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

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 32 views

    Molina

    Uploaded by

    Mikaela Robles
    This case discusses whether 'opposing and conflicting personalities' is equivalent to psychological incapacity to void a marriage. The court ruled that it does not, as psychological incapacity must involve a serious personality disorder that existed when the marriage began and makes fulfilling marital obligations impossible. The court provided guidelines for determining psychological incapacity as grounds to void a marriage.

    Copyright:

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

    Molina

    Uploaded by

    Mikaela Robles
    32 views2 pages
    This case discusses whether 'opposing and conflicting personalities' is equivalent to psychological incapacity to void a marriage. The court ruled that it does not, as psychological incapacity must involve a serious personality disorder that existed when the marriage began and makes fulfilling marital obligations impossible. The court provided guidelines for determining psychological incapacity as grounds to void a marriage.

    Original Description:

    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?

    This case discusses whether 'opposing and conflicting personalities' is equivalent to psychological incapacity to void a marriage. The court ruled that it does not, as psychological incapacity must involve a serious personality disorder that existed when the marriage began and makes fulfilling marital obligations impossible. The court provided guidelines for determining psychological incapacity as grounds to void a marriage.

    Copyright:

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

    Molina

    Uploaded by

    Mikaela Robles
    This case discusses whether 'opposing and conflicting personalities' is equivalent to psychological incapacity to void a marriage. The court ruled that it does not, as psychological incapacity must involve a serious personality disorder that existed when the marriage began and makes fulfilling marital obligations impossible. The court provided guidelines for determining psychological incapacity as grounds to void a marriage.

    Copyright:

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

    Republic vs.

    CA and Molina
    G.R. No. 108763
    February 13, 1997

    FACTS
    This is a petition for review on certiorari challenging the decision
    of Court of Appeals (CA) affirming the marriage of respondent
    Roridel Molina to Reynaldo Molina void ab initio, on the ground
    of "psychological incapacity".
    The couple got married in 1985, after a year, Reynaldo
    manifested signs of immaturity and irresponsibility both as
    husband and a father preferring to spend more time with friends
    whom he squandered his money, depends on his parents for aid
    and assistance and was never honest with his wife in regard to
    their finances. In 1986, the couple had an intense quarrel and
    as a result their relationship was estranged. Roridel quit her work
    and went to live with her parents in Baguio City in 1987 and a
    few weeks later, Reynaldo left her and their child. Since then he
    abandoned them.
    Roridel then filed a petition for declaration of nullity of marriage
    before the RTC of La Trinidad on the grounds of psychological
    incapacity which allege that Reynaldo was incapable of
    complying with essential marital obligations and was a highly
    immature; and that it would be to the couple's best interest to
    have their marriage declared null and void in order to free them
    from what appeared to be an incompatible marriage from the
    start. The trial court declared the marriage void finding that "that
    the marriage between the parties broke up because of their
    opposing and conflicting personalities." Then, it added its own
    opinion that "the Civil Code Revision Committee (hereinafter
    referred to as Committee) intended to liberalize the application of
    our civil laws on personal and family rights, which the CA
    affirmed in toto; hence, the Solicitor General filed a petition for
    certiorari.
    ISSUE
    Whether “opposing and conflicting personalities” is equivalent to
    psychological incapacity and therefore void.

    RULING
    No. The marriage between Roridel and Reynaldo subsists and
    remains valid. The law intended to confine the meaning of
    psychological incapacity only to the most serious cases of
    personality disorders that must have existed at the time marriage
    is celebrated. Irreconcilable differences or conflicting
    personalities are not incapacities that would hinder the fulfillment
    of the essential marital obligations of the parties. The
    characteristics of gravity, judicial antecedence and incurability
    are not present in the case. In addition, the expert testimony by
    Dr Sison showed no incurable psychiatric disorder but only
    incompatibility which is not considered as psychological
    incapacity.
    The following are the guidelines as to the grounds of
    psychological incapacity laid set forth in this case: (1) the burden
    of proof belongs to the plaintiff; (2) the root cause of
    psychological incapacity must be medically or clinically identified,
    alleged in the complaint, sufficiently proven by expert, and clearly
    explained in the decision; (3) the incapacity must be proven to
    be existing at the time of the celebration of marriage; (4) the
    incapacity must be medically or clinically permanent or incurable;
    (5) such illness must be grave enough to disable fulfillment of
    essential marital obligations; (6) the essential marital obligation
    must be embraced by Articles 68 to 71 of the Family Code as
    regards husband and wife, and Articles 220 to 225 of the same
    code as regards parents and their children; (7) interpretation
    made by the National Appellate Matrimonial Tribunal of the
    Catholic Church are to be given great weight; and (8) the fiscal
    and the Solicitor-General must appear as counsel for the State.

    You might also like