Choa v Choa

Nov. 26, 2002 | Panganiban

Petitioner: Leni O. Choa
Respondents: Alfonso C. Choa
NATURE
Petition for review on certiorari of the decision rendered by
the CA.
DOCTRINE
Art. 36. A arriage contracted by any !arty who, at the
tie of the celebration, was !sychologically inca!acitated to
co!ly with the essential arital obligations of arriage,
shall li"ewise be void even if s#ch inca!acity becoes
anifest only after its soleni$ation. (As amended by E.O.
227.)
FACTS
Petitioner and res!ondent were arried on %arch &', &()&, and
had 2 children.
&. *es!ondent +led for the ann#lent of their arriage with
the *,C of Negros Occidental, -ranch '&, based on the
alleged !sychological inca!acity of the !etitioner.
a. According to hi, +ling a series of charges against
hi /and wanting to !#t hi behind bars and to
banish hi fro the co#ntry0 is 1very abnoral2 for a
wife.
b. 3e also claied that she was 1iat#re, carefree,
and 4lac"ed5 the intention of !rocreative se6#ality,2
and also that she does not do her chores and does
not ta"e care of their child.
2. Petitioner +led a de#rrer to evidence
&
.
ACTIONS OF THE COURT
Supreme Court
ISSUE: WON Alfonso presented sufcient evidence to support the
ndin! of psycholo!ical incapacity in "eni ( NO )
&
Challenges the s#7ciency of a !arty8s evidence to s#stain a
verdict
RATIO
&. 3is testiony basically co!lains abo#t a0 lac" of attention
to their children9 b0 iat#rity9 and c0 a lac" of an intention
of !rocreative se6#ality. ,hese things do not constit#te
!sychological inca!acity. 1:ar fro it.2 only that they
co#ld not get along well together
a. Lac" of the intention of !rocreative se6#ality belied
by the !resence of their 2 children.
2. #epublic v. $olina% ild characterological !ec#liarities,
ood changes and occasional eotional o#tb#rsts cannot
be acce!ted as root ca#ses of !sychological inca!acity.
;. 3is e6!ert witness /<r. Antonio %. =a#$on0 failed to identify
and !rove the root ca#se of the alleged !sychological
inca!acity.
a. 3e testi+ed that both of the Choas are of noral
!ersonality, and were >#st inco!atible ? the
!roble f#ndaentally being a con@ict in
!ersonalities.
RUIN!: Petition =*AN,A<.