FIRST DIVISION
[G.R. No. 215550. August 24, 2015.]
MARIA AILEEN ABIVA-SAZON, petitioner, vs. REYNALDO B. SAZON, respondent.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, First Division, issued a Resolution datedAugust 24, 2015 which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 215550 (Maria Aileen Abiva-Sazon v. Reynaldo B. Sazon).
After a judicious review of the records, the Court resolves to DENY the instant petition and AFFIRM the July 31, 2014 Decision 1 and November 19, 2014 Resolution 2 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CV No. 99432 for failure of petitioner Maria Aileen Abiva-Sazon (petitioner) to show that the CA committed any reversible error when it reversed and set aside the November 19, 2010 Partial Decision 3 of the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City, Branch 225 in Civil Case No. Q-08-62975.
As aptly pointed out by the CA, while the Psychological Evaluation Report was replete with technical terms, it failed to explain in reasonable detail how respondent Reynaldo B. Sazon's (respondent) condition could be characterized as grave, deeply-rooted, and incurable within the parameters of psychological incapacity jurisprudence. For psychological incapacity to constitute as a ground to nullify a marriage, it must exist at the time the marriage was celebrated, which was, however, not shown in this case, as the psychologist merely concluded in his testimony that respondent's disorder was brought about by the "conditions of worth imposed by [his] mother" without explaining or describing respondent's family or personal background.
Further, although the personal examination of the spouse who is alleged to be psychologically incapacitated is not a condition sine qua non for the declaration of nullity of marriage under Article 36 of the Family Code, 4 the CA correctly observed that instead of relying solely on the accounts of petitioner and the parties' children which may possibly be self-serving and biased, the parties' common friends, colleagues or close relatives, who could have provided the needed evidence on respondent's behavior prior to or at the time of the celebration of their marriage, were not taken into account.
SO ORDERED." EHaASD
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) EDGAR O. ARICHETADivision Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1.Rollo, pp. 55-68. Penned by Associate Justice Samuel H. Gaerlan with Associate Justices Apolinario D. Bruselas, Jr. and Marlene Gonzales-bison concurring.
2. See Petition for Review; id. at 16.
3.Id. at 42-43. Penned by Presiding Judge Maria Elisa Sempio Diy.
4. See Suazo v. Suazo, 629 Phil. 157, 175-176 (2010), citing Marcos v. Marcos, 397 Phil. 840, 850 (2000).