Amy Perez-Ferraris v.Brix Ferraris GR 162368 July 17, 2006 495 SCRA 396 Denial of SC of the Petition of Declaration of Nullity of Marriage they had a son. Brix left her and her 10-month old son. • However. on May 17.Amy Perez-Ferraris v. but he still left. Two years later. aka Amy Perez. Armida Perez. 1997. . married Brix Ferraris in 1995. Brix Ferraris Facts: • Ma. Amy begged him to stay. their union was very short. but it seemed that everything is not favorable to her. attended various spiritual seminars and tried many other religions. She talked to her in-laws.• Trying to make things right out of that sudden change in her life. she went to fortune tellers. . she tried to talk to Brix’ and her friends. He preferred to spend time with his band mates and he also slept with other women.• She contended that she tried everything to save her marriage with Brix until she gave up in 2000. He abandoned her and their son and . She argued that her husband Brix would always leave the house when they quarreled. She filed a petition for declaration of nullity of marriage at the Pasig Trial Court citing the husband’s psychological incapacity. He had violent tendencies during epileptic attacks. • Amy presented to the court her witness: Dr Natividad Dayan. • She said Brix has “mixed personality disorder” called “schizoid”. • Dr Natividad “Natty” Dayan is a clinical and forensic psychologist. . PhD. brought the case to the Supreme Court .• The RCT of Pasig City rendered a decision denying the petition for declaration of nullity of Amy’s marriage with Brix. Amy Perez-Ferraris. as the petitioner herein. The CA also denied the appeal on the case. • Issue #2 – Whether Dr Natividad Dayan’s statement is necessary for the declaration of nullity of marriage. sleeping with other women and abandonment are demonstrations of psychological incapacity. . the violent tendencies during epileptic attacks.Issues: • Issue #1 – Whether the leaving from the house when the husband and wife quarreled. spending more time with band mates. • The SC said that psychological incapacity. refers to a serious psychological illness afflicting a party even before the celebration of the marriage. . • The Supreme Court denied the petition of Amy Perez-Ferraris. • It must be so grave and so permanent as to deprive one of awareness of the essential obligations of a matrimonial bond as stated in Article 68-71 in the New Civil Code. • The SC ruled that the husband’s mixed personality disorder is a MERE refusal or unwillingness to assume the essential obligations of marriage. to be ground for the nullity of marriage under the Article 36 of the Family Code of the Philippines.Ruling of the Supreme Court: No. 320 SCRA 76 (1999). . sexual infidelity or perversion and abandonment do not by themselves constitute grounds for declaring a marriage void based on psychological incapacity.• The SC cited in Hernandez v CA. that habitual alcoholism. . Both the family and marriage are to be “protected” by the state.• The Constitution recognizes the sanctity of marriage and the unity of the family. . It decrees marriage as legally “inviolable” and protects it from dissolution at the whim of the parties. did not give enough proof to favor Amy Perez. also prescribed by law. the court was convinced that the “mixed personality disorder” of Brix is not rooted on psychological incapacity as defined by law.• Yes • The court acknowledges that it heavily relies on psychological experts for its understanding of the human personality. but a mere refusal to perform the marital obligations. Based on the statements of Dr Natty Dayan. in the case at bar. the statement of Dr Natty Dayan. • However. . google.Citations of Similar Cases: Book sources: • Luicita Estrella Hernandez v.ph . No.lawphil.ph/jurisprudence/2000/oct2000/136490.net/judjuris/juri2004/may2004/gr_149498_2004. 158896. 162368. 2004) Electronic Sources: • Leouel Santos v. Court of Appeals and Molina Arellano Law Foundation (http://www. Manuel Siayngco.com. Court of Appeals and Mario C.htm) • Republic v.net/judjuris/juri1997/feb1997/gr_108763_1997.judiciary. 320 Scra 76 (December 8. Marcos v. G.R.R. G.gov.net/judjuris/juri1995/jan1995/gr_112019_1995. Court of Appeals and Julia Rosario Bedia-Santos Arellano Law Foundation (http://www. Quintero-Humano Supreme Court decisions online (http://www. 441 Scra 422 (October 27. 1999) • Juanita Carating-Sianyngco v. Marcos Supreme Court decisions online (http://sc.html) • Brenda B. Wilson G.html) Photos/Comics used in slides: www.lawphil. Hernandez. No.html) • Republic v.lawphil.