From the foregoing evidence, all lead to the conclusion that the parties should be nullified and

voided by reason of the extreme psychological incapacity and emotional immaturity of the
respondent to what has been hopeless and loveless marriage.

Respondents personal manifestation of traits and values effectively showed her psychological
incapacity and inability to understand, assume, and discharge the essential marital obligations of
living together, observing love, respect, and fidelity. Her psychological incapacity and defect is
no less than mental incapacity that relates to the most serious personality disorder. Her refusal to
cohabit with petitioner, demonstrated by her sudden disappearance after the day of their
marriage, is the worst kind of mental disorder.

The behavioural defects, which petitioner felt, observed, and noticed from the actuations of his
wife proved that the respondent is psychologically incapacitated to comply with his basic marital
obligations which consist of the following:

During their marriage, petitioner and respondent have not acquired properties of their own except
some separate personal belongings and effects/

Respondent, at the time of the celebration of his marriage with the petitioner, was
psychologically incapacitated to comply with the essential obligation of marriage such as the
observance of love, respect, understanding, and fidelity, which are the basic postulates of
marriage. Neither was she able to render mutual help, support, nor assistance in necessities, both
temporal and spiritual, which are essential to sustain a marriage. Respondents incapacity
appeared to have been innate and deeply rooted in his upbringing and psychological history as
will be testified to by a competent and expert psychologist.

The behavioural defects, which petitioner felt, observed, and noticed from the actuations of his
wife proved that the respondent is psychologically incapacitated to comply with her basic marital
obligations which consist of the following:

Respondent had shown her extreme emotional immaturity and irresponsibility.

From the above-narration, it can readily be seen that there was serious psychological incapacity
on the part of the respondent to perform her marital obligation which is habitual, incurable, and
grave. To make petitioner remain married to the respondent which only appears on a Marriage
Contract will only work injustice, mental torture, and untold misery to the petitioner.

The couples marriage bond is now irretrievably broken and irreconcilable, the root cause of
which is the psychological incapacity of the respondent, which is clinically and evidentially
identified as indicated in the psychological evaluation report, copy of which will be presented in
Court.
After __ long years of absence,

By taking another man as her husband totally abandoning him.

The decision of the respondent to untie the marital knot and set herself free from the bondage of
marriage has placed petitioner in an iniquitous situation where she is duty-bound to the marriage
but respondent bind herself as she has now a family of her own.

During the past several years that petitioner and respondent have lived together as husband and
wife they have not acquired any real property or any personal property of value, thus, they have
no conjugal asset to speak of.

Unknown to petitioner, prior to, during, and even after his marriage to respondent, the latter was
already afflicted with an incurable psychological incapacity which prevented her from
performing the basic and essential obligations of marriage, thus, rendering their legal union
void ab initio.

Unknown to petitioner, prior, during, and even after her marriage to respondent, the latter was
already afflicted with an incurable psychological incapacity which prevented him from
performing the basic and essential obligations of marriage, thus, rendering their legal union
void ab initio

As shown from the facts hereinabove narrated, respondent was psychologically incapacitated to
enter into the marriage, much more, maintain and sustain a stable and lasting marital relationship
due principally to his mental immaturity and lack of discernment as to the duties and
responsibilities of a responsible husband resulting on his failure to comply with his marital
obligations to the marriage.

Respondents immaturity, irresponsibility, and lack of discernment as to the duties of a

responsible husband are shown in the following manner:

Respondents behaviour and actions during the marriage are all external manifestations and
indications of her psychological incapacity to comply and be cognitive of the essential marital
obligations.

Petitioners expert witness will testify, support, and prove the said personality disorder of the
respondent in court at the proper time.

After the marriage, petitioner began to discern the following behavioural patterns of the
respondent:
Truly, respondent was psychologically incapacitated wife, immature, and irresponsible. She
failed to live up and comply with marital obligations as provided under Art. 68, 69, 70, and 71,
and Art. 220 of the Family Code to wit:

From the inception of petitioners marriage to respondent or even prior or subsequent thereto, the
latter was already psychologically incapacitated to enter into the marriage, much more, maintain,
and sustain a stable and lasting marital relationship due principally to her mental immaturity and
lack of discernment as to the duties and responsibilities of a responsible wife resulting in her
failure to comply with her marital obligation to the marriage.

Respondents immaturity, irresponsibility, and lack of discernment as to the duties of a

responsible wife are shown in the following manner:

1.
2.

While all these unfortunate things and events where happening, petitioner is in a forlorn place,
on board an on-going vessel, bored with loneliness,