ANTONIO V. REYES Leonilo Antonio was married to Marrie Yvonne Reyes on Dec 6, 1990.

They had a child who died 5 months later. Reyes concealed the fact that she previously had an illegitimate son introducing the boy as an adopted child of the family. She fabricated a story that her brotherin-law attempted to rape and kill her. She misrepresented herself as a psychiatrist. She claimed to be a successful singer when no member of her family witnessed her alleged singing activities. She invented friends from the music industry who wrote letters to Antonio touting her as the number one moneymaker. Antonio later found out that she was the one who actually wrote and sent the letters. She altered her pay slip to represent herself as one of greater means. She exhibited insecurities and jealousies over Antonio to the extent of calling his officemates to monitor his whereabouts. On Mar 8, 1993, Antonio filed a petition to have their marriage declared null and void and presented two expert witnesses who concluded that her persistent lying and paranoia made her psychologically incapacitated to perform her marriage obligations. While the case was pending, on Mar 30, 1995, the marriage of the parties was annulled by the Catholic Church. RTC granted the petition, CA reversed. ISSUE: WON Marrie Yvonne Reyes was psychologically incapacitated. HELD: YES. Petition granted. Marriage VOID. RATIO: 1. A person unable to distinguish between fantasy and reality would similarly be unable to comprehend the legal nature of the marital bond and the corresponding obligations attached to marriage. 2. Present case sufficiently satisfies guidelines in MOLINA (REP. V. CA). Psychological incapacity was sufficiently proven by expert witnesses & root cause has been medically identified. It clearly existed at the time of and even before the marriage. Its gravity is sufficient to prove her disability to assume the essential obligations of marriage based on love, trust and respect. 3. MOLINA (1997) is not set in stone and interpretation of Art 36 FC relies heavily on a case-to-case perception. Clinical diagnosis of incurability was not yet required when expert witnesses testified in 1994-95. SANTOS V. CA, promulgated by the SC in Jan 1995, in its doctrinal rule omitted any reference to incurability as a characteristic of psychological incapacity. Hence, there was no legal impelling cause to prove incurability during trial. In this case, Court is convinced by the totality of the evidence that Reyes psychological incapacity is incurable. 4. Conclusion of canonical bodies, though not controlling, hold sway since they were drawn from a similar recognition as the trial court.