Title
Supreme Court
Aiko Yokogawa-Tan vs. Jonnell Tan and the Republic
Case
G.R. No. 254646
Decision Date
Oct 23, 2023
Aiko sought nullity of marriage due to Jonnell's psychological incapacity, citing infidelity, neglect, and antisocial personality disorder. Supreme Court granted petition, voiding marriage under Article 36.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 254646)

Postpartum Neglect and Emotional Estrangement

Their daughter, Aimii, was born on June 6, 2012. During Aiko’s postpartum recovery at her parents’ home, Jonnell rarely visited and provided no support. After returning to their conjugal residence, he spent long hours away, returned home late or in the early morning, and ceased affectionate or intimate conduct with Aiko.

Discovery of Extramarital Relationship and Abandonment

Aiko discovered medical clinic records indicating Jonnell fathered another child with a mistress operating a vegetable stall. In January 2015, he permanently left their home to live with that woman, compelling Aiko to return to her parents’ residence.

Trial Court Proceedings and Expert Evaluation

On November 14, 2016, Aiko filed for nullity of marriage on the ground of psychological incapacity. Summons by substituted service went unanswered; the public prosecutor found no collusion. Clinical psychologist Dr. Nedy L. Tayag diagnosed Aiko with dependent personality disorder and Jonnell with antisocial personality disorder, each rooted in developmental deficiencies and characterized as grave and incurable. Dr. Tayag concluded their marriage was beyond repair.

Regional Trial Court Decision

On May 7, 2018, Branch 162 denied the petition for insufficiency of evidence, concluding the facts did not establish psychological incapacity. A motion for reconsideration was denied on July 9, 2018.

Court of Appeals Ruling

On November 27, 2020, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s decision. It held that marital discord may stem from jealousy, immaturity, or financial stress and found Dr. Tayag’s report inadequate given its reliance on Aiko’s one-sided narration.

Supreme Court Petition and Parties’ Contentions

Aiko argued that clear and convincing expert testimony established Jonnell’s incapacity, noting absence of any contrary evidence. She emphasized that marriage requires mutual compliance with essential obligations and urged protection of the marital bond’s sanctity. The Solicitor General opposed, contending evidence was insufficient; Jonnell did not file a comment.

Legal Standards on Psychological Incapacity

Under Family Code Article 36, a marriage is void if, at solemnization, a party was psychologically incapacitated to comply with essential marital obligations. The Supreme Court revised the rigid “Molina guidelines” in Tan-Andal v. Andal, requiring proof of a spouse’s enduring personality structure characterized by juridical antecedence, incurability, and gravity, established by clear and convincing evidence.

Supreme Court’s Analysis and Holding

The Court found that Jonnell’s antisocial personality disorder manifested in habitual negl

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.