LEOUEL SANTOS, petitioner vs COURT OF APPEALS, defendant

GR No. 112019. January 4, 1995

FACTS:

Leouel, a First Lieutenant in the Philippine Army, met Julia in Iloilo. The two got married
in 1986 before a municipal trial court followed shortly thereafter, by a church
wedding. The couple lived with Julia’s parents at the J. Bedia Compound. Julia gave birth
to a baby boy in 1987 and was named as Leouel Santos Jr. Occasionally, the couple will
quarrel over a number of things aside from the interference of Julia’s parents into their
family affairs.

Julia left in 1988 to work in US as a nurse despite Leouel’s pleas to dissuade her. Seven
months after her departure, she called her husband and promised to return home upon
the expiration of her contract in July 1989 but she never did. Leouel got a chance to visit
US where he underwent a training program under AFP, he desperately tried to locate or
somehow get in touch with Julia but all his efforts were of no avail.

Leouel filed a complaint to have their marriage declared void under Article 36 of the
Family Code. He argued that failure of Julia to return home or to communicate with him
for more than 5 years are circumstances that show her being psychologically incapacitated
to enter into married life.

Issue:

Whether or not the grounds of psychological incapacity in this case should be appreciated.

Ruling:

The Supreme Court denied the petition. Psychological incapacity should refer to no less
than a mental (not 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 which, as so expressed by Article 68 of the Family Code, include
their mutual obligations to live together, observe love, respect and fidelity and
render help and support. The psychological condition must exist at the time the marriage
is celebrated and must be incurable. Mere abandonment cannot therefore qualify as
psychological incapacity on the part of Julia.