10

CHI MING TSOI v. COURT OF APPEALS and GINA LAO TSOI

Jan. 16, 1997 | G.R. No. 119190 | TORRES JR., J. | Second Division | Psychological Incapacity | YRPM
DOCTRINE: FC 36: A marriage contracted by any party who, at the time of the celebration, was psychologically
incapacitated to comply with the essential marital obligations of marriage, shall likewise be void even if such incapacity
becomes manifest only after its solemnization.
SUMMARY: Chi Ming Tsoi and Gina Lao-Tsoi married each other on May 22, 1988 but despite being together for more
than a year, they still haven’t consummated their marriage. They underwent medical examinations and the wife was found
to be healthy but the husband’s result was confidential and was prescribed medications. This led to the wife to seek the
annulment of their marriage on the ground that the husband is psychological incapacitated. The husband did not want to
annul the marriage for he loves his wife and thinks they could still reconcile with one another. He was found to be potent
and capable of an erection. The Trial Court and the CA ruled to annul the marriage. The SC affirmed the decision saying
that senseless refusal to consummate the marriage constitutes to psychological incapacity.

FACTS:
 May 22, 1988 plaintiff and defendant married at the Manila Cathedral in Intramuros, Manila. After the marriage,
they went home to the house of the defendant’s mother and spent their first night as a married couple
 But the two of them did not have sexual intercourse with one another contrary to the wife’s expectations and this
happened as well on the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th nights
 The couple went to Baguio with the husband’s family and during the 4-day trip they also did not have sexual
intercourse with the husband avoiding it by taking a long walk or sleeping on a rocking chair
 They slept on the same bed from May 22, 1988 to March 15, 1989 and during this period there was no attempt of
sexual intercourse between them.
 They underwent medical examinations with the wife’s result being that she is healthy, normal and still a virgin
while the husband’s examination was kept confidential and he prescribed some medications
 The wife claims that the husband is impotent and a closet homosexual. That the reason that he married her was
in order to acquire or maintain his residency status
 According to the husband he attempted to have sexual intercourse with his wife but was always avoided him
 The husband doesn’t want the marriage to be annulled because 1) he loves her very much 2) there is no defect
on his part and he is physically and psychologically capable and 3) their relationship is still young hence they can
still reconcile with one another
 He argued that the reason for the filing of the case of the wife is that 1) she would be forced to return jewelry of
the husband’s mother and 2) that he will consummate their marriage
 He submitted himself to medical examination and the result stated that there is no evidence of impotency and that
he is capable of an erection
 The Trial Court ruled that the marriage is void and the CA affirmed the trial court’s decision

ISSUE/s: W/N the alleged refusal to have sex constitutes to psychological incapacity – YES

RULING:
 The court ruled that there was no collusion between the parties for the wife wants the marriage to be annulled but
the husband wants to sustain the marriage
 One of the essential marital obligations under the Family Code is the procreation of children which is the basic
end of marriage. Constant non-fulfillment of this obligation will destroy the integrity or wholeness of the marriage
 The senseless and protracted refusal of one of the parties to fulfill the martial obligation is equivalent to
psychological incapacity
 Despite being physically potent, the husband refrained from having sexual intercourse with his wife during the
entire period of May 22, 1988 to March 15, 1989, he deserves to be doubted for not having asserted his rights
 Despite saying the he loved his wife dearly he did not perform a sexual act despite little to no resistance from the
wife which leads to the conclusion that they are of a hopeless situation
 The court finding the gravity of the failed relationship of the parties trapped in its mire of unfulfilled vows and
unconsummated marital obligations can do no less but sustain the decision of the lower courts

DISPOSITION: Petition DISMISSED. CA AFFIRMED.