ChanRobles Virtual law Library

[ G.R. No. 135369. January 20, 1999]

JUAN SIM vs. NELLY LIM.

FIRST DIVISION

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated JAN 20, 1999.

G.R. No. 135369 (Juan Sim vs. Nelly Lim.)

Petitioner assails the decision of the Court of Appeals setting aside the regional trial court's decision declaring void the marriage celebrated between petitioner Juan Sim and private respondent Nelly Lim for petitioner's failure to prove the insanity of his respondent wife.

Petitioner filed an action for the annulment of his marriage with private respondent on the ground of the latter's insanity, alleging that before and during the celebration of their marriage, private respondent had been observed acting abnormally and because of such behavior, petitioner brought private respondent to a psychiatric doctor and after several interviews was diagnosed to be suffering from schizophrenia, as a result of which the parties have separated.

The trial court nullified and declared the wedding void.

On appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the legal presumption is generally in favor of sanity and that he who alleges the insanity of another has the burden of proving the same. It was further held that the trial court's reliance on petitioner's witness tell short of the evidentiary standard required to overcome the presumption of sanity and the presupposition of the validity of a marriage.

Thus, the instant petition which is unimpressed with merit.

It is a legal truism that to overcome a presumption created by law, such as the validity of a marriage and the sanity of the contracting parties, the evidence must be clear, unequivocal, and convincing (Katipunan vs. Tenorio, 38 OG 173, Sept. 29, 1937).

The Court notes the undisputed fact that at the time of the subject marriage, private respondent Nelly Lim was holding a Bachelor of Science in Commerce degree, major in Banking and Finance. Furthermore, when private respondent joined her husband to establish a family of their own, she performed the tasks of a cashier in the family business of her father-in-law. These facts only indicate that petitioner is of sound mind. As against these proofs of private respondent's sanity, the testimony of petitioner's witnesses fell short of the evidentiary standard required to overcome the presumption of private respondent's sanity. It should also be emphasized that it is not the task of this Court to undertake a review of the evidence.

WHEREFORE, petition is denied due course.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) VIRGINIA ANCHETA-SORIANO

Clerk of Court

Back to Home | Back to Main

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE