
Police have launched a manhunt and formed a special task force to investigate the fatal shooting of a prominent…

The so-called “Oplan Romanov,” or the alleged covert operation purportedly aimed at eliminating Vice President Sara…

TACLOBAN CITY — Just a week after classes resumed following a fatal mass shooting on campus, officials at San Jose…

The Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office (PCSO) has signed up another corporation to expand public access to the…

Water reserves at Pantabangan Dam are rising steadily following heavy rains brought by the southwest monsoon and…

The Supreme Court of the Philippines (SC)
What's your take?
Google Preferred Sources
Get more Daily Tribune stories in your search results
Add Daily Tribune as a preferred source on Google Search.
Continue reading
The Supreme Court (SC) has ruled that a decades-long unjustified absence from a marital home could be considered evidence of psychological incapacity to fulfill marital obligations.
The decision, penned by Senior Associate Justice Marvic M.V.F. Leonen of the SC's Second Division and dated 17 April, 2024, nullified the marriage between Leonora and Alfredo on the grounds of psychological incapacity.
The couple married in June 1984, but Alfredo’s behavior changed over the years. He refused to provide financial support, treated Leonora as merely an occupant in their home rather than his wife, and engaged in extramarital affairs.
In 1994, Leonora and Alfredo separated. Alfredo went on to marry several other women. Leonora then filed a petition to nullify her marriage, but the Regional Trial Court ruled there was insufficient evidence to prove Alfredo’s subsequent marriages. The Court of Appeals also dismissed her petition, prompting her to elevate the case to the SC.
The court declared their marriage void, stating that Alfredo’s prolonged absence from the marital home demonstrated psychological incapacity, rendering him incapable of fulfilling his marital duties.
Citing Article 68 of the Family Code, which mandates spouses to live together, observe mutual love, respect, fidelity, and provide mutual help and support, the Court emphasized that Alfredo’s infidelity, lack of support, and unjustified absence showed he did not comprehend his responsibilities as a husband and father.