CASE DIGEST
Tan-Andal vs. Andal
(G.R. No. 196359, May 11, 2021)
EN BANC, J. LEONEN
EXPERT WITNESS NOT NEEDED IN PROVING PSYCHOLOGICAL INCAPACITY; PSYCHOLOGICAL INCAPACITY IS LIBERALLY INTERPRETED; NEW GUIDELINES FOR PSYCHOLOGICAL INCAPACITY CASES
In 1995, Rosanna Tan and Mario Victor Andal married each other. Earlier in their marriage, Rosanna also observed Mario to be emotionally immature, irresponsible, irritable, and psychologically imbalanced. Rosanna later learned that Mario was a drug addict. Rosanna filed a petition to have her marriage declared void on the ground that Mario was psychologically incapacitated. To prove her case, she presented a psychologist (Dr. Fonso Garcia) who, after interviewing Rosanna, Rosanna’s daughter, and Rosanna’s sister, concluded that Mario was psychologically incapacitated to perform essential marital obligations. Dr. Garcia did not interview Mario as the latter, despite invitation, refused an interview. In her assessment, Dr. Garcia found Mario to be suffering from Narcissistic Antisocial Personality Disorder.
Whether or not marriage is void due to psychological incapacity. (YES)
PSYCHOLOGICAL INCAPACITY CASES
Psychological incapacity consists of clear acts of dysfunctionality that show a lack of understanding and concomitant compliance with one’s essential marital obligations due to psychic 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 that was formed before the parties married. Furthermore, it must be shown caused by a genuinely serious psychic cause. To prove psychological incapacity, a party must present clear and convincing evidence of its existence.
DRUG ADDICTION
That Drug addiction as a ground of legal separation will not prevent the court from voiding the marriage. So long as the party can demonstrate that the drug abuse is a manifestation of psychological incapacity existing at the time of marriage, this should be enough to render the marriage void under Article 36 (Psychological Incapacity)
NEW SET OF GUIDELINES:
1. The burden of proof in proving psychological incapacity is still on the plaintiff. The Supreme Court however clarified that the quantum of proof required in nullity cases is clear and convincing evidence.
2. Psychological incapacity is neither a mental incapacity nor a personality disorder that must be proven through expert testimony. There must be proof, however, of the durable or enduring aspects of a person’s personality, called “personality structure,” which manifests itself through clear acts of dysfunctionality that undermines the family. 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.
3. Incurable, not in the medical, but in the legal sense;
4. As to gravity, it must be shown that the incapacity is caused by a genuinely serious psychic cause.
5. Juridical antecedence. The incapacity must be proven to be existing at the time of the celebration of the marriage even if such incapacity becomes manifest only after its solemnization.
6. The decisions of the National Appellate Matrimonial Tribunal of the Catholic Church of the Philippines has persuasive effect on nullity cases pending before secular courts
No comments:
Post a Comment