Scribd
Upload
1K views

PETITION For Declaration of Nullity

Reghis M. Romero filed a petition to have his marriage to Olivia Lagman Romero declared null due to psychological incapacity. He claims they married in 1972 due to pressure from her parents, though he was unprepared and only intended to please them. The couple experienced turbulent fights and estrangement as he focused on his career, and a psychological evaluation found he has Obsessive Compulsive Personality Disorder which caused his inability to comply with marital obligations. He asks the court to declare the marriage null based on his psychological incapacity existing prior to and during the marriage.

Uploaded by

Kira Jorgio
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
1K views

PETITION For Declaration of Nullity

Reghis M. Romero filed a petition to have his marriage to Olivia Lagman Romero declared null due to psychological incapacity. He claims they married in 1972 due to pressure from her parents, though he was unprepared and only intended to please them. The couple experienced turbulent fights and estrangement as he focused on his career, and a psychological evaluation found he has Obsessive Compulsive Personality Disorder which caused his inability to comply with marital obligations. He asks the court to declare the marriage null based on his psychological incapacity existing prior to and during the marriage.

Uploaded by

Kira Jorgio
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 7

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT


NATIONAL CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION
Quezon City
Branch 94

REGHIS M. ROMERO
II
Plaintiff,

- versus - Civil Case No. Q-98-34627


For: Declaration of
Nullity of Marriage

OLIVIA LAGMAN ROMERO


Defendant.

x-----------------------------x

PETITION
COMES NOW petitioner, by the undersigned counsel and unto
this Honorable Court, most respectfully alleges:

1. Petitioner is of legal age, Filipino citizen and a resident of


Unit 22H, Magnolia Residences, Barangay Kaunlaran, Quezon City, a
copy of a sworn certification of residence (with house location sketch)
issued by Barangay Kaunlaran is hereto attached as Annex “A”
pursuant to OCA Circular No. 631 dated October 2, 2018;

1
OCA Circular No. 63 reads:

(a) Contents and form of the petition. With reference to the requirements of Section 5 of
A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC and Section 2(b) of A.M. No. 02-11-11-SC, petitioner shall state
the complete address of the parties in the petition (i.e., house number, street, purok,
village, subdivision, barangay, zone, town, city and province);

(b) In view of the foregoing, petitioner shall attach the following: (1) sworn certification
of residence (with house location sketch) issued by the barangay; (2) sworn statement
of counsel of record that he/she has personally verified petitioner’s residency and
that the petitioner had been residing thereat for at least six (6) months prior to the
filing of petition; and (3) any but not limited to the following supporting documents:

a. Utility bills in the name of the petitioner for at least six (6) months prior to
the filing of the petition;
1
2. A sworn statement of counsel of record that he has
personally verified petitioner’s residency and that the petitioner had
been residing thereat for at least six (6) months prior to the filing of
the petition is hereto attached as Annex “B” pursuant to the
abovementioned circular;

3. A Notarized lease contract and receipts for rental


payments executed six (6) months prior to the filing of this petition is
hereto attached as Annex “C” pursuant to the abovementioned
circular;

4. Respondent is of legal age, Filipino citizen and a resident


of New York St. Project 10, Quezon City, where she may be served
with summons, orders and other legal processes of this Honorable
Court;

5. Petitioner and respondent are husband and wife, having


been legally married on May 11, 1972 at the Mary the Queen Parish in
San Juan City, a copy of their marriage certificate is hereto attached
as Annex “D”;

6. During their marriage, they were blessed with two (2)


children, namely, Michael and Nathaniel, born in 1973 and 1975
respectively, a copy of their Certificate of Live Birth are hereto
attached as Annexes “E” and “F”;

7. In retrospect, the couple first met in Baguio City in 1971


when the petitioner helped the respondent and her family who were
stranded along Kennon Road.

b. Government-issued I.D. or Company I.D., bearing the photograph and


address of the petitioner and issued at least six (6) months prior to the filing
of the petition;

c. Notarized lease contract, if available, and/or receipts for rental payments


(bearing the address of the petitioners) for at least six (6) months prior to the
filing of the petition;

d. Transfer Certificate of Title, or Tax Declaration, or Deed of Sale and the like,
in the name of the petitioner where he/she resides;

2
8. Since then, the petitioner developed a closeness with the
respondent’s family, especially with the latter's parents who tried to
play matchmakers for both the petitioner and respondent.

9. In the desire to please respondent’s parents, petitioner


courted the respondent and, eventually, they became sweethearts.
The petitioner was still a student at the time, determined to finish his
studies and provide for the financial needs of his siblings and
parents.

10. Thus, less than a year into their relationship, petitioner


tried to break-up with the respondent because he felt that her
demanding attitude would prevent him from reaching his personal
and family goals.

11. The respondent, however, refused to end their


relationship and insisted on staying with the petitioner at the latter's
dormitory overnight. The petitioner declined and, instead, made
arrangements with his friends so that respondent could sleep in a
female dormitory.

12. The next day, petitioner brought respondent home and


while nothing happened between them the previous night,
respondent’s parents believed that they had eloped and planned for
them to get married.

13. Petitioner initially objected to the planned marriage as he


was unemployed and still unprepared. However, respondent’s
parents assured him that they would shoulder all expenses and
would support them until they are financially able. As the
respondent’s parents had treated him with nothing but kindness,
petitioner agreed.

14. The couple experienced a turbulent and tumultuous


marriage, often having violent fights and jealous fits. Petitioner could
not forgive respondent for dragging him into marriage and resented
her condescending attitude towards him.

15. The couple became even more estranged when petitioner


secured a job as a medical representative and became engrossed in
his career and focused on supporting his parents and siblings. As a

3
result, he spent little time with his family, causing respondent to
complain that petitioner failed to be a real husband to her.

16. To date, the couple have gone separate ways and there is
no hope for reconciliation.

17. Petitioner, convinced that they both deserve to start a


new life anew with feelings of hope for a brighter future, invokes his
psychological incapacity to comply with his essential martial
obligations under Article 362 of the Family Code.

18. In relation to this, petitioner only married the respondent


not out of love but out of the desire to please the latter's parents who
were kind and accommodating to him.

19. The petitioner is not prepared to comply with the


essential marital obligations at the time, as his mind was geared
towards finishing his studies and finding employment to support his
parents and siblings.

20. Moreover, based from reliable information from close


friends, the respondent is already in a relationship with a certain
Eddie Garcia (Mr. Garcia) but the petitioner has no ill-feelings
towards Mr. Garcia, as he and the respondent have been separated
for a long time.

21. Petitioner engaged a clinical psychologist who conducted


a psychological evaluation on the ability of the petitioner to cope up
with the essential obligations of marriage, a copy of the Psychological
Evaluation Report dated April 28, 2020 is hereto attached as Annex
“G”;

22. The evaluation shows that petitioner is suffering from


Obsessive Compulsive Personality Disorder (OCPD). According to
the clinical psychologist, petitioner’s behavioral disorder gave him a
strong obsession for whatever endeavour he chooses, such as his

2
Article 36 reads:

“A marriage contracted by any party who, at the time of the celebration, was
psychologically incapacitated to comply with the essential marital obligations of marriage, shall
likewise be void even if such incapacity becomes manifest only after its solemnization”. (As
amended by Executive Order 227)
4
work, to the exclusion of other responsibilities and duties such as
those pertaining to his roles as father and husband.

23. Moreover, it is surmised that petitioner’s OCPD was the


root of the couple's disagreements and that the same is incurable,
explaining too that petitioner was an unwilling groom as marriage
was farthest from his mind at the time and, as such, felt cheated into
marriage.

24. These findings reveal petitioner’s psychological


incapacity under Article 36 of the Family Code. This psychological
defect or illness is grave, serious and incurable and existed prior to
the marriage and became manifest during its existence.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most respectfully


prayed that the marriage of the petitioner with the respondent be
declared a nullity. It is likewise prayed that if and when parties are
able to enter into an extrajudicial settlement as to custody and joint
parenting, the same be adopted by this Court and in the absence
thereof, a fair and just settlement of their rights and obligations as
parents be adjudicated by this Honorable Court.

We pray for such other reliefs, just and equitable under the
premises.

Quezon City. May 15, 2020

VICTOR KENNER S. GALANG


Galang Firm, Magnolia Residences, Quezon City
Roll No. 71888
IBP No.057880; 08 January 2019; Quezon City
PTR No. 2917578; 08 January 2019; Quezon City
MCLE Compliance No. VI-0087263; 13 June 2021

5
VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION
AGAINST NON-FORUM SHOPPING

I, REGHIS M. ROMERO II of legal age, residing at 1st St., Barangay


Kaunlaran, Quezon City, after having sworn to by law hereby depose
and state under oath that:

1. I have ceased the preparation of the foregoing Petition;

2. The allegations contained herein are true and correct of my


own knowledge;

3. I have not commenced any other action or proceedings


involving the same issues in the Supreme Court, the Court of
Appeals, or any other tribunal or agency; to the best of my
knowledge, no such action or proceeding is pending in the
Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or different Divisions
thereof, or any other tribunal or agency; and that, if I should
learn that a similar action or proceeding has been filed or is
pending before the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals or
different Division thereof, or any other tribunal or agency. I
undertake to promptly inform this Honorable Court within five
(5) days therefrom.

In witness whereof, I have hereunto signed this Verification this 15th


day of May 2020, in Makati City, Philippines.

REGHIS M. ROMERO II
Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me this 15th day of May 2020


at Makati City affiant exhibiting to me her Community Tax

Certificate No. 11986199 issued on 8 January 2020 in Quezon City.


Doc. No. 8937; Page No. 839; Book No. 128; Series of 2020

KAREN KAY GARCIA


6
NOTARY PUBLIC
Until December 31, 2020 PTR No. 346347, 01-23-20
Manila IBP No. 233434, 01-08-20,
Quezon City
Attorney’s Roll No. 75435
MCLE No.:II-34450

You might also like