Professional Documents
Culture Documents
respectfully avers:
(Michelle) and respondent Simon John Rosario (Simon) contracted marriage at Cabugao, Ilocos Sur. The marital union did not
produce any child. On December 15, 2006, a year after their marriage,John left for Canada went back home. Michelle now comes to court to pray for the declaration of nullity of her marriage to Simon John on the ground of to work. Since then, he never
psychological incapacity.
ISSUE
Whether constitutes or not abandonment incapacity to by be and a of itself for
psychological
ground
THE LAW
ARTICLE 36 Psychological incapacity, to be a ground for the nullity of marriage under Article 361 of the Family Code, refers to a
serious psychological illness affecting a party even before the celebration of marriage.
JURISPRUDENCE
In Santos vs. Court of Appeals2, the Supreme Court held that psychological incapacity must be characterized by (a)
Article 36. A marriage contracted by any party who, at the time of the celebration was psychologically incapacitated to comply with the essential marital obligations of marriage, shall likewise be void even if such incapacity becomes manifest only after its celebration. 2 310.Phil.21(1995)
In Republic vs. Molina3, the Supreme Court further set forth guidelines in the interpretation and application of
ARGUMENTS
THE TOTALITY OF THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED DOES NOT WARRANT DECLARATION OF NULLITY OF MARRIAGE OF MICHELLE AND SIMON JOHN THE
ABANDONMENT BY AND OF ITSELF DOES NOT CONSTITUTE PSYCHOLOGICAL INCAPACITY TO BE A GROUND FOR DECLARATION OF NULLITY OF MARRIAGE UNDER ARTICLE 36 OF THE FAMILY CODE
DISCUSSION
ON THE TOTALITY OF EVIDENCE PRESENTED
The Supreme Court clarified in Antonio vs. Reyes4 that the Molina Guidelines is not set in stone and that Article 36 is to be applied in a case to case basis. Furthermore in Ngo Te vs. Yu-Te5, expert testimony is not always required but certainly helps prove allegations since Psychological Incapacity is a mental process. Nevertheless, there is still a need to prove the psychological incapacity through independent evidence adduced by the person alleging said disorder6. In this case, the psychological incapacity report is insufficient to establish Simons psychological incapacity. In this case, Michele sought to establish that Simon was not able to fulfill the marital obligations of marriage on the ground
3 4 5 6
of
his
abandonment
of
the
conjugal
home,
ceasing
to
335 Phil.664 (1997) G.R.No. 155800, 10 March, 2000. G.R.No. 161793, February 2009. Bier vs Bier, G.R.No. 173294, February 27, 2008.
provide
spousal
support
and
failing
to
communicate
with
his
wife. (TSN, December 15, 2010). No other witness who had seen and observed his demeanor before their marriage and during their year together were presented. Michelle relied heavily on the findings of the psychologist who made up the following
developed Partner Relational Problem. 2. During their marriage, Simon demonstrated in his
attitude and behavior his psychological incapacity to fulfill essential marital obligations 2.1 He was self-centered, selfish, insensitive, when he
The report
was on
not
able
to
interview she
Simon.
The on her
only the
the
interview not
conducted weight to
Michelle.
Hence,
Court
should
give
assessment regarding the behavior of Simon. The report failed to show the root cause of Simonss
psychological incapacity as it failed to demonstrate that there was a natal or supervening disabling factor or an adverse integral element in Simons character, that effectively
incapacitated her from accepting, and thereby complying with, the essential marital obligations7,and that his psychological
incapacity was already existing before their marriage. ON ABANDONMENT The intendment of of the 36 law to has the been most to confine cases the the of
application personality
Article
serious of
disorders
clearly
demonstrative
utter
insensitivity or inability to give meaning and significance to the marriage.8 The petition must fail. Mere difficulty or neglect in the performance of marital obligations or ill will on the part of the spouse which is the abandonment of the husband of his wife
7 8
Ferraris vs Ferraris,G.R.No.162368, July 17, 2006. Ting vs Velez-Ting, G.R.No.166562, March 31, 2009.
in
this
case
is
different
from
incapacity
rooted
in
some
debilitating psychological illness. An unsatisfactory marriage,is not a null and void marriage.9 At best, the circumstances relied upon by the petitioner grounds for legal of separation of and not under a ground 36 for of are the the
declaration
nullity
marriage
Article
Family Code. Under Article 55 of the Family Code, Abandonment of petitioner by respondent without justifiable cause for more than one year is a ground for legal separation.
PRAYER
WHEREFORE,considering does not constitute that abandonment by and of the itself Public
psychological
incapacity,
Prosecutor prays that the petition be ordered DENIED and the marriage of Michelle Tan-Rosario and Simon John Rosario be