Republic V Encelan 688 SCRA 215

Facts: Cesar Married Lolita, and they had two children. To support the family, Cesar went abroad and
worked as an OFW in Saudi Arabia. After two years of working abroad, Cesar learned that Lolita is having
an illicit affair with Alvin Perez, and thereafter, left the conjugal dwelling together with the two children.
But even with such circumstances, Cesar never failed to send financial support for the family. On June
1995, Cesar filed a petition against Lolita for the declaration of the nullity of his marriage based on Lolita’s
psychological incapacity. Cesar, during a hearing even presented a psychological evaluation report on
Lolita with the finding that “Lolita was not suffering from any form of psychiatric illness, but had been
unable to provide the expectations expected of her for a good and lasting marital relationship.... and her
transferring from one job to another depicts some interpersonal problem with co-workers as well as her
impatience in attaining her ambitions .... and her refusal to go with her husband abroad signifies her
reluctance to work out a good marital and family relationship...” Cesar found ally in RTC as it gave him a
favourable decision which declared his marriage to Lolita null and void. The court of Appeals also affirmed
the decision of RTC, and thereafter, the case was elevated to the Supreme Court, thus, this case.

Issue: Whether or not psychological incapacity is indeed present in the person of Lolita as to nullify a
valid marriage.

Ruling: No. Marriage is an inviolable social institution protected by the State and any doubt should be
resolved in favour of its existence and continuation against its dissolution and nullity. In this case, sexual
infidelity and abandonment of the conjugal dwelling do not necessarily constitute psychological
incapacity; these are simply grounds for legal separation. To constitute psychological incapacity, it must
be shown that the unfaithfulness and abandonment are manifestations of a disordered personality that
actually prevented the erring spouse from discharging the essential marital obligations, which the court
found not present in the person of Lolita.