I.

MARRIAGE

A. DEFINITION AND NATURE OF MARRIAGE

Article 1. Marriage is a special contract of permanent union
between a man and a woman entered into in accordance with law for the
establishment of conjugal and family life. It is the foundation of the
family and an inviolable social institution whose nature, consequences,
and incidents are governed by law and not subject to stipulation, except
that marriage settlements may fix the property relations during the
marriage within the limits provided by this Code.

What is Article 36 of the Family Code?

ARTICLE 36
A marriage contracted by any party who, at the time of the
celebration, was psychologically incapacitated to comply with
the essential martial obligations of marriage, shall likewise be void even
if such incapacity becomes manifest only after its solemnization.
(*Amended by EO 227 on July 17, 1987)

When and how was Article 36 Amended?

Amended by EO 227 on July 17, 1987 (7/17/1987)

What is PSYCHOLOGICAL INCAPACITY?

No definition; courts define on case-to-case basis

Dependent on the facts of the case

A code should not have many definitions as it would constrict the concept
– one case would be excluded by another definition.

Psychological Capacity pertains to?

Not to be confused with INSANITY – total mental inability to function

in all aspects of life.

We only refer to PSYCHOLOGICAL INCAPACITY “inability to

comply with the essential marital obligations.”

INCAPACITY prevents them from performing their marital duties

Constant senseless refusal to comply with obligations even if one is
physically capable to
Ex: Person can be super effective in professional life but prioritizes such
over family matters.
When can PSYCHOLOGICAL INCAPACITY be known to be present
in a person?

Can Psychological Capacity be CURED?

The incapacity must exist at the time of the marriage ceremony BUT can
also manifest during marriage.
Since it is ground for nullity, it CANNOT be cured.
Cohabitation and rearing of children will not cure the void marriage.

SANTOS V. COA & BEDIA-SANTOS

FACTS:
Leouel was a lieutenant who married Julia in Iloilo on September
20, 1986. Their love was shaky because Julia’s parents were always
meddling in their affairs, which would be a subject of their fights. Julia
leaves for the U.S. on May 1988. 7 months later, Julia calls Leouel for the
first time and promises to return home upon expiration of her contract in
July 1989. Leouel files for nullity of marriage as her behavior constitutes
refusal to perform marital duties. Julia responds and says that it was he
who was incapable since he was always in the army. She refused to
submit evidence or appear in court.

ISSUES:
Whether or not Leouel’s petition for declaration of nullity will be
accepted.

HELD:
The RTC and the COA denied his petition for lack of merit.
The SC denied the petition as the problem was not close to
the definition of psychological incapacity which they came up based on
the facts of the case.

What are the 2 interpretations of Psychological Incapacity according to

Caguioa?

2 INTERPRETATIONS OF PSYCHOLOGICAL INCAPACITY

Vitiation of consent: One does not know the consequences of marriage.

If he had known, he would not have consented to contract marriage.

 What's the Difference between Insanity and Psychological
Incapacity?

Insanity has defect in consent, which is grounds for voidable marriage.

Appearance of consent
Lucid intervals of clarity
Curable medically
Psychological Incapacity refers to obligations attendant to marriage
ONLY.

Did the committee give EXAMPLES of psychological incapacity?

NO.
The committee did not give examples of psych incapacity because it
would limit the applicability of the code (ejusdem generis)
To be judged on a CASE-TO-CASE basis instead.

Guided by:
experience,
expert opinion and
decisions of church tribunals (not binding)

What are the SIMILAR provisions from Canon Law with Article 36?

SIMILAR PROVISION IN NEW CANON LAW CODE

Canon 1095: They are incapable of contracting marriage:

Who lack sufficient use of reason
Who suffer from grave defect of discretion of judgment concerning
martrimonial duties
For causes of psychological nature are unable to assume the essential
marital obligations

Briefly EXPLAIN the history of CANON 1095..

HISTORY OF CANON 1095
1st - “Those who cannot assume the essential obligations of
marriage because of a grave psycho-sexual anomaly are unable to
contract marriage
2nd – “…because of a grave psychological anomaly”
3rd – “...because of causes of a psychological nature”

According to the BOOK: CANONS AND COMMENTARIES ON

MARRIAGE BY GRAMUNT, HERVADA, WAUCK
What does "incapacity" refer to?
 The INCAPACITY refers to
Inability to commit oneself to the essentials of marriage – consists of real
inability to render what is due by contract.
Inability to commit oneself must refer to the essential obligations of
marriage.
Tantamount to psychological abnormality – mere difficulty to assume
obligations is not counted (can be overcome with normal effort)

*must be proven that the person was indeed deprived of the ability to
assume marital obligations.

According to to Justice Dy on Dr. Gerard Veloso: How does one

CHARACTERIZE Psychological Incapacity?
Psychological Incapacity must be characterized by:
1. Gravity
Incapacity must be grave/serious that the party is unable to carry out
ordinary duties required in marriage
2. Juridical Antecedence
Rooted in history of party w/c can manifest only after marriage
3. Incurability
Incurable beyond the control of the person

What is the Summary Decision based on all such Deliberations by the

committee?
BASED ON ALL SUCH DELIBERATIONS
Incapacity should not include simple psychoses like low intelligence,
immaturity, etc.
Must stand with existing precepts of marriage law
REALLY JUST refers to inability to assume basic marital
obligations such as mutual love, respect, rendering help and support, etc.

What are other CONDITIONS?

OTHER CONDITIONS
Psychoses such as drug addiction, alcoholism, homosexuality are merely
VOIDABLE (Art. 46) (at conception of marriage)
If during marriage – grounds only for SEPARATION
CONSTITUTIONAL CONSIDERATION
Article 36 is considered as the code which protects the constitutional right
of marital life
Its aim is to defend against marriages ill-equipped to promote family life.

How does one PROVE Psychological Incapacity?

PROVING PSYCHOLOGICAL INCAPACITY
 1. Psychosomatic: can only be proven by external manifestations
2. Indicators must be clearly alleged in court
Does the spouse observe love and care for the other and the children?
Articles 220, 221, etc. dictate the duties of parents – failure of such is a
good indicator of incapacity
3. There must be a supervening disabling factor (not just mere refusal or
neglect)
**Nationality is IMMATERIAL

Article 36:

The Molina Case

vs
Chi Ming Tsoi Case

The case commenced on August 16, 1990 with the filing by

respondent Roridel (wife) of a verified petition for declaration of nullity
of her marriage to Reynaldo (husband).

Allegations:

After a year of marriage, Reynaldo showed signs of "immaturity

and irresponsibility" as a husband and a father since he preferred to spend
more time with his peers and friends on whom he squandered his money.
 He depended on his parents for aid and assistance
 He was never honest with wife in regard to their finances
resulting in frequent quarrels between them.
Sometime in February 1986, Reynaldo was relieved of his job in
Manila, and since Roridel became the sole breadwinner of the family, in
October 1986 the couple had a Very Intense Quarrel.
Their relationship was estranged that in March 1987, Roridel
resigned from her job in Manila and went to live with her parents in
Baguio City.
A few weeks later, Reynaldo left Roridel and their child,
abandoned them.
Among others, the following were stipulated during the pre-trial:
 That the parties are separated-in-fact for more than three
years;
 That the petitioner is not asking support for her and her
child;
  That the respondent is not asking for damages;
 That the common child of the parties is in the custody of
the petitioner wife.
ISSUES:
Whether or not the marriage is void on the ground of the phrase
"Psychological Incapacity" (Art. 36 Family Code)

Trial court rendered judgment declaring the marriage VOID.

Therefore, Reynaldo had thus shown that he was Psychologically
Incapable of complying with essential marital obligations and was a
highly immature and habitually quarrel some individual who though of
himself as a KING to be served.
Republic of the Philippines appealed and was denied by the Court
of Appeals, affirming in toto the RTC's decision.
That it would be to the couple's best interest to have their marriage
declared NULL and VOID in order to free them from the appeared to be
an INCOMPATIBLE marriage from the start.

I. The Psychology of the Incapacitated

Solicitor General insisted that the appealed decision tended "to
establish in effect the most liberal divorce procedure in the world which
is anathema to our culture."
"Opposing and conflicting personalities is Not equivalent to
psychological incapacity."Petitioner Existing jurisprudence and rules as
per SC
In denying the SG's appeal, the CA relied heavily ob the trial court's
findings "that the marriage between the parties broke up because of their
opposing and conflicting personalities." And that the Civil Code Revision
Committee intended to liberalize the application of our civil laws on
personal and family rights.
A. Signifier without signified

Art. 36 defined:
Art. 36, FC - as proposed by Civil Code Revision Committee (CCRC) of
the UP Law Center
Caguioa: differs from insanity (impaired consent) as the incapacity
resides in the impaired understanding of marital obligations; former is
curable/treatable and with lucid intervals
"As ground for annulment of marriage, We view psychologically
incapacity as a broad range of mental and behavioral conduct on the part
of one spouse indicative of how he or she regards the marital union, his or
her personal relationship with the other spouse, as well as his or her
conduct in the long haul for the attainment of the principal objectives of
marriage. If said conduct, observed and considered as a whole, tends to
cause the union to self-destruct because it defeats the very objectives of
marriage, then there is enough reason to leave the spouses to their
individual fates.
In the case at bar, We find that the trial judge committed no
indiscretion in analyzing and deciding the instant case, as it did, hence,
We find no cogent reason to disturb the findings and conclusions thus
made."
Vitug: mental (not physical) incapacity existing at time of ceremony
causing a party to be incognitive of marital obligations

Proposes no-fault divorce