Amy Perez-Ferraris v.

Brix Ferraris
GR 162368 July 17, 2006
495 SCRA 396
Denial of SC of the Petition of Declaration of Nullity of
Marriage

Amy Perez-Ferraris v. Brix Ferraris

Facts:
Ma. Armida Perez, aka Amy Perez, married Brix Ferraris
in 1995. Two years later, on May 17, 1997, they had a
son.
However, their union was very short. Brix left her and
her 10-month old son. Amy begged him to stay, but he
still left.

 Trying to make things right out of that sudden change in

her life, she went to fortune tellers, attended various
spiritual seminars and tried many other religions. She
talked to her in-laws, she tried to talk to Brix and her
friends, but it seemed that everything is not favorable
to her.

 She contended that she tried everything to save her

marriage with Brix until she gave up in 2000. She filed a
petition for declaration of nullity of marriage at the
Pasig Trial Court citing the husbands psychological
incapacity. She argued that her husband Brix would
always leave the house when they quarreled. He had
violent tendencies during epileptic attacks. He preferred
to spend time with his band mates and he also slept
with other women. He abandoned her and their son and

 Amy presented to the court

her witness: Dr Natividad
Dayan, PhD.
Dr Natividad Natty Dayan
is a clinical and forensic
psychologist.
She said Brix has mixed
personality disorder called
schizoid.

 The RCT of Pasig City rendered a decision denying the

petition for declaration of nullity of Amys marriage with
Brix. The CA also denied the appeal on the case. Amy
Perez-Ferraris, as the petitioner herein, brought the case
to the Supreme Court

Issues:
Issue #1 Whether the leaving from the house when the
husband and wife quarreled, the violent tendencies during
epileptic attacks, spending more time with band mates,
sleeping with other women and abandonment

are

demonstrations of psychological incapacity.

Issue #2 Whether Dr Natividad Dayans statement is
necessary for the declaration of nullity of marriage.

Ruling of the Supreme Court:

No.
The Supreme Court denied the petition of Amy Perez-Ferraris.
The SC said that psychological incapacity, to be ground for
the nullity of marriage under the Article 36 of the Family Code
of the Philippines, refers to a serious psychological illness
afflicting a party even before the celebration of the marriage.
It must be so grave and so permanent as to deprive one of
awareness of the essential obligations of a matrimonial bond
as stated in Article 68-71 in the New Civil Code.
The SC ruled that the husbands mixed personality disorder is
a MERE refusal or unwillingness to assume the essential
obligations of marriage.

 The SC cited in Hernandez

v CA, 320 SCRA 76 (1999),
that habitual alcoholism,
sexual
infidelity
or
perversion
and
abandonment do not by
themselves
constitute
grounds for declaring a
marriage void based on
psychological incapacity.
.

 The Constitution recognizes the sanctity of marriage

and the unity of the family. It decrees marriage as
legally inviolable and protects it from dissolution at
the whim of the parties. Both the family and marriage
are to be protected by the state.

 Yes
The court acknowledges that it heavily relies on
psychological experts for its understanding of the
human personality.
However, in the case at bar, the statement of Dr Natty
Dayan, did not give enough proof to favor Amy Perez.
Based on the statements of Dr Natty Dayan, the court
was convinced that the mixed personality disorder of
Brix is not rooted on psychological incapacity as defined
by law, but a mere refusal to perform the marital
obligations, also prescribed by law.

Citations of Similar Cases:

Book sources:
Luicita Estrella Hernandez v. Court of Appeals and Mario C. Hernandez, G.R. No. 162368, 320 Scra 76
(December 8, 1999)
Juanita Carating-Sianyngco v. Manuel Siayngco, G.R. No. 158896, 441 Scra 422 (October 27, 2004)
Electronic Sources:
Leouel Santos v. Court of Appeals and Julia Rosario Bedia-Santos
Arellano Law Foundation (http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1995/jan1995/gr_112019_1995.html)
Republic v. Court of Appeals and Molina
Arellano Law Foundation (http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1997/feb1997/gr_108763_1997.html)
Brenda B. Marcos v. Wilson G. Marcos
Supreme Court decisions online (http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2000/oct2000/136490.htm)
Republic v. Quintero-Humano
Supreme Court decisions online (http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2004/may2004/gr_149498_2004.html)
Photos/Comics used in slides:
www.google.com.ph