Buccat vs Buccat (Article 45-46)

72 Phil. 19 | April 25, 1941

J. Horrilleno

Facts:

The plaintiff met the defendant in March 1938. After several interviews, both were committed
on September 19 of the same year. On November 26, the plaintiff married the defendant in the Catholic
cathedral Baguio City. After getting married for about eighty-nine days, the defendant who was nine-
months pregnant gave birth to a son. Thereafter, the plaintiff left and never returned to their married
life. The Plaintiff Godofredo seeks the annulment of her marriage with the defendant Luida on the
grounds that, in consenting to the marriage, he did so because the defendant had assured him that she
was a virgin.

Issue:

Is the plaintiff’s concealment of pregnancy a ground for annulment of marriage?

Ruling:

No, it is improbable that the plaintiff had not even suspected the pregnant state of the
defendant, being this, as is proved in very late pregnant condition. Considering that the plaintiff was a
first year law.