You are on page 1of 3

CHI MING TSOI VS COURT OF APPEALS AND GINA LAO-TSOI

The present case was initiated by Gina Lao-Tsoi against her husband Chi Ming
Tsoi before the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City. From the records of the case, the
court decreed the annulment of the marriage on the ground of psychological
incapacity. Upon appeal, the Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC decision and denied
the motion for reconsideration filed by the husband.
The Supreme Court, affirming the presence of psychological incapacity and
taking into consideration the gravity of the failed relationship in which the parties
found themselves trapped into, sustained the CA decision dissolving the union of
the spouses.
The arguments below support the conclusion of the Court that the relation of
the spouses was replete with unfulfilled vows and unconsummated marital
obligations:
The defendant admitted that since their marriage on May 22,
1988, until their separation on March 15, 1989, there was no
sexual contact between them. But, the reason for this,
according to the defendant, was that everytime he wants to
have sexual intercourse with his wife, she always avoided
him and whenever he caresses her private parts, she always
removed his hands. The defendant claims, that he forced his
wife to have sex with him only once but he did not continue
because she was shaking and she did not like it. So he
stopped.1
Meanwhile, the spouses submitted themselves to physical examination. Results
showed that the wife is healthy and capable of pro-creation while the husbands
initial medical report was kept confidential:
The results of their physical examinations were that she is
healthy, normal and still a virgin, while that of her husband's
examination was kept confidential up to this time. While no
medicine was prescribed for her, the doctor prescribed
medications for her husband which was also kept
confidential. No treatment was given to her. For her husband,
he was asked by the doctor to return but he never did. 2
The husband submitted himself to another physical examination for the purpose of
finding out if he is impotent. The results showed there is no evidence of impotency
and he is capable of erection.
1 Chi Ming Tsoi vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 119190, (insert SCRA number), (insert page
number)

2 Chi Ming Tsoi vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 119190, (insert SCRA number), (insert
page number)

The doctor said, that he asked the defendant to masturbate


to find out whether or not he has an erection and he found
out that from the original size of two (2) inches, or five (5)
centimeters, the penis of the defendant lengthened by one
(1) inch and one centimeter. Dr. Alteza said, that the
defendant had only a soft erection which is why his penis is
not in its full length. But, still is capable of further erection, in
that with his soft erection, the defendant is capable of
having sexual intercourse with a woman.3
The Supreme Court said that under the Family Code, the basic end of
marriage is to procreate children through sexual cooperation. Constant nonfulfillment of this obligation, despite ability to do so, will destroy the wholeness of
the marriage. The Court refused to believe petitioner-husbands contention that the
wifes refusal is the root cause of the unconsummated marriage:
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. 4
xxx xxx xxx
After almost ten months of cohabitation, the admission that
the husband is reluctant or unwilling to perform the sexual
act with his wife whom he professes to love very dearly, and
who has not posed any insurmountable resistance to his
alleged approaches, is indicative of a hopeless situation, and
of a serious personality disorder that constitutes
psychological incapacity to discharge the basic marital
covenants within the contemplation of the Family Code. 5
In the case at bar, the Supreme Court finally ruled that the senseless and
protracted refusal of the husband to fulfill marital obligations is equivalent to
3 Chi Ming Tsoi vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 119190, (insert SCRA number), (insert
page number)
4 Chi Ming Tsoi vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 119190, (insert SCRA number), (insert
page number)
5 Chi Ming Tsoi vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 119190, (insert SCRA number), (insert
page number)

psychological incapacity. The presence of this ground to declare the nullity of a


marriage only warrants that the Court affirm the ruling assailed herein.