Chi Ming Choi Case

Chi Ming Choi v. CA and Gina Lao-Tsoi [LED-G.R. No. 119190.
January 16,
1997]
PRINCIPLE:
One of the essential martial obligations under the Family Code is "To procreate children
based on the universal principle that procreation of children through sexual cooperation
is the basic end of marriage." Constant non-fulfillment of this obligation will finally
destroy the integrity or wholeness of the marriage.
Either spouse may file a petition for declaration of nullity of marriage.
FACTS:
 Parties did not have sexual intercourse for almost a year after they got married.
 The wife filed a petition for declaration of nullity of marriage on the ground of
the psychological incapacity of her husband.
 The wife alleged that:
o they slept together in the same room and the same bed but there was no
attempt of sexual intercourse between them;
o the results of their physical examination before a urologist showed that
the she is healthy, normal and still a virgin, while that of her husband’s
examination were kept confidential;
o husband is impotent and a closet homosexual as he did not show his
penis (she observed the defendant using an eyebrow pencil and
sometimes the cleansing cream of his mother); and
o he only married her, to acquire or maintain his residency status in the
Philippines and to publicly maintain the appearance of a normal man.
 The husband opposed the petition alleging the he loves her wife. He admitted
that they since their marriage until their separation, there was no sexual contact
between them. This is because every time he wants to, his wife avoided him. He
claims he forced his wife one time to have sex with him but he did not continue
because she was shaking and she did not like it.
 The defendant submitted himself to a physical examination and his penis was
examined for the purpose of finding our whether he is impotent. Based on the
medical report, there is no evidence of impotency and is capable of erection.
(TN: original size: 2 inches or five cm; when he was asked by the doctor to
masturbate, it lengthened by 1 inch and 1 cm; he had only a soft erection which
is why the penis is not at its full length but is still capable of further erection)
 Both RTC and CA- favored the wife and declared the husband psychologically
incapacitated
ISSUE: Whether or not Chi Ming Tsoi’s refusal to have intercourse constitutes
psychological incapacity
RULING:
 YES. One of the essential martial obligations under the Family Code is "To
procreate children based on the universal principle that procreation of children
through sexual cooperation is the basic end of marriage." Constant non-
fulfillment of this obligation will finally destroy the integrity or wholeness of the
marriage.
 In the case at bar, the senseless and protracted refusal of one of the parties to
fulfill the above marital obligation is equivalent to psychological incapacity. SC
held that sexual intimacy is a gift and a participation in the mystery of creation.
It is a function which enlivens the hope of procreation and ensures the
continuation of family relations. The SC added that marriage is definitely not for
children but for two consenting adults who view the relationship with love amor
gignit amorem, respect, sacrifice and a continuing commitment to compromise,
conscious of its value as a sublime social institution.
 The RTC and the CA have no finding as to who between the spouses refused to
have sexual contact with the other. The fact remains however, that there has
never been a coitus between them. Since the action to declare marriage void
may be filed by either party; i.e. even the psychologically incapacitated, the
question as to who refuses to have sex with the other becomes immaterial.
 Hence, finding the gravity of the failed relationship in which the parties found
themselves trapped in tis mire of unfulfilled vows, and unconsummated marital
obligations, the SC affirmed the decision of the CA in favor of the wife.
 SC denied the petition and declared the petitioner husband
psychologically incapacitated.

Chi Ming Choi Case

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chi Ming Choi Case

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chi Ming Choi Case

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chi Ming Choi v. CA and Gina Lao-Tsoi [LED-G.R. No. 119190.

You might also like