Ngo Te vs Yu-Te

Facts:

Edward Kenneth Ngo Te and Rowena Ong Gutierrez Yu- Te met in a

gathering organized by the Filipino-Chinese association in their college.

They eloped and went to Cebu.

They went back to Manila and stayed at Rowena’s uncle’s house.

They got married in court because of Rowena’s uncle.

Edward was treated like a prisoner during their at her uncle’s house.

Edward was able to escape and live with his family.

He asked for his inheritance from his father but was refused.

His family hid him from Rowena and her family.

After almost 4 years, Edward filed for annulment on the basis of the
Rowena’s psychological incapacity.

During the proceedings in the RTC, a clinical psychologist examined

petitioner found both parties psychologically incapacitated.

The CA reversed and set aside the decision of the RTC saying that the
clinical psychologist did not personally examine the respondent

Further the psychological incapacity was not [sic] attended by gravity,

juridical antecedence and incurability.

Issue:

Whether or not the marriage between the parties is null and void based on
Article 36.

Held:

Yes. The psychologist who provided expert testimony found both parties
psychologically incapacitated. Petitoner’s Behavioral pattern falls under the
classification of dependent personality disorder, and respondent’s that of
the narcissist and anti social personality disorder. By the very nature of
Article 36 courts, despite having the primary task and burden of decision-
making, must not discount but, instead, must consider as decisive
evidence the expert opinion on the psychological and mental
temperaments of the parties.