Question #2 (Bar 2022)

Razna and Junsi got married in 2015 and were blessed with two children, Zarah and
Mica. In 2020, because of the COVID-19 pandemic, the entire family had to spend 24
hours together every day in their small house. Razna observed that although Junsi
continued to work from home to support the family, he began to exhibit paranoia, and
constantly kept making sure that they always washed their hands and rubbed them
with alcohol ten times before eating. Junsi also always wore a face mask, face shield and
hazmat in the house, except when he was alone in the room. Junsi began sleeping
separately from Razna and their children. He believed that other people who wanted to
meet him in person were actively trying to harm him by exposing him to the virus.

In early 2022, Razna filed a petition for declaration of nullity of her marriage with Junsi
on the ground of psychological incapacity under Article 36 of the Family Code, citing
his atypical behavior. She presented the testimony of a doctor, who proved that Junsi
was suffering from psychotic paranoia due to intense stress, which accounted for his
belief in things that are not real.

Should Razna’s petition be granted? Explain briefly. 

ANSWER: (If forms will be graded, it would be 5/5, as to substance it would be 2.5/5)

No, Razna’s petition should not be granted notwithstanding the fact that Junsi is
suffering from psychotic paranoia.
In the long line of cases decided by the Supreme Court, a person is considered
psychologically incapacitated when there is a failure to perform the essential marital
obligation as a husband and wife. (Your legal basis is “bitin,”although you were able to
demonstrate the essence of psychological incapacity in general. In my case, I did not
state Article 36 but I was able to enumerate the requisites of the provision with
emphasis on this general concept, i.e. same with your legal basis as stated above)
Here, the facts do not show any taint personality that Junsi can be considered as
psychologically incapacitated. His atypical behavior such as always wearing a mask
and face shield is just a protective measure in order to prevent from getting a virus
brought by COVID-19. These acts do not constitute clear acts of dysfunctionality that
undermine the marriage. (Your argument is not responsive to your legal basis, i.e.
failure to perform the essential marital obligation. Thus, “Argument” still your weakness.
Focus on this weakness. More practice. Read cases. Be patient)
Thus, Razna’s petition should not be granted.

Suggested answer:
No, Razna’s petition should not be granted.
According to jurisprudence, the requisites of psychological incapacity are: (1) that the
afflicted spouse be incapacitated to comply with the essential marital obligations, and
(2) that such incapacity be present at the time of the celebration of the marriage.
Further, a clinically or medically diagnosed illness or disorder as in this case i.e.
psychotic paranoia amounts to psychological incapacity in legal contemplation only
when such an illness or disorder causes a party to be truly incognizant of his or her
essential marital obligations.
Here, Junsi, although suffering from psychotic paranoia, still capable of supporting his
family through work from home, more so during Covid-19 pandemic. Applying the
foregoing requirements, the testimony of a doctor, who proved that Junsi was suffering
from psychotic paranoia due to intense stress would not suffice to grant Razna’s
petition.
Hence, Razna’s petition should be denied. (to avoid redundancy).

Alternative legal basis:

Under the Family Code, 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 void even if such incapacity becomes manifest
only after its solemnization. Further, a clinically or medically diagnosed illness or
disorder as in this case i.e. psychotic paranoia amounts to psychological incapacity in
legal contemplation only when such an illness or disorder causes a party to be truly
incognizant of his or her essential marital obligations.