LORNA GUILLEN PESCA VS ZOSIMO A.

PESCA
April 17, 2001| Vitug J. | Legal Interpretatio legis vim obtinet
PETITIONERS: Lorna Guillen Pesca
RESPONDENTS: Zosimo A. Pesca

SUMMARY
The case is about the marriage annulment between Lorna G. Pesca and Zosimo A. Pesca. Lorna
filed for the declaration of nullity of their marriage, citing in the case of Lorna G. Pesca and
Zosimo A. Pesca, the petitioner, Lorna, filed a complaint before the Regional Trial Court seeking
the declaration of nullity of their marriage due to the respondent's alleged psychological
incapacity. Lorna claimed that Zosimo exhibited signs of psychological incapacity, such as being
emotionally immature, irresponsible, cruel, violent, and a habitual drinker. She also mentioned
instances of physical violence towards her and their children.
After leaving the conjugal home and staying with her sister, Lorna decided to forgive Zosimo
and returned home, hoping for a change. However, the situation did not improve, and matters
became worse. Eventually, Lorna filed for the nullity of their marriage, custody of their minor
children, and support pendente lite.
The summons and complaint were served on Zosimo, but he failed to file an answer or enter his
appearance within the required period. The trial court ordered the city prosecutor to investigate
possible collusion between the parties, but no evidence of collusion was found. Zosimo belatedly
filed an answer without leave of court, admitting the marriage and the birth of their children but
vehemently denying the allegation of psychological incapacity.
The case proceeded to the Court of Appeals, which reversed the decision of the Regional Trial
Court. The Court of Appeals found that there was insufficient evidence to prove Zosimo's
psychological incapacity. Therefore, the marriage between Lorna and Zosimo was not declared
null and void.

Whether or not the declaration of nullity of their marriage invoking psychological

incapacity, is sufficient to nullified their marriage?

HELD
The Regional Trial Court initially declared the marriage between Lorna G. Pesca and Zosimo A.
Pesca null and void ab initio on the ground of psychological incapacity on the part of Zosimo.
However, the Court of Appeals reversed the decision of the Regional Trial Court and found that
there was insufficient evidence to prove Zosimo's psychological incapacity. Therefore, the
marriage between Lorna and Zosimo was not declared null and void.
FACTS:
- Lorna G. Pesca and Zosimo A. Pesca got married on March 3, 1975, after a whirlwind
courtship.
- They did not live together initially as Lorna was still a college student and Zosimo, a seaman,
had to leave the country shortly after the marriage.
- They eventually established their residence in Quezon City and later built their own house in
Caloocan City.
- During the two months of the year when Zosimo was on vacation, their marriage was described
as blissful.
- They had four children together: Ruhem (19 years old), Rez (17 years old), Ryan (11 years old),
and Richie (9 years old).
- Lorna filed a complaint seeking the nullity of their marriage on the ground of Zosimo's alleged
psychological incapacity.
- Zosimo, in his belated answer, admitted the marriage and the birth of their children but
vehemently denied the allegation of psychological incapacity.
ISSUE/S:
1. Whether or not the declaration of nullity of their marriage invoking psychological
incapacity, is sufficient to nullified their marriage?
HELD:
The Regional Trial Court initially declared the marriage between Lorna G. Pesca and Zosimo A.
Pesca null and void ab initio on the ground of psychological incapacity on the part of Zosimo.
However, the Court of Appeals reversed the decision of the Regional Trial Court and found that
there was insufficient evidence to prove Zosimo's psychological incapacity. Therefore, the
marriage between Lorna and Zosimo was not declared null and void. Court of Appeals changed
the decision of the Regional Trial Court. The husband, Zosimo A. Pesca, appealed the decision of
the trial court to the Court of Appeals, contending that the trial court erred in holding that there
was legal basis to declare the marriage null and void and in denying his motion to reopen the
case. The Court of Appeals found that there was insufficient evidence to prove Zosimo's
psychological incapacity and declared the marriage valid and subsisting