1.    What is the policy of the Constitution on Marriage?


The policy of the Constitution is to protect and strengthen the family as the basic social institution, and marriage as the foundation of the family. Because of this, the Constitution decrees marriage as legally inviolable and protects it from dissolution at the whim of the parties.


2.    Define Marriage under the Family Code.


Article 1 of the Family Code describes marriage as "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" and as "the foundation of the family and an inviolable social institution."


3.    How should the court rule on the validity of marriage?


It is axiomatic that the validity of marriage and the unity of the family are enshrined in our Constitution and statutory laws, hence any doubts attending the same are to be resolved in favor of the continuance and validity of the marriage and that the burden of proving the nullity of the same rests at all times upon the petitioner.


4.    What is Psychological Incapacity as a ground of nullity of marriage?


'Psychological incapacity,' as a ground to nullify a marriage under Article 36 of the Family Code, should refer to no less than a mental -not merely physical -incapacity that causes a party to be truly incognitive of the basic marital covenants that concomitantly must be assumed and discharged by the parties to the marriage which, as so expressed in Article 68 of the Family Code, among others, include their mutual to live together, observe respect and fidelity and render help and support.

Psychological incapacity under Article 36 of the Family Code contemplates an incapacity or inability to take cognizance of and to assume basic marital obligations, and is not merely the difficulty, refusal, or neglect in the performance of marital obligations or ill will. It is not enough to prove that a spouse failed to meet his responsibility and duty as a married person; it is essential that he or she must be shown to be incapable of doing so because of some psychological, not physical illness.


5.    What are the elements of Psychological Incapacity as a ground of nullity of marriage?


In Santos v. CA (Santos), the Court first declared that psychological incapacity must be characterized by: (a) gravity (i.e., it must be grave and serious such that the party would be incapable of carrying out the ordinary duties required in a marriage); (b) juridical antecedence (i.e., it must be rooted in the history of the party antedating the marriage, although the overt manifestations may emerge only after the marriage); and ( c) incurability (i.e., it must be incurable, or even if it were otherwise, the cure would be beyond the means of the party involved).


6.    Give instances that may negate psychological incapacity of a spouse?


The spouse had a job; provided money for the family from the sale of his property; provided the land where the family home was built on; lived in the family home with petitioner-appellee and their children;


7.    Are habitual drunkenness, gambling, and failure to find a job indicators of psychological incapacity?


Habitual drunkenness, gambling, and failure to find a job indicators are nowhere nearly the equivalent of psychological incapacity, in the absence of incontrovertible proof that these manifestations of an incapacity rooted in some debilitating psychological condition or illness.


8.    May a child be considered a reliable witness in an Article 36 Case?


No. It has been held that the parties' child is not a very reliable witness in an Article 36 case as "he could not have been there when the spouses were married and could not have been expected to know what was happening between his parents until long after his birth."

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

JR HAULING SERVICES AND OSCAR MAPUE, PETITIONERS, VS. GAVINO L. SOLAMO, RAMIL JERUSALEM, ARMANDO PARUNGAO, RAFAEL CAPAROS, JR., NORIEL SOLAMO, ALFREDO SALANGSANG, MARK PARUNGAO AND DEAN V. CALVO, RESPONDENTS.

Marcelo G. Saluday Vs. People of the Philippines G.R. No. 215305. April 3, 2018