SC voids marriage due to unjustified absence from marital home

SC voids marriage due to husband’s unjustified absence from marital home

By: - Reporter / @luisacabatoINQ
/ 01:40 PM August 29, 2024

AFFIRMED The high tribunal sided with the Commission on Audit, which said in 2011 the gratuity benefits were unnecessary and excessive as the firm had been incurring losses. —INQUIRER FILE PHOTO

INQUIRER FILE PHOTO

MANILA, Philippines — The Supreme Court (SC) has ruled that “decades-long unjustified absence from the marital home may be considered evidence of psychological incapacity to comply with marital obligations.”

In a statement on Thursday, the SC cited the case of Leonora Dela Cruz-Lanuza against her husband Alfredo Lanuza, Jr.

Article continues after this advertisement

READ: House OKs divorce bill: ‘No monster’

FEATURED STORIES

Leonora and Alfredo married in 1984 and separated after 10 years due to Alfredo’s changed behavior.

“He refused to provide financial support to his family, and treated Leonora merely as an occupant of their home rather than as his wife. He also engaged in extramarital affairs,” the SC statement read.

Article continues after this advertisement

Alfredo then married several women after the separation, it added.

Article continues after this advertisement

Leonora filed a petition to nullify her marriage. However, the Regional Trial Court ruled that there was insufficient evidence to prove Alfredo’s subsequent marriages.

She filed a petition at the Court of Appeals, but it also denied her appeal. This prompted her to file a petition at the SC.

Article continues after this advertisement

The SC Second Division ruled in Leonora’s favor. It declared her marriage void on April 17.

“The Court declared their marriage void, ruling that Alfredo’s long absence from his marital home showed psychological incapacity, which made him unable to fulfill his marital duties,” the SC statement read.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.

Subscribe to our daily newsletter

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

READ: Divorce bill ‘will pass through the eye of a needle’ in Senate, says Estrada

“Under Article 68 of the Family Code, spouses are obliged to live together, observe mutual love, respect, and fidelity, and render mutual help and support,” it added. “Alfredo’s infidelity, lack of support for his wife and children, and unjustified absence from his family indicate that he does not understand the responsibilities of a husband and father.”

TAGS: annulment, marital spat, Supreme Court

© Copyright 1997-2024 INQUIRER.net | All Rights Reserved

We use cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. By continuing, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. To find out more, please click this link.