FACTS: Chi MinTsoi and Gina Lao-Tsoi were married for 10 months. But still their marriage was not consummated because the husband refuses to have sexual intercourse with his spouse. Even if she already made efforts, they still failed to consummate their marriage by performing coitus. The spouses decided to undergo a medical check up to see if there was something wrong with them. The Doctor found out that there was nothing wrong with their organs and that the man was not impotent.
ISSUE: Whether or not the refusal of private respondent to have sexual communion with petitioner is psychological incapacity, which may be a ground for annulment, in the light of Article 36 of the Family Code.
HELD: The issue of whether or not the appellant is psychologically incapacitated to discharge a basic marital obligation was resolved upon a review of both the documentary and testimonial evidence on record. Appellant admitted that he did not have sexual relations with his wife after almost ten months of cohabitation, and it appears that he is not suffering from any physical disability. Such abnormal reluctance or unwillingness to consummate his marriage is strongly indicative of a serious personality disorder which to the mind of this Court clearly demonstrates an 'utter insensitivity or inability to give meaning and significance to the marriage' within the meaning of Article 36 of the Family Code (See Santos vs. Court of Appeals)
REASONING: If a spouse, although physically capable but simply refuses to perform his or her essential marriage obligations, and the refusal is senseless and constant, Catholic marriage tribunals attribute the causes to psychological incapacity than to stubborn refusal. Senseless and protracted refusal is equivalent to psychological incapacity. Thus, the prolonged refusal of a spouse to have sexual intercourse with his or her spouse is considered a sign of psychological incapacity.
** To see the original copy of this case follow this link
No comments:
Post a Comment