Noel B. Baccay vs. Maribel C.

Baccay and Republic of the Philippines

NO PSYCHOLOGICAL INCAPACITY
The totality of evidence presented by petitioner was not sufficient to sustain a finding that
respondent was psychologically incapacitated.
Juridical Antecedence: Failed to prove the root cause of alleged psychological
incapacity.
Maribels refusal to have sexual intercourse with Noel did not constitute a ground
to find her psychologically incapacitated under Article 36 of the Family Code. As Noel
admitted, he had numerous sexual relations with Maribel before their marriage. Maribel
therefore cannot be said to be incapacitated to perform this particular obligation and that
such incapacity existed at the time of marriage.
Incurability: Failed to establish that the Narcissistic Personality Disorder is permanent
and incurable.
Petitioner failed to establish that Maribels supposed Narcissistic Personality
Disorder was the psychological incapacity contemplated by law and that it was
permanent and incurable. The psychologist even admitted that Maribel was capable of
entering into marriage except that it would be difficult for her to sustain one.
Gravity: Only mild peculiarities in character.
Maribels refusal to have sexual intercourse with Noel did not constitute
psychological incapacity. As her traits were merely mild peculiarities in her character or
signs of ill-will and refusal or neglect to perform her marital obligations. As pointed out
by the OSG the psychologist was vague as to how Maribels refusal to have sexual
intercourse with Noel constituted Narcissistic Personality Disorder. The CA noted that
Maribel may have failed or refused to perform her marital obligations but such did not
indicate incapacity. The CA stressed that the law requires nothing short of mental illness
sufficient to render a person incapable of knowing the essential marital obligations.
Courts Ruling:
As correctly observed by the CA, the report of the psychologist, who concluded
that Maribel was suffering from Narcissistic Personality Disorder traceable to her
experiences during childhood, did not establish how the personality disorder
incapacitated Maribel from validly assuming the essential obligations of the marriage.
Indeed, the same psychologist even testified that Maribel was capable of entering into a
marriage except that it would be difficult for her to sustain one. Mere difficulty, it must be
stressed, is not the incapacity contemplated by law.
The Court emphasizes that the burden falls upon petitioner, not just to prove
that private respondent suffers from a psychological disorder, but also that such
psychological disorder renders her truly incognitive of the basic marital covenants that
concomitantly must be assumed and discharged by the parties to the marriage.
Psychological incapacity must be more than just a difficulty, a refusal, or a neglect in the
performance of some marital obligations. An unsatisfactory marriage is not a null and
void marriage.