Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 414 views

    Navarro Vs Navarro - Persons

    Uploaded by

    Wu CM Jessica
    The petitioner filed for annulment of his marriage to the respondent, claiming the respondent was psychologically incapacitated. The trial court agreed both parties were incapacitated. However, the Court of Appeals reversed, finding the marriage still valid. The Supreme Court denied the petition, finding the petitioner failed to prove the respondent was psychologically incapacitated at the time of marriage. For a marriage to be annulled on this ground, the incapacity must be grave, have existed prior to marriage, and be incurable. The petitioner only showed marital issues like refusal to be intimate, but not an illness causing incapacity to comply with marital obligations when they wed. Thus, the Court of Appeals' decision finding the marriage valid

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Navarro Vs Navarro - Persons

    Uploaded by

    Wu CM Jessica
    414 views1 page
    The petitioner filed for annulment of his marriage to the respondent, claiming the respondent was psychologically incapacitated. The trial court agreed both parties were incapacitated. However, the Court of Appeals reversed, finding the marriage still valid. The Supreme Court denied the petition, finding the petitioner failed to prove the respondent was psychologically incapacitated at the time of marriage. For a marriage to be annulled on this ground, the incapacity must be grave, have existed prior to marriage, and be incurable. The petitioner only showed marital issues like refusal to be intimate, but not an illness causing incapacity to comply with marital obligations when they wed. Thus, the Court of Appeals' decision finding the marriage valid

    Original Description:

    Persons and Family Relations case digest

    Original Title

    Navarro vs Navarro_Persons

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The petitioner filed for annulment of his marriage to the respondent, claiming the respondent was psychologically incapacitated. The trial court agreed both parties were incapacitated. However, the Court of Appeals reversed, finding the marriage still valid. The Supreme Court denied the petition, finding the petitioner failed to prove the respondent was psychologically incapacitated at the time of marriage. For a marriage to be annulled on this ground, the incapacity must be grave, have existed prior to marriage, and be incurable. The petitioner only showed marital issues like refusal to be intimate, but not an illness causing incapacity to comply with marital obligations when they wed. Thus, the Court of Appeals' decision finding the marriage valid

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    414 views1 page

    Navarro Vs Navarro - Persons

    Uploaded by

    Wu CM Jessica
    The petitioner filed for annulment of his marriage to the respondent, claiming the respondent was psychologically incapacitated. The trial court agreed both parties were incapacitated. However, the Court of Appeals reversed, finding the marriage still valid. The Supreme Court denied the petition, finding the petitioner failed to prove the respondent was psychologically incapacitated at the time of marriage. For a marriage to be annulled on this ground, the incapacity must be grave, have existed prior to marriage, and be incurable. The petitioner only showed marital issues like refusal to be intimate, but not an illness causing incapacity to comply with marital obligations when they wed. Thus, the Court of Appeals' decision finding the marriage valid

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    NARCISO S. NAVARRO, JR. vs.

    CYNTHIA CECILIO-NAVARRO
    G.R. No. 162049, April 13, 2007
    Quisumbing, J.:
     
    Facts
                  Petitioner, after several years of marriage and children with herein respondent Cynthia Cecilio-
    Navarro, filed a petition for nullity of marriage on the ground of psychological incapacity. Respondent, in
    her answer, alleged that it was petitioner who left their conjugal home and live a certain Dr. Lucila
    Posadas making the respondent-wife refused to have sex with him and told him to look for other women
    instead. After presenting witnesses of both parties, the trial court held that the petitioner and the
    respondent were both psychologically incapacitated to perform their marital obligations. However, when
    the case was brought to the Court of Appeals, it reversed the decision of the trial court and declared that
    the marriage still subsists.
     
    Issue
     
                  Whether or not respondent wife is psychologically incapacitated to annul the marriage.
     
    Held
                  The petition was DENIED. The Court held that, petitioner failed to present evidences before
    them to show that the respondent is, beyond doubt, psychologically incapacitated in order to annul their
    marriage. The petitioner-spouse failed to show that grave and incurable incapacity on the part of both
    spouses existed at the time of the celebration of their marriage.
                  Citing the case of Santos vs. CA, psychological incapacity as contemplated in Article 36 of the
    New Civil Code must be characterized by (1) gravity, (2) juridical antecedence, and (3) incurability.
                  Moreover, it should be noted that, Article 36 of the New Civil Code should only refer to the most
    serious cases of personality disorders, which makes it unable to give meaning and significance to the
    marriage.
                  In the case at bar, the constant bickering of the spouses and the refusal of the respondent-wife
    to sleep with her husband does not amount to psychological incapacity but it simply shows their
    immaturity, and immaturity does not fall on the definition of psychological incapacity as stated in the said
    Code. Psychological incapacity must be more than just a “refusal” in the performance of some marital
    obligations, it is indispensable that they must be supported with evidence that one of the spouses is
    incapable of doing so because, for example, of some psychological illness which had already exists at the
    time of the celebration of their marriage.
                  Because it is only the petitioner-spouse who took the psychological tests, witness De Castro’s
    statements were rendered by the Court to have been no probative value since it was only based on a
    hearsay.
                  Therefore, the petition for the nullity of the marriage filed by the petitioner-spouse should not be
    granted based on the aforementioned facts and that the decision rendered of the Court of Appeals is
    hereby affirmed.

    You might also like