AZCUETA VS RP Facts: Marietta Azcueta (Marietta) filed a petition for declaration of absolute nullity of her marriage to Rodolfo Azcueta

(Rodolfo) before the Regional Trial Court (RTC). Marietta a erred that Rodolfo !as psychologically incapacitated to comply !ith the essential obligations of marriage. Marietta complained that despite her encouragement" Rodolfo ne er bothered to loo# for a $ob and al!ays depended on his mother for financial assistance and for his decisions. %t !as Rodolfo&s mother !ho found them a room near the Azcueta home and paid the monthly rental. Rodolfo also pretended to ha e found !or# and ga e Marietta money !hich actually came from Rodolfo&s mother. 'hen Marietta confronted him" Rodolfo cried li#e a child and told her his parents could support their needs. They had se( only once a month !hich Marietta ne er en$oyed. 'hen they discussed this" Rodolfo told Marietta that se( !as sacred and should not be en$oyed or abused. Rodolfo also told her he !as not ready for a child. 'hen Marietta as#ed Rodolfo if they could mo e to another place" he did not agree and she !as forced to lea e and see if he !ould follo! her. )e did not. Rodolfo&s first cousin" !ho at one time li ed !ith Rodolfo&s family" corroborated Marietta&s testimony that Rodolfo !as not gainfully employed and relied on the allo!ance gi en by his mother !ho also paid the rentals for the room the couple li ed in. The psychiatrist !ho e(amined Marietta testified that she found the latter to be mature" independent" focused" responsible" had a direction and ambition in life" and !as not psychologically incapacitated to perform the duties and responsibilities of marriage. *ased on information gathered from Marietta" the same psychiatrist found Rodolfo to be suffering from +ependent ,ersonality +isorder characterized by loss of self-confidence" constant self-doubt" inability to ma#e his o!n decisions and dependency on other people. The psychiatrist e(plained that the root cause of the disorder !as a crossidentification !ith Rodolfo&s mother !ho !as the dominant figure in the family considering that Rodolfo&s father" a seaman" !as al!ays out of the house. .he added that the problem began during the early stages of Rodolfo&s life but manifested only after his marriage. .he stated that the problem !as se ere" because he !ould not be able ta#e on the responsibilities of a spouse" and incurable" because it began in early de elopment and had been deeply ingrained in his personality. .he" thus" concluded that Rodolfo !as psychologically incapacitated to perform his marital duties and responsibilities. Rodolfo failed to appear and file an ans!er despite ser ice of summons on him. The City ,rosecutor found no collusion bet!een the parties. *ased on the e idence presented by Marietta" the Regional Trial Court (RTC) declared the marriage oid ab initio. The .olicitor /eneral appealed the RTC&s decision" arguing that the psychiatric report !as based solely on the information gi en by Marietta" and there !as no sho!ing that the alleged psychological disorder !as present at the start of the marriage or that it !as gra e" permanent and incurable. The Court of Appeals re ersed the RTC&s decision. Marietta" thus" brought the case to the .upreme Court on a petition for re ie! on certiorari. %ssue: 'hether or not Rodolfo is psychologically incapacitated to $ustify a declaration that his marriage to Marrieta is oid ab initio under Article 01 of the Family Code.

)eld: Rodolfo !as psychologically incapacitated to perform his marital duties because of his +ependent ,ersonality +isorder. )is marriage to Marietta !as declared oid ab initio. Marietta sufficiently discharged her burden to pro e her husband&s psychological incapacity. As held in Marcos s. Marcos 2034 ,hil. 567 (8777)9" there is no re:uirement that the respondent spouse should be personally e(amined by a physician or psychologist as a condition sine :ua non for the declaration of nullity of marriage based on psychological incapacity. 'hat matters is !hether the totality of e idence presented is ade:uate to sustain a finding of psychological incapacity. Marietta&s testimony !as corroborated in material points by Rodolfo&s close relati e" and supported by the psychiatrist&s testimony lin#ing the manifestations of Rodolfo&s psychological incapacity and the psychological disorder itself. %t is a settled principle of ci il procedure that the conclusions of the trial court regarding the credibility of !itnesses are entitled to great respect from the appellate courts because the trial court had an opportunity to obser e the demeanor of !itnesses !hile gi ing testimony !hich may indicate their candor or lac# thereof. .ince the trial court itself accepted the eracity of Marietta&s factual premises" there is no cause to dispute the conclusion of psychological incapacity dra!n therefrom by her e(pert !itness. The root cause of Rodolfo&s psychological incapacity !as alleged in the petition" medically or clinically identified" sufficiently pro en by testimony of an e(pert !itness !ith more than 67 years e(perience in the field of psychology and psychological incapacity" and clearly e(plained in the trial court&s decision. As held in Te s. Te (/.R. ;o. <1<430" <0 February 8773)" =(b)y the ery nature of Article 01" courts" despite ha ing the primary tas# and burden of decision-ma#ing" must not discount but" instead" must consider as decisi e e idence the e(pert opinion on the psychological and mental temperaments of the parties.> Rodolfo&s psychological incapacity !as also established to ha e clearly e(isted at the time of and e en before the celebration of marriage. 'itnesses !ere united in testifying that from the start of the marriage" Rodolfo&s irresponsibility" o erdependence on his mother and abnormal se(ual reticence !ere already e ident. These manifestations of Rodolfo&s +ependent ,ersonality +isorder must ha e e(isted e en prior to the marriage being rooted in his early de elopment and a by-product of his upbringing and family life. Furthermore" Rodolfo&s psychological incapacity had been sho!n to be gra e so as to render him unable to assume the essential obligations of marriage. The Court of Appeals& opinion that Rodolfo&s re:uests for financial assistance from his mother might ha e been due to embarrassment for failing to contribute to the family coffers and that his moti e for not !anting a child !as a =responsible> realization since he !as unemployed" !ere dismissed by the )igh Court for being speculati e and unsupported by e idence. The .upreme Court li#e!ise disagreed !ith the Court of Appeals& finding that Rodolfo&s irresponsibility and o erdependence on his mother could be attributed to immaturity" noting that at the time of his marriage" Rodolfo !as almost 83 years old. Also" the e(pert testimony identified a gra e clinical or medical cause for Rodolfo&s abnormal beha ior ? +ependent ,ersonality +isorder.
A person afflicted !ith +ependent ,ersonality +isorder cannot assume the essential marital obligations of li ing together" obser ing lo e" respect and fidelity and rendering help and support" for he is unable to ma#e e eryday decisions !ithout ad ice from others" allo!s others to ma#e most of his important decisions (such as !here to li e)" tends to agree !ith people e en !hen he

belie es they are !rong" has difficulty doing things on his o!n" olunteers to do things that are demeaning in order to get appro al from other people" feels uncomfortable or helpless !hen alone and is often preoccupied !ith fears of being abandoned. (Te s. Te" supra) @ne !ho is unable to support himself" much less a !ifeA one !ho cannot independently ma#e decisions regarding e en the most basic matters that spouses face e ery dayA and one !ho cannot contribute to the material" physical and emotional !ell-being of his spouse" is psychologically incapacitated to comply !ith the marital obligations !ithin the meaning of Article 01 of the Family Code. This is not to say" ho!e er" that anyone diagnosed !ith +ependent ,ersonality +isorder is automatically deemed psychologically incapacitated to perform hisBher marital obligations. The court must e aluate the facts" as guided by e(pert opinion" and carefully e(amine the type of disorder and the gra ity thereof before declaring the nullity of a marriage under Article 01. Finally" it has been established that Rodolfo&s condition is incurable" ha ing been deeply ingrained in his system since his early years. CCC A person afflicted !ith +ependent ,ersonality +isorder cannot assume the essential marital obligations. This is not to say" ho!e er" that anyone diagnosed !ith +ependent ,ersonality +isorder is automatically deemed psychologically incapacitated to perform hisBher marital obligations. The court must e aluate the facts. (Azcueta s. Republic" /.R. ;o. <57115A 81 May 8773)