1|Page

Republic of the Philippines

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
National Capital Judicial Region
City of Manila
Branch ____

Mylene Lagazon Martin,

Petitioner,

-versus- Civil Case No. ___

For: Declaration of Nullity
of marriage underArt.36
of Family Code.
Rodolfo Fernandez Gantang,
Respondent,

x-----------------------------------------------------x

PETITION

COMES NOW petitioner, through the undersigned counsel and to this Honorable
Court respectfully alleges:

1. That the petitioner Mylene Lagazon Martin is of legal age, married, Filipinno and
resident of 12 Masangkay St. Sta Cruz, Manila;

2. That the respondent Rodolfo Fernandez Gantang is likewise of legal age,

married, Filipino and presently resisidng at 12 Masangkay St. Sta Cruz, Manila;

3. That petitioner and respondent celebrated their marriage on December 27, 2000
before the Parish Church of San Agustin, Manila, certified true copy of their
Marriage Certificate is attached and made integral part of hereof as Annex “A”;

4. That petitioner and respondent have two children. They have no written
agreement executed before the marriage to govern property relations or have
any community property acquired during their marriage. They have no debts;
2|Page

5. That petitioner met the respondent sometime in 1998 in the City of Manila. Their
romance culminated in a marriage before the priest of San Agustin Church;

6. That in a short span of time they had been together, this is the time which the
petitioner describes as a period where the respondent’s instability, psychological
or otherwise, showed up;

7. That other instances wherein such instability could be reasonably inferred are as
follows:

a. After their marriage, the respondent gave up his job at JEG-TCB

Constructions Inc. as Project Manager without justifiable reason;

b. That the petitioner tried to explain to him that it was his responsibility to
support her but respondent would ignore and shout at her, making the
petitioner the breadwinner of the family;

c. That the respondent is a compulsive gambler;

d. He is a womanizer;

e. He resorts to drug and alcohol abuse during their cohabitation;

f. That the respondent does not want to have a child with petitioner because
according to him it will just cause burden for him;

g. That the parties would fight even for the smallest things through not due to
the fault of the petitioner, and frequently, the respondent would always
apologize to the petitioner, but later on, he will repeat his quarrelsome and
troublesome ways;

h. He prefers to hang out with friends and with her flings instead of being with
petitioner;

8. That during their honeymoon period, things was running smoothly between them,
but not on the succeeding week, when the respondent’s instability started to
manifest clearly to the petitioner. Their relationship lasted sometime in 2003;

9. That some other manifestations of the psychological and emotional disturbances

on the part of the respondent can be cited as follows;
3|Page

a. That there were any times when the respondent never even kissed the
petitioner. Respondent would not even look at her whenever they spoke with
each other. She was always the one, who holds or hugs him so that they may
become closer to him; he simply had to always turn his back to her. This is
causing so much unbearable emotional and psychological pain on the part of
the petitioner;

b. That petitioner told the respondent that they should discuss what went wrong
between them and hopefully they could work it out again. The petitioner
verbalized all of the things she had noticed and felt, knowing that everything
works out when there is an open communication. She told him about the lack
of passion, respect and romance in their relationship. The respondent just
ignored her pleas;

c. That respondent began hurting the petitioner physically by throwing things on

her and showing her around.

d. That respondent did not stop gambling and using alcohol and drugs;

e. The respondent abandoned petitioner and left to be with another woman.

Since May 2003, the respondent did not return nor tried to communicate with
the petitioner. The petitioner on several instances, tried to reach the
respondent through his relatives and friends but to no avail;

10. That the petitioner already gave up on the respondent after trying to give all her
efforts just to save her marriage to a man who, as shown in the foregoing is not
cognitive to and psychologically incapable of performing, his basic marital
covenants to herein petitioner;

11. That further, respondent’s psychological incapacity from all indications appears
to have been manifesting at the time of the celebration of marriage. Although
said manifestations were not then perceived, the root cause shall be proved to
such an extent that respondent could not have known the obligation hew was to
fulfill or knowing them could not have validly performed them. It is of such
incapacity that respondent was unable to assume his marital obligations;

12. That the respondent’s incapacity to fulfill his essential marital obligations appear
to be grave, incurable and deeply ingrained, thus; warranting the issuance of the
Decree of Nullity of petitioner’s marriage with the respondent;
4|Page

13. That finally, the petitioner has therefore no other recourse but to seek judicial
relief. The prospects or possibility of respondent to reform and assume his
essential marital obligations is a remote possibility, if not a hopeless expectancy.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, after trial, it is respectfully prayed that this Honorable Court

rendered judgment:

1. Declaring the marriage entered into by the parties as NULL and VOID on the
ground of psychological incapacity of the respondent;

2. Ordering the Local Civil Registrar and the National Statistics Office to cancel
in their respective Books of Marriage, the marriage between the petitioner and
the respondent.

Petitioner prays for such other relief she may be entitles to in the premises.

City of Manila, January 23, 2016.

RUIZ AND SANCHEZ ASSOCIATE LAW OFFICES

By:

_______________________________
Atty. Edward Sanchez
Commission Serial No. 14786
Until December 31, 2016
Roll of Attorney 78956
IBP No. 547698/January 1, 2005/ Manila
P.T.R No. 546468/ January 1, 2016
Roll No. 2256
5|Page

VERIFICATION-CERTIFICATION
ON NON-FORUM SHOPPING

I, Mylene Lagazon Martin, of legal age, Filipino citizen, resident of 12 Masangkay

St. Sta Cruz, Manila, after having been sworn to in accordance with law, depose
and say:

1. That I am the petitioner in the above- entitled case;

2. That I caused the preparation and filing of the foregoing Petition;

3. That all the allegation therein are true and correct of my own knowledge and
based on authentic records

4. That I hereby certify under oath that I have not heretofore commenced any
other action or proceeding involving the same issues in the Supreme Court,
Court of Appeals, or any other tribunal or agency, and that to the best of my
knowledge, there is no pending before this Honorable Court, Court of
Appeals, Supreme Court or any other tribunal or agency involving the same
parties and the same issues, and that if I learn hereafter that there are other
proceedings pending before this Honorable Court, or any other tribunal or
agency, I hereby undertake to report that fact within five (5) days therefrom to
this Honorable Court.

Manila Philippines, January 23, 2016.

__________________
Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 24th of January 2016 at Manila. Affiant
exhibited to me her Passport No. 123456 issued at Manila.

Doc No.____;
Page No ___;
Book No____:
Series of 2016: NOTARY PUBLIC