Labaya, Paolo Bernabe E.
Villanueva v. CA that such claim for nullity of marriage was meant to bolster his case
October 27, 2006 | Ynares-Santiago, J. | Force, Intimidation, Undue
Influence
PETITIONERS: Orlando Villanueva
RESPONDENTS: Hon Court of Appeals and Lilia Canalita-
Villanueva
DOCTRINE/s: The court merely examined the circumstances of the
case and ruled upon it.
For force, intimidation, and undue influence as ground for nullification
of marriage, the courts look at the circumstances in each case
FACTS:
1. Orlando and Lilia got married 1988. About 4 years thereafter,
Orlando filed with the Trial Court a petition for annulment of his
marriage alleging that threats of violence and duress forced him into
marrying Lilia, who was already pregnant; that he did not get her
pregnant prior to the marriage; that he never cohabited with her after
the marriage; and that he later learned that Lilia’s child died during
delivery.
2. Lilia denied all the allegations of Orlando. According to her, Orlando
freely and voluntarily married her; that Orlando stayed in Palawan
with her for a month after their marriage; that Orlando wrote her
letters after he returned to Manila; that Orlando knew of the progress
of Lilia’s pregnancy which ended when her son was born
prematurely.
3. The trial court ruled in favor of Lilia which the CA affirmed
4. Hence, the present petition.
ISSUE/s:
1. Whether Orlando and Lilia’s marriage may be annulled on the
ground of vitiated consent - NO
RULING: WHEREFORE, the petition is PARTLY GRANTED (some
damages awards were deleted but the marriage subsists)
RATIO:
1. The SC agreed with the ruling of the CA in finding that Orlando took
4 years to take serious steps in nullifying the marriage. The observed
in a criminal action against him for bigamy.
2. More importantly, Orlando based his claim on the ground of vitiated
consent alleging that:
a. Harassing phone calls made to him
b. Unwanted visits by men at his school
c. Threatening presence of one Ka Celso, an alleged member of
the NPA whom Orlando claimed to have been hired by Lilia
and who accompanied him in going to Palawan to marry
Lilia
3. The SC was not convinced with these allegations. At the time the
supposed danger were happening, he was working as a security
guard. By his employment, he could have been knowledgeable on
how to keep his person out of harm’s way. Furthermore, he could
have sought assistance from the police.
4. Orlando also claimed that there was fraud in their marriage, as he
was made to believe that Lilia was pregnant with his child.
According to him, he could not have impregnated Lilia since he
could not have an erection at that time. According to the court, this
was an outright lie. Orlando’s counsel even admitted that there was a
time when Orlando and Lilia went to a hotel to consummate sexual
relations
5. Moreover, Orlando relied on the weakness of Lilia’s claim as to the
exact date of the death of her son. The SC held however that such
weakness was inconsequential as there was really no controversy
regarding the date of death of the infant. Relying on this date,
Orlando claimed that there could have been no premature delivery
since at the time mentioned by Lilia, the 35-week period of
pregnancy is complete. Whether the infant was born prematurely or
not, the point was that Lilia delivered a fetus. In light of the
admission of of sexual intercourse and failure to attribute pregnancy
to another man, Orlando cannot complain that Lilia deceived him
into marrying her