Alcazar v Alcazar, G.R. No.

174451, October 13, 2009

FACTS: Veronica and Rey got married. After their wedding, they lived in Rey’s house in Occidental
Mindoro. Then they returned to Manila, but Rey did not live with Veronica in her home in Tondo. Rey then
left for Riyahd where he was working. He never contacted his wife since he left. About a year and a half,
Veronica was informed that her husband is coming home. But she was surprised that he did not go
directly to her in Tondo but to his house in Mindoro instead. Thus, petitioner concluded that respondent
was physically incapable of consummating his marriage with her, providing sufficient cause for annulment
of their marriage pursuant to paragraph 5, Article 45 of the Family Code. Respondent has been
uncooperative to the investigation. Dr. Tayag testified that Rey was suffering from Narcissistic Personality
Disorder, hence, it is a sufficient ground for declaration of nullity of marriage. RTC denied. CA also
denied. Hence, this petition.

ISSUE W/N the respondent is psychologically incapacitated to perform his essential marriage obligations

HELD: SC denied. The action originally filed was annulment of marriage based on Article 45, paragraph 5 of the
Family Code. Article 45(5) of the Family Code refers to lack of power to copulate.[16] Incapacity to consummate
denotes the permanent inability on the part of the spouses to perform the complete act of sexual intercourse. No
evidence was presented in the case at bar to establish that respondent was in any way physically incapable to
consummate his marriage with petitioner. Petitioner even admitted during her cross-examination that she and
respondent had sexual intercourse after their wedding and before respondent left for abroad. Petitioner was
actually seeking for declaration of nullity of her marriage to respondent based on the latter’s psychological
incapacity to comply with his marital obligations of marriage under Article 36 of the Family Code. he Court
declared that “psychological incapacity” under Article 36 of the Family Code is not meant to comprehend all
possible cases of psychoses. It should refer, rather, to no less than a mental (not physical) incapacity that causes a
party to be truly incognitive of the basic marital covenants that concomitantly must be assumed and discharged by
the parties to the marriage. Psychological incapacity must be characterized by (
Posted by Michelle Vale Cruz at Saturday, March 22, 2014