Case Digest (G.R. No. 228127)
Facts:
Fernando C. Clavecilla v. Marivic V. Clavecilla and the Republic of the Philippines, G.R. No. 228127, March 06, 2023, First Division, Gesmundo, C.J., writing for the Court.Petitioner Fernando C. Clavecilla filed a Verified Petition on November 14, 2006 in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Naga City, Branch 20 seeking a declaration of nullity of his marriage under Article 36 of the Family Code, initially faulting his wife, Marivic V. Clavecilla, for psychological incapacity. The parties married in Jeddah on December 10, 1987 and again in Manila on March 12, 1988, and had one child born in 1993.
During trial petitioner presented the clinical report and testimony of psychologist Nedy Tayag, who diagnosed petitioner with Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD) and opined that this rendered him psychologically incapacitated, incurable, and unable to perform essential marital obligations; Dr. Tayag also submitted interviews of petitioner’s friends. In her Answer, respondent Marivic denied the allegations, counter-claimed that petitioner was the guilty spouse (citing infidelity and irresponsibility), and offered documentary proof she had been gainfully employed during the marriage.
On April 10, 2013, the RTC granted the petition but, contrary to petitioner's pleading, the court found that petitioner himself was psychologically incapacitated and declared the marriage null ab initio under Art. 36; the RTC directed support arrangements for the child and ordered the usual post-judgment administrative steps. Marivic’s motion for reconsideration was denied and she appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA).
The CA, in a June 30, 2016 decision, reversed and set aside the RTC, holding that petitioner failed to prove psychological incapacity on either spouse: Dr. Tayag’s report and witness interviews were insufficient to establish the requisite root cause, gravity, juridical antecedence and incurability. The CA denied petitioner’s motion for reconsideration in an October 7, 2016 resolution. Petitioner filed this petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court to challenge the CA’s affirmance of the ...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Was the petition fatally defective for lack of a personally signed verification and certification against forum shopping?
- May factual issues be raised in a petition for review under Rule 45 when the CA and the trial court have conflicting findings?
- May a spouse who is alleged to be psychologically incapacitated initiate a petition for declaration of nullity under Article 36 of the Family Code?
- Has the Court in Kalaw v. Fernandez abandoned the guidelines set forth in Republic v. Molina for establishing psychological incapacity?
- Did petitioner prove psychological incapacity (juridical antecedence, grav...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)