SC rules long absence from home as psychological incapacity in marriage

MANILA, Philippines — A prolonged, unjustified absence from the marital home can be seen as evidence of psychological incapacity to fulfill marital obligations, which is a ground for marriage annulment.

In an 18-page decision promulgated on April 17, the Supreme Court granted a petition for the nullity of marriage between Leonora de la Cruz and Alfred Lanuza on the grounds of psychological incapacity.

The case stemmed from Dela Cruz's petition to annul her marriage with Lanuza.

They were married in June 1984, but Alfredo's behavior gradually deteriorated over time.

He stopped providing financial support to the family and treated Leonora more like a housemate than a wife. He also became involved in extramarital relationships.

The couple separated in 1994, after which Alfredo went on to marry multiple other women.

The Regional Trial Court denied Dela Cruz's petition to annul their marriage, a decision that was later affirmed by the Court of Appeals.

This prompted Dela Cruz to file a petition before the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court ruled their marriage void, finding that Lanuza’s prolonged absence from the marital home demonstrated psychological incapacity, rendering him incapable of fulfilling his marital obligations.

According to the high court, Lanuza’s behavior suggested that he lacked an understanding of his responsibilities as a husband and father.

“Based on the facts, the respondent left his family in 1994 and appears to have contracted marriage several times, with different women. He never gave financial support to his children and only visited them once, for less than an hour,” the court’s decision read.

“Respondent's infidelity, failure to provide support to his wife and children, and unjustified absence from his family all indicate that he is not cognizant of the duties and responsibilities of a husband and father,” it added.