incapacity becomes
obligations, even if such lack or incapacity
xxxxxxxxx manifest after the marriage was not ruled out by
becomes manifest after the celebration."
Justice Puno and Justice Alice Sempio-Diy.
With the above definition, and considering the
Justice Caguioa suggested that the remedy was
Christian traditional concept of marriage of the It is believed that many hopelessly broken
Noticeably, the immediately preceding to allow the afflicted spouse to remarry.
Filipino people as a permanent, inviolable, marriages in our country today may already be
formulation above has dropped any reference to
indissoluble social institution upon which the dissolved or annulled on the grounds proposed
"wanting in the sufficient use of reason or
family and society are founded, and also realizing by the Joint Committee on declaration of nullity For clarity, the Committee classified the bases for
judgment to understand the essential nature of
the strong opposition that any provision on as well as annulment of marriages, thus determining void marriages, viz.:
marriage" and to "mentally incapacitated." It was
absolute divorce would encounter from the rendering an absolute divorce law unnecessary.
explained that these phrases refer to "defects in
Catholic Church and the Catholic sector of our In fact, during a conference with Father Gerald
the mental faculties vitiating consent, which is not 1. lack of one or more of the essential requisites
citizenry to whom the great majority of our people Healy of the Ateneo University, as well as another
the idea . . . but lack of appreciation of one's of marriage as contract;
belong, the two Committees in their joint meeting with Archbishop Oscar Cruz of the
marital obligation." There being a defect in
meetings did not pursue the idea of absolute Archdiocese of Pampanga, the Joint Committee
consent, "it is clear that it should be a ground for
divorce and, instead, opted for an action for was informed that since Vatican II, the Catholic 2. reasons of public policy;
voidable marriage because there is the
judicial declaration of invalidity of marriage based Church has been declaring marriages null and
appearance of consent and it is capable of
on grounds available in the Canon Law. It was void on the ground of "lack of due discretion" for
convalidation for the simple reason that there are 3. special cases and special situations.
thought that such an action would not only be an causes that, in other jurisdictions, would be clear
lucid intervals and there are cases when the
acceptable alternative to divorce but would also grounds for divorce, like teen-age or premature
insanity is curable . . . Psychological incapacity
solve the nagging problem of church annulments marriages; marriage to a man who, because of The ground of psychological incapacity was
does not refer to mental faculties and has nothing
of marriages on grounds not recognized by the some personality disorder or disturbance, cannot subsumed under "special cases and special
to do with consent; it refers to obligations
civil law of the State. Justice Reyes was, thus, support a family; the foolish or ridiculous choice situations," hence, its special treatment in Art. 36
attendant to marriage."
requested to again prepare a draft of provisions of a spouse by an otherwise perfectly normal in the Family Code as finally enacted.
on such action for celebration of invalidity of person; marriage to a woman who refuses to
marriage. Still later, to avoid the overlapping of cohabit with her husband or who refuses to have My own position as a member of the Committee
provisions on void marriages as found in the children. Bishop Cruz also informed the then was that psychological incapacity is, in a Nowhere in the Civil Code provisions on Marriage
present Civil Code and those proposed by Committee that they have found out in tribunal sense, insanity of a lesser degree. is there a ground for avoiding or annulling
Justice Reyes on judicial declaration of invalidity marriages that even comes close to being
work that a lot of machismo among husbands are
of marriage on grounds similar to the Canon Law, manifestations of their sociopathic personality psychological in nature.
As to the proposal of Justice Caguioa to use the
the two Committees now working as a Joint anomaly, like inflicting physical violence upon
Committee in the preparation of a New Family term "psychological or mental impotence,"
their wives, constitutional indolence or laziness, Where consent is vitiated due to circumstances
Code decided to consolidate the present Archbishop Oscar Cruz opined in the earlier
drug dependence or addiction, and psychosexual existing at the time of the marriage, such
February 9, 1984 session that this term "is an
provisions on void marriages with the proposals anomaly.34 marriage which stands valid until annulled is
of Justice Reyes. The result was the inclusion of invention of some churchmen who are moralists
capable of ratification or convalidation.
an additional kind of void marriage in the but not canonists, that is why it is considered a
In her separate opinion in Molina,35 she weak phrase." He said that the Code of Canon
enumeration of void marriages in the present
Civil Code, to wit: expounded: Law would rather express it as "psychological or
mental incapacity to discharge . . ." Justice
On the other hand, for reasons of public policy or Canon Law concept of psychological incapacity binding on the civil courts, may be given fulfilling the responsibilities he assumes as a
lack of essential requisites, some marriages are into the Family Code—and classified the same as persuasive effect since the provision itself was result of the consent he elicits.
void from the beginning. a ground for declaring marriages void ab initio or taken from the Canon Law.37 The law is then so
totally inexistent from the beginning. designed as to allow some resiliency in its
Since the address of Pius XII to the auditors of
application.38
With the revision of Book I of the Civil Code, the Roman Rota in 1941 regarding psychic
particularly the provisions on Marriage, the A brief historical note on the Old Canon Law incapacity with respect to marriage arising from
drafters, now open to fresh winds of change in (1917). This Old Code, while it did not provide Yet, as held in Santos,39 the phrase pathological conditions, there has been an
keeping with the more permissive mores and directly for psychological incapacity, in effect, "psychological incapacity" is not meant to increasing trend to understand as ground of
practices of the time, took a leaf from the recognized the same indirectly from a comprehend all possible cases of psychoses. It nullity different from others, the incapacity to
relatively liberal provisions of Canon Law. combination of three old canons: "Canon #1081 refers to no less than a mental (not physical) assume the essential obligations of marriage,
required persons to be ‘capable according to law’ incapacity that causes a party to be truly especially the incapacity which arises from
in order to give valid consent; Canon #1082 noncognitive of the basic marital covenants that sexual anomalies. Nymphomania is a sample
Canon 1095 which states, inter alia, that the
required that persons ‘be at least not ignorant’ of concomitantly must be assumed and discharged which ecclesiastical jurisprudence has studied
following persons are incapable of contracting
the major elements required in marriage; and by the parties to the marriage which, as under this rubric.
marriage: "3. (those) who, because of causes of
Canon #1087 (the force and fear category) expressed by Article 6840 of the Family Code,
a psychological nature, are unable to assume the
required that internal and external freedom be include their mutual obligations to live together,
essential obligations of marriage" provided the The problem as treated can be summarized,
present in order for consent to be valid. This line observe love, respect and fidelity; and render
model for what is now Art. 36 of the Family Code: thus: do sexual anomalies always and in every
of interpretation produced two distinct but related help and support. The intendment of the law has
"A marriage contracted by any party who, at the case imply a grave psychopathological condition
grounds for annulment called ‘lack of due been to confine it to the most serious of cases of
time of the celebration, was psychologically which affects the higher faculties of intellect,
discretion’ and ‘lack of due competence.’ Lack of personality disorders clearly demonstrative of an
incapacitated to comply with the essential marital discernment, and freedom; or are there sexual
due discretion means that the person did not utter insensitivity or inability to give meaning and
obligations of marriage, shall likewise be void anomalies that are purely so – that is to say, they
have the ability to give valid consent at the time significance to the marriage.41 This interpretation
even if such incapacity becomes manifest only arise from certain physiological dysfunction of the
of the wedding and, therefore, the union is is, in fact, consistent with that in Canon Law, thus:
after its solemnization." hormonal system, and they affect the sexual
invalid. Lack of due competence means that the
condition, leaving intact the higher faculties
person was incapable of carrying out the
3.5.3.1. The Meaning of Incapacity to Assume. A however, so that these persons are still capable
It bears stressing that unlike in Civil Law, Canon obligations of the promise he or she made during
sharp conceptual distinction must be made of free human acts. The evidence from the
Law recognizes only two types of marriages with the wedding ceremony."
between the second and third paragraphs of empirical sciences is abundant that there are
respect to their validity: valid and void. Civil Law,
C.1095, namely between the grave lack of certain anomalies of a sexual nature which may
however, recognizes an intermediate state, the
Favorable annulment decisions by the Roman discretionary judgment and the incapacity to impel a person towards sexual activities which
voidable or annullable marriages. When the
Rota in the 1950s and 1960s involving sexual assume the essential obligation. Mario are not normal, either with respect to its
Ecclesiastical Tribunal "annuls" a marriage, it
disorders such as homosexuality and Pompedda, a rotal judge, explains the difference frequency [nymphomania, satyriasis] or to the
actually declares the marriage null and void, i.e.,
nymphomania laid the foundation for a broader by an ordinary, if somewhat banal, example. Jose nature of the activity itself [sadism, masochism,
it never really existed in the first place, for a valid
approach to the kind of proof necessary for wishes to sell a house to Carmela, and on the homosexuality]. However, these anomalies
sacramental marriage can never be dissolved.
psychological grounds for annulment. The Rota assumption that they are capable according to notwithstanding, it is altogether possible that the
Hence, a properly performed and consummated
had reasoned for the first time in several cases positive law to enter such contract, there remains higher faculties remain intact such that a person
marriage between two living Roman Catholics
that the capacity to give valid consent at the time the object of the contract, viz, the house. The so afflicted continues to have an adequate
can only be nullified by the formal annulment
of marriage was probably not present in persons house is located in a different locality, and prior understanding of what marriage is and of the
process which entails a full tribunal procedure
who had displayed such problems shortly after to the conclusion of the contract, the house was gravity of its responsibilities. In fact, he can
with a Court selection and a formal hearing.
the marriage. The nature of this change was gutted down by fire unbeknown to both of them. choose marriage freely. The question though is
nothing short of revolutionary. Once the Rota This is the hypothesis contemplated by the third whether such a person can assume those
Such so-called church "annulments" are not itself had demonstrated a cautious willingness to paragraph of the canon. The third paragraph responsibilities which he cannot fulfill, although
recognized by Civil Law as severing the marriage use this kind of hindsight, the way was paved for does not deal with the psychological process of he may be able to understand them. In this latter
ties as to capacitate the parties to enter lawfully what came after 1970. Diocesan Tribunals began giving consent because it has been established a hypothesis, the incapacity to assume the
into another marriage. The grounds for nullifying to accept proof of serious psychological problems priori that both have such a capacity to give essential obligations of marriage issues from the
civil marriage, not being congruent with those laid that manifested themselves shortly after the consent, and they both know well the object of incapacity to posit the object of consent, rather
down by Canon Law, the former being more ceremony as proof of an inability to give valid their consent [the house and its particulars]. than the incapacity to posit consent itself.
strict, quite a number of married couples have consent at the time of the ceremony.36 Rather, C.1095.3 deals with the object of the
found themselves in limbo—freed from the consent/contract which does not exist. The
Ecclesiastical jurisprudence has been hesitant, if
marriage bonds in the eyes of the Catholic contract is invalid because it lacks its formal
Interestingly, the Committee did not give any not actually confused, in this regard. The initial
Church but yet unable to contract a valid civil object. The consent as a psychological act is both
examples of psychological incapacity for fear that steps taken by church courts were not too clear
marriage under state laws. Heedless of civil law valid and sufficient. The psychological act,
by so doing, it might limit the applicability of the whether this incapacity is incapacity to posit
sanctions, some persons contract new marriages however, is directed towards an object which is
provision under the principle of ejusdem generis. consent or incapacity to posit the object of
or enter into live-in relationships. not available. Urbano Navarrete summarizes this
The Committee desired that the courts should consent. A case c. Pinna, for example, arrives at
distinction: the third paragraph deals not with the
interpret the provision on a case-to-case basis; the conclusion that the intellect, under such an
positing of consent but with positing the object of
It was precisely to provide a satisfactory solution guided by experience, the findings of experts and irresistible impulse, is prevented from properly
consent. The person may be capable of positing
to such anomalous situations that the Civil Law researchers in psychological disciplines, and by deliberating and its judgment lacks freedom. This
a free act of consent, but he is not capable of
Revision Committee decided to engraft the decisions of church tribunals which, although not line of reasoning supposes that the intellect, at
the moment of consent, is under the influence of intelligent judgment, and a mature evaluation and other. These are general strokes and this is not affective immaturity, narcissism, and antisocial
this irresistible compulsion, with the inevitable weighing of things. The decision coram Sabattani the place for detained and individual description. traits.
conclusion that such a decision, made as it was concerning a nymphomaniac affirmed that such
under these circumstances, lacks the necessary a spouse can have difficulty not only with regard
A rotal decision c. Pinto resolved a petition where Marriage and Homosexuality. Until 1967, it was
freedom. It would be incontrovertible that a to the moment of consent but also, and
the concrete circumstances of the case concerns not very clear under what rubric homosexuality
decision made under duress, such as this especially, with regard to the matrimonium in
a person diagnosed to be suffering from serious was understood to be invalidating of marriage –
irresistible impulse, would not be a free act. But facto esse. The decision concludes that a person
sociopathy. He concluded that while the that is to say, is homosexuality invalidating
this is precisely the question: is it, as a matter of in such a condition is incapable of assuming the
respondent may have understood, on the level of because of the inability to evaluate the
fact, true that the intellect is always and conjugal obligation of fidelity, although she may
the intellect, the essential obligations of marriage, responsibilities of marriage, or because of the
continuously under such an irresistible have no difficulty in understanding what the
he was not capable of assuming them because inability to fulfill its obligations. Progressively,
compulsion? It would seem entirely possible, and obligations of marriage are, nor in the weighing
of his "constitutional immorality." however, rotal jurisprudence began to
certainly more reasonable, to think that there are and evaluating of those same obligations.
understand it as incapacity to assume the
certain cases in which one who is sexually
obligations of marriage so that by 1978, Parisella
hyperaesthetic can understand perfectly and Stankiewicz clarifies that the maturity and
Prior to the promulgation of the Code of Canon was able to consider, with charity, homosexuality
evaluate quite maturely what marriage is and capacity of the person as regards the fulfillment
Law in 1983, it was not unusual to refer to this as an autonomous ground of nullity. This is to say
what it implies; his consent would be juridically of responsibilities is determined not only at the
ground as moral impotence or psychic that a person so afflicted is said to be unable to
ineffective for this one reason that he cannot moment of decision but also and especially
impotence, or similar expressions to express a assume the essential obligations of marriage. In
posit the object of consent, the exclusive jus in during the moment of execution of decision. And
specific incapacity rooted in some anomalies and this same rotal decision, the object of matrimonial
corpus to be exercised in a normal way and with when this is applied to constitution of the marital
disorders in the personality. These anomalies consent is understood to refer not only to the jus
usually regularity. It would seem more correct to consent, it means that the actual fulfillment of the
leave intact the faculties of the will and the in corpus but also the consortium totius vitae. The
say that the consent may indeed be free, but is essential obligations of marriage is a pertinent
intellect. It is qualified as moral or psychic, third paragraph of C.1095 [incapacity to assume
juridically ineffective because the party is consideration that must be factored into the
obviously to distinguish it from the impotence that the essential obligations of marriage] certainly
consenting to an object that he cannot deliver. question of whether a person was in a position to
constitutes the impediment dealt with by C.1084. seems to be the more adequate juridical structure
The house he is selling was gutted down by fire. assume the obligations of marriage in the first
Nonetheless, the anomalies render the subject to account for the complex phenomenon that
place. When one speaks of the inability of the
incapable of binding himself in a valid homosexuality is. The homosexual is not
party to assume and fulfill the obligations, one is
3.5.3.2. Incapacity as an Autonomous Ground. matrimonial pact, to the extent that the anomaly necessarily impotent because, except in very few
not looking at matrimonium in fieri, but also and
Sabattani seems to have seen his way more renders that person incapable of fulfilling the exceptional cases, such a person is usually
especially at matrimonium in facto esse. In [the]
clearly through this tangled mess, proposing as essential obligations. According to the principle capable of full sexual relations with the spouse.
decision of 19 Dec. 1985, Stankiewicz collocated
he did a clear conceptual distinction between the affirmed by the long tradition of moral theology: Neither is it a mental infirmity, and a person so
the incapacity of the respondent to assume the
inability to give consent on the one hand, and the nemo ad impossibile tenetur. afflicted does not necessarily suffer from a grave
essential obligations of marriage in the psychic
inability to fulfill the object of consent, on the lack of due discretion because this sexual
constitution of the person, precisely on the basis
other. It is his opinion that nymphomaniacs anomaly does not by itself affect the critical,
xxxx of his irresponsibility as regards money and his
usually understand the meaning of marriage, and volitive, and intellectual faculties. Rather, the
apathy as regards the rights of others that he had
they are usually able to evaluate its implications. homosexual person is unable to assume the
violated. Interpersonal relationships are
They would have no difficulty with positing a free 3.5.3.5 Indications of Incapacity. There is responsibilities of marriage because he is unable
invariably disturbed in the presence of this
and intelligent consent. However, such persons, incapacity when either or both of the contractants to fulfill this object of the matrimonial contract. In
personality disorder. A lack of empathy (inability
capable as they are of eliciting an intelligent and are not capable of initiating or maintaining this other words, the invalidity lies, not so much in the
to recognize and experience how others feel) is
free consent, experience difficulty in another consortium. One immediately thinks of those defect of consent, as in the defect of the object of
common. A sense of entitlement, unreasonable
sphere: delivering the object of the consent. cases where one of the parties is so self-centered consent.
expectation, especially favorable treatment, is
Anne, another rotal judge, had likewise treated [e.g., a narcissistic personality] that he does not
usually present. Likewise common is
the difference between the act of consenting and even know how to begin a union with the other,
interpersonal exploitativeness, in which others 3.5.3.6 Causes of Incapacity. A last point that
the act of positing the object of consent from the let alone how to maintain and sustain such a
are taken advantage of in order to achieve one’s needs to be addressed is the source of incapacity
point of view of a person afflicted with relationship. A second incapacity could be due to
ends. specified by the canon: causes of a psychological
nymphomania. According to him, such an the fact that the spouses are incapable of
nature. Pompedda proffers the opinion that the
affliction usually leaves the process of knowing beginning or maintaining a heterosexual
clause is a reference to the personality of the
and understanding and evaluating intact. What it consortium, which goes to the very substance of Authors have made listings of obligations
contractant. In other words, there must be a
affects is the object of consent: the delivering of matrimony. Another incapacity could arise when considered as essential matrimonial obligations.
reference to the psychic part of the person. It is
the goods. a spouse is unable to concretize the good of One of them is the right to the communio vitae.
only when there is something in the psyche or in
himself or of the other party. The canon speaks, This and their corresponding obligations are
the psychic constitution of the person which
not of the bonum partium, but of the bonum basically centered around the good of the
3.5.3.3 Incapacity as Incapacity to Posit the impedes his capacity that one can then affirm that
conjugum. A spouse who is capable only of spouses and of the children. Serious psychic
Object of Consent. From the selected rotal the person is incapable according to the
realizing or contributing to the good of the other anomalies, which do not have to be necessarily
jurisprudence cited, supra, it is possible to see a hypothesis contemplated by C.1095.3. A person
party qua persona rather than qua conjunx would incurable, may give rise to the incapacity to
certain progress towards a consensus doctrine is judged incapable in this juridical sense only to
be deemed incapable of contracting marriage. assume any, or several, or even all of these
that the incapacity to assume the essential the extent that he is found to have something
Such would be the case of a person who may be rights. There are some cases in which
obligations of marriage (that is to say, the formal rooted in his psychic constitution which impedes
quite capable of procuring the economic good interpersonal relationship is impossible. Some
object of consent) can coexist in the same person the assumption of these obligations. A bad habit
and the financial security of the other, but not characteristic features of inability for
with the ability to make a free decision, an deeply engrained in one’s consciousness would
capable of realizing the bonum conjugale of the interpersonal relationships in marriage include
not seem to qualify to be a source of this at the whim of the parties. Both the family and essential obligations of marriage. Thus, "mild (8) The trial court must order the prosecuting
invalidating incapacity. The difference being that marriage are to be "protected" by the state. characterological peculiarities, mood changes, attorney or fiscal and the Solicitor General to
there seems to be some freedom, however occasional emotional outbursts" cannot be appear as counsel for the state. No decision shall
remote, in the development of the habit, while accepted as root causes. The illness must be be handed down unless the Solicitor General
The Family Code echoes this constitutional edict
one accepts as given one’s psychic constitution. shown as downright incapacity or inability, not a issues a certification, which will be quoted in the
on marriage and the family and emphasizes their
It would seem then that the law insists that the refusal, neglect or difficulty, much less ill will. In decision, briefly stating therein his reasons for his
permanence, inviolability and solidarity.
source of the incapacity must be one which is not other words, there is a natal or supervening agreement or opposition, as the case may be, to
the fruit of some degree of freedom.42 disabling factor in the person, an adverse integral the petition. The Solicitor General, along with the
(2) The root cause of the psychological incapacity element in the personality structure that prosecuting attorney, shall submit to the court
must be (a) medically or clinically identified, (b) effectively incapacitates the person from really such certification within fifteen (15) days from the
Conscious of the law’s intention that it is the
alleged in the complaint, (c) sufficiently proven by accepting and thereby complying with the date the case is deemed submitted for resolution
courts, on a case-to-case basis, that should
experts and (d) clearly explained in the decision. obligations essential to marriage. of the court. The Solicitor General shall discharge
determine whether a party to a marriage is
Article 36 of the Family Code requires that the the equivalent function of the defensor vinculi
psychologically incapacitated, the Court, in
incapacity must be psychological—not physical, contemplated under Canon 1095.47
sustaining the lower court’s judgment of (6) The essential marital obligations must be
although its manifestations and/or symptoms
annulment in Tuason v. Court of Appeals,43 ruled those embraced by Articles 68 up to 71 of the
may be physical. The evidence must convince
that the findings of the trial court are final and Family Code as regards the husband and wife as Noteworthy is that in Molina, while the majority of
the court that the parties, or one of them, was
binding on the appellate courts.44 well as Articles 220, 221 and 225 of the same the Court’s membership concurred in the
mentally or psychically ill to such an extent that
Code in regard to parents and their children. ponencia of then Associate Justice (later Chief
the person could not have known the obligations
Such non-complied marital obligation(s) must Justice) Artemio V. Panganiban, three justices
Again, upholding the trial court’s findings and he was assuming, or knowing them, could not
also be stated in the petition, proven by evidence concurred "in the result" and another three—
declaring that its decision was not a judgment on have given valid assumption thereof. Although no
and included in the text of the decision. including, as aforesaid, Justice Romero—took
the pleadings, the Court, in Tsoi v. Court of example of such incapacity need be given here
pains to compose their individual separate
Appeals,45 explained that when private so as not to limit the application of the provision
opinions. Then Justice Teodoro R. Padilla even
respondent testified under oath before the lower under the principle of ejusdem generis, (7) Interpretations given by the National
emphasized that "each case must be judged, not
court and was cross-examined by the adverse nevertheless such root cause must be identified Appellate Matrimonial Tribunal of the Catholic
on the basis of a priori assumptions, predelictions
party, she thereby presented evidence in the as a psychological illness and its incapacitating Church in the Philippines, while not controlling or
or generalizations, but according to its own facts.
form of testimony. Importantly, the Court, aware nature fully explained. Expert evidence may be decisive, should be given great respect by our
In the field of psychological incapacity as a
of parallel decisions of Catholic marriage given by qualified psychiatrists and clinical courts. It is clear that Article 36 was taken by the
ground for annulment of marriage, it is trite to say
tribunals, ruled that the senseless and protracted psychologists. Family Code Revision Committee from Canon
that no case is on ‘all fours’ with another case.
refusal of one of the parties to fulfill the marital 1095 of the New Code of Canon Law, which
The trial judge must take pains in examining the
obligation of procreating children is equivalent to became effective in 1983 and which provides:
(3) The incapacity must be proven to be existing factual milieu and the appellate court must, as
psychological incapacity.
at "the time of the celebration" of the marriage. much as possible, avoid substituting its own
The evidence must show that the illness was "The following are incapable of contracting judgment for that of the trial court."48
The resiliency with which the concept should be existing when the parties exchanged their "I marriage: Those who are unable to assume the
applied and the case-to-case basis by which the do's." The manifestation of the illness need not essential obligations of marriage due to causes
Predictably, however, in resolving subsequent
provision should be interpreted, as so intended be perceivable at such time, but the illness itself of psychological nature."
cases,49 the Court has applied the aforesaid
by its framers, had, somehow, been rendered must have attached at such moment, or prior
standards, without too much regard for the law’s
ineffectual by the imposition of a set of strict thereto.
Since the purpose of including such provision in clear intention that each case is to be treated
standards in Molina,46 thus:
our Family Code is to harmonize our civil laws differently, as "courts should interpret the
(4) Such incapacity must also be shown to be with the religious faith of our people, it stands to provision on a case-to-case basis; guided by
From their submissions and the Court's own medically or clinically permanent or incurable. reason that to achieve such harmonization, great experience, the findings of experts and
deliberations, the following guidelines in the Such incurability may be absolute or even persuasive weight should be given to decisions researchers in psychological disciplines, and by
interpretation and application of Art. 36 of the relative only in regard to the other spouse, not of such appellate tribunal. Ideally— subject to our decisions of church tribunals."
Family Code are hereby handed down for the necessarily absolutely against everyone of the law on evidence—what is decreed as canonically
guidance of the bench and the bar: same sex. Furthermore, such incapacity must be invalid should also be decreed civilly void.
In hindsight, it may have been inappropriate for
relevant to the assumption of marriage
the Court to impose a rigid set of rules, as the one
obligations, not necessarily to those not related
(1) The burden of proof to show the nullity of the This is one instance where, in view of the evident in Molina, in resolving all cases of psychological
to marriage, like the exercise of a profession or
marriage belongs to the plaintiff. Any doubt source and purpose of the Family Code incapacity. Understandably, the Court was then
employment in a job. Hence, a pediatrician may
should be resolved in favor of the existence and provision, contemporaneous religious alarmed by the deluge of petitions for the
be effective in diagnosing illnesses of children
continuation of the marriage and against its interpretation is to be given persuasive effect. dissolution of marital bonds, and was sensitive to
and prescribing medicine to cure them but may
dissolution and nullity. This is rooted in the fact Here, the State and the Church—while remaining the OSG’s exaggeration of Article 36 as the "most
not be psychologically capacitated to procreate,
that both our Constitution and our laws cherish independent, separate and apart from each liberal divorce procedure in the world."50 The
bear and raise his/her own children as an
the validity of marriage and unity of the family. other—shall walk together in synodal cadence unintended consequences of Molina, however,
essential obligation of marriage.
Thus, our Constitution devotes an entire Article towards the same goal of protecting and has taken its toll on people who have to live with
on the Family, recognizing it "as the foundation of cherishing marriage and the family as the deviant behavior, moral insanity and sociopathic
the nation." It decrees marriage as legally (5) Such illness must be grave enough to bring inviolable base of the nation. personality anomaly, which, like termites,
"inviolable," thereby protecting it from dissolution about the disability of the party to assume the consume little by little the very foundation of their
families, our basic social institutions. Far from Lest it be misunderstood, we are not suggesting addition of new grounds for annulment, but rather "The courts consider the following elements
what was intended by the Court, Molina has the abandonment of Molina in this case. We was an accommodation by the Church to the crucial to the marital commitment: (1) a
become a strait-jacket, forcing all sizes to fit into simply declare that, as aptly stated by Justice advances made in psychology during the past permanent and faithful commitment to the
and be bound by it. Wittingly or unwittingly, the Dante O. Tinga in Antonio v. Reyes,55 there is decades. There was now the expertise to provide marriage partner; (2) openness to children and
Court, in conveniently applying Molina, has need to emphasize other perspectives as well the all-important connecting link between a partner; (3) stability; (4) emotional maturity; (5)
allowed diagnosed sociopaths, schizophrenics, which should govern the disposition of petitions marriage breakdown and premarital causes. financial responsibility; (6) an ability to cope with
nymphomaniacs, narcissists and the like, to for declaration of nullity under Article 36. At the the ordinary stresses and strains of marriage,
continuously debase and pervert the sanctity of risk of being redundant, we reiterate once more etc."
During the 1970s, the Church broadened its
marriage. Ironically, the Roman Rota has the principle that each case must be judged, not
whole idea of marriage from that of a legal
annulled marriages on account of the personality on the basis of a priori assumptions, predilections
contract to that of a covenant. The result of this Fr. Green goes on to speak about some of the
disorders of the said individuals.51 or generalizations but according to its own facts.
was that it could no longer be assumed in psychological conditions that might lead to the
And, to repeat for emphasis, courts should
annulment cases that a person who could failure of a marriage:
interpret the provision on a case-to-case basis;
The Court need not worry about the possible intellectually understand the concept of marriage
guided by experience, the findings of experts and
abuse of the remedy provided by Article 36, for could necessarily give valid consent to marry.
researchers in psychological disciplines, and by "At stake is a type of constitutional impairment
there are ample safeguards against this The ability to both grasp and assume the real
decisions of church tribunals. precluding conjugal communion even with the
contingency, among which is the intervention by obligations of a mature, lifelong commitment are
best intentions of the parties. Among the psychic
the State, through the public prosecutor, to guard now considered a necessary prerequisite to valid
factors possibly giving rise to his or her inability
against collusion between the parties and/or II. matrimonial consent.
to fulfill marital obligations are the following: (1)
fabrication of evidence.52 The Court should rather
antisocial personality with its fundamental lack of
be alarmed by the rising number of cases
We now examine the instant case. Rotal decisions continued applying the concept loyalty to persons or sense of moral values; (2)
involving marital abuse, child abuse, domestic
of incipient psychological incapacity, "not only to hyperesthesia, where the individual has no real
violence and incestuous rape.
sexual anomalies but to all kinds of personality freedom of sexual choice; (3) the inadequate
The parties’ whirlwind relationship lasted more or
disorders that incapacitate a spouse or both personality where personal responses
less six (6) months. They met in January 1996,
In dissolving marital bonds on account of either spouses from assuming or carrying out the consistently fall short of reasonable expectations.
eloped in March, exchanged marital vows in May,
party’s psychological incapacity, the Court is not essential obligations of marriage. For marriage .
and parted ways in June. The psychologist who
demolishing the foundation of families, but it is . . is not merely cohabitation or the right of the
provided expert testimony found both parties xxxx
actually protecting the sanctity of marriage, spouses to each other's body for heterosexual
psychologically incapacitated. Petitioner’s
because it refuses to allow a person afflicted with acts, but is, in its totality the right to the
behavioral pattern falls under the classification of
a psychological disorder, who cannot comply with community of the whole of life; i.e., the right to a The psychological grounds are the best approach
dependent personality disorder, and
or assume the essential marital obligations, from developing lifelong relationship. Rotal decisions for anyone who doubts whether he or she has a
respondent’s, that of the narcissistic and
remaining in that sacred bond. It may be stressed since 1973 have refined the meaning of case for an annulment on any other terms. A
antisocial personality disorder.56
that the infliction of physical violence, psychological or psychic capacity for marriage as situation that does not fit into any of the more
constitutional indolence or laziness, drug presupposing the development of an adult traditional categories often fits very easily into the
dependence or addiction, and psychosexual By the very nature of Article 36, courts, despite personality; as meaning the capacity of the psychological category.
anomaly are manifestations of a sociopathic having the primary task and burden of decision- spouses to give themselves to each other and to
personality anomaly.53 Let it be noted that in making, must not discount but, instead, must accept the other as a distinct person; that the
As new as the psychological grounds are,
Article 36, there is no marriage to speak of in the consider as decisive evidence the expert opinion spouses must be ‘other oriented’ since the
first place, as the same is void from the very obligations of marriage are rooted in a self-giving experts are already detecting a shift in their use.
on the psychological and mental temperaments
beginning.54 To indulge in imagery, the Whereas originally the emphasis was on the
of the parties.57 love; and that the spouses must have the
parties' inability to exercise proper judgment at
declaration of nullity under Article 36 will simply capacity for interpersonal relationship because
provide a decent burial to a stillborn marriage. marriage is more than just a physical reality but the time of the marriage (lack of due discretion),
Justice Romero explained this in Molina, as involves a true intertwining of personalities. The recent cases seem to be concentrating on the
follows: parties' incapacity to assume or carry out their
fulfillment of the obligations of marriage depends,
The prospect of a possible remarriage by the responsibilities and obligations as promised (lack
according to Church decisions, on the strength of
freed spouses should not pose too much of a of due competence). An advantage to using the
Furthermore, and equally significant, the this interpersonal relationship. A serious
concern for the Court. First and foremost, ground of lack of due competence is that at the
professional opinion of a psychological expert incapacity for interpersonal sharing and support
because it is none of its business. And second, time the marriage was entered into civil divorce
became increasingly important in such cases. is held to impair the relationship and
because the judicial declaration of psychological and breakup of the family almost always is proof
Data about the person's entire life, both before consequently, the ability to fulfill the essential
incapacity operates as a warning or a lesson of someone's failure to carry out marital
and after the ceremony, were presented to these marital obligations. The marital capacity of one
learned. On one hand, the normal spouse would responsibilities as promised at the time the
experts and they were asked to give professional spouse is not considered in isolation but in
have become vigilant, and never again marry a
reference to the fundamental relationship to the marriage was entered into."581avvphi1
person with a personality disorder. On the other opinions about a party's mental capacity at the
time of the wedding. These opinions were rarely other spouse.
hand, a would-be spouse of the psychologically
incapacitated runs the risk of the latter’s disorder challenged and tended to be accepted as Hernandez v. Court of Appeals59 emphasizes the
recurring in their marriage. decisive evidence of lack of valid consent. Fr. Green, in an article in Catholic Mind, lists six importance of presenting expert testimony to
establish the precise cause of a party’s
elements necessary to the mature marital
relationship: psychological incapacity, and to show that it
The Church took pains to point out that its new
existed at the inception of the marriage. And as
openness in this area did not amount to the
Marcos v. Marcos60 asserts, there is no The common factor among individuals who have acid (5-HIAA) negatively correlated with frequently belittle their capabilities; they fear
requirement that the person to be declared personality disorders, despite a variety of measures of aggression and a past history of criticism and are easily hurt by others’ comments.
psychologically incapacitated be personally character traits, is the way in which the disorder suicide attempts. Schizotypal personality has At times they actually bring about dominance by
examined by a physician, if the totality of leads to pervasive problems in social and been associated with low platelet monoamine others through a quest for overprotection.
evidence presented is enough to sustain a finding occupational adjustment. Some individuals with oxidase (MAO) activity and impaired smooth
of psychological incapacity.61 Verily, the personality disorders are perceived by others as pursuit eye movement.
Dependent personality disorder usually begins in
evidence must show a link, medical or the like, overdramatic, paranoid, obnoxious or even
early adulthood. Individuals who have this
between the acts that manifest psychological criminal, without an awareness of their behaviors.
Brain Wave Activity Abnormalities in disorder may be unable to make everyday
incapacity and the psychological disorder itself. Such qualities may lead to trouble getting along
electroencephalograph (EEG) have been decisions without advice or reassurance from
with other people, as well as difficulties in other
reported in antisocial personality for many years; others, may allow others to make most of their
areas of life and often a tendency to blame others
This is not to mention, but we mention slow wave is the most widely reported important decisions (such as where to live), tend
for their problems. Other individuals with
nevertheless for emphasis, that the presentation abnormality. A study of borderline patients to agree with people even when they believe they
personality disorders are not unpleasant or
of expert proof presupposes a thorough and in- reported that 38 percent had at least marginal are wrong, have difficulty starting projects or
difficult to work with but tend to be lonely, isolated
depth assessment of the parties by the EEG abnormalities, compared with 19 percent in doing things on their own, volunteer to do things
or dependent. Such traits can lead to
psychologist or expert, for a conclusive diagnosis a control group. that are demeaning in order to get approval from
interpersonal difficulties, reduced self-esteem
of a grave, severe and incurable presence of other people, feel uncomfortable or helpless
and dissatisfaction with life.
psychological incapacity.62 Parenthetically, the when alone and are often preoccupied with fears
Types of Disorders According to the American
Court, at this point, finds it fitting to suggest the of being abandoned.65 and antisocial personality
Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and
inclusion in the Rule on Declaration of Absolute Causes of Personality Disorders Different mental disorder described, as follows—
Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (3d ed.,
Nullity of Void Marriages and Annulment of health viewpoints propose a variety of causes of
rev., 1987), or DSM-III-R, personality disorders
Voidable Marriages,63 an option for the trial judge personality disorders. These include Freudian,
are categorized into three major clusters: Characteristics include a consistent pattern of
to refer the case to a court-appointed genetic factors, neurobiologic theories and brain
behavior that is intolerant of the conventional
psychologist/expert for an independent wave activity.
behavioral limitations imposed by a society, an
assessment and evaluation of the psychological Cluster A: Paranoid, schizoid and schizotypal
inability to sustain a job over a period of years,
state of the parties. This will assist the courts, personality disorders. Individuals who have these
Freudian Sigmund Freud believed that fixation at disregard for the rights of others (either through
who are no experts in the field of psychology, to disorders often appear to have odd or eccentric
certain stages of development led to certain exploitiveness or criminal behavior), frequent
arrive at an intelligent and judicious habits and traits.
personality types. Thus, some disorders as physical fights and, quite commonly, child or
determination of the case. The rule, however,
described in the Diagnostic and Statistical spouse abuse without remorse and a tendency to
does not dispense with the parties’ prerogative to
Manual of Mental Disorders (3d ed., rev.) are Cluster B: Antisocial, borderline, histrionic and blame others. There is often a façade of charm
present their own expert witnesses.
derived from his oral, anal and phallic character narcissistic personality disorders. Individuals who and even sophistication that masks disregard,
types. Demanding and dependent behavior have these disorders often appear overly lack of remorse for mistreatment of others and
Going back, in the case at bench, the (dependent and passive-aggressive) was emotional, erratic and dramatic. the need to control others.
psychological assessment, which we consider as thought to derive from fixation at the oral stage.
adequate, produced the findings that both parties Characteristics of obsessionality, rigidity and
Cluster C: Avoidant, dependent, obsessive- Although characteristics of this disorder describe
are afflicted with personality disorders—to emotional aloofness were thought to derive from
compulsive and passive-aggressive personality criminals, they also may befit some individuals
repeat, dependent personality disorder for fixation at the anal stage; fixation at the phallic
disorders. Individuals who have these disorders who are prominent in business or politics whose
petitioner, and narcissistic and antisocial stage was thought to lead to shallowness and an
often appear anxious or fearful. habits of self-centeredness and disregard for the
personality disorder for respondent. We note that inability to engage in intimate
rights of others may be hidden prior to a public
The Encyclopedia of Mental Health discusses relationships.lawphil.net However, later
scandal.
personality disorders as follows— researchers have found little evidence that early The DSM-III-R also lists another category,
childhood events or fixation at certain stages of "personality disorder not otherwise specified,"
development lead to specific personality that can be used for other specific personality During the 19th century, this type of personality
A group of disorders involving behaviors or traits
patterns. disorders or for mixed conditions that do not disorder was referred to as moral insanity. The
that are characteristic of a person’s recent and
qualify as any of the specific personality term described immoral, guiltless behavior that
long-term functioning. Patterns of perceiving and
disorders. was not accompanied by impairments in
thinking are not usually limited to isolated Genetic Factors Researchers have found that
reasoning.lawphil.net
episodes but are deeply ingrained, inflexible, there may be a genetic factor involved in the
maladaptive and severe enough to cause the etiology of antisocial and borderline personality Individuals with diagnosable personality
individual mental stress or anxieties or to disorders; there is less evidence of inheritance of disorders usually have long-term concerns, and According to the classification system used in the
interfere with interpersonal relationships and other personality disorders. Some family, thus therapy may be long-term.64 Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental
normal functioning. Personality disorders are adoption and twin studies suggest that Disorders (3d ed., rev. 1987), anti-social
often recognizable by adolescence or earlier, schizotypal personality may be related to genetic personality disorder is one of the four "dramatic"
continue through adulthood and become less factors. Dependent personality disorder is characterized personality disorders, the others being
in the following manner—
obvious in middle or old age. An individual may borderline, histrionic and narcissistic.66
have more than one personality disorder at a
Neurobiologic Theories In individuals who have
time. A personality disorder characterized by a pattern
borderline personality, researchers have found The seriousness of the diagnosis and the gravity
that low cerebrospinal fluid 5-hydroxyindoleacetic of dependent and submissive behavior. Such
of the disorders considered, the Court, in this
individuals usually lack self-esteem and
case, finds as decisive the psychological SO ORDERED.
evaluation made by the expert witness; and, thus,
rules that the marriage of the parties is null and
void on ground of both parties’ psychological ANTONIO EDUARDO B. NACHURA
incapacity. We further consider that the trial
court, which had a first-hand view of the
witnesses’ deportment, arrived at the same
conclusion.
SO ORDERED.
ARTURO D. BRION
RESOLUTION
BERSAMIN, J.:
xxxx
While petitioner's marriage with the For our review is the Petition for Review
respondent failed and appears to be without on Certiorari1 filed by petitioner Renato Reyes So
(petitioner) against the Decision dated July 4,
hope of reconciliation, the remedy however
is not always to have it declared void ab 20012 and the Resolution dated October 18,
initio on the ground of psychological 20013 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R.
CV No. 65273. The challenged decision reversed
incapacity. An unsatisfactory marriage,
however, is not a null and void the decision4 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC),
marriage.19 No less than the Constitution Branch 143, Makati City declaring the marriage
of the petitioner and respondent Lorna Valera
recognizes the sanctity of marriage and the
unity of the family; it decrees marriage as (respondent) null and void on the ground of the
legally "inviolable" and protects it from latter’s psychological incapacity under Article 36
of the Family Code. The assailed resolution
dissolution at the whim of the parties. Both
the family and marriage are to be denied the petitioner’s motion for
"protected" by the state.20 reconsideration.
SO ORDERED.
SO ORDERED.