Republic of the Philippines REGIONAL TRIAL COURT 11th Judicial Region Branch ___ Davao City JACKIE MARIE

SANTOS MOLINA, Petitioner, Civil Case No. _________ FOR: Judicial ecla!a"io# o$ Nulli"% o$ Ma!!ia&e u#de! A!"icle '( o$ ")e Fa*il% Code

-versusKARLO MOLINA, JR., Respondent x-------------------------------------------x ANS+ER

COMES NO+, Res,o#de#" Ka!lo Moli#a, JR., and unto this Court, !ost respectfully aver that" -REFATOR.

onorable

1# $t is %ell settled in &urisprudence that the intend!ent of the la% is to confine 'psychological incapacity( to the !ost serious cases of personality disorders clearly de!onstrative of an utter insensibility or inability to give !eaning and significance to !arriage# )urther, the Constitution sets out a policy of protecting and strengthening the fa!ily as the basic social institution, and !arriage is the foundation of the fa!ily#1 MATERIAL ATES *# Respondent +arlo ,olina, J#R# -+.R/0 for brevity1, through counsel, received a copy of the Petition filed by petitioner Jac2ie ,arie 3antos ,olina -J.C+$4 for brevity1 on Dece!ber ____________ 5 and that this
1

Republic of the Philippines vs. Galang, GR NO. 168335, June 6, 2 11. Page | 1

.ns%er is filed %ithin the prescribed period as provided by 3ection 6 of the Rules on Declaration of .bsolute 7ullity of 8oid ,arriages and .nnul!ent of 8oidable ,arriages#

A MISSIONS AN 9# Paragraphs 1, * and : are ad!itted5

ENIALS

:# Paragraph 9 is specifically denied being that herein Respondent +.R/0 refuses to be separated fro! his %ife5 ;# Paragraph ; is ad!itted except for the 9rd sentence thereof# +.R/0 %as a regular e!ployee of <nion Ban25

=# Paragraph = is specifically denied# +.R/0>s father does not possess a do!ineering and authoritarian characteristic# .nd such ?ualities, even if true, are not the reason %hy respondent has a close relationship %ith his !other# +.R/0 does not as2 per!ission but !erely infor!s his parents of these engage!ents so as not to %orry the!# +.R/0 is only considering failing health of his father %ho has already had a stro2e in the past because of this, respondent avoids any instance %hich !ay &eopardi@e his father>s health5

A# Paragraph A is %holly denied but ad!its that +.R/0 has a degree in Bachelor of 3cience in Business .d!inistration ,a&or in ,anage!ent5

6# Paragraph 6 is specifically denied# +.R/0>s %allet %as actually stolen %hich happened on 7ove!ber 1:, *BBA and is proven by a police blotter and the subse?uent apprehension of the thief# +.R/0 also do not recall

Page | 2

his credit card being confiscated by his !other# $t is ad!itted that respondent>s vehicle is still under repair at the !o!ent# $t is also ad!itted that J.C+$4 often pays for so!e expenses but respondent usually pay the! !ost of the ti!e5 C# Paragraph C is partially ad!itted and paragraph 1B is denied# $t is

ad!itted that +.R/0 proposed to J.C+$4 on ,arch *=, *BB6# Contrary to J.C+$4>s allegations, +.R/0>s parents accepted J.C+$4 li2e a daughter they never had5

1B#Paragraph 11 is partially ad!itted# Dhe parents ca!e late because the %edding %as scheduled by the court at C a#!# in the !orning# .lso, Judge .nacleto Reyes %as +.R/0>s godfather# 11#Paragraph 1* is specifically denied# +.R/0 shared in the pay!ent of the rent# +.R/0 did not reali@e that doing chores %as an essential !arital obligation#

1*#Paragraph 19 is specifically denied# J.C+$4 never as2ed ho% !uch +.R/0 earns# Being J.C+$4>s husband it is but natural for hi! to share %hat happened during his %or25

19#Paragraph 1: is specifically denied# +.R/0 does not re!e!ber any fight about paying the rent# .lthough the couple fought about so!e gifts to be given on Christ!as5

1:#Paragraph 1: and 1; is denied# .gain, +.R/0>s relationship %ith his parents never turned sour5

1;#Paragraph 1= and 1A is specifically denied# +.R/0 is still e!ployed in <nion Ban2#

1=#Paragraph 16 is specifically denied# +.R/0, in fact, loves J.C+$4 so !uch that he %ould accede to any of her re?uest ho% ridiculous it !ay be# J.C+$4 had a tendency to be rough during coitus# 0n the anniversary night, J.C+$4 as2ed +.R/0 to slap her %hile having sex %hich +.R/0 reluctantly co!plied# But because +.R/0 could not slap her hard enough, J.C+$4 got !ad of %hich an altercation ensued5

1A#Paragraph 1C is specifically denied for the sa!e reason in the next preceding nu!ber5

16#Paragraph *B and *1 are specifically denied# +.R/0 al%ays does his best to provide to J.C+$4# Dhe usual argu!ent that they %ould have %ould al%ays be about !oney5

1C#Paragraph ** is specifically denied# +.R/0 could not go to Bansalan at that ti!e because of %or2# Ehen +.R/0 ca!e ho!e fro! %or2, he %as surprised that is personal things %ere placed outside their house# +.R/0 tried to reason %ith J.C+$4 but the latter 2ept saying '/ayas diriF Eala 2a pulosF .2o ang nagbayad diri# .2o ang tag-iya#( -Get out of hereF Hou are uselessF $>! the one paying# $>! the o%ner#1 Eith that, +.R/0 felt that he should leave as there %ere people already gathering outside their house %atching5

*B#Paragraph *9, *: and *; are specifically denied# J.C+$4 %ould not let +.R/0 see her# 3he even as2ed +.R/0>s for!er best friend .lexis Buenaventura to %arn the for!er to stay a%ay her# +.R/0>s !other even tried to tal2 to J.C+$4 but the latter refused to listen# Ehen +.R/0 tried to enter their house to tal2 to J.C+$4, she %ould threaten the latter to get out or she %ill screa!5

Page | 4

*1#Paragraph *= is denied except for the fact that .lexis Buenaventura %as +.R/0>s friend until college5

**#Paragraph *A is specifically denied# +.R/0 cannot recall any of those he had said and done %ith Buenaventura %hen they %ere children5

*9#Paragraph *6 is specifically denied# +.R/0 could not recall those specific incidents5

*:#Paragraph *C is specifically denied# +.R/0 does not re!e!ber if he had said those to Buenventura# +.R/0 is surprised that Buenaventura still recall those things considering their age at that ti!e5

*;#Paragraph 9B is specifically denied except for the fact that +.R/0 did sho% Buenaventura once a picture of the latter driving the onda vehicle# $t is the sa!e vehicle %hich is currently being repaired# +.R/0 %as too e!barrassed to bring his car in ca!pus because it %as very old5

*=#+.R/0 ad!its in Paragraph 91 that they argued before graduating but denies the reason for their argu!ent then# Buenaventura al%ays gets !ad at +.R/0 %hen the latter gives excuses to refuse the for!er to s2ip classes or to have a night out %ith so!e friends5

*A#Paragraph 9*, 99 and 9: are specifically denied# +.R/0 has never been exa!ined by this Dr# .!anda Policarpio nor has !et her in any%ay# +.R/0 is not fa!iliar %ith the study conducted by Dr# Policarpio#

*6#Paragraph 9; is denied# J.C+$4 and +.R/0 bought appliances and furniture after they %ere !arried5

Page | 5

EFENSES Res,o#de#" /as #o"

!e*iss i# $ul$illi#& )is *a!i"al o0li&a"io#s.

*C#Petitioner see2s fro! this

onorable Court that her !arriage %ith

+.R/0 be declared null and void under .rticles 9= of the )a!ily Code5 9B#J.C+$4 asserts that +.R/0 is incapable of fulfilling the basic !arital obligations under .rticle =6 %hich are -11 to live together, -*1 observe !utual love, respect and fidelity, -91 and render !utual help and support5

91#+.R/0 has contributed and devoted his life to !a2e his fa!ily happy especially to his %ife5

9*#Contrary to J.C+$4>s assertion, +.R/0 !ostly pays for the utilities in their house# ,ost of ti!e, +.R/0 %ould pay for the rent of the house because J.C+$4 %ould not be able to pay on ti!e5

99#Dhough there !ay be ti!e that +.R/0 could not do so!e of the house chores, but this %as only because he &ust ca!e fro! %or2# )or that reason he hired a house2eeper# 3uch ground %ould not !erit a case for annul!ent of !arriage5

9:#+.R/0 does his very best to acceded to any favors or re?uests !ade by J.C+$4 even though they %ere ridiculous# But %hen +.R/0 refused, J.C+$4 %ould then get angry5

Page | 6

9;#.lso, although the couple %ould have their fights and !isunderstandings, these do not constitute sufficient grounds to assert that +.R/0 is psychologically incapacitated to perfor! his !arital obligations#

36. $n

the case of Re,u0lic o$ ")e -)ili,,i#es v. Cou!" o$ A,,eals 1 the

3upre!e Court held"

'$t see!s clear at this stage that the !arriage bet%een the parties bro2e up because of their opposing and conflicting personalities# 7either of the! can accept and understand the %ea2ness of each other# 7o one gives in and instead, bla!e each other for %hatever proble! or !isunderstandingIs they encounter# xxx 'xxx ,ere sho%ing of irreconcilable differences and conflicting personalities in no %ise constitutes psychological incapacity# xxx(

3!. $n

the land!ar2 case of Sa#"os v. Cou!" A,,eals' the 3upre!e Court

described psychological incapacity in this %ise" '$t refers to no less than a !ental -not physical1 incapacity that causes a party to be "!ul% i#co&#i"ive o$ ")e 0asic *a!i"al cove#a#"s that conco!itantly !ust be assu!ed and discharged by the parties to the !arriage %hich, as so expressed by .rticle =6 of the )a!ily Code, include their !utual obligations to live together, observe love, respect and fidelity and render help and support# Dhere is hardly any doubt that the intend!ent of the la% has been "o co#$i#e ")e *ea#i#& o$ 2,s%c)olo&ical i#ca,aci"%3 "o ")e *os" se!ious cases o$ ,e!so#ali"% diso!de!s clea!l% de*o#s"!a"ive o$ a# u""e! i#se#si"ivi"% o! i#a0ili"% "o &ive *ea#i#& a#d si&#i$ica#ce "o ")e *a!!ia&e. Dhis psychologic condition !ust exist at the ti!e the !arriage is celebrated xxx(
2 3

G.R. No. 1 8!63. "eb#ua#$ 13, 1%%! 2& '(R) 22. Page | 7

-4!phasis supplied1 96#Dhe !ere fact that the J.C+$4 and +.R/0 had proble!s and !isunderstandings as a couple does not support the nullification of the !arriage based on .rticle 9= of the )a!ily Code# ,oreover, nor!al !arital proble!s !ust not be !ade an excuse to end a perfectly valid !arriage# Failu!e o$ Res,o#de#" "o live "o&e")e! /i") )is /i$e /as #o" )is doi#&. 9C#Petitioner asserts that +.R/0 refused to return to the con&ugal ho!e but in truth and in fact the for!er did not %ant +.R/0 to return# J.C+$4 gathered +.R/0>s personal belongings and placed the! outside their house# $t %as J.C+$4 %ho 2ic2ed +.R/0 out of their house5 :B#$n as !uch as +.R/0 %ould li2e to return to the house, J.C+$4 %ould refuse for!er entry therein# Because +.R/0 still loves J.C+$4, the for!er did not opt to file charges against the latter5 :1#0ne ti!e %hen +.R/0 %ent to the house to reason %ith J.C+$4, the for!er %as surprised %hen Buenaventura ca!e out fro! the house and %arned +.R/0 not to co!e any!ore5

Res,o#de#"4s !ela"io#s)i, /i")

close )is

*o")e! is #o" i#dica"ive o$ ,s%c)olo&ical i#ca,aci"%. :*#Petitioner asserts that +.R/0>s parents are the ones !a2ing the decisions for hi!5

Page | 8

:9#+.R/0 is indeed close to his !other ho%ever this does not !a2e hi! incapable of !a2ing decisions for hi!self# +.R/0 decided to !arry J.C+$4 on his o%n volition and based on his feelings for her# e %as not in any %ay influenced or ordered by any person to !a2e that decision for hi!5 ::#.ssu!ing, but not conceding that +.R/0 is dependent upon his fa!ily, it is still inconclusive as to his incapacity to co!ply %ith his !arital obligations5
&5. $n

the case of Re,u0lic v. L%#e""e Ca0a#"u&56a&uio7 the 3upre!e

Court held" 'Dr# Gerong found that ,artini>s 'personality disorders( including his being a '!a!a>s boy( are 'serious, grave and existing already during the adolescent period and incurable( and concluded that ,artini 'appeared to be dependent upon his fa!ily and unable 'to establish a do!icile for his fa!ily and to support his fa!ily# xxx xxx )ro! /ynette>s deposition, ho%ever, it is gathered that ,artini>s failure to establish a co!!on life %ith her ste!s fro! his !e$usal, #o" i#ca,aci"%, "o do so# I" is do/#!i&)" i#ca,aci"%, #o" !e$usal o! #e&lec" o! di$$icul"%, *uc) less ill /ill, /)ic) !e#de!s a *a!!ia&e void o# ")e &!ou#d o$ ,s%c)olo&ical i#ca,aci"%.3 -e!phasis supplied1 :=#4vidently, there are no sufficient grounds to !erit the annul!ent of the !arriage of J.C+$4 and +.R/0 based on Psychological $ncapacity# Based on the foregoing facts, +.R/0 cannot be incapable of perfor!ing his !arital obligations#

-RA.ER

&

G.R. No. 1!1 &2. June 3 , 2

8 Page | 9

+8EREFORE, -REMISES CONSI ERE , it is !ost respectfully prayed of this onorable Court that after a hearing on the !erits" a# D47H the petition to declare the nullity of !arriage under .rticle 9= of the )a!ily Code5 b# .//0E the parties to settle differences in a co!pro!ise agree!ent#

Respondent and counsel also pray for such relief consistent %ith &ustice and e?uity#

RES-ECTFULL. SU6MITTE City, Philippines#

this Dece!ber _________ in Davao

KARLO MOLINA, J.R. Plaintiff .ssisted by" TAN -A9 ESTRELLA LA+ FIRM Counsel for plaintiff CCC Jacinto 3treet, Davao City Philippines By" ATT.. I:. -A9 PDR 7o# _________ 1-B*-195 D#C $BP /ife ,e!ber Roll 7o# _______ Roll of .ttorney>s 7o# _______ ,C/4 Certificate of 4xe!ption 7o# ______ $ssued on ___________ at Pasig City ATT.. SU9ETTE TAN PDR 7o# ___________5 1-1A-195 D#C $BP /ife ,e!ber Roll 7o# _________ Roll of .ttorney>s 7o# ________ ______________

Page | 10

ATT.. JE9IEL ESTRELLA PDR 7o# 11111115 1-B:-195 D#C# Roll 7o# =1BB*5 D$7 7o# CC6-6A1-:99 $BP /ife ,e!ber 66A119 ,C/4 Co!pliance 7o# $$$-BB1:1665 .pril *9, *B19

Copy furnished by personal service" ATT.. CARELL R.9A NARTATE9 ATT.. NOR 8USSEIN LAU6AN ATT.. KRIS MARIAN 6AN9ON B.7J07 /.<B.7 K 7.RD.D4J /.E )$R, *nd )loor, .BC Building, Lui!po Boulevard, Davao City

E;-LANATION ON FILING 6. REGISTERE MAIL: Dhe service of this .ns%er %as effected by registered !ail because of the difficulty in effecting personal filing on account of the distance of Davao City fro! Pasig City %here the petition is filed# Dhe !ail !atter %as deposited, postage pre-paid, at the 8ictoria Pla@a Post 0ffice, J#P# /aurel .venue, Davao City on _________ as evidenced by registry receipt no# ________ %ith instructions to the post!aster to return the sa!e if not served or unclai!ed after ten -1B1 days fro! notice#

Page | 11

Republic of the Philippines M C $ D H 0 ) D . 8 . 0 M ss# x---------------------------------x :ERIFICATION I, KARLO MOLINA, J.R., of legal age, )ilipino, and a resident of Davao City, Philippines upon !y oath do hereby depose and state that $ a! the respondent in the above entitled case %ho had cause the preparation and filing of the foregoing .ns%er# $ hereby certify that the factual allegations contained therein are true and correct of !y o%n personal 2no%ledge andIor based on authentic records in !y possession#

IN +ITNESS +8EREOF, $ have hereunto affixed !y signature this Dece!ber 6, *B1* in Davao City, Philippines#

KARLO MOLINA, J.R. .ffiant

SU6SCRI6E AN S+ORN TO before !e this Dece!ber __, *B1: in Davao City, Philippines, affiant $an Julius De Castro exhibiting his current and unexpired driver>s license nu!bered /__-_____ bearing his photograph and signature as co!petent proof of his identity#

Doc 7o# ________5 Page 7o# _______5

JE9IEL ESTRELLA 7otary Public 7otarial Co!!ission 3erial 7o# 1CC-*B1;

Boo2 7o# _______5 3eries of *B1:#

Co!!ission 4xpires on Dece!ber 91, *B1; Roll 7o# =1BB*5 D$7-CC6-6A1-:99 PDR 70# 11111115 1-B:-195 Davao City CCC Jacinto 3t#, 6BBB Davao City, Philippines

Page | 13