Art 45Grounds for Annulment

CASE

Moe v. Dinkins

Katipunan v.
Tenorio

TOPIC
DOCTRIN
E
FACTS
PROVISIO
N
DIFFEREN
CE
CASE
TOPIC

DOCTRINE

FACTS

Sarao vs. Guevara

Physical incapacity to
consummate
marriage.
The defect must be
lasting and not only
temporary for it to be
a ground for
annulment. The test
of impotence is not
the capacity to
reproduce but the
capacity to copulate
The case of oozing
genital fluid which
spoiled the
husbands appetite

Suntay v.
CojuancoSuntay

Buccat v.
Buccat

Aquino v.
Delizo

for carnal knowledge

with her even after
she was cured
though with the
consequence of
infertility.
PROVISION
DIFFERENCE

Art 45 (5)

Martinez v. Martinez
To make a person legally unfit to run his own
affairs, his acts of prodigality must show:
1. A morbid mind, and
2. A tendency to spend or waste the
estate so as to expose the family to
want or deprive the forced heirs of
their inheritance.