AILEEN ONG SY,

Petitioner,

-versus- Civil Case No. CEB 41138

For: Judicial Declaration of Nullity of
Marriage

ROGER YU SY,
Resondent.
x------------------------/

ANSWER
(With Omnibus Motion for the Issuance of Temporary Restraining Order/Writ of Preliminary Injunction,
Setting of Support Pendente Lite for the Common Children and for Visitorial/Joint Custody over the
Common Children)

RESPONDENT, through the undersigned counsel, unto this Honorable Court most respectfully states:

By way of answer:

ADMISSIONS AND DENIALS

1. The parties’ personal circumstances stated at paragraphs 1 & 2 of the Petition are admitted.
However, henceforth, Respondent may be served with summons, notices, orders, and other
processes of this Honorable Court through the undersigned counsel at……;

2. Paragraphs 4 & 5 are admitted except the allegation that the Respondent is aloof. The truth is
Respondent was not an aloof person, in fact during medical school, Respondent had a girlfriend.
It was, inf act, Petitioner who never had a boyfriend then, maybe she was the aloof;

3. Paragraph 9 is denied. The truth is despite the Respondent’s busy schedule, he always makes it a
point to be present during his children’s school activities. In fact, Respondent was present in
most of his children’s school activities;

4. Paragraph 11 of the Compliant is qualifiedly admitted. Respondent asked the question jokingly.
To put the incident in context, the parties were on vacation with their children at the time.
Petitioner woke Respondent up in the middle of the night to tell him that she was pregnant. Half
asleep and not prepared with a response to such news, Respondent just jokingly asked Petitoner
if it was his child;
5. Respondent also wishe to put paragraph 13 of the Complaint in its proper light. At that time,
Petitoner’s mother, although ill, had already been dischargd from the hospital for a full 3
weeks…..

6. The truth of the matter is that he was disappointed with Petitioner’s behavior but did not shout
at, quarrel with, or resent for it. The parties sometimes ran into each other at he hospital…..

7. When Petitioner’s mother passed away, Respondetn felt as much grief as Petitioenr did, he just
was not showy about it and regrets that petitioner misinterpreted his natural self. Respondent
also symphatized with Petitioner by telling her that life has to go on and that she should slowly
readjust for her own family. He thought that this was the best way to comfort her, especially
since she is also a doctor for whom death is a constant reality. Petitoner however, refused to
pull herself together even for her family. She grieved so desperately that she took sleeping pills,
sedatives and anxioulytic drugs up to fourteen times a day just to sleep and forget her grief;

8. Respondent admits that he is devoted to his work, but he is also equally devoted to his family
and children. Even when he was newly married, Respondent always thought that his family
could not stay at his in laws house forever and be always dependent on them. That is why he
also works ahrd. In fact, Respondent barely bought things for himself and was not materialistic
or showy, unlike Petitioner who is self-centered and self-entitled, and who spends so much on
luxurious, but unnecessary goods, fashion items, gadgets, make up and other lifestyle
items/activities;

9. Respondent vehemently denies all allegations that he neglets spending time and communicating
with his family, especially with his children, because even with his hectic schedule, his only full
free day is Sunday, which he always blocked out for his family. He would help the children with
their school work and would initiate outings with the whole family. Petitoner however, would
refuse to go because she schedules all her appointments with beauty salon, manicurist and
activities with her younger sister on Sundays;

10. Respondent values hischildren’s education and takes time out of hisd ay to tutor them.
Sometimes, Respondent is strict with them because he wants to teach them the same disicipline
that his own mother raised him with. Once, during a family gagthering, Petitioner even told
everybody present that she was very thankful that Respondent does this because she herself
does not have the patience to sit with the children and plod through their school work;

COUNTER STATEMENT OF FACTS

Pre-Marital History

11. Respondent is the fourth of the five children in a modest family. His parents worked hard to
provide for him and his four siblings and after that, there was not much money left over for
luxuries. Respondent’s mother was an industrious worker even when she was chronically ill,
 repeatedly taught Respondent and his siblings the values of education, hardwork, honesty,
discipline, and responsibility. When Respondent’s mother passed away in her fifties, he and his
siblings all banded together and pitched in to run the household since their father was busy
working to support them;

12. The parties met each other in their foruth year of medical school. At that time, Respondent’s
relationship with his long-time girlfriend was failing, so when Petitioner and Respondent slowly
got to know each other better, they ended up becoming romantically involved;

13. During their relationship as boyfriend and girlfriend, it was petitioner who was the showier. She
was touchy-feely, liked public displays of affection and expected it from respondent. She would
also buy him gifts of clothes and gadgets. Although he never asked for them, Respondent was
always appreciative. He was, however, more conservative and was not in the habit of flaunting
his affections;

14. As a student, Petitioner was a happy go-lucky as she admits in her Complaint. She preferred to
spend time with her group of friends. Because of their less-than-serious attitude towards
schoolwork, she and her group of friends flunked second year of medical school and had to
repeat that year;

15. When Petitioner was doing her internship, she was accused of sleeping and failing to monitor
her patient during her duty hours. Because of this, her internship had to be extended. Petitioner
however, perceived herself to have done nothing wrong, and believed that the incident was a
personal attack directed against her by her superior. She had to beg her department head for a
lighter penalty and was then, fortunately able to graduate on time;

Marital History

16. Immediately after the parties’ marriage, Petitioner’s parents offered to let the parties stay at
heir house. This was because Respondent’s family was not as affluent as they were and they did
not want their daughter, herein Petitioner, to live at a standard lower than what she was used
to;

17. Because the parties lived with Petitioner’s parents. Petitioner even in her new role as a wife,
never bothered to learn about managing the parties’ family finances.;

18. For instance, when the parties were still newlyweds, both also just new doctors, Petitioner
would insist on buying shares at exclusive clubs and lifetime memberships at gyms she would
only attend for two months. She retained her showy lifestyle and would indulge in shopping
sprees and would change high end mobile phone every year;
19. Years’ into the parties’ marriage, Petitioner’s impulsive buying and financial irresponsibility
eventually led her to incur credit card charges of more than a thousand U.S. Dollars per month
from playing online games. The credit card where these charges were made was a
supplementary card to Respondent’s who. As primary cardholder, had to sholder all these
unnecessary expenses on top of the household expenses and school fees of the parties’
children;

20. Petitioner’s online gaming eventually led her to meet a certain Thomas, her first American
admirer. She would, as she admitted in her Judicial Affidavit, go on to have another one.
Petitioner was not shy about flaunting her admirers even to her husband. That is how
Respondent found out about them;

21. At another time, Petitioner asked Respondent to buy her a two-carat diamond ring. Respondent
did his best to buy it and even enlisted the help of a cousin in Hong Kong. When the parties’
relationship grew sorely strained and Respondent moved out. Petitioner threw the ring at him
and shouted that she did not need it anymore. However, about six to nine months after that,
Petitioner insistently asked for the ring back. When Respondent asked her why she wanted it
again, Petitioner only said, “It looks good on my finger.”

22. In February 2013, Respondent was in Boston when Petitioner asked him to buy her a Louis
Vuitton bag. He agreed;

23. In July of the same year, while Respondent was in Singapore, Petitioner asked him to buy her a
Channel bag worth about two hundred fifty thousand pesos (PHP250,000.00) The pirce shocked
the Respondent so much but he agreed to a compromise when Petitioner offered to pay for half
of the amount. She got her bag;

24. Later that year in December, a week after curtly informing Respondent that she was going to
seek judicial declaration of nullity of her marriage to him, Petitioner asked Respondent to buy
her an ipad;

25. Petitioner’s lackadaisical attitude towards schoolwork and responsibility was also carried over to
her professional life, where she continues to keep a poor work ethic. Petitioner is a Pathologist
who works at a hospital laboratory. Everyday, she would report to work past three o’ cock in the
afternoon, and then rush to leave by five. She would not report to work if she does not feel like
working;

26. This attitude of Petitioner’s has sorely affected her relationship with her colleagues, who would
notice that she frequently absents herself from work;

27. Other hospital employees Petitioner works with also do not appreciate her constantly rushing
them to prepare her slides and specimens just because she refuses to report to work on time;
28. Petitioner’s attitude not only caused a fight with an officemate and a rift between herself and
formerly close colleagues, but also spilled over to severely damage her relationship with her
younger sister, her close confidante who was supposed to be her third witness in this case;

29. Near Christmas of last year, Petitioner and her younger sister had an altercation so violently that
it nearly escalated into a physical confrontation on Christmas Day, in front of their gravely ill
father;

30. Petitioner attempted to strike her younger sister in the head with a broomstick. Respondent,
who was present, had to physically restrain her. Since then, they are no longer on speaking
terms;

31. Last July 2017, Petitioner was livid with the parties’ daughter, accusing the child of being a
traitor for allegedly failing to defend her mother and for always siding with her father, herein
Respondent. After severely berating her, Petitioner threw the child’s things all over the ground,
called her a bitch, and forced her to leave the house at ten thirty in the evening. When
Respondent rush to pick up their daughter, he found her sitting on the outside steps. Crying
hysterically, holding a knife in one hand and thinking about cutting her wrist. Respondent
hurriedly brought his daughter to his car, asked her to wait inside while he went up to pack up
her things. As he was kneeling over a suitcase, Petitioner came up from behind him and
suddenly kicked him in the back. After the incident, while the parties’ daughter stayed with
Respondent, Petitioner lied to her father about it, telling him that the child was at Respondent’s
place to work on a school project;

32. On numerous occasions, Petitioner would attempt to alienate the children from their father. In
fact, when the parties’ daughter was fifteen or sixteen, she was angry at her father because of
the terrible things fed her by her mother. It was only later, when she had matured that she
came to see her father’s point of view and understood that he was always working so hard so
that he could provide for them. Because of this, Petitioner was infuriated with her;

33. Petitioner is also fond of pitting the siblings against each other for her personal gratification.
Because she likes feeling that the children are on her side, she would tell the younger children –
both boys – nasty things about their father and would even say to them, “Do not be like your
older sister, who is a traitor because she always sides with her father”;

34. Up to the present, even though she is employed and is earning, and even though it is
Respondent who pays the children’s tuition fees and who spends for the household needs of
Petitioner and the children, Petitioner continues to demand from Respondent an exorbitant
amount of money ostensibly as monthly support;

35. With the foregoing, it is clear that Petitioner is herself suffering from psychological incapacity.
She is too self-centered and so insensitive that it is evident that she is not capable of
understanding her marital obligations and that she also failed to discharge her obligations as a
wife and as a mother as manifested in the following actions, among others:
 A.) She is too materialistic;
B.) She is a profligate spender and without regard to the family’s financial well being;
C.) She fails to provide support to her husband;
D.) She puts her personal and material matters/concerns/interest above those of her family;
E.) She pitts her children against each other and alienates the feelings of her children from their
father; and
F.) She failed to discharge her duty of fidelity to her husband by having extramarital affairs;

BY WAY OF MOTION FOR THE ISSUANCE

OF A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER
AND/OR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

36. Respondent most respectfully repleads all the above allegations and hereunder make further
allegations;

37. The parties are currently living separately. All three children are living with Petitoner, who
unilaterally decides whether or not to allow the children, especially the two minor boys, to see
their father during the weekends when he comes around to take them on outings and to spend
time with them. At least once, Petitioner has unreasonably denied Respondent his paternal right
and to visit his children;

38. Of late, Petitioner has acted more vengefully towards Respondent, spreading hateful lies about
him in his own clinic and in front of his patients;

39. Also, recently, Petitioner went to the place where Respondent was staying and violently
knocked on the gate and then threw rocks at the house. She acted so violently that the
neighbors in the subdivision felt threatened that they called for the barangay tanods and the
police to come over;

40. Worse, Petitioner brought with her the two minor children and let them witness her violence
and her throwing of stones at the house. Tha is definitely not a ggod sight for children to see;

41. The reason why Petitioner attacked the place where Respondent was staying was because she
demanded that Respondent give her more money, even though Respondent has regularly
provided her the usual substantial amount of support of PHP80,000.00 per month;

42. Respondent, hence, fears that, given the Petitioner’s known attitude and character of being a
profligate spender, the Children’s needs and education may be sacrificed;
 43. Respondent also fears that given the Petitioner’s known attitude and character of being
profligate spender and her erratic temper, she will continue to harass the Respondent with her
demands for money;

44. The foregoing acts of the Petitioner also endangers Respondent’s rights to physical safety,
mental peace, and professional and personal reputation and integrity;

45. With the foregoing, Respondent submits that he is clearly entitled to a temporary restraining
order and/or a preliminary injunction enjoining the Petitioner from (i) demanding spousal
support, (ii) from committing acts that will endanger the physical safety of the Respondent,
disturb his mental peace and tarnish his professional and personal reputation and integrity and
(iii) from committing acts or saying things that will alienate the feelings of the common children
from the Respondent;

46. Moreover, {etitioner herself is a gainfully employed specialist physician, she is a pathologist in a
very reputable private hospital – Cebu Doctor’s Hospital. As such, she is earning very well and
more than enough to decently support herself;

47. It is therefore, clear that Respondent is entitled to the foregoing request for TRO and/ot P.I.
because (i) it has been established that Respondent is entitled thereto; (ii) the continuances of
the acts of the Petitioner would clearly work injustice on the Respondent, and (iii) the Petitioner
who was doing the foregoing acts to be enjoined is violating the rights of the Respondent as a
spouse, as father and as a person;

BY WAY OF MOTION TO SE AMOUNT OF

SUPPORT FOR THE COMMON CHILDREN
PENDENTE LITE

48. Respondent again mos respectfully repleads all the above allegations and hereunder make
further allegations;

49. Respondent acknowledges his obligation to support his children with the Petitioner. It is,
however, respectfully submitted that the obligation to support the common children is a joint
responsibility of the spouses and, hence, should be shared by the parties who are both gainfully
employed as physicians;

50. Respondent should not also be subjected to the capricious and whimsical denads of the
Petitioner for money in the guise of support for the common children;

51. In view thereof, Respondent respectfully asks this Honorable Court to set the amount of support
for the common children that the Respondent should defray. Respondent also respectfully asks
this Honorable Court to identify specific items of expenses for the common children (e.g. tuition
fee, salary for househelp or driver with a specific amount of groceries) which Respondent shall
 be responsible for and to allow the latter to directly pay such expenses where it is due without
having to pass the money through the Petitioner;

BY WAY OF MOTION TO SET THE

VISITORIAL/SHARED CUSTODY SCHEDULE
OF THE RESPONDENT OVER THE
COMMON CHILDREN

52. Respondent again most respectfully repleads all the above allegations and hereunder make
further allegations;

53. Respondent should not also be subjected to the whims and moods of the Petitioner on when he
would be allowed to see or spend timw with the common children or held hostage such
visitorial or joint custody right of the Respondent should the demands of the Petitioner be not
complied;

54. As the legitimate father of the children, Respondent is unconditionally entitled under the law to
a joint custody over the common children;

55. In view thereof, Respondent also respectfully asks this Honorable Court to fix a schedule for the
visitation of joint custody rights of the Respondent over the common children;

CONCLUSION AND PRAYER

56. Petitioner’s acts before and after marriage all point toward a psychological incapacity to perform
the essential marital obligations of mutual respect and fidelity, and rendering mutual help and
support, and joint responsibility of managing the household;

57. This psychological incapacity stems from an abnormal psyche, a grave irregularity of personality
so ingrained that it is incurable, as her refusal to admit this personal flaw and the progressive and
violent deterioration of her personality would tend to show;

58. Petitioner’s personality disorder has also resulted in a failure to fulfill the parental obligations of
cultivating her children’s mental and moral well-being, of giving thme love, affection, proper
advice, companionship and understandning, and in instilling in them the honoured values of self-
discipline, undustry and thrift;

WHEREFORE, with the foregoing premises considered, and considering especially Petitioner’s
pscychological incapacity to perform her marital obligations, which incapacity is grave, incurable,
and is evidenced by juridical antecedence, Respondent most respectfully prays that this
Honorable Court:
1. Issue a Teporary Restraining Order and/or a Writ of Preliminary Injunction enjoining
Petitioner from:
a. Demanding spousal support;
b. Committing acts that will endanger the physical safety of the Respondent, disturb his
mental peace and tarnish his professional and personal reputation and integrity and to
stay away from Respondent’s residence and palce of work, and
c. Committing acts of saying thins that will alienate the feelings of the common children
from the respondent;

2. Set the amount of support fr the common children pendente lite that the Respondent should
defray by identifying specific items of expenses for the common children which the latter shall
directly pay where it is due and without having to pass the money thorugh the Petitioner;

3. Set the schedule of the Respondent for the exercise of his visitorial or joint custody over the
common children;

4. Declare the Petitioner psychologically incapacitated from understanding and discharging her
marital obligations and declare the marriage of the parties null and void; and

5. Dissolving the absolute community of property and distributing its assets.

Other reliefs just and equitable are likewise prayed for.

 ENTRY OF APPEARANCE AND MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE ANSWER

The undersigned counsel most respectfully enters his appearance as counsel for the
Respondent. Henceforth, it is respectfully requested from this Honorable Court, and from the
adverse party, that all orders, resolutions, decisions, pleadings and other legal processes be
furnished or served to the Respondent throught he undersigned counsel at his office indicated
herein below.

BY WAY OF MOTION.

Respondent, thorugh the undersigned counsel and unto this Honorable Court, most
respectfully files this motion for leave to file an Answer and states that:

1. Respondent respectfully asks this Honorable Court that he be allowed to file his Answer
in this case to protect his interests, including, but not limited to, hid right to custody over
the common children;

2. Considering that Respondent’s counsel is not allowed to obtain copies of the reocrds of
this case from this Honorable Court until it has formally entered its appearance,
Respondent likewise respectfully asks this Honorable Court to be given fifteen (15) days
from the date of filing this motion to file his Answer;

3. In the meantime, Respondent also respectfully asks this Honorable Court to be allowed
to participate in the proceedings of this case, including but not limited to cross-examine
witnesses that will be presented by the Petitioner on February 14, 2018 and onwards;

4. Under Section 8 of A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC or the Rule on Declaration of Absolute Nullity of
Void Marraiges and Annulment of Voidable Marraiges, “If the respondent fails to fiel an
answer, the court shall not declare him or her in default”.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is respectfully prayed from this Honorable Court

that:
1. Respondent be allowed to file his Answer within fifteen days from the dat of filing of
this motion;
2. Respondent be allowed to participate in the proceedings of this case starting on…
3. Other reliefs just and equitable under the premises are likewise prayed for.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED.