Maristela-Cuan vs. Cuan, Jr. G.R. No. 248518. December 07, 2021, [Case Digest]

 

Maristela-Cuan vs. Cuan, Jr.

G.R. No. 248518. December 07, 2021,

LAZARO-JAVIER, J.:

Case Digest

Facts:

            Janice testified that she met Marcelino sometime in 1997 when she and her friends were playing lawn tennis in Quezon City. Marcelino introduced himself and invited them to have some drinks thereafter. Then she met Marcelino again and they started playing tennis together. Marcelino courted her. He would call her regularly and they would go out on dates. After two (2) months of courtship, she finally accepted Marcelino's proposal and she became his girlfriend.

            In the course of their relationship, she noticed that Marcelino was overprotective toward her. He would constantly ask where she was and who she was with. She thought it was normal for any person in a relationship to be in such state of emotion. Their relationship was on and off during the first five (5) months because of Marcelino's constant jealousy. Marcelino later on told her that only marriage could remove his anxiety.  Thus, to mend their turbulent affair, they got married on June 20, 1997 in the City Hall of Quezon City.

            Their parents were unaware of their decision to get married. After the wedding ceremony, they just shared a meal at a restaurant and then parted ways. They went home to their respective houses. There was no honeymoon. They did not live together under one roof. They only saw each other after work and during weekends.

            Days and months passed by but they continued to live their respective lives as they used to. In her heart and mind and on paper, she was married to Marcelino. But they never lived together as husband and wife. They went to motels for about five (5) times, yet, they never engaged in sex. Marcelino would attempt to have sex with her but then, he would suddenly stop. She did not know why and it constantly puzzled her.

            Three (3) months after their wedding, Marcelino's jealousy escalated and took a turn for the worse. He barred her from talking to any other man. He got angry whenever they passed by a handsome man thinking she was staring at the latter.  He was furious every time he saw her talking to a male co-worker. He turned violent and even physically hurt her whenever he got jealous.  There was one incident when he hit her because he thought she was staring at some random man in a disco.

            Janette Velasco corroborated the testimony of Janice. She testified that she met Janice in college at AMA Computer College. Back then, they were close friends but they lost communication for a while. They met again when they were already working. She met Marcelino when he and Janice were still sweethearts. Janice confided to her that they got married and their parents knew nothing about it. She also confided to her about Marcelino's unfounded jealousy over a friend. She suspected that Marcelino had insecurities in their relationship.

            She (Dr. Tayag) diagnosed Janice with Passive-Aggressive Personality Disorder.  Janice was emotionally unstable whose weak disposition drove her to enter into relationships to cater to her deep emotional longings. The root-cause of her condition was her desire for control. As a middle child, Janice struggled to gain favor from significant others through passive compliance and blind obedience. She longed for a relationship to boost her need for attachment and nurturance. This, she found in the arms of Marcelino and she accepted whatever fate had prepared for her.

            Marcelino, on the other hand, did not appear for clinical examination despite her (Dr. Tayag) invitation. She, nonetheless found Marcelino to be suffering from Paranoid Personality Disorder with Narcissistic and Antisocial Features based on the psychodynamic analysis of his behavior, attitude, and character known to both Janice and Janette. Marcelino was a self-centered man highly engrossed with immediate satisfaction of his pleasures. He had very low tolerance for stress and frustration. Having been raised from a broken-family, he lacked a sense of responsibility and proper chastisement. Since he always got what he wanted, he became highly sensitive to deprivation. He was preoccupied with his needs and desires which prevented him from performing his spousal functions.

            Trial court granted the petition and declared the marriage of Janice to Marcelino void on ground of psychological incapacity of both parties. It ruled that Janice and Marcelino did not observe love, respect, and support for each other. They were abnormally involved in the union as their personality disorders deprived them from performing their marital obligations.

            Court of Appeals reversed. It held that Janice failed to prove that she and Marcelino were suffering from psychological incapacity within the contemplation of Article 36 of the Family Code.

 

Issue:

            Did the evidence on record sufficiently support the petition of Janice for declaration of nullity of her marriage with Marcelino on ground of psychological incapacity?

 

Held:

            Yes; Article 36 of the Family Code provides that a marriage contracted by any party who, at the time of the celebration, was psychologically incapacitated to comply with the essential marital obligations of marriage, shall likewise be void even if such incapacity becomes manifest only after its solemnization. As expressed in Article 68 of the Family Code, the marital covenants include the mutual obligations of husband and wife to live together, observe love, respect, and fidelity and to help and support each other.

            Psychological incapacity is not only a mental incapacity nor only a personality disorder that must be proven through expert opinion. There may now be proof of the durable aspects of a person's personality, called "personality structure," which manifests itself through clear acts of dysfunctionality that undermines the family. The spouse's personality structure must make it impossible for him or her to understand and, more importantly, to comply with his or her essential marital obligations [Tan-Andal vs. Andal].

Proof of these aspects of personality need not only be given by an expert. Ordinary witnesses who have been present in the life of the spouses before the latter contracted marriage may testify on behaviors that they have consistently observed from the supposedly incapacitated spouse. From there, the judge will decide if these behaviors are indicative of a true and serious incapacity to assume the essential marital obligations.

To stress, psychological incapacity consists of clear acts of dysfunctionality which show lack of understanding and concomitant compliance with one's essential marital obligations. But every case involving the alleged psychological incapacity of a spouse should be resolved based on its particular set of facts and Article 36 of the Family Code, applied on a case-to-case basis.

Tan-Andal correctly stated the threshold of evidence in psychological incapacity cases, i.e., the spouse alleging psychological incapacity is required to prove his or her case with clear and convincing evidence. Clear and convincing evidence is the quantum of proof that requires more than preponderance of evidence but less than proof beyond reasonable doubt.

Therefore, the Court of Appeals erred in not giving credence to Dr. Garcia's expert opinion just because Mario did not appear for psychiatric evaluation.

Verily, Tan-Andal democratized the forms of evidence proving psychological incapacity. The Court allowed lay persons to prove psychological incapacity through evidence of a personality structure or psychic causes that manifest itself through clear acts of dysfunctionality that undermine the family. The types of evidence that a lay person may adduce for this purpose are (i) the reputation of the incapacitated spouse being psychologically incapacitated – that is, the view-point of reasonable members of the spouses' relevant communities; (ii) the character of the incapacitated spouse relevant to or indicative of such incapacity, (iii) the every day behavior, acts or conduct of the incapacitated spouse, (iv) the offended spouse's own experience of neglect, abandonment, unrequited love, and infliction of mental distress, among others.

These types of evidence may establish circumstances probative of the dysfunctional acts inimical to the family. The relevant circumstances to be proven may include (i) instances of violence against women and their children as defined in Republic Act No. 9262 (RA 9262), (ii) zero probability of reconciliation between the spouses, and (iii) failure of the spouse or the spouses to perform his, her, or their marital duties and obligations in a manner clearly demonstrative of an utter insensitivity or inability to give meaning and significance to the marriage. The third category of circumstances refers to the characterization, i.e., clearly demonstrative of an utter insensitivity or inability to give meaning and significance to the marriage, that was once used to describe the personality disorder that gave rise to psychological incapacity.

Since Tan-Andal has abandoned the focus on personality disorders and expert opinions, this characterization may now be appropriated to capture the essence of the problematic personality structure or psychic causes that spawn psychological incapacity. Embraced in this inclusive circumstance are such facts as (i) forms of addiction demonstrative of such insensitivity or inability, (ii) abandonment by one spouse of the other, or (iii) instances of actual loss of trust, love, and respect for each other. This notwithstanding the reality of meaningless marriages which force either or both spouses into chronically unproductive and detached lives, thus, physically and psychologically endangering themselves in the process.

Applying Tan-Andal here, we find that Janice was able to prove by clear and convincing evidence that, indeed, her marriage to Marcelino should be declared void on ground of psychological incapacity. We find though, that based on the evidence presented, only Marcelino was psychologically incapacitated to perform his marital duties.

Marcelino is psychologically incapacitated in the legal sense.

First - Juridical Antecedence (i.e., the condition existed prior to the celebration of marriage): Marcelino's condition has juridical antecedence since it manifested even before the celebration of his marriage to Janice. When he and Janice were only in a boyfriend-girlfriend relationship, he manifested early on his overprotective tendencies toward her. His constant but unfounded feeling of jealousy was the cause of his "on and off" relationship with Janice. He convinced Janice that his anxiety would only go away if she would marry him.

But even after they got married, Marcelino’s attitude took a turn for the worse. He got jealous of other men and barred Janice from talking to them altogether. He also became violent and started physically assaulting Janice.

 

Second - Gravity (i.e., the condition cannot be categorized as mild characterological peculiarities, mood changes, and occasional emotional outbursts):

Marcelino never accorded Janice the love and respect that was due her as his wife and partner. During their marriage, he never lived with Janice under one roof. He never even had sex with her. According to Janice, although he attempted to have sex with her in a motel for about five (5) times, he suddenly stopped each time. For reasons unknown to Janice, Marcelino was not able to consummate even a single sexual intercourse with her.

 

Finally – Incurability (i.e., the couple's respective personality structures are so incompatible and antagonistic that the only result of the union would be the inevitable breakdown of the marriage):

Marcelino's psychological incapacity is incurable in the legal sense. To recall, Marcelino brought up the idea of marriage to Janice, not for reasons such as mutual love or settling down and starting a family with Janice, but to remove his anxiety.[64] He himself admitted to Janice that marriage was the only way for him not to feel anxious, jealous, and overprotective of Janice. As it was though, his overprotectiveness, extreme jealousy, and violent tendencies were the very same reasons why he never got to fulfill his spousal obligations toward Janice. Marcelino was so preoccupied with his own needs and insecurities which prevented him from performing his spousal functions. In the end, he got so consumed by them that he abandoned his wife and ended their union over the telephone.