REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

National Capital Judicial Region

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
MAKATI CITY

ANALEE DIMALANTA NOGOY

Plaintiff, Civil Case No. xxxx
-Versus-

EDISON BUCU HIPOLITO “Annulment of Marriage Under

Defendant. Article 45(2) of the Family Code.”
x-------------------------------------------------x

PETITION
PETITIONER, Analee D. Nogoy, by counsel, respectfully states:

1. Petitioner is of legal age, born on September 18, 1974, and a resident of Concepcion, Tarlac
where summons may be served for the instant case;

2. The respondent is of legal age and a resident of Makati City (last known residence) where
he may be served with summons for the instant case;

3. Petitioner and respondent first met sometime in 1995;

4. The two decided to get married on January 27, 1997 at Conception, Tarlac;

5. They have four children, all at Legal age;

(Legal actions and consents for the minor children shall be discussed on a different
petition.)

FACTS

6. The petitioner have several reasons to file a dissolution of their marriage, including Extra
Marital Affairs her husband does. It all started when he worked as a Jeepney Driver in Tarlac.

7. Every time the Petitioner wants to ask him about their problems it would only result in
Assaults, yes the respondent beats up the petitioner every time he gets angry of her for asking
things;

8. They were living on the same roof with the respondent’s parents, and they know how
hard her life was when they were together, but it seems they don’t care about it;

9. Aside from that, he is irresponsible, he also has no capability of financial support, given
by the fact that he only give his wife and 4 children 500 pesos budget for a week. He was
spending all his money to his mistress/es.

10. After 2 years he decided to work overseas, and when he finally landed a Job in Middle
East, his unfaithfulness worsened.

11. After his contract overseas, he went home to Philippines, he was able to bring a little amount
which he eventually consumed;
12. The Respondent decided to Travel to Manila and work there as Jeepney Driver, but
nothing changed. Sometimes he won’t send them any amount, that’s why the petitioner and their
children experienced being starved and in debt;

13. One day he arrived home, with nothing, they started to have a heated argument in the
middle of the night, and her husband, pick up his things and left them stating that he will never
go back until she is there;

14. His parents and sisters go angry for it is dangerous for him to go out in the middle of the
night, so they blamed the petitioner and argued with her as if she was the one in the wrong;

15. The day followed and the petitioner left with her Children and went home to her Family,
the next day to her shocked, they sent back their things and that’s when she decided to never
went back to his husband’s again;

16. She moved on with her life, found a job and raised her 4 children by herself;

17. Her husband did not make any efforts to find them or to communicate with them,
technically, he abandoned them and that is such a strong reason for her to file a dissolution of
their marriage thru ANNULMENT.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is respectfully prayed that the marriage of the

parties be annulled in accordance with Article 45(2) of the Family Code.

Petitioner also prays for other reliefs as may be deemed just and equitable in the
premises.

MARVI R. ABO
Counsel for Petitioner
412 Gemini Street, Annex 45
Guadalupe, Makati City
PTR No. 6346588, 01-25-20, Makati
IBP No. 737133, 01-10-20, Makati
Attorney’s Roll No. 64974
MCLE No.: II-00130
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES)
Municipality of Concepcion )
Province of Tarlac )

VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION

AGAINST NON-FORUM SHOPPING

I, Analee D. Nogoy, of legal age, residing at Concepcion, Tarlac, after having sworn to by law
hereby depose and state under oath that:

1. I have ceased the preparation of the foregoing Petition;

2. The allegations contained herein are true and correct of my own knowledge;

3. I have not commenced any other action or proceedings involving the same issues in the
Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or any other tribunal or agency; to the best of my
knowledge, no such action or proceeding is pending in the Supreme Court, the Court of
Appeals, or different Divisions thereof, or any other tribunal or agency; and that, if I should
learn that a similar action or proceeding has been filed or is pending before the Supreme
Court, the Court of Appeals or different Division thereof, or any other tribunal or agency. I
undertake to promptly inform this Honorable Court within five (5) days therefrom.

In witness whereof, I have hereunto signed this Verification this 22nd day of December 2020, in
Concepcion, Tarlac, Philippines.

ANALEE DIMALANTA NOGOY-HIPOLITO

Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me this 22nd day of December 2020 at Concepcion,
Tarlac affiant exhibiting to me her Community Tax Certificate No. 00227879 issued on 22nd
December 2020 in Concepcion, Tarlac.

KAREN R. CAYETANO
Lawyer
Concepcion, Tarlac
PTR No. 05212 IBP No. 01962
Attorney’s Roll No. 63725
MCLE No.: II-00145

Doc. No.
Page No.
Book No.
Series of
 EXPLANATION FOR SERVICE BY REGISTERED MAIL

[Pursuant to Section 11, Rule 13 of the 1997 Revised Rules of Court]

PETITIONER, by counsel, submits that the foregoing Petition is being served to the
adverse party by registered mail due to lack of time and owing to heavy workload of the liaison
officer of the undersigned lawyer.

KAREN R. CAYETANO
Lawyer
Concepcion, Tarlac
PTR No. 05212 IBP No. 01962
Attorney’s Roll No. 63725
MCLE No.: II-00145

c/o

MARVI R. ABO
Counsel for Petitioner
412 Gemini Street, Annex 45
Guadalupe, Makati City
PTR No. 6346588, 01-25-20, Makati
IBP No. 737133, 01-10-20, Makati
Attorney’s Roll No. 64974
MCLE No.: II-00130

Copy Furnished:

ACOSTA LAW FIRM

Counsel for Respondent
Makati City, Metro Manila
 REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
National Capital Judicial Region
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
MAKATI CITY

ANALEE DIMALANTA NOGOY

Plaintiff, Civil Case No. 20-M102
-Versus-

EDISON BUCU HIPOLITO “Annulment of Marriage Under

Defendant. Article 45(2) of the Family Code.”
x-------------------------------------------------x

DECISION

THIS IS A VERIFIED PETITION FOR Annulment of Marriage filed by petitioner Analee D.

Nogoy, against respondent Edision B. Hipolito, due to the psychological problem of the latter.

Respondent was served with summons but despite the lapse of time within which to file
his answer, he failed to do so, upon motion, the Court ordered the Office of the City Prosecutor
to conduct an investigation in this case to determine the presence of collusion between the parties
in the filing on this case. Prosecutor Manny S. Garcia filed a report dated January 09, 2021
finding no collusion existing between the parties in the filing of this case.

During the Pre-trial on March 25, 2021, petitioner appeared together with her counsel,
Respondent failed to appear despite notice. The State was represented by the Office, was
deputized by the Office of the Solicitor General to appear for and its behalf. Petitioner presented
and marked her evidence (Exhibits A to G). Thereafter, the parties entered into the following
stipulations:

1. The spouses were married on January 27, 1997 at Concepcion, Tarlac;

2. They did not acquire any property conjugal in nature;

3. The spouses are now living separately;

4. They have 4 children; and

5. The respondent did not file any answer.

Article 68 of the Family Code also provides the essential obligations and responsibilities
of a Spouse, thus:

The husband and wife are obliged to live together and to observe mutual love, respect and
fidelity and render mutual help and support.
 DECISION –page 2- CCN: 20-M102

Ms. Abinal also administered psychological test on petitioner that revealed that petitioner
is “ a person who has a strong sense of duty and the ability to see what needs to be done in any
situations sensually allows her to overcome her worries, be in marital, she is quiet, supportive
and a caring person. When she finds that one needs emotional support, she puts forth effort to
meet the needs of people she loves. She is dependable and would follow through things she
knows are important. She is named as to faithful, loyal, traditional and family oriented. She also,
is the type who would try hard in making her family running smoothly, laws and regulations for
her are sued and have to be followed, this is because she has a strongly dealt internal work of
duty, In general Ms. Nogoy’s personality profile is overwhelming with that of a normal
functioning person “ (Est. 1-8). However Ms. Abinal found a different signs on the respondent.
Consider her psychology and Diagnostic Formulations on the marital relationship and
considering personalities of the respondent.

“Ms. Nogoy’s personality profile and marital history does not manifest any signs of
psychological abnormality, she has the capacity to face realities of life and deal with difficulties
coordinately and constructively. She is bound to be free of tension and anxieties that could
happen to be decision making ability to be productive. She has the capacity to take on her
responsibilities as a married woman.

Mr. Hipolito, on the other hand, manifests the following clinical symptoms;
*Has an inflated sense of self importance
*Has a sense of entitlement i.e. unreasonable expectations of very positive,
treatment or automatic compliance with his expectations
*Takes advantage of others to achieve his own ends.
*Lacks empathy, he is unwilling to identify with the feelings and needs of others
*Shows arrogant or domineering behaviors or attitudes.

Mr. Hipolito manifested symptoms are already present even before the time he
contracted marriage. These symptoms are consistent with the clinical picture of
Narcissistic Personality Disorder. People with such disorder often have a grandiose view
of themselves, a need for admiration and lack of empathy that begins by early adulthood
and is present in various situations. (Par.III of Exh. 1-5)

This finally led Ms. Abinal to submit her evaluation and recommendation, stating:

“Overall analysis of the data gathered show that Ms. Nogoy is functional to
perform her marital obligations. Mr. Hipolito, on the other hand is found to have a narcissistic
personality disorder which renders him psychologically incapacitated to perform his obligations
in the marital context. Personality disorder are fixed pattern of behavior which affect many
personal and social institutions. They cause distress or impair personal functioning. Symptoms
are grave, serious and last a long time.”

Ms. Emely Abinal , a psychologist whose qualification as an expert witness were

admitted by the parties, conducted the necessary clinical interviews and psychological test on the
petitioner the results of which were reduced into writing (Exh. I). from the results of the
psychological test and the clinical interviews, Ms. Abinal found the respondent to be
psychologically incapacitated to discharge his marital roles and responsibilities.
 DECISION-page 3- CCN: 20-M102

Respondent was given a chance to present her case but despite the notices sent to him he
failed to appear in Court. He also did not file any answer. Upon motion, respondent was deemed
to have waived the presentation of his evidence. City pros. Oliver Garcia manifested that the
State has no controvert evidence to present. Upon motion, the case was deemed submitted for
decision Copy of the Order was furnished the Office of the Solicitor General which has not filed
any Certification as to its stand in this case in view of Resolution No. A.M. 02-11-11-SC issued
by the Supreme Court.

Petitioner seeks the declaration of the annulment of her marriage with the respondent due
to latter’s psychological incapability under Article 45 of the Family Code of the Philippines
which states:

“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”.

The Family Code did not enumerate specific cases of the psychological incapacity as it
might limit the application of this provision. Hence, it left to the Court trying the case to
determine the same on a case to case basis. However, in the case of R.P. vs. C.A. et.al, 268
SCRA 198, the Supreme Court laid down the guidelines for the interpretation and application of
Art.45 of the Family Code and these are.

Annulment refers to a marriage that is valid until annulled by a court, while declaration of
nullity refers to a marriage which is void from the very beginning.

A marriage may be annulled for any of the following causes, existing at the time of the
marriage [see also Prescriptive period or when the action must be filed]:

1. The party in whose behalf it is sought to have the marriage annulled was over 18 years of
age but below 21, and the marriage was solemnized without the consent of the parents,
guardian or person having substitute parental authority over the party, in that order,
unless after attaining the age of twenty-one, such party freely cohabited with the other
and both lived together as husband and wife [Article 45(1), Family Code].
2. Either party was of unsound mind, unless such party after coming to reason, freely
cohabited with the other as husband and wife [Article 45(2), Family Code].
3. The consent of either party was obtained by fraud, unless such party afterwards, with full
knowledge of the facts constituting the fraud, freely cohabited with the other as husband
and wife [Article 45(1), Family Code]. Any of the following circumstances shall
constitute fraud, and no other misrepresentation or deceit as to character, health, rank,
fortune or chastity shall constitute such fraud [Article 46, Family Code]:
a. Non-disclosure of a previous conviction by final judgment of the other party of a
crime involving moral turpitude;
b. Concealment by the wife of the fact that at the time of the marriage, she was pregnant
by a man other than her husband;
c. Concealment of sexually transmissible disease (STD), regardless of its nature, existing
at the time of the marriage; or
d. Concealment of drug addiction, habitual alcoholism or homosexuality or lesbianism
existing at the time of the marriage.
 DECISION-page 4- CCN:20-M102

4. The consent of either party was obtained by force, intimidation or undue influence, unless
the same having disappeared or ceased, such party thereafter freely cohabited with the
other as husband and wife [Article 45(4), Family Code].
5. Either party was physically incapable of consummating the marriage with the other, and
such incapacity continues and appears to be incurable [Article 45(5), Family Code]. This
is also called impotence.
6. Either party was afflicted with a sexually-transmissible disease (STD) found to be serious
and appears to be incurable [Article 45(6), Family Code].

In view thereof, the undersigned believes that the continuance of the marital relationship
is impossible due to Mr. Hipolito’s psychological problem to perform his marital obligations. It
is therefore recommended end that the petition for annulment of marriage be given, favorable
consideration by Honorable n Court” (par.IV Exh.1-6)

The court agrees with the findings that the respondent is suffering from a Narcissistic
Personality Disorder which duly incapacitated him to discharge his marital role. It is likewise
severe as it caused chaos and distress in the marriage which led to their separation.

Respondent failed to comply with the provision of Art.68 of the Family Code which
mandates spouses to live together, observe mutual love, respect and fidelity and to render mutual
help and support. The spouses here have not observed and live the true meaning of love and
marriage. They have been living separately for years now. They now seem like strangers to each
other. It is to their best interest that their marital bond be severed as there is no marriage
obtaining in this case. If at all, it is only a sham marriage which exists only on paper.

Petitioner’s evidence further discloses that the parties did not acquire any substantial
conjugal properties.

WHEREFORE, the petition is granted and the marriage between petitioner

Analee D. Nogoy and respondent Edison B. Hipolito solemnized on January 27, 1997 at
Concepcion, Tarlac, Philippines ANNULLED.

After the finality of this decision, let a Decree of Annulment of Marriage be issued in this
case.

SO ORDERED:
RTC Br 130
Makati City, Metro Manila, Philippines
October 07, 2022

LORELEI S. BALANSAY-TAPIA
Executive Judge
(Seal of the Regional Trial Court)
Prepared by:

Ms. Agatha Lim – Clerk of Court

 REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
National Capital Judicial Region
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
MAKATI CITY

ANALEE DIMALANTA NOGOY

Plaintiff, Civil Case No. 20-M102
-Versus-

EDISON BUCU HIPOLITO “Annulment of Marriage Under

Defendant. Article 45(2) of the Family Code.”
x-------------------------------------------------x

ORDEROFTHE

FINALITYOFJUDGMENT

This is to certify that on October 07, 2022, a decision was rendered by this Honorable Court in
the above-entitled case, this dispositive part of which read as follows:

PREMISES CONSIDERED, JUDGMENT IS HEREBY RENDERED

1. Declaring the marriage conducted by the parties on 27th day of January, 1997
ANNULLED with all the effect therein as provided;
\
2. Ordering the Concepcion, Tarlac Civil Registrar and the Philippine Statistics
Authority to CANCEL marriage contracted by the parties from the books of marriage
and to instead record this decision therein in accordance with law

SO ORDERED:
RTC Br 130
Makati City, Metro Manila, Philippines
August 22, 2022

LORELEI S. BALANSAY-TAPIA
Executive Judge
(Seal of the Regional Trial Court)
Prepared by:

Ms. Agatha Lim – Clerk of Court

 REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
National Capital Judicial Region
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
MAKATI CITY

ANALEE DIMALANTA NOGOY

Plaintiff, Civil Case No. 20-M102
-Versus-

EDISON BUCU HIPOLITO “Annulment of Marriage Under

Defendant. Article 45(2) of the Family Code.”
x-------------------------------------------------x

D EC R E E O F A N N U L M E N T

This cause, which has been regularly docketed, matured and set for hearing as to the
Petitioner, came on this day upon proof of proper and legal service of process upon the
Respondent, upon the one tonus testimony of witness on behalf of the Petitioner, regularly taken
after proper and legal notice and filed in accordance with law.

Upon consideration whereof the court finds from the evidences, independent of any
admission of parties, Pleadings or otherwise, the following facts:

A. The parties were married on 27th day of January, 1997 at Concepcion, Tarlac;
B. Petitioner (or Respondent –is only true for the Respondent) is an actual resident and
domiciliary of the Republic of the Philippines for at least six months immediately
before bringing this suit.

SO ORDERED:
RTC Br 130
Makati City, Metro Manila, Philippines
September 16, 2022

LORELEI S. BALANSAY-TAPIA
Executive Judge

Prepared by:
(Seal of the Regional Trial Court)

Ms. Agatha Lim – Clerk of Court

 REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
National Capital Judicial Region
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
MAKATI CITY

ANALEE DIMALANTA NOGOY

Plaintiff, Civil Case No. 20-M102
-Versus-

EDISON BUCU HIPOLITO “Annulment of Marriage Under

Defendant. Article 45(2) of the Family Code.”
x-------------------------------------------------x

CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICITY

THIS IS TO CERTIFY that on October 07, 2022 a decision was rendered in the above-
entitled case, the dispositive portion of which reads as follows:

ACCORDINGLY, the petition is GRANTED and the marriage of Analee D. Nogoy and
Edison B. Hipolito on January 27, 1997 in Concepcion, Tarlac is declared ANNULLED under
Article 45 of the Family Code.

No other relief granted.

Considering that as of today, aforesaid decision was never reconsidered set aside or
modified and that no appeal has been interposed said decision is now Final and Executory.

SO ORDERED:
RTC Br 130
Makati City, Metro Manila, Philippines
September 23, 2022

LORELEI S. BALANSAY-TAPIA
Executive Judge

(Seal of the Regional Trial Court)

Prepared by:

Ms. Agatha Lim – Clerk of Court