Spouse not psychologically incapacitated, but marriage still null and void

This is the case of Annie and Tony, who first met in 1989 in college. Every time Tony visited Annie in the boarding house, he was always drunk. Six years later Annie accepted Tony’s proposal to be sweethearts. At that time, Tony was already working as a seaman. And since he would be working abroad, they decided to enter into a hasty civil marriage without a marriage license. After one month Tony left to work abroad.

During their marital union, Tony showed love and respect for Annie. Every time he was back at the house for a vacation, he would give his full salary of P40,000 to the conjugal funds but would ask for the same money back to spend on his vices. He was always out of their conjugal house, gambling and drinking with his friends. He also exhibited unreasonable and baseless jealousy towards Annie’s male friends. But the fact is he had an illicit relationship.

Five years later he was already dismissed as a seaman because of drug trafficking, where he earned almost a million pesos in less than a year. Later, Annie gave birth to their only child Katy. Then Annie left for Dubai to support her family. One month later, she found out that Tony left their daughter after her first birthday. Since then, Annie had no more contact with Tony.

Thereafter, without any hope of reconciliation, she filed a petition for Declaration of Nullity of their marriage on the ground of psychological incapacity of Tony to perform his essential marital obligations. She also alleged in her petition that their marriage has no marriage license.

After trial, the Regional Trial Court granted Annie’s petition and declared that the evidence presented prove the psychological incapacity of Tony.

On appeal by the OSG, the CA reversed and set aside the ruling of the RTC and declared the marriage of Tony and Annie still valid. Was the CA correct?

No, said the Supreme Court (SC). Annie failed to establish the psychological incapacity of Tony. Her evidence merely showed that Tony was an impulsive gambler, habitual drunkard, womanizer, illegal substance user and even a drug trafficker. These actuations are not related to psychological incapacity as alleged by Annie.

But it is apparent in the Marriage Certificate of the couple that there is no marriage license issued. Under Art. 14 of the Family Code (FC), no license shall be necessary for a man and woman who have lived together as husband and wife for at least five years and without any legal impediment to marry each other. But here, there is no evidence of said facts. Since the exceptional case under said article does not apply, the requisite of a valid marriage license is lacking. Hence the marriage of Annie and Tony is still void from the beginning.

So the CA decision is reversed and set aside and the RTC decision declaring their marriage null and void is restored (Torralba vs. Torralba and Republic G.R No. 214392 Dec. 7, 2022).

*      *      *

Email: [email protected]