REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES REGIONAL TRIAL COURT NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION Branch ____, Makati City

BIANCA FERRER-PEREZ, Petitioner,

-versus11-38476 of

CIVIL CASE No. QFor: Declaration of Nullity Marriage and Dissolution of Absolute Community of Property

ALEX PEREZ, Respondent. x-------------------------------------------x

PETITION
Petitioner, BIANCA FERRER-PEREZ, by counsel, to this Honorable Court most respectfully states:

1.

Petitioner BIANCA FERRER-PEREZ is of legal age, married, Filipino and presently residing at Unit No. 12 Neptune St., Bel-Air Village, Makati City. She may be served with judgments, orders, pleadings and other lawful court processes through the undersigned counsels office address provided hereunder. Respondent ALEX PEREZ is of legal age, married, Filipino, and presently residing at No. 39 Abueva St., Corinthian Gardens, Quezon City, where he may be served with Summons and other lawful court processes. He may likewise be served with Summons and other lawful court processes at

2.

North Expressway Motorist Station at 1160 EDSA Balintawak, Quezon City.

3.

On 14 February 2008, petitioner and respondent met at Northwest Airlines Flight 73. Petitioner was a flight attendant of the said airline while respondent was a passenger for the said flight. During the flight, respondent expressed interest in petitioner by initiating short conversations with petitioner during the flight. Their romance was beginning to blossom. Petitioner and respondent started to go out on dates when respondent was not assigned abroad. After a few weeks, the parties started going steady and officially became a couple. After one of petitioners flight assignments, respondent picked a fight with petitioner, accusing the latter of having an affair with one of her colleagues who was her former boyfriend of several years. At one point, as respondent was fetching petitioner at Ninoy Aquino International Airport, he suddenly rushed towards a male flight attendant and grabbed him. He then threatened the male attendant not to come near petitioner or else he would knock your head off. Thereafter, he scolded petitioner for allegedly flirting with said male colleague. Despite her reassurance that she was faithful to respondent, he refused to accept such statements.

4.

5.

6. Oftentimes, respondent would dictate to petitioner her schedule while she was not assigned by her employer to a flight demanding that she spend most of her time with him than with her friends. Petitioner acceded to his requests on the belief that he just missed her while she was away.
7.

On December 2008, petitioner and respondent took a vacation in the United States. While celebrating New Years Eve at Peppermill Hotel in Reno, Nevada, the couple out of sheer and fun and in a state of insobriety, decided to spice up their vacation by trying out one of the quickie marriage booths before flying back to Manila. (A copy of the marriage certificate is attached hereto as Annex A and made an integral part hereof.) Upon their return, petitioner and respondent decided to rent a condominium unit in Galeria de Magallanes, Makati City where they lived together as husband and wife.

8.

9. Petitioner still continued to be a flight attendant at Northwest Airlines (now Delta Airlines) while respondent continued to operate his Caltex Station and 24-hour convenience store at EDSA. Due to the nature of their respective careers, the couple spent most of their time apart. 10. Although their relationship started to crumble, petitioner still exerted efforts at restoring their relationship by maintaining constant communication with respondent during her international assignments. Nevertheless, respondent used his work as an excuse in failing to return her calls. 11. When petitioner would call respondent at night, thinking that he would be at home, respondent would not be able to talk to petitioner as he would be out on drinking sprees at friends houses or playing poker at Midas Casino at Pasig City with his high school barkada. 12. During the times that petitioner would be in Manila, respondent would often quarrel with petitioner over trivial matters such as the way she prepares the food or cleans the house. His short temper would also lead to arguments about her work and how she was never at home and would just leave the house without any attempt to resolve their differences. 13. At one of the instances when she was doing her general cleaning of their conjugal home, she chanced upon respondents open laptop which displayed pictures of him with several other women in compromising poses as screen savers. Upon browsing through his laptop, petitioner saw obscene video footages of respondent with women he was having sexual relations with. When confronted by petitioner, respondent merely stated that it was petitioners fault as she was an absentee wife and also claimed that petitioner was also as promiscuous as he flirting with her exboyfriend/colleague. 14. It has come to a point that petitioner could no longer endure the emotional trauma brought by respondents lack of love and respect for petitioner as his wife. Petitioner became distraught with the discovery of his promiscuity that

led her to refuse any sexual advances made by respondent to her.

15. In

a psychological report dated 18 August 2011, petitioner and respondents were both found to be psychologically incapacitated and that such already existed before marriage, but became manifest only after the celebration which prevented both from complying with their essential marital obligations. (Hereto attached as Annex B and made an integral part hereof.) psychological incapacities of the parties are considered severe and grave in degree, because both disorders hampered, disrupted and interfered with their normal functioning that affected the totality of their marital relationship. Both incapacities are found to be permanent in nature, because both started early in their psychological development, that the pattern of their behavior became so deeply engrained into their personality structures that no amount of psychiatric or professional assistance can modify or change it. there was no property agreement or settlement entered by the parties prior to the marriage, their property relations is governed by the absolute community of property system pursuant to Article 75 of the Family Code. The parties did not have property at the time of the celebration of the marriage. Neither did they acquire any property during the marriage and the absolute community has no debts at the time of the filing of this petition.

16. The

17. Since

Prayer WHEREFORE, premises considered, petitioner BIANCA FERRER-PEREZ most respectfully prays that this Honorable Court, after due hearing, declare the marriage of the parties VOID AB INITIO on the ground of petitioner and respondents psychological incapacity under Art. 36 of the Family Code.

Other reliefs, just and equitable under the circumstances, are likewise prayed for.

Makati City, 12 June 2011.

CCAAB Law Offices

Penthouse Suite, Finlandia Building, Legaspi Street, Salcedo Village, Makati City, 1385 Tel. No. 8347397; 8750254 By: JENNIFER ANNE MARIE D. CRUZ Roll No. 59345 IBP No. 823956; 1/12/12; Makati City PTR No. 5692304; 1/12/12; Makati City MCLE Compliance No. III-0019365

VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION OF NON-FORUM SHOPPING I, BIANCA FERRER-PEREZ, of legal age, married, Filipino

and presently residing at Unit No. 12 Neptune St., Bel-Air Village,

Makati City. after having been duly sworn in accordance with

law, hereby depose and state that:

1.

I am the petitioner in the above entitled case;

2. I have caused the preparation and filing of the foregoing Petition and have read and understood all the allegations contained therein, and the same are true and correct of my own personal knowledge based on authentic records;

2. I have not commenced any other action or filed any claim involving the same issues in any court, tribunal or quasi-judicial agency.

3. If I should thereafter learn that a similar action has been filed or is pending, I shall report such fact to this Honorable Court within five (5) days from knowledge thereof.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have set my hand and affixed my signature this _____ day of June 2011 in Makati City.

BIANCA FERRER-PEREZ Affiant SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this _____ day of June 2011 in Makati City, with affiant exhibiting to me her ________________________. Doc. No. ____; Page No. ____; Book No. ____; Series of 2011.