Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Rosanna Tan-Andal Vs Mario Victor Andal: Molina Guidelines Nullity Cases
Rosanna Tan-Andal Vs Mario Victor Andal: Molina Guidelines Nullity Cases
G.R. No. 196359 – Civil Law – Persons and Family Relations – Marriage; Annulment
of Marriage – Psychological Incapacity – Abandonment of certain portions of the
Molina Guidelines – Expert witness not needed in proving psychological
incapacity
In 1995, Rosanna Tan and Mario Victor Andal married each other. They were
blessed with one child. However, even before their marriage, Rosanna already
observed Mario to be extremely irritable and moody. 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. Due to his erratic behavior, Rosanna caused Mario to be confined
in a drug rehab center twice. Mario’s irresponsibility even caused the closure of
their family business. Mario also exposed their daughter to 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 Mario was psychologically incapacitated to
perform the essential marital obligations.
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.
In May 2007, the trial court voided the marriage between Rosanna and Mario
as it ruled that Rosanna was able to prove her case. The Court of Appeals
however reversed the trial court on the ground that the findings of Dr. Garcia
was unscientific and unreliable because she diagnosed Mario without
interviewing him.
HELD: Yes. Dr. Garcia’s expert testimony is given due weight. HOWEVER, the
Supreme Court declared, among others, that in psychological incapacity cases,
expert testimony is NOT a requirement.
3. Incurable, not in the medical, but in the legal sense; incurable as to the
partner. Psychological incapacity is so enduring and persistent 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 and irreparable breakdown of the
marriage.