Tan vs. Abandal

This is because marriage is presumed valid and in this jurisdiction, a
presumption can only be rebutted with clear and convincing

evidence.
2. Psychological incapacity is neither a mental incapacity nor a

Rosanna Tan-Andal personality disorder that must be proven through expert
testimony. There must be proof, however, of the durable or enduring
vs. aspects of a person’s personality, called “personality structure,”
which manifests itself through clear acts of dysfunctionality that
Mario Victor Andal undermines the family. The spouse’s personality structure must make
it impossible for him or her to understand and, more important, to
comply with his or her essential marital obligations. Proof of these
aspects of personality need not be given by an expert. Ordinary
witnesses who have been present in the life of the spouses before the
latter contracted marriage may testify on behaviors that they have
consistently observed from the supposedly incapacitated spouse.
G.R. No. 196359 – Civil Law – Persons and Family Relations –
Marriage; Annulment of Marriage – Psychological Incapacity –
3. Incurable, not in the medical, but in the legal sense; incurable as
Abandonment of certain portions of the Molina Guidelines – Expert
to the partner. Psychological incapacity is so enduring and persistent
witness not needed in proving psychological incapacity
with respect to a specific partner, and contemplates a situation where
the couple’s respective personality structures are so incompatible and
antagonistic that the only result of the union would be the inevitable
In 1995, Rosanna Tan and Mario Victor Andal married each other. and irreparable breakdown of the marriage.
They were blessed with one child. However, even before their
marriage, Rosanna already observed Mario to be extremely irritable
4. As to gravity, it must be shown that the incapacity is caused by
and moody. Earlier in their marriage, Rosanna also observed Mario to
a genuinely serious psychic cause. It is not necessary that it must be
be emotionally immature, irresponsible, irritable, and psychologically
shown that the psychological incapacity is a serious or dangerous
imbalanced. Rosanna later learned that Mario was a drug addict. Due
illness BUT that “mild characterological peculiarities, mood changes,
to his erratic behavior, Rosanna caused Mario to be confined in a
occasional emotional outbursts” are excluded. The psychological
drug rehab center twice. Mario’s irresponsibility even caused the
incapacity cannot be mere “refusal, neglect, or difficulty, much less
closure of their family business. Mario also exposed their daughter to
ill will.”
his drug use. In December 2000, fed up with Mario, Rosanna chose to
live separately from him. In August 2003, Rosanna filed a petition to
have her marriage with Mario be declared void on the ground that 5. Juridical antecedence. The incapacity must be proven to be
Mario was psychologically incapacitated to perform the essential existing at the time of the celebration of the marriage even if such
marital obligations. incapacity becomes manifest only after its solemnization.
To prove her case, she presented a psychologist (Dr. Fonso Garcia) 6. Essential marital obligations are not limited to those between
who, after interviewing Rosanna, Rosanna’s daughter, and Rosanna’s spouses. Hence, those covered by Articles 68 up to 71 of the Family
sister, concluded that Mario was psychologically incapacitated to Code as regards the husband and wife as well as Articles 220, 221
perform essential marital obligations. Dr. Garcia did not interview and 225 of the same Code in regard to parents and their children.
Mario as the latter, despite invitation, refused an interview. In her
assessment, Dr. Garcia found Mario to be suffering from Narcissistic 7. The decisions of the National Appellate Matrimonial Tribunal of
Antisocial Personality Disorder. the Catholic Church of the Philippines has persuasive effect on
nullity cases pending before secular courts. Canonical decisions are,
In May 2007, the trial court voided the marriage between Rosanna to reiterate, merely persuasive and not binding on secular courts.
and Mario as it ruled that Rosanna was able to prove her case. The Canonical decisions are to only serve as evidence of the nullity of the
Court of Appeals however reversed the trial court on the ground that secular marriage, but ultimately, the elements of declaration of nullity
the findings of Dr. Garcia was unscientific and unreliable because she under Article 36 must still be weighed by the judge.
diagnosed Mario without interviewing him.
SUMMARY: Psychological incapacity consists of clear acts of
On appeal, the Supreme Court took the opportunity to revisit dysfunctionality that show a lack of understanding and concomitant
the Molina Guidelines and the other nullity casesdecided by the compliance with one’s essential marital obligations due to psychic
Supreme Court after Molina. causes. It is not a medical illness that has to be medically or clinically
identified; hence, expert opinion is not required. As an explicit
requirement of the law, the psychological incapacity must be shown
to have been existing at the time of the celebration of the marriage,
and is caused by a durable aspect of one’s personality structure, one
ISSUE: Whether or not the marriage between Rosanna and Mario is that was formed before the parties married. Furthermore, it must be
void. shown caused by a genuinely serious psychic cause. To prove
psychological incapacity, a party must present clear and convincing
evidence of its existence.
HELD: Yes. Dr. Garcia’s expert testimony is given due weight. The Supreme Court also emphasized that in voiding ill-equipped
HOWEVER, the Supreme Court declared, among others, that in marriages, courts are not really violating the inviolability of marriage
psychological incapacity cases, expert testimony is NOT a as a social institution which is enshrined in no less than the
requirement. Constitution. Courts should not hesitate to declare such marriages
void solely for the sake of their permanence when, paradoxically,
doing so destroyed the sanctity afforded to marriage. In declaring ill-
Below is the Supreme Court’s new set of guidelines in determining equipped marriages as void ab initio, the courts really assiduously
the existence of psychological incapacity: defend and promote the sanctity of marriage as an inviolable social
institution. The foundation of our society is thereby made all the
1. The burden of proof in proving psychological incapacity is still on more strong.
the plaintiff. The Supreme Court however clarified that the quantum
of proof required in nullity cases is clear and convincing
evidence which is more than preponderant evidence (ordinary civil
cases) but less than proof beyond reasonable doubt (criminal cases).

Tan vs. Abandal

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Tan vs. Abandal

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Tan vs. Abandal

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

This is because marriage is presumed valid and in this jurisdiction, a

presumption can only be rebutted with clear and convincing

2. Psychological incapacity is neither a mental incapacity nor a

You might also like

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.