Republic of the Philippines

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

National Capital Judicial Region
BRANCH 5
Makati City

KOKO MARTEN
Petitioner, CIVIL CASE NO: 12345

-versus- - for -

JULLIA ABUNDA MARTEN, DECLARATION OF ABSOLUTE

Respondent NULLITY OF MARRIAGE

X- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -X

PETITION

Petitioner, thru counsel, unto this Honorable Court most respectfully

states:

1. That petitioner is of legal age, Filipino and a resident of 3F, RCBC

Building,buendia, Makati City while the respondent is also of legal age,
Filipino and a resident of #123 Quirino Street, Brgy. Magsaysay, San Pedro,
Laguna, where they may be served with summons and the other processes
of this Honorable Court.

2. That petitioner and respondent are husband and wife, respectively,

having been married on August 6, 2006 at Annunziata Parish Church at
Victoria Homes Tunasan, Muntinlupa City, as per attached Certificate of
Marriage marked as Exhibit A.

3. That out of their union, petitioner and respondent begot two (2)
children, namely: Ted Failon Marten, born on March 4, 2007 and Mike
Marten born on January 17, 2011, as per attached Certificates of Live Birth
marked as Exhibits B and C.

4. That petitioner met the respondent when he was hired as a talent

or singing/dance instructor in the entertainment industry for those who
want to go to Korea, where she is one of the applicants at Calendula, San
Pedro, Laguna.

5. That from the time the petitioner saw her, she courted her and after
one (1) month they became sweethearts.

6. That while they were sweethearts, petitioner immediately observed

that respondent was materialistic and fond of borrowing or asking money
from the petitioner on the guise that she needed it for her family when
infact she just uses the money to have a good time with his co--talents or to
spend the nights with her barkadas.

7. That on several occasions, petitioner even learned that she was

dating her former employer and boyfriend but he just ignored it.

8. That however, respondent was not lucky enough to travel to Korea

because her talent did not pass her Japanese benefactors.

9. That in the meantime, petitioner also applied for a job as an

overseas seafarer to Florida, USA and other parts of the world and so they
just had a long distance relationship.

10. That finally because of the love of the petitioner, they were
married on August 6, 2006 and out of their union they begot two (2)
children.
 11. That after the wedding, the newly first lived with his parents in
Tagaytay for about two (2) years before moving out. They then established
their conjugal home at her parents' house.

12. That petitioner continued his work as seafarer and would only
come home to them every eight (8) months and that the first years of
cohabitation was generally smooth with them also enjoying their children.

13. That likewise, petitioner had an agreement that respondent will

use the money that he will send to buy all the material needs of her family,
to build a house and to send their children to a private school.

14. That however, since their marriage in 2006 up to sometime in

2016 or after a period of ten (10) years, petitioner observed that despite all
the money that he sent to the respondent estimated at Php5,000,000.00,
still he cannot see any visible construction, improvements or material
belongings in their house and as a matter of fact, respondent was not even
able to build their own house.

15. That however, everytime petitioner goes home, her commitments

were not yet accomplished and so they would always quarrel which are
oftentimes violent and there were times that respondent almost decided to
cut off his support but because of their children he did not do so.

16. That finally sometime in 2017, when petitioner went home from
his seafaring job and there found out that nothing really improved, contrary
to what they talked about prior to what they agreed upon. He was really
dismayed by the fact that respondent failed to keep her promises, especially
to that of her being rumored to always go out at night.

17. That the separation happened on January 2018 with petitioner

deciding to call it quits between them. He was the one who left the
respondent together with the children at her family's abode. He would only
communicate with the respondent to check on their children and nothing
more, as per attached Judicial Affidavit of petitioner. Koko Martin, marked
as Exhibit D

18. That petitioner then consulted a clinical psychologist in the

person of Clinical Psychologist, Francis Doke, about his predicament with
his wife/respondent and the former conducted interviews and
administration of batteries of psychological tests upon the petitioner,
corroborative interviews with petitioner's sister, Marjorie Vargas and
cousin, lan Asuela, as per attached Judicial Affidavits Marjorie Vargas and
lan Asuela marked as Exhibits E and F.

19. That under these circumstances, respondent is psychologically

incapacitated, pursuant to Art. 36 of the Family Code, to comply with the
essential marital obligations of their marriage, which obligations are
provided for under Art. 68 of the same Code, henceforth, the Clinical
Psychologist recommends to the Court that the marriage which took place
between the petitioner and the respondent be declared as null and void.
Attached is the Judicial Affidavit of the Clinical Psychologist and
Psychological and Evaluation Report prepared and executed by Francis
Doke, and marked as Exhibits G and H.

20. That respondent is suffering from psychological incapacity to

enter marriage life which incapacity is not merely physical but rooted in her
history antedating the marriage and patently incurable which is so serious
or grave, such that she is incognito of the basic marital covenant expressed
in Art. 68 of the Family Code, which include living together, observe love,
respect and fidelity and render help and support.

21. That the petitioner is now imprisoned by his marriage to the

respondent and has no other available remedy but to file this petition,
pursuant to Art. 36 of the Family Code, which states as follows:
 "Art. 36. A marriage contracted by any party who, at the
time of the celebration, was psychologically incapacitated to
comply with the essential marital obligations of marriage,
shall likewise be avoid even if such incapacity becomes
manifest only after its solemnization.

22. That this action for the declaration of absolute nullity of the
marriage between the petitioner and the respondent, which was celebrated
after the affectivity of the Family Code, does not prescribe.

23. That this Petition, being between members of the same family,
earnest efforts towards a compromise had been exerted but their
differences could no longer be settled considering the circumstances before,
during and after their marriage and especially their present condition.

24. That petitioner is hereby attaching his documents, as compliance

of the requirements of OCA Circular No. 63-2019 dated October 2, 2018, as
follows:
a. Sworn Certification of Residency with house location sketch;
b. Sworn Statement of Counsel of record that he has personally
verified respondent's residency; and
c. A photocopy of the Employment ID of the petitioner.

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most respectfully prayed of this

Honorable Court that Judgment be rendered as follows:

1.Declaring the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent

as null and void, because of the psychological incapacity of the respondent,
pursuant to Art. 36 of the Civil Code.

2.Ordering the Office of the City Civil Registrar of Muntinlupa, City,

Metro Manila to cancel the Certificate of Marriage between the petitioner
and respondent dated August 6, 2006 under Registry No. 123456-123.
 3. Declaring that the petitioner's status is now considered single and
that he has no legal impediment to marry.

4.And to grant to the petition such other relief and remedy as justice
and equity may permit.

Makati City, September 11, 2020.

ESMER & VILLANUEVA

LAW OFFICE
BY:
ATTY JUAN L. ESMER
Counsel for the Petitioner
Roll No. 12345, IBP 6789 (Lifetime)
PTR No. 12345678 Makati City, Jan. 2, 2020
MCLE Compliance VI-0012345 (01/31/19)
JP Rizal St., Makati City
Cell No. 09123456678/097712356789
EMAIL atty.JuanEsmer@yahoo.com