Title
Supreme Court
Ngo Te vs. Yu-Te
Case
G.R. No. 161793
Decision Date
Feb 13, 2009
Couple eloped, married without license; psychological incapacity found, marriage annulled under Article 36 of Family Code.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 161422)

Procedural History

Petitioner filed for annulment in the RTC on grounds of respondent’s psychological incapacity. Respondent defaulted; OCP investigated collusion and recommended trial on the merits. A clinical psychologist evaluated both spouses. RTC declared the marriage void for mutual psychological incapacity. OSG appealed. CA reversed, finding lack of direct examination of respondent and failure to meet Molina requirements. SC entertained petitioner’s petition under Rule 45.

Issue on Review

Whether, under Article 36 of the Family Code and the 1987 Constitution, the parties’ marriage is void ab initio by reason of psychological incapacity.

Supreme Court Analysis and Applicable Standards

  1. Article 36 contemplates a party’s inability, from psychological causes, to assume essential marital obligations (Articles 68–71: cohabitation, love, respect, fidelity, help, and support).
  2. The 1987 Constitution declares marriage inviolable and mandates state protection for the family, imposing a high threshold for dissolution.
  3. Molina guidelines require the root psychological cause (a) be alleged, (b) clinically identified, (c) proven by experts, and (d) clearly explained; show inception at celebration; manifest permanent or relative incurability; be grave enough to disable marital obligations; and specify the breached obligations.
  4. Expert opinions, even if based on collateral data, are decisive when they demonstrate a causal link between a diagnosed disorder and incapacity to discharge marital duties.

Psychological Capacity Assessment

The clinical psychologist administered multiple projective and objective tests (MMPI, Rorschach, Bender, etc.) and life-history interviews. Findings:
– Petitioner exhibits dependent personality disorder (inability to make independent decisions, fear of abandonment, submissiveness).
– Respondent exhibits narcissistic and antisocial personality disorders (exploitative behavior, disregard for rights of others, impulsivity, intimidation).

Supreme Court Ruling

Both parties were found psychologically incapacitated to assume essential marital obliga

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.