PFR CASE DIGEST

Leouel Santos vs. CA Republic v. Molina, G.R. No. 108763 8 Guidelines (Psychological Incapacity)

GR No. 112019, January 4, 1995 1. The burden of proof to show the nullity of the marriage belongs to the plaintiff.
FACTS: Roridel and Reynaldo were married on April 14, 1985 and begot a son. After a year of
2. The root cause of the psychological incapacity must be (a) medically or clinically identified,
marriage, Reynaldo showed signs of "immaturity and irresponsibility" as a husband and a father
(b) alleged in the complaint, (c) sufficiently proven by experts and (d) clearly explained in the
since 1) he preferred to spend more time with his peers and friends on whom he squandered his
decision.
FACTS: money; 2) he depended on his parents for aid and assistance; and 3) he was never honest with
3. The incapacity must be proven to be existing at "the time of the celebration" of the marriage.
his wife in regard to their finances, resulting in frequent quarrels between them. When
4. Such incapacity must also be shown to be medically or clinically permanent or incurable
Reynaldo was relieved from his job, Roridel had been the sole breadwinner of the family. In
Leouel, a First Lieutenant in the Philippine Army, met Julia in Iloilo.  The two got married in 5. Such illness must be grave enough to bring about the disability of the party to assume the
October 1986 the couple had a very intense quarrel, as a result of which their relationship was
1986 before a municipal trial court followed shortly thereafter, by a church wedding.  The essential obligations of marriage.
estranged. In March 1987, Roridel resigned from her job in Manila and went to live with her
couple lived with Julia’s parents at the J. Bedia Compound.  Julia gave birth to a baby boy in 6. The essential marital obligations must be those embraced by Articles 68 up to 71 of the
parents in Baguio City. A few weeks later, Reynaldo left Roridel and their child, and had since
1987 and was named as Leouel Santos Jr.  Occasionally, the couple will quarrel over a number Family Code as regards the husband and wife as well as Articles 220, 221 and 225 of the same
then abandoned them. Reynaldo admitted that he and Roridel could no longer live together as
of things aside from the interference of Julia’s parents into their family affairs.  Code in regard to parents and their children.
husband and wife, but contended that their misunderstandings and frequent quarrels were due to
7. Interpretations given by the National Appellate Matrimonial Tribunal of the Catholic Church
(1) Roridel's strange behavior of insisting on maintaining her group of friends even after their
Julia left in 1988 to work in US as a nurse despite Leouel’s pleas to dissuade her.  Seven in the Philippines, while not controlling or decisive, should be given great respect by our courts.
marriage; (2) Roridel's refusal to perform some of her marital duties such as cooking meals; and
months after her departure, she called her husband and promised to return home upon the (3) Roridel's failure to run the household and handle their finances. On 16 August 1990, Roridel
 8. The trial court must order the prosecuting attorney or fiscal and the Solicitor General to
expiration of her contract in July 1989 but she never did.  Leouel got a chance to visit US where filed a petition for declaration of nullity of her marriage to Reynaldo Molina. Evidence for
appear as counsel for the state.
he underwent a training program under AFP, he desperately tried to locate or somehow get in Roridel consisted of her own testimony, that of two of her friends, a social worker, and a
touch with Julia but all his efforts were of no avail. psychiatrist of the Baguio General Hospital and Medical Center. Reynaldo did not present any
Ma. Armida “Amy” Perez-Ferraris vs Brix Ferraris
evidence as he appeared only during the pre-trial conference. RTC declared the marriage void.
The Solicitor General appealed to the Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals denied the Armida and Brix are a showbiz couple. The couple’s relationship before the marriage and even
Leouel filed a complaint to have their marriage declared void under Article 36 of the Family
during their brief union (for well about a year or so) was not all bad. During that relatively short
Code.  He argued that failure of Julia to return home or to communicate with him for more than appeals and affirmed in toto the RTC’s decision. Hence, this petition. period of time, Armida was happy and contented with her life in the company of Brix.  Armida
even admits that Brix was a responsible and loving husband.  Their problems began when
5 years are circumstances that show her being psychologically incapacitated to enter into
ISSUE: W/N psychological incapacity on the part of Reynaldo has been established Armida started doubting Brix’ fidelity.  It was only when they started fighting about the calls
married life. from women that Brix began to withdraw into his shell and corner, and failed to perform his so-
called marital obligations.  Brix could not understand Armida’s lack of trust in him and her
HELD: The marriage between Roridel and Reynaldo subsists and remains valid.  What constant naggings.  He thought her suspicions irrational.  Brix could not relate to her anger,
ISSUE: Whether their marriage can be considered void under Article 36 of the Family Code. temper and jealousy.  Armida presented a psychological expert (Dr. Dayan) who finds Brix to
constitutes psychological incapacity is not mere showing of irreconcilable differences and be a schizoid and a dependent and avoidant type. This is evidenced by Brix’s
conflicting personalities.  It is indispensable that the parties must exhibit inclinations which
HELD: “leaving-the-house” attitude whenever they quarreled, the violent tendencies during epileptic
would not meet the essential marital responsibilities and duties due to some psychological attacks, the sexual infidelity, the abandonment and lack of support, and his preference to spend
illness.  Reynaldo’s action at the time of the marriage did not manifest such characteristics that more time with his band mates than his family.
The intendment of the law has been to confine the meaning of psychological incapacity to the would comprise grounds for psychological incapacity.  The evidence shown by Roridel merely ISSUE: Whether or not PI is attendant in the case at bar.
most serious cases of personal disorders clearly demonstrative of an utter insensitivity or showed that she and her husband cannot get along with each other and had not shown gravity of
HELD: The SC upheld the decision of the lower courts. The alleged mixed personality
inability to give meaning and significance to the marriage.  This condition must exist at the time the problem neither its juridical antecedence nor its incurability.  In addition, the expert disorder, the “leaving-the-house” attitude whenever they quarreled, the violent tendencies
the marriage is celebrated. testimony by Dr Sison showed no incurable psychiatric disorder but only incompatibility which during epileptic attacks, the sexual infidelity, the abandonment and lack of support, and his
preference to spend more time with his band mates than his family, are not rooted on some
is not considered as psychological incapacity.
debilitating psychological condition but a mere refusal or unwillingness to assume the essential
Undeniably and understandably, Leouel stands aggrieved, even desperate, in his present obligations of marriage and these do not constitute PI. Further, the expert was not able to prove
her findings. Notably, when asked as to the root cause of respondent’s alleged psychological
situation.  Regrettably, neither law nor society itself can always provide all the specific answers incapacity, Dr. Dayan’s answer was vague, evasive and inconclusive.  She replied that such
to every individual problem.  Wherefore, his petition was denied. disorder “can be part of his family upbringing” She stated that there was a history of Brix’s
parents having difficulties in their relationship- this is of course inconclusive for such has no
direct bearing to the case at bar.

1
PFR CASE DIGEST

What is psychological incapacity? which shows that Sharon is indeed psychologically incapacitated. Dr. Dayan declared that physical examination and the result was there is not evidence of impotency and he is capable of
Sharon was suffering from Anti-Social Personality Disorder exhibited by her blatant display of
The term “psychological incapacity” to be a ground for the nullity of marriage under Article 36 infidelity; that she committed several indiscretions and had no capacity for remorse, even erection. 
of the Family Code, refers to a serious psychological illness afflicting a party even before the bringing with her the two children of Mustafa Ibrahim to live with petitioner.  Such immaturity
celebration of the marriage.  It is a malady so grave and so permanent as to deprive one of and irresponsibility in handling the marriage like her repeated acts of infidelity and
awareness of the duties and responsibilities of the matrimonial bond one is about to assume.  As abandonment of her family are indications of Anti-Social Personality Disorder amounting to ISSUE: Whether Chi Ming Tsoi’s refusal to have sexual intercourse with his wife constitutes
all people may have certain quirks and idiosyncrasies, or isolated characteristics associated with psychological incapacity to perform the essential obligations of marriage. psychological incapacity.
certain personality disorders, there is hardly any doubt that the intendment of the law has been
to confine the meaning of “psychological incapacity” to the most serious cases of personality ISSUE: Whether or not PI has been proven.
disorders clearly demonstrative of an utter insensitivity or inability to give meaning and HELD:
significance to the marriage.  It is for this reason that the Courts rely heavily on psychological HELD: PI is not proven in court in this case. The evidence is not sufficient. PI is intended to
experts for its understanding of the human personality.  However, the root cause must be the most serious cases of personality disorders which make one be incapable of performing the The abnormal reluctance or unwillingness to consummate his marriage is strongly indicative of
identified as a psychological illness and its incapacitating nature must be fully explained in essential marital obligations. Sharon’s sexual infidelity does not constitute PI nor does it a serious personality disorder which to the mind of the Supreme Court clearly demonstrates an
court. constitute the other forms of psychoses which if existing at the inception of marriage, like the utter insensitivity or inability to give meaning and significance tot the marriage within the
state of a party being of unsound mind or concealment of drug addiction, habitual alcoholism, meaning of Article 36 of the Family Code.
homosexuality or lesbianism, merely renders the marriage contract voidable pursuant to Article
46, Family Code.  If drug addiction, habitual alcoholism, lesbianism or homosexuality should
MARCOS VS MARCOS occur only during the marriage, they become mere grounds for legal separation under Article 55 If a spouse, although physically capable but simply refuses to perform his or her essential
of the Family Code.  These provisions, however, do not necessarily preclude the possibility of marital obligations and the refusal is senseless and constant, Catholic marriage tribunals
FACTS: Brenda B. Marcos married Wilson Marcos in 1982 and they had five children. these various circumstances being themselves, depending on the degree and severity of the
Alleging that the husband failed to provide material support to the family and have resorted to attribute the causes to psychological incapacity than to stubborn refusal.  Furthermore, one of
disorder, indicia of psychological incapacity. Sexual infidelity is not one of those contemplated
physical abuse and abandonment, Brenda filed a case for the nullity of the marriage on the in law.  Until further statutory or jurisprudential parameters are set or established, SI cannot be the essential marital obligations under the Family Code is to procreate children thus constant
ground that Wilson Marcos has psychological incapacity. The RTC declared the marriage null appreciated in favor of the dissolution of marriage. non-fulfillment of this obligation will finally destroy the integrity and wholeness of the
and void under Article 36 which was however reversed by the Court of Appeals
Chi Ming Tsoi vs. CA marriage.  

ISSUES: 1. Whether personal medical or psychological examination of the respondent by a GR No. 119190, January 16, 1997
physician is a requirement for a declaration of psychological incapacity. G.R. No. L-5877, September 28, 1954
2. Whether or not the totality of evidence presented in this case show psychological incapacity.
FACTS: People of the Philippines
HELD: Psychological incapacity, as a ground for declaring the nullity of a marriage, may be vs Arturo Mendoza
Chi Ming Tsoi and Gina Lao Tsoi was married in 1988.  After the celebration of their wedding,
established by the totality of evidencepresented. There is no requirement, however that the Ponente: Paras
respondent should be examined by a physician or a psychologist as a conditionsince qua non for they proceed to the house of defendant’s mother.  There was no sexual intercourse between
such declaration.Although this Court is sufficiently convinced that respondent failed to provide them during their first night and same thing happened until their fourth night.  In an effort to
material support to the family and may haveresorted to physical abuse and abandonment, the Facts:
totality of his acts does not lead to a conclusion of psychological incapacity on hispart. There is have their honeymoon in a private place, they went to Baguio but Gina’s relatives went with
August 1936, Jovita de Asis and Arturo Mendoza got married in Marikina. During their
absolutely no showing that his “defects” were already present at the inception of the marriage them.  Again, there was no sexual intercourse since the defendant avoided by taking a long
or that they areincurable.Verily, the behavior of respondent can be attributed to the fact that he marriage, Arturo was marred to Olga Lema in Manila. When Jovita died, Arturo contracted
walk during siesta or sleeping on a rocking chair at the living room.   Since May 1988 until
had lost his job and was not gainfully employed for aperiod of more than six years. It was another marriage with Carmencita Panlillio in Laguna. This last marriage gave rise to his
during this period that he became intermittently drunk, failed to give material and moral March 1989 they slept together in the same bed but no attempt of sexual intercourse between
support,and even left the family home.Thus, his alleged psychological illness was traced only to prosecution for bigamy.
them.  Because of this, they submitted themselves for medical examination to aurologist in
said period and not to the inception of the marriage. Equallyimportant, there is no evidence
showing that his condition is incurable, especially now that he is gainfully employed as a Chinese General Hospital in 1989.  The result of the physical examination of Gina was
Arturo contends that his marriage with Lema is null and void, therefore non-existent at the time
taxi driver.In sum, this Court cannot declare the dissolution of the marriage for failure of disclosed, while that of the husband was kept confidential even the medicine prescribed.   There
petitioner to show that the alleged psychologicalincapacity is characterized by gravity, juridical he married Jovita. Then his 3rd marriage was valid also because it occurred after the death of
were allegations that the reason why Chi Ming Tsoi married her is to maintain his residency
antecedence and incurability; and for her failure to observe the guidelines outlined inMolina. Jovita.
status here in the country.  Gina does not want to reconcile with Chi Ming Tsoi and want their
marriage declared void on the ground of psychological incapacity.  On the other hand, the latter
David Dedel vs Court of Appeals & Sharon Corpuz-Dedel Solicitor General argues that, even assuming that Arturo's marriage to Lema is void, he is not
does not want to have their marriage annulled because he loves her very much, he has no defect
In 1966, David and Sharon married each other. They’ve had four children since then. David exempt from criminal liability in the absence of judicial annulment of said bigamous marriage.
on his part and is physically and psychologically capable and since their relationship is still
then found out that Sharon is irresponsible as a wife and as a mother because during the
marriage Sharon had extra-marital affairs with various other guys particularly with one Mustafa young, they can still overcome their differences.  Chi Ming Tsoi submitted himself to another
Ibrahim, a Jordanian, with whom she had 2 children. She even married Ibrahim. David averred Ruling:
that Sharon is psychologically incapacitated and David submitted the findings of Dr. Dayan

2
PFR CASE DIGEST

 it is admitted that appellant's second marriage with Olga Lema was contracted during the another woman and had been disposing some of her properties which is administered by Gomez sought a clarification of that portion in the decision regarding the procedure for the
existence of his first marriage with Jovita de Asis. Section 29 of the marriage law (act 3613), in Roberto.  The latter claims that because their marriage was void ab initio, the declaration of liquidation of common property in “unions without marriage”.  During the hearing on the
force at the time the appellant contracted his second marriage in 1941, provides as follows: such voidance is unnecessary and superfluous.  On the other hand, Soledad insists the motion, the children filed a joint affidavit expressing desire to stay with their father. 
declaration of the nullity of marriage not for the purpose of remarriage, but in order to provide a
Illegal marriages. — Any marriage subsequently contracted by any person during the lifetime basis for the separation and distribution of properties acquired during the marriage. ISSUE: Whether or not the property regime should be based on co-ownership.
of the first spouse of such person with any person other than such first spouse shall be illegal
and void from its performance, unless:
ISSUE: Whether or not a petition for judicial declaration should only be filed for purposes of HELD:
remarriage.
(a) The first marriage was annulled or dissolved;
The Supreme Court ruled that in a void marriage, regardless of the cause thereof, the property
HELD: relations of the parties are governed by the rules on co-ownership.  Any property acquired
(b) The first spouse had been absent for seven consecutive years at the time of the second
marriage without the spouse present having news of the absentee being alive, or the absentee during the union is prima facie presumed to have been obtained through their joint efforts.   A

being generally considered as dead and believed to be so by the spouse present at the time of The declaration of the nullity of marriage is indeed required for purposed of remarriage.  party who did not participate in the acquisition of the property shall be considered as having
contracting such subsequent marriage, the marriage so contracted being valid in either case until However, it is also necessary for the protection of the subsequent spouse who believed in good contributed thereto jointly if said party’s efforts consisted in the care and maintenance of the
declared null and void by a competent court. faith that his or her partner was not lawfully married marries the same.  With this, the said family. 
person is freed from being charged with bigamy.
This statutory provision plainly makes a subsequent marriage contracted by any person during Cariño vs Cariño
the lifetime of his first spouse illegal and void from its performance, and no judicial decree is When a marriage is declared void ab initio, law states that final judgment shall provide for the
necessary to establish its invalidity, as distinguished from mere annullable marriages. There is liquidation, partition and distribution of the properties of the spouses, the custody and support
here no pretence that appellant's second marriage with Olga Lema was contracted in the belief of the common children and the delivery of their presumptive legitimes, unless such matters
that the first spouse, Jovita de Asis, has been absent for seven consecutive years or generally In 1969 SPO4 Santiago Cariño married Susan Nicdao Cariño. He had 2 children with her. In
had been adjudicated in previous judicial proceedings.  Soledad’s prayer for separation of
1992, SPO4 contracted a second marriage, this time with Susan Yee Cariño. In 1988, prior to
considered as dead, so as to render said marriage valid until declared null and void by a
property will simply be the necessary consequence of the judicial declaration of absolute nullity his second marriage, SPO4 is already bedridden and he was under the care of Yee. In 1992, he
competent court. died 13 days after his marriage with Yee. Thereafter, the spouses went on to claim the benefits
of their marriage.  Hence, the petitioner’s suggestion that for their properties be separated, an
of SPO4. Nicdao was able to claim a total of P140,000.00 while Yee was able to collect a total
ordinary civil action has to be instituted for that purpose is baseless.  The Family Code has of P21,000.00. In 1993, Yee filed an action for collection of sum of money against Nicdao. She
wanted to have half of the P140k. Yee admitted that her marriage with SPO4 was  solemnized
clearly provided the effects of the declaration of nullity of marriage, one of which is the
Wherefore, the appealed judgment is reversed and the defendant-appellant acquitted, with costs during the subsistence of the marriage b/n SPO4 and Nicdao but the said marriage between
separation of property according to the regime of property relations governing them. Nicdao and SPO4 is null and void due to the absence of a valid marriage license as certified by
de officio so ordered.
the local civil registrar. Yee also claimed that she only found out about the previous marriage on
Domingo vs. CA Valdes vs. RTC SPO4’s funeral.

226 SCRA 572 260 SCRA 221 ISSUE: Whether or not the absolute nullity of marriage may be invoked to claim presumptive
legitimes.

HELD: The marriage between Nicdao and SPO4 is null and void due the absence of a valid
FACTS: marriage license. The marriage between Yee and SPO4 is likewise null and void for the same
FACTS: has been solemnized without the judicial declaration of the nullity of the marriage between
Nicdao and SPO4. Under Article 40 of the FC, the absolute nullity of a previous marriage may
Antonio Valdez and Consuelo Gomez were married in 1971 and begotten 5 children.  Valdez be invoked for purposes of remarriage on the basis solely of a final judgment declaring such
Soledad Domingo, married with Roberto Domingo in 1976, filed a petition for the declaration filed a petition in 1992 for a declaration of nullity of their marriage pursuant to Article 36 of the previous marriage void.  Meaning, where the absolute nullity of a previous marriage is sought
to be invoked for purposes of contracting a second marriage, the sole basis acceptable in law,
of nullity of marriage and separation of property.  She did not know that Domingo had been Family Code, which was granted hence, marriage is null and void on the ground of their mutual for said projected marriage to be free from legal infirmity, is a final judgment declaring the
previously married to Emerlinda dela Paz in 1969.  She came to know the previous marriage psychological incapacity.  Stella and Joaquin are placed under the custody of their mother while previous marriage void. However, for purposes other than remarriage, no judicial action is
necessary to declare a marriage an absolute nullity.  For other purposes, such as but not limited
when the latter filed a suit of bigamy against her.  Furthermore, when she came home from the other 3 siblings are free to choose which they prefer. to the determination of heirship, legitimacy or illegitimacy of a child, settlement of estate,
Saudi during her one-month leave from work, she discovered that Roberto cohabited with dissolution of property regime, or a criminal case for that matter, the court may pass upon the

3
PFR CASE DIGEST

validity of marriage even after the death of the parties thereto, and even in a suit not directly
instituted to question the validity of said marriage, so long as it is essential to the determination
of the case. In such instances, evidence must be adduced, testimonial or documentary, to prove
the existence of grounds rendering such a previous marriage an absolute nullity.  These need not
be limited solely to an earlier final judgment of a court declaring such previous marriage void.

The SC ruled that Yee has no right to the benefits earned by SPO4 as a policeman for their
marriage is void due to bigamy; she is only entitled to properties, money etc owned by them in
common in proportion to their respective contributions. Wages and salaries earned by each
party shall belong to him or her exclusively (Art. 148 of FC). Nicdao is entitled to the full
benefits earned by SPO4 as a cop even if their marriage is likewise void. This is because the
two were capacitated to marry each other for there were no impediments but their marriage was
void due to the lack of a marriage license; in their situation, their property relations is governed
by Art 147 of the FC which provides that everything they earned during their cohabitation is
presumed to have been equally contributed by each party – this includes salaries and wages
earned by each party notwithstanding the fact that the other may not have contributed at all.

Republic vs. Nolasco

FACTS:

Gregorio Nolasco is a seaman.  He met Janet Parker, a British, in bar in England.  After that,
Janet started living with Nolasco in his ship for six months.  It lasted until the contract of
Nolasco expired then he brought her to his hometown in Antique.  They got married in January
1982.  Due to another contract, Nolasco left the province.  In 1983, Nolasco received a letter
from his mother informing him that his son had been born but 15 days after, Janet left.  Nolasco
went home and cut short his contract to find Janet’s whereabouts.  He did so by securing
another seaman’s contract going to London.  He wrote several letters to the bar where they first
met but it was all returned.  Gregorio petitioned in 1988 for a declaration of presumptive death
of Janet. 

ISSUE: Whether or not Nolasco had a well-founded belief that his wife, Janet, is already dead?

HELD: 

The Supreme Court ruled that Nolasco’s efforts to locate Janet were not persistent to show that
he has a well-founded belief that his wife was already dead because instead of seeking
assistance of local authorities and the British Embassy, he even secured another contract.  More
so, while he was in London, he did not even try to solicit help of the authorities to find his wife.