Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 2K views

    Comparison of Republic v. CA & Molina and Tan-Andal v. Andal

    Uploaded by

    Arah Obias Cope
    The Court in Tan-Andal v. Andal modified the interpretation of psychological incapacity from the previous case of Republic v. CA & Molina. Specifically: 1. Tan-Andal lowered the burden of proof from beyond reasonable doubt to clear and convincing evidence. 2. It no longer requires psychological incapacity to be a mental disorder, and expert opinions are not mandatory. 3. Psychological incapacity does not need to be proven as permanent or incurable, only that it exists at the time of marriage.

    Copyright:

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

    Comparison of Republic v. CA & Molina and Tan-Andal v. Andal

    Uploaded by

    Arah Obias Cope
    2K views2 pages
    The Court in Tan-Andal v. Andal modified the interpretation of psychological incapacity from the previous case of Republic v. CA & Molina. Specifically: 1. Tan-Andal lowered the burden of proof from beyond reasonable doubt to clear and convincing evidence. 2. It no longer requires psychological incapacity to be a mental disorder, and expert opinions are not mandatory. 3. Psychological incapacity does not need to be proven as permanent or incurable, only that it exists at the time of marriage.

    Original Description:

    CivLaw

    Original Title

    Andal-Molina

    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 Court in Tan-Andal v. Andal modified the interpretation of psychological incapacity from the previous case of Republic v. CA & Molina. Specifically: 1. Tan-Andal lowered the burden of proof from beyond reasonable doubt to clear and convincing evidence. 2. It no longer requires psychological incapacity to be a mental disorder, and expert opinions are not mandatory. 3. Psychological incapacity does not need to be proven as permanent or incurable, only that it exists at the time of marriage.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    2K views2 pages

    Comparison of Republic v. CA & Molina and Tan-Andal v. Andal

    Uploaded by

    Arah Obias Cope
    The Court in Tan-Andal v. Andal modified the interpretation of psychological incapacity from the previous case of Republic v. CA & Molina. Specifically: 1. Tan-Andal lowered the burden of proof from beyond reasonable doubt to clear and convincing evidence. 2. It no longer requires psychological incapacity to be a mental disorder, and expert opinions are not mandatory. 3. Psychological incapacity does not need to be proven as permanent or incurable, only that it exists at the time of marriage.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    The Court in the case of Tan-Andal v.

    Andal modified the interpretation of the requirements of


    psychological incapacity as a ground for declaration of nullity of marriage found in Art. 36 of the
    family code.1

    Comparison of Republic v. CA & Molina and Tan-Andal v. Andal


    Republic v. CA and Molina Tan-Andal v. Andal
    1. The burden of proof to show the 1. Molina, however, is silent on what
    nullity of the marriage belongs to quantum of proof is required in
    the plaintiff; nullity cases. Andal Case hold that
    2. The root cause of the psychological the plaintiff-spouse must prove his
    incapacity must be (a) medically or or her case with clear and
    clinically identified, (b) alleged in the convincing evidence;
    complaint, ( c) sufficiently proven by 2. The Court now categorically
    experts and ( d) clearly explained in abandons the second Molina
    the decision; guideline. Now, psychological
    3. The incapacity must be proven to be incapacity is neither a mental
    existing at “the time of the incapacity, not a personality
    celebration” of the marriage; disorder that must be proven
    4. Such incapacity must also be shown through expert opinion. That a
    to be medically or clinically medical examination of the person
    permanent or incurable. Such concerned need not be resorted to.
    incurability may be absolute or even Instead, the Court in Andal case
    relative only in regard to the other said, "the totality of evidence
    spouse, not necessarily absolutely presented is enough to sustain a
    against everyone of the same sex; finding of psychological
    5. Such illness must be grave enough incapacity.”;
    to bring about the disability of the 3. That the psychological incapacity
    party to assume the essential contemplated in Article 36 of the
    obligations of marriage. In other Family Code is incurable, not in the
    words, there is a natal or medical, but in the legal sense;
    supervening disabling factor in the 4. It need not be a mental or
    person, an adverse integral element personality disorder.
    in the personality structure that 5. It need not be a permanent and
    effectively incapacitates the person incurable condition. 
    from really accepting and thereby 6. the testimony of psychologist or
    complying with the obligations psychiatrist is not mandatory in all
    essential to marriage; and cases; and
    6.  The existence or absence of the 7. The totality of the evidence must
    psychological incapacity shall be show clear and convincing evidence
    based strictly on the facts of each to cause the declaration of nullity of
    case and not on a priori marriage. 3
    assumptions, predilections or
    generalizations.2

    1
    https://saklawph.com/psychological-incapacity/
    2
    https://dailyguardian.com.ph/may-a-petition-for-nullity-of-marriage-that-was-denied-be-refiled/
    3
    https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/20821/

    You might also like