OLIVER GALANO, PETITIONER-APPELLEE, VS. JEANIFER A. CASTRO, RESPONDENT,
MACALINO, J:
Sought to be reversed and set aside in this appeal under Rule 41 of the Rules of Court are the April 12, 2013 Decision[1] (“Assailed Decision”) and the August 23, 2013 Order[2] (“Assailed Order”) of the Regional Trial Court (“RTC”) of Balaoan, La Union, Branch 34 in Civil Case No. 908. The Assailed Decision declared the marriage of Petitioner-Appellee Oliver Galano (“Oliver”) and Respondent Jeanifer A. Castro (“Jeanifer”) void ab initio on the ground of both parties’ psychological incapacity; while the Assailed Order denied the Motion for Reconsideration[3] filed by Oppositor Appellant, the Republic of the Philippines (“the Republic”).
The Facts
This case stemmed from a Petition[4] for “Annulment of Marriage under Art. 36 of the Family Code” instituted by Oliver on June 28, 2011 before Branch 34 of the RTC of Balaoan, La Union. The Petition, docketed as Civil Case No. 908, was grounded on Jeanifer’s alleged psychological incapacity. Despite Jeanifer’s failure to file an Answer to the Petition, the assistant provincial prosecutor determined that there was no collusion between the parties.[5]
During trial, Oliver sought to establish that he and Jeanifer met in San Miguel Church, Tarlac City sometime in January 2002. Twenty-five year-old Oliver was then employed as a Maintenance Engineer in Sanyo Semiconductor Manufacturing Phils.; while Jeanifer, then twenty-four years old, was still a student. Apart from being text mates, Oliver and Jeanifer were members of the Parish Renewal Experience (“PREX”).[6]
One day, Oliver fetched Jeanifer at school because the latter will allegedly serve at a PREX seminar in church. Later, Oliver discovered that there was no scheduled PREX seminar for that night. However, Jeanifer no longer wanted to go home for fear that her mother might get mad at her. Thus, Oliver spent the night chatting with Jeanifer at the Luisita Mall grounds.[7]
Early in the morning of the following day, Jeanifer’s sister-in-law came to Oliver’s apartment searching for her. Apparently, Jeanifer did not ask permission to spend the night outside her house. Thus, the parents of Jeanifer insisted that she and Oliver get married at the soonest possible time. Although he was hesitant because he was the breadwinner of the family and she has not yet finished her studies, Oliver assented to marrying Jeanifer.[8]
Oliver wed Jeanifer on June 18, 2002 at the Office of the Municipal Trial Judge in Cities, Branch 1, Tarlac City in civil rites solemnized by Municipal Trial Judge Marvin B. Mangino.[9] Thereafter, Oliver and Jeanifer stayed at the latter’s family house in Sitio Valdez, San Rafael, Tarlac City. Their marriage was blessed with a son, Sean Gabriel Castro Galano (“Sean Gabriel”), who was born on September 28, 2004.[10]
During their union, Oliver noticed that Jeanifer was childish, carefree and decided matters on her own without regard for his feelings or opinion. Allegedly, Oliver was obliged to feed Sean Gabriel at night and do the household chores, even though he works during the day and she was a plain housewife.[11] Oliver likewise observed that Jeanifer spent more than what he earns. To sustain Jeanifer’s extravagant lifestyle, Oliver was constrained to work in the Middle East.
According to Oliver, he endured the hardships and homesickness he experienced while working abroad for the sake of his family. He religiously sent his hard-earned money to Jeanifer, who did not give even a small portion of it to Oliver’s family. Oliver also discovered that Jeanifer was in a huge personal debt and that she was dating a certain man named Erwin Sacramento. Worse, he found out that on January 4 to 6 and January 11, 2011, Jeanifer left Sean Gabriel alone in their home.[12] Because of all these, Oliver was forced to immediately return to the Philippines.
Realizing, however, that his broken relationship with Jeanifer was already beyond repair, Oliver secured the services of a psychologist, Dr. Juanita E. Ordoña (“Dr. Ordoña”), and filed his Petition for declaration of nullity of his marriage to Jeanifer. He likewise filed a criminal case for adultery against Jeanifer.[13]
Through interviews with Oliver and his sister, Tessie Galano (“Tessie”)[14], Dr. Ordoña learned that Oliver is the 2nd among five (5) siblings of Benedicto and Remedios Galano. Benedicto, who is a fisherman and a weaver, is a quiet and perfectionist type of person who easily becomes upset and annoyed. On the other hand, Remedios, who is a housekeeper and a weaver at the same time, is simple, submissive, and is Oliver’s confidant.
Having grown up among the poorest families in their locality, Oliver engaged at a very young age in different kinds of livelihood, such as fishing during the night with his parents, farming and selling ice candies, fruits and vegetables. All the fruits of his labor were however given to his mother, Remedios, as he was not allowed to hold any amount of money during his childhood. Owing to his strong determination and perseverance, Oliver obtained a scholarship and earned his bachelor’s degree in Mechanical Engineering. Dr. Odoña stated in her Psychological Evaluation and Case Report that with this kind of scenario, Oliver developed a sense of repressed emotions.
With respect to Jeanifer, Dr. Ordoña allegedly sent three (3) letters inviting her to an interview which were unanswered. Dr. Ordoña, however, did not present the return card and a copy of the said letters when she was called to the witness stand.[15] It was only through a series of questions answered by Oliver and Tessie that Dr. Ordoña became acquainted with Jeanifer’s background.
Allegedly, Jeanifer is the 4th among the five (5) siblings of Norma and Cesar Castro. Her father, Cesar, left the country to work abroad when she was only four (4) years old. Thus, Norma, who was strict and overprotective, stood both as the mother and father to Jeanifer and her siblings. Because Jeanifer was obliged to ask permission from Norma wherever she will go, she developed a sense of confusion and lack of self-identity, with a diminished self-worth and distorted moral concept.
After a series of examinations, Dr. Ordoña arrived at the following conclusion and recommendation:
“CONCLUSION
In view of the foregoing, the following conclusions were drawn based from the findings and assessment of this particular case:
1. The Petitioner and the Respondent are suffering from psychological disorders particularly personality disorders. The Petitioner is suffering from Passive Aggressive Personality Disorder[16] while Respondent is assessed to have manifested Borderline Personality Disorder[17].
2. The personality disorders of these parties are already deeply rooted in their personality structures because the root cause can be traced back during their developmental years. Hence, their disorders have been existent long before the solemnization of their marriage and were explicitly manifested only during the marriage.
3. The personality disorders of the parties incapacitated them to perform their essential marital obligations of living together, to observe mutual love, respect, fidelity and renders mutual help and support to each other.
4. The personality disorders of both parties are assessed to be serious, grave, deep rooted and incurable.
RECOMMENDATION
Based from the above cited conclusions derived from the case, it is respectfully recommended to the Honorable Court that the Petition for the Declaration of Nullity of Marriage between OLIVER GALANO and JEANIFER A. CASTRO be granted due to psychological incapacities of both parties.”[18]
Relying on Dr. Ordoña’s findings, the RTC rendered the Assailed Decision, decreeing:
“WHEREFORE, in the light of the foregoing, this Court hereby declares the marriage contract between Petitioner and Respondent as NULL and VOID ab initio due to the psychological incapacities of both the parties, hence, their inability to comply with the essential obligations of marriage as provided for in Article 36 of the Family Code of the Philippines.
Let copies of this Judgment be furnished the Office of the Civil Registrar of Balaoan, La Union; Local Civil Registrar of Tarlac City, Tarlac, and the National Statistics Office, Manila and to other appropriate government agencies, for their information/record, and for the execution/implementation of this Judgment.
Balaoan, La Union, April 12, 2013.”[19]
The RTC found that both parties failed to perform their respective marital obligations since they continuously refuse to dwell together and instead chose to live separately. Considering that Dr. Ordoña assessed their psychological incapacities to be grave, incurable and deeply rooted, the RTC granted Oliver’s Petition.
Disagreeing with the Assailed Decision, the Republic filed a Motion for Reconsideration, which was however denied by the RTC in its Assailed Order, viz:
“In view of the foregoing, the Motion for Reconsideration of the Office of the Solicitor General is hereby DENIED.
SO ORDERED.”[20]
The Issues
Hence, the Republic interposed this appeal ascribing the following errors to the RTC:
“THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN ITS FINDING THAT BOTH PARTIES ARE PSYCHOLOGICALLY INCAPACITATED TO COMPLY WITH THE ESSENTIAL MARITAL OBLIGATIONS.
THE TRIAL COURT FAILED TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THAT PSYCHOLOGICAL INCAPACITY MUST BE PERMANENT, GRAVE, INCURABLE AND MUST HAVE JURIDICAL ANTECEDENCE”[21]
Simply stated, the only issue for this Court’s resolution is whether the RTC correctly granted Oliver’s Petition for declaration of nullity of his marriage to Jeanifer.
This Court’s Ruling
We grant the Republic’s appeal.
“Psychological incapacity” as a ground to nullify a marriage under Article 36[22] of the Family Code, should refer to no less than a mental – not merely physical – incapacity that causes a party to be truly incognitive of the basic marital covenants that concomitantly must be assumed and discharged by the parties to the marriage. These include their mutual obligations to live together, observe love, respect and fidelity and render help and support as expressed in Article 68[23] of the same Code. Psychological incapacity must be characterized by: (a) gravity (i.e., it must be grave and serious such that the party would be incapable of carrying out the ordinary duties required in a marriage); (b) juridical antecedence (i.e., it must be rooted in the history of the party antedating the marriage, although the overt manifestations may emerge only after the marriage); and (c) incurability (i.e., it must be incurable, or even if it were otherwise, the cure would be beyond the means of the party involved).[24]
In this case, the RTC relied on the Psychological Evaluation and Case Report prepared by Dr. Ordoña stating that the parties’ personality disorders are “serious, grave, deep-rooted and incurable.”
The Republic now contends that Dr. Ordoña’s finding that Jeanifer’s Borderline Personality Disorder lacked depth and objectivity because it was based solely on a one-sided information provided by Oliver and his sister, Tessie. It likewise questions Dr. Ordoña’s conclusion as regards Oliver’s Passive Aggressive Personality Disorder on the ground that he himself denied being psychologically incapacitated. Oliver, on the other hand, defends the RTC’s finding that both he and Jeanifer are psychologically incapacitated to discharge their marital obligations and that such incapacities are serious, permanent and incurable.[25]
We agree with the Republic.
To start with, Jeanifer’s alleged behavior was not satisfactorily established by Oliver. Dr. Ordoña admitted that she derived her conclusions exclusively from the information given by Oliver and his sister, Tessie. Expectedly, their description of Jeanifer would contain a considerable degree of bias; thus, a psychological evaluation based on this one-sided description alone can hardly be considered as credible or sufficient.[26] Dr. Ordoña testified as follows:
“Q: Madam witness, as I go over your psychological evaluation report regarding this case as far as Oliver Galano and Jeanifer Castro, there are only two (2) sources of information whom you took in arriving your report? A: Yes, sir. Q: One of course is the petitioner and the sister of the petitioner? A: Yes, ma’am. Q: You did not try to contact also the person of respondent? A: Actually I have exerted effort, I sent letter, sir. Q: Do you have a copy of that letter? A: I did not bring anymore but she did not responded to my letter, sir. x x x Q: Did you not also try to consider other person aside from the eldest sister, of course we know the eldest sister she will favor the petitioner in this case? A: This is the reason that I exerted effort to contact the respondent but she never responded, sir. Q: Did you not ask from their common friends, you only focused on exerting your efforts to the person of respondent? How many letters have you sent? A: I sent three, sir. Q: And according to you despite these three (3) letters, she failed to appear? A: Yes, sir. Q: How sure are you that these letters were received by the respondent, do you have a return card? A: The return card, sir. Q: Do you have with you those receipt that will substantiate your claim that you really exerted effort? A: I did not bring, sir. x x x”[27] (Copied verbatim, Emphasis supplied)
Clearly, it cannot be gainsaid that Dr. Ordoña failed to prove that she exerted any real effort to reach Jeanifer and hear her side in order to reach a reliable conclusion as to her psychological state.
While it has been held in Marcos v. Marcos[28] that the person sought to be declared psychologically incapacitated need not be examined by the psychologist as a condition precedent to arrive at a conclusion if the incapacity can be proven by independent means, no such independent evidence was adduced in this case. Evidence from independent sources who intimately knew Jeanifer before and after the celebration of the marriage would have made a big difference and could have added weight to Dr. Ordoña’s report.[29] However, Dr. Ordoña did not personally seek out and meet with other persons who could have shed light on and established the conduct of the spouses before and during their marriage.[30]
With respect to Oliver’s alleged psychological incapacity, it did not escape this Court’s attention that the same was not even alleged in his Petition, which was grounded only on Jeanifer’s supposed psychological incapacity. It is elementary that the root cause of the psychological incapacity must be alleged in the complaint (or petition), among others.[31] Here, neither Oliver’s psychological incapacity nor its root cause was alleged in his Petition.
Curiously, Oliver himself denied that he was psychologically incapacitated during his testimony, to wit:
“Q: So you are the one who is psychologically incapacitated, is it correct to say that? A: I object to that, sir.”[32] (Emphasis supplied)
At any rate, Oliver was remiss in showing that either he or Jeanifer had an existing mental disorder at the inception of their marriage. It must be remembered that Jeanifer’s alleged immaturity and other acts such as sexual infidelity occurred during her marriage with Oliver. At this juncture, We note that sexual infidelity, even if true, does not necessarily constitute psychological incapacity, but is simply a ground for legal separation.[33]
Dr. Ordoña’s report also failed to prove the gravity or severity of the parties’ alleged condition, specifically, why and to what extent their disorders are serious, and how it incapacitated them to comply with their marital duties. Finally, Dr. Ordoña’s pronouncement that the parties’ personality disorders “are already deeply rooted in their personality structures because the root cause can be traced back during their developmental years”, rendering the same incurable, are insufficient to prove that their mental conditions could not be treated, or if it were otherwise, the cure would be beyond their means to undertake.[34]
Courts have always stressed that psychological incapacity must be more than just a “difficulty,” a “refusal,” or a “neglect” in the performance of some marital obligations. Oliver’s marriage with Jeanifer may have been unsatisfactory, but this does not equate to a null and void marriage.[35] Considering the insufficiency of evidence demonstrating the psychological incapacity of either Oliver or Jeanifer, We uphold the existence and continuation of their marriage and consequently rule against its dissolution and nullity.
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the instant appeal is GRANTED. Accordingly, the April 12, 2013 Decision and the August 23, 2013 Order of the Regional Trial Court of Balaoan, La Union, Branch 34 in Civil Case No. 908 are REVERSED and SET ASIDE. The Petition for declaration of nullity of marriage filed by Petitioner-Appellee Oliver Galano under Article 36 of the Family Code is hereby DISMISSED.
SO ORDERED.
Castillo, M., J. Chairperson, and Galapate-Laguilles, Z. T., JJ., concur.
[1] Rollo, pp. 42-49.
[2] Rollo, pp. 50-51.
[3] Original Records, pp. 81-87.
[4] Original Records, pp. 1-5.
[5] Original Records, p. 28.
[6] T.S.N., September 15, 2011, pp. 3-4; p. 8.
[7] See the Psychological Evaluation and Case Report prepared by Dr. Juanita Ordoña (Original Records, pp. 51-72).
[8] Ibid.
[9] As evidenced by the parties’ Certificate of Marriage with Registry No. 2002-1627 (Original Records, p. 6).
[10] See Sean’s Certificate of Live Birth with Registry No. 2004-9300 (Original Records, p. 7).
[11] T.S.N., September 15, 2011, p. 5.
[12] Supra, at note 7; See also the Extract Copy Bangar Police Station Blotter (Original Records, p. 8); T.S.N., September 6, 2012, pp. 3-4.
[13] T.S.N., September 15, 2011, p. 4.
[14] T.S.N., October 16, 2013, p. 3.
[15] T.S.N., October 16, 2013, pp. 6-7.
[16] According to Dr. Ordoña in her Report, “it is a personality trait marked by a pervasive pattern of negative attitudes and passive usually deny conflict in interpersonal or occupational situations.”
[17] As stated by Dr. Ordoña in her Report, “it is an essential feature in instability, including interpersonal relationships, behavior, mood and self-image. It is a psychological condition which produces extreme emotional pain, adverse effects in the lifestyles of the sufferers and usually a significant negative impact on the relationship with others.”
[18] Original Records, pp. 71-72.
[19] Rollo, pp. 48-49.
[20] Rollo, p. 51.
[21] Brief for the Appellant, p. 1. (Rollo, p. 24).
[22] Art. 36. 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.
[23] Art. 68. The husband and wife are obliged to live together, observe mutual love, respect and fidelity, and render mutual help and support.
[24] Republic v. De Gracia, G.R. No. 171557, February 12, 2014.
[25] See Oliver’s Comment to the Brief for Oppositor-Appellant (Rollo, pp. 54-57).
[26] Republic v. Galang, G.R. No. 168335, June 6, 2011.
[27] Supra, at note 15.
[28] G.R. No. 136490, October 19, 2000.
[29] Republic v. Galang, Supra, at note 26.
[30] Republic v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 159594, November 12, 2012.
[31] Republic v. Court of Appeals and Molina, G.R. No. 108763, February 13, 1997.
[32] T.S.N., September 15, 2011, p. 12.
[33] Republic v. Encelan, G.R. No. 170022, January 9, 2013.
[34] See Republic v. Galang, Supra, at note 26.
[35] Baccay v. Baccay, G.R. No. 173138, December 1, 2010.