Article 36 Family Code - 7/26 lecture.

. The law does not define what psychological incapacity and therefore the determination led courts on a case to case basis.

Relative Psychological Incapacity -P.I maybe relative. A spouse may be P. incapacitated (for example, a husband) as far as his wife is concerned but not with the other women. Absolute Psychological Incapacity regardless of who ones partner is, the person will always be psychologically incapacitated But the SC does not require a party to prove whether the Psychological Incapacity is absolute or relative because such person who is psychologically incapacitated is allowed to remarry. Weakness of such rule? Article 36 maybe subject to abuse. The spouse who may not be really psychologically incapacitated but would want to end the marriage will just accept that he is declared as psychologically incapacitated since he is still allowed to remarry. If one is also interested to have his marriage declared void for purposes of remarriage, you will not oppose, although, based on our law, there is the requirement that the fiscals would see to it that theres no collusion between the parties but the determination of such is very difficult. What some would do is simply do not answer and do not appear or they do not file a petition in the courts and you cannot say there is already collusion. But there is a possibility In cases decided by the court dealt that a person who is psychologically incapacitated is allowed to remarry, you may not anymore oppose because you are allowed to remarry. (concur: the person should prove to the court that the other party is absolutely psychologically incapacitated)

1.)

Can Psychological incapacity be equated with insanity or a total mental inability to function in all aspects of Marriage?

NO. This is only relevant in the compliance of the essential marital obligations. What is considered as psychological incapacity? -Lack of appreciation of ones marital obligations = does not refer to mental faculties and has nothing with consent. It refers to obligations attendant to marriage. This must be present at the time of the celebration of marriage but maybe manifested later. Santos case: the most important guidelines of psychological incapacity 1.) Gravity the incapacity must be grave or serious such that the party is not able to fulfill his/her marital obligations. Juridical antecedence it must be rooted at the inception of marriage although the overt manifestations may emerge only after the marriage. Incurability incurable or even if it would be otherwise, the cure must be beyond the means of the parties involved. So even if in reality, its curable, its still considered as incurable for the prupose of Art. 36 if the cure is beyond the means of the parties involved.

2.)

3.)

The Santos case: (was the very first case that enabled the courts to define the scope and meaning of Article 36) Issue: whether the refusal of the wife to return to or communicate with his husband was a ground for declaration of Psychological incapacity? Accordingly, although neither indecisive or persuasive or having no Juridical or secular effect, the Jurisprudence under Canon Law prevailing at the time of the told enactment can nevertheless cannot be declared as impertinent or if not, can be taken as an aid to the interpretation of the court In this case, the SC was not convinced of the conviction, and stated that There is hardly any doubt that the intendment of the law has been to confine the meaning of psychological incapacity to the most serious cases of personality disorders clearly demonstrative of an utter insensitivity or inability to give meaning and significance to the marriage. The petition was DENIED.

Proofs to show Psychological Incapacity -is psychosomatic and deals with the state of the mind and thus can be only be proven by indicators or external manifestations of the person claimed to be psychologically incapacitated. So that is the reason why the expert witness will have to interview with people who have worked or have dealings with the person sought to be declared psychologically incapacitated. 2.) Is the personal medical or psychological examination a requirement for the declaration of psychological incapacity? NO. The expert witness may gather evidence from other sources. 3.) When the marriage is declared void on the ground of P.I., is the person who was declared as psychologically incapacitated likewise allowed to remarry?

Ching Tsoi case:

-Procreation is one the essential marital obligations. Constant not fulfillment of this obligation will destroy the integrity or wholeness of the marriage. -According to the SC, the prolonged refusal of the Spouse to have sexual intercourse with his partner is considered a ground of psychological incapacity - Even the psychologically incapacitated can file a case in the court with regards to Article 36. Both spouses can also be declared as psychologically incapacitated.

necessarily absolutely against everyone of the same sex. Furthermore, such incapacity must be relevant to the assumption of marriage obligations, not necessarily to those not related to marriage, like the exercise of a profession or employment in a job. Hence, a pediatrician may be effective in diagnosing illnesses of children and prescribing medicine to cure them but may not be psychologically capacitated to procreate, bear and raise his/her own children as an essential obligation of marriage. (5) Such illness must be grave enough to bring about the disability of the party to assume the essential obligations of marriage. Thus, "mild characteriological peculiarities, mood changes, occasional emotional outbursts" cannot be accepted as root causes. The illness must be shown as downright incapacity or inability, nor a refusal, neglect or difficulty, much less ill will. In other words, there is a natal or supervening disabling factor in the person, an adverse integral element in the personality structure that effectively incapacitates the person from really accepting and thereby complying with the obligations essential to marriage. (6) The essential marital obligations must be those embraced by Articles 68 up to 71 of the Family Code as regards the husband and wife as well as Articles 220, 221 and 225 of the same Code in regard to parents and their children. Such non-complied marital obligation(s) must also be stated in the petition, proven by evidence and included in the text of the decision. (7) Interpretations given by the National Appellate Matrimonial Tribunal of the Catholic Church in the Philippines, while not controlling or decisive, should be given great respect by our courts. It is clear that Article 36 was taken by the Family Code Revision Committee from Canon 1095 of the New Code of Canon Law, which became effective in 1983 and which provides: The following are incapable of contracting marriage: Those who are unable to assume the essential obligations of marriage due to causes of psychological nature. 14 Since the purpose of including such provision in our Family Code is to harmonize our civil laws with the religious faith of our people, it stands to reason that to achieve such harmonization, great persuasive weight should be given to decision of such appellate tribunal. Ideally subject to our law on evidence what is decreed as canonically invalid should also be decreed civilly void. This is one instance where, in view of the evident source and purpose of the Family Code provision, contemporaneous religious interpretation is to be given persuasive effect. Here, the State and the Church while remaining independent, separate and apart from each other shall walk together in synodal cadence towards the same goal of protecting and cherishing marriage and the family as the inviolable base of the nation. (8) The trial court must order the prosecuting attorney or fiscal and the Solicitor General to appear as counsel for the state. No decision shall he handed down unless the Solicitor General issues a certification, which will be quoted in the decision, briefly staring therein his reasons for his agreement or opposition, as the case may be, to the petition. The Solicitor General, along with the prosecuting attorney, shall submit to the court such certification within fifteen (15) days from the date the case is deemed submitted for resolution of the court. The Solicitor General shall discharge the equivalent function of the defensor vinculi contemplated under Canon 1095.

Molina case: -the SC was not convinced that irreconcilable differences are a ground for nullity of marriage -must look for the best expert witness -must prove strong evidence for the declaration -8 guildelines for psychological incapacity
1) The burden of proof to show the nullity of the marriage belongs to the plaintiff. Any doubt should be resolved in favor of the existence and continuation of the marriage and against its dissolution and nullity. This is rooted in the fact that both our Constitution and our laws cherish the validity of marriage and unity of the family. Thus, our Constitution devotes an entire Article on the Family, 11 recognizing it "as the foundation of the nation." It decrees marriage as legally "inviolable," thereby protecting it from dissolution at the whim of the parties. Both the family and marriage are to be "protected" by the state. The Family Code 12 echoes this constitutional edict on marriage and the family and emphasizes the permanence, inviolability and solidarity (2) The root cause of the psychological incapacity must be (a) medically or clinically identified, (b) alleged in the complaint, (c) sufficiently proven by experts and (d) clearly explained in the decision. Article 36 of the Family Code requires that the incapacity must be psychological not physical. although its manifestations and/or symptoms may be physical. The evidence must convince the court that the parties, or one of them, was mentally or physically ill to such an extent that the person could not have known the obligations he was assuming, or knowing them, could not have given valid assumption thereof. Although no example of such incapacity need be given here so as not to limit the application of the provision under the principle of ejusdem generis, 13 nevertheless such root cause must be identified as a psychological illness and its incapacitating nature explained. Expert evidence may be given qualified psychiatrist and clinical psychologists. (3) The incapacity must be proven to be existing at "the time of the celebration" of the marriage. The evidence must show that the illness was existing when the parties exchanged their "I do's." The manifestation of the illness need not be perceivable at such time, but the illness itself must have attached at such moment, or prior thereto. (4) Such incapacity must also be shown to be medically or clinically permanent or incurable. Such incurability may be absolute or even relative only in regard to the other spouse, not

Barcelona: (Sept. 2003)

-Procedural rules apply to actions pending and unresolved at the

time of their passage.[16] The obvious effect of the new Rules providing that expert opinion need not be allegedin the petition is that there is also no need to allege the root cause of the psychological incapacity. Only experts in the fields of neurological and behavioral sciences are competent to determine the root cause of psychological incapacity. Since the new Rules do not require the petition to allege expert opinion on the psychological incapacity, it follows that there is also no need to allege in the petition the root cause of the psychological incapacity The root causes of many psychological disorders are still unknown to science even as their outward, physical manifestations are evident. Hence, what the new Rules require the petition to allege are the physical manifestations indicative of psychological incapacity. Respondent Tadeos second petition complies with this requirement.

Repetition of Santos and Molina and the new rules were followed. What is important is that the presence of evidence that can adequately establish the partys psychological incapacity of if the totality of EVIDENCE presented is enough to sustain the finding of persons psychological incapacity then the medical examination is no longer needed.

Annulment Distinguished from Divorce: -when you declare a nullity of marriage, it means that there was no marriage from the very beginning. No marriage at all. Do not sever a marital tie. -Divorce; valid marriage; a subsequent ground after the marriage causes the divorce and would sever the marital tie.

4.) What are the essential Marital Obligations? -Rights and Obligations as between the spouses (Articles 68-71 of the FC) and Obligations of Parents to their children (Articles 220-222 and 225 ) - such non-compliance of the obligations must be stated in the petition proven by evidence and included in the text of the petition.

- Petiton was DENIED. No Material support and Physical abuse did not suffice the totality of the EVIDENCE. Republic v Dagdag -each case must be judged according to the facts -the wife failed to show the husbands psychological incapacity -decided in accordance to the Molina case. Chua:

5.) Rule of Canonical Annulment

-Petition was DENIED.

Interpretations of the National Appellate Matrimonial Tribunal of the Philippines while not controlling or decisive, should be given great respect by our courts. Antonio Vs Reyes case; -SC declared a pathological liar as psychologically incapacitated 6.) The fiscal and the Solicitor General to appear as counsel for the state. No decision shall he handed down unless the Solicitor General issues a certification, which will be quoted in the decision, briefly staring therein his reasons for his agreement or opposition, as the case may be, to the petition. The Solicitor General, along with the prosecuting attorney, shall submit to the court such certification within fifteen (15) days from the date the case is deemed submitted for resolution of the court. The Solicitor General shall discharge the equivalent function of the defensor vinculi contemplated under Canon 1095. No longer required. Under the new rules. -objected by lawyers because the judges will not render decisions unless the SG passes such certification as to his agreement or opposition to the petition, the SG cannot makes its certifications without knowing the facts of the case. -delayed the disposition of cases under the article 36 Guidelines modified from Molina: Certification from the SG and the requirement of the expert witness

-reiteration of the previous -mere showing of irreconcilable differences and conflicting personalities do not constitute -TOTALITY OF EVIDENCE MUST BE SUFFICIENT TO SUSTAIN A FINDING OF P.I. -a medical evaluation is still strongly required. Barcelona case: Modified ruling of the requirement of the expert witness was first applied Non-retroactivity rules do not apply to Procedural laws If there is a pending case under Article 36 when issued by the SC, the new rules should be applied because it is Procedural in nature Expert was required in Molina but no longer necessary in this case

Dedel case: -the respondents sexual infidelity and abandonment do not constitute P.I. -the trial court has no jurisdiction to resolve church marriage. The authority is within the court of the Roman Catholic Church

Marcos v Marcos case:

-does not refer to mental faculties but the personality disorder must be present at the time of marriage -personality disorders are very complex and elusive. The facts presented are grounds for Legal Separation. Anacleta case: -if you file a declaration of nullity and the respondent doesnt answer or appear, (like in Santos) , its not an assurance that you will be granted by annulment because the fiscal and SG is there, even if petition is unopposed, you still need to present the evidence and convince the court that you have complied with the requirement. - the fiscal and SG has the duty to ascertain collusion and oppose the application in such probabilities.