Short answer. Yes. Insanity is the one annulment ground a relative may raise. Any relative, guardian or person having legal charge of the insane spouse may file at any time before the death of either party — a window that stays open, unlike the five-year periods elsewhere in the article.
What the law says
(2) For causes mentioned in number 2 of Article 45, by the same spouse, who had no knowledge of the other's insanity; or by any relative or guardian or person having legal charge of the insane, at any time before the death of either party, or by the insane spouse during a lucid interval or after regaining sanity;
Family Code, Article 47 — Who May File; Prescriptive Periods. Read the full provision →
Three people may file, and a relative is one of them
Elsewhere the article gives the action to the injured spouse alone. Here it names three: the sane spouse, any relative or guardian or person having legal charge of the insane, and the insane spouse personally during a lucid interval or after regaining sanity. The reason is plain enough — a person who was not of sound mind when the marriage was celebrated may be in no position to protect their own interests afterwards, and the law does not leave that to the other spouse's goodwill.
What the relative's window is
A relative may file at any time before the death of either party. There is no five-year period to miss; the constraint is that both spouses must still be living. Once one of them dies, the marriage can no longer be annulled on this ground and questions of property and succession are settled on the footing that it was valid. That is why families who have been debating what to do for years should understand that delay carries a real risk, even though no deadline is printed.
The sane spouse's own right is narrower
The clause lets the other spouse file only if that spouse had no knowledge of the other's insanity. Someone who married with full knowledge of the condition cannot later use it to undo the marriage. Nothing in that limitation restricts the relative or guardian, whose standing does not depend on the sane spouse's state of mind at all. In practice this is what makes the relative's route valuable: it survives where the spouse's own claim has been defeated by what the spouse knew.
Standing and condition both have to be shown
The provision speaks of a relative, a guardian, or a person having legal charge, so a court will want to see the relationship or the appointment as well as the medical picture. Two things then matter most: the condition as it stood at the time of the wedding, since that is the ground, and its condition now, since it bears on who may act. Gather medical and hospital records covering the period before the marriage, and any guardianship papers, before consulting.
Cases citing this provision
These Supreme Court decisions cite the provision above. We list them so you can read them yourself; the summaries of what each decided are not ours to give.
- Engrace Niñal, et al. vs. Norma Bayadog, G.R. No. 133778, March 14, 2000 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Maria Lina P. Quirit-Figarido vs. Edwin L. Figarido, G.R. No. 259520, November 5,2024 — read the decision on LawPhil →