Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 96 views

    Pesca v. Pesca

    Uploaded by

    Dredd Lelina
    Zosimo and Lorna Pesca were married in 1975 and had four children together. However, Lorna alleged that Zosimo was emotionally immature, irresponsible, and violently abusive. She fled the marital home on two occasions to escape the abuse but eventually filed for annulment on grounds of Zosimo's psychological incapacity. The trial court granted the annulment but the appellate court reversed, finding that psychological incapacity was not established. The Supreme Court then had to determine whether the guidelines from the Molina case on proving psychological incapacity should be applied retroactively. The Court held that the Molina guidelines must be followed as they have the force and effect of law based on legal principles of stare

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Pesca v. Pesca

    Uploaded by

    Dredd Lelina
    96 views2 pages
    Zosimo and Lorna Pesca were married in 1975 and had four children together. However, Lorna alleged that Zosimo was emotionally immature, irresponsible, and violently abusive. She fled the marital home on two occasions to escape the abuse but eventually filed for annulment on grounds of Zosimo's psychological incapacity. The trial court granted the annulment but the appellate court reversed, finding that psychological incapacity was not established. The Supreme Court then had to determine whether the guidelines from the Molina case on proving psychological incapacity should be applied retroactively. The Court held that the Molina guidelines must be followed as they have the force and effect of law based on legal principles of stare

    Original Description:

    Stat Con - case digest

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Zosimo and Lorna Pesca were married in 1975 and had four children together. However, Lorna alleged that Zosimo was emotionally immature, irresponsible, and violently abusive. She fled the marital home on two occasions to escape the abuse but eventually filed for annulment on grounds of Zosimo's psychological incapacity. The trial court granted the annulment but the appellate court reversed, finding that psychological incapacity was not established. The Supreme Court then had to determine whether the guidelines from the Molina case on proving psychological incapacity should be applied retroactively. The Court held that the Molina guidelines must be followed as they have the force and effect of law based on legal principles of stare

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    96 views2 pages

    Pesca v. Pesca

    Uploaded by

    Dredd Lelina
    Zosimo and Lorna Pesca were married in 1975 and had four children together. However, Lorna alleged that Zosimo was emotionally immature, irresponsible, and violently abusive. She fled the marital home on two occasions to escape the abuse but eventually filed for annulment on grounds of Zosimo's psychological incapacity. The trial court granted the annulment but the appellate court reversed, finding that psychological incapacity was not established. The Supreme Court then had to determine whether the guidelines from the Molina case on proving psychological incapacity should be applied retroactively. The Court held that the Molina guidelines must be followed as they have the force and effect of law based on legal principles of stare

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    LORNA PESCA, petitioner, vs. ZOSIMO PESCA, respondent.

    G.R. No. 136921. April 17, 2001


    VITUG, J.:

    FACTS:
    Lorna G. Pesca and Zosimo A. Pesca were married on March 3, 1975. They union begot
    four children.
    In 1988, Lorna alleged that Zosimo is an emotionally immature and irresponsible husband.
    He was cruel, violent and a habitual drinker. When cautioned to stop or, to at least, minimize his
    drinking, he would beat, slap and kick Lorna. At one time, he chased her with a loaded shotgun
    and threatened to kill her in the presence of the children. The children were not spared from
    physical violence as well.
    On November 19, 1992, Lorna and her children left the conjugal abode to live in the house
    of her sister as they could no longer bear his violent ways. Two months later, she decided to
    forgive him and returned home to give him a chance to change. But, to her dismay, matters even
    became worse.
    After submitting herself to medical examination, Lorna then filed a complaint with the
    barangay authorities, and a case was filed against Zosimo for slight physical injuries. Zosimo
    was convicted by the MTC of Caloocan City and sentenced him to eleven days of imprisonment.
    This time, Lorna and her children left the conjugal home for good.
    She sued him before the RTC for the declaration of nullity of their marriage invoking
    psychological incapacity. On 11 January 1995, Zosimo belatedly filed an answer and denied the
    allegation that he was psychologically incapacitated.
    On 15 November 1995, the trial court declared the marriage to be null and void ab initio on
    the basis of psychological incapacity on the part of respondent.
    The CA reversed the decision of RTC and declared the marriage valid and subsisting. CA
    said that the appellee has not established the appellant’s psychological incapacity.
    Petitioner pleads to reverse the decision of the CA on the thesis that the doctrine enunciated
    in the Santos case as well as the guidelines set out in the Molina case should have no retroactive
    application and, on the assumption that the Molina ruling could be applied retroactively, the
    guidelines therein outlined should be taken to be merely advisory and not mandatory in nature.
    ISSUE: W/N the guidelines for psychological incapacity in the case of Republic vs CA &
    Molina should be taken in consideration in deciding in this case.

    HELD:
    Yes. In the Molina case, guidelines were laid down by the SC before a case would fall under
    the category of psychological incapacity to declare a marriage null and void. This decision has
    force and effect of a law. These guidelines are mandatory in nature. Petition denied.

    The "doctrine of stare decisis," ordained in Article 8 of the Civil Code, expresses that
    judicial decisions applying or interpreting the law shall form part of the legal system of the
    Philippines. The rule follows the settled legal maxim legis interpretado legis vim obtinet that the
    interpretation placed upon the written law by a competent court has the force of law.

    You might also like