Title
Antonio S. Quiogue, Jr. vs. Maria Bel B. Quiogue and the Republic
Case
G.R. No. 203992
Decision Date
Aug 22, 2022
Marriage nullified due to Antonio's chronic infidelity rooted in narcissistic personality disorder, deemed psychological incapacity under Article 36.
Font Size:

Case Summary (G.R. No. 203992)

Background of the Case

  • Antonio S. Quiogue, Jr. and Maria Bel B. Quiogue were married on October 16, 1980, and have four children.
  • They have been separated since 1998 after a series of conflicts, primarily stemming from allegations of infidelity and psychological issues.
  • Antonio filed a Petition for Declaration of Nullity of Marriage, claiming both parties were psychologically incapacitated to fulfill marital obligations.

Allegations and Responses

  • Antonio alleged that Maribel was ill-tempered and confrontational, failing to provide emotional support.
  • Maribel countered that Antonio's infidelity and gambling led to their separation, asserting that he was verbally abusive and disrespectful.
  • A public prosecutor's report indicated no collusion between the parties, and attempts at reconciliation were unsuccessful.

Testimonies and Evidence

  • Antonio testified about Maribel's lack of love and respect, detailing her confrontational behavior and public humiliation.
  • Witnesses, including an office staff member and a psychiatrist, corroborated Antonio's claims regarding Maribel's behavior and the psychological evaluation.
  • The psychiatrist, Dr. Valentina Del Fonso Garcia, recommended nullification of the marriage based on psychological incapacity.

Court Decisions

  • The Regional Trial Court (RTC) initially ruled in favor of Antonio, declaring the marriage void due to both parties' psychological incapacity.
  • The Court of Appeals (CA) reversed this decision, stating that infidelity and irreconcilable differences did not meet the criteria for psychological incapacity under Article 36 of the Family Code.

Legal Standards for Psychological Incapacity

  • Article 36 of the Family Code requires proof of psychological incapacity that is grave, antecedent, and incurable.
  • The Court clarified that psychological incapacity must be established through expert testimony and cannot be solely based on marital problems.

Court's Ruling on Psychological Incapacity

  • The Supreme Court found that Antonio's chronic infidelity constituted psychological incapacity, as it was rooted in a personality disorder that existed before the marriage.
  • The Court emphasized that infidelity could indicate psychological incapacity if it severely undermines the essential obligations of marriage.

Analysis of Antonio's Behavior

  • Antonio's behavior was linked to his dysfunctional upbringing, characterized by a lack of emotional support and exposure to his father's infidelity.
  • His inability to maintain fidelity and his perception of marital roles contributed to the breakdown of the marriage.

Maribel's Actions and Psychological Capacity

  • Maribel's retaliat...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.