Mr. Willan filed for legal separation from his wife, Mrs. Willan, citing her frequent assaults and jealousy throughout their marriage. However, the Supreme Court denied the petition, finding that Mr. Willan had implicitly condoned Mrs. Willan's cruelty by having intercourse with her one last time, despite not wanting to. The Court of Appeal upheld this decision, ruling that intercourse constituted condonation even if the husband only engaged in it due to his wife's violence, and that Mr. Willan was not involuntary in the act as he could have left.
Mr. Willan filed for legal separation from his wife, Mrs. Willan, citing her frequent assaults and jealousy throughout their marriage. However, the Supreme Court denied the petition, finding that Mr. Willan had implicitly condoned Mrs. Willan's cruelty by having intercourse with her one last time, despite not wanting to. The Court of Appeal upheld this decision, ruling that intercourse constituted condonation even if the husband only engaged in it due to his wife's violence, and that Mr. Willan was not involuntary in the act as he could have left.
Mr. Willan filed for legal separation from his wife, Mrs. Willan, citing her frequent assaults and jealousy throughout their marriage. However, the Supreme Court denied the petition, finding that Mr. Willan had implicitly condoned Mrs. Willan's cruelty by having intercourse with her one last time, despite not wanting to. The Court of Appeal upheld this decision, ruling that intercourse constituted condonation even if the husband only engaged in it due to his wife's violence, and that Mr. Willan was not involuntary in the act as he could have left.
DOCTRINE Condonation (Implied condonation through acts of the offended spouse) Forgiveness of the marital offense as a defense in legal separation since resuming conjugal life together is contrary to the reason behind legal separation.
FACTS 1. Parties were married on June 1925 and had 2 children. 2. Throughout the marriage, respondent frequently and persistently assaulted him; and was immensely jealous of his relations with other women 3. Respondent frequently demanded intercourse with him at times when he did not wish to have it 4. They had intercourse one last time for the sake of peace as a result of the respondent pestering him far into the night
Supreme Court: ISSUES of the CASE
ISSUE:WON petitioner intercourse was a result of condonation, (YES) RATIO 1. Intercourse with the wife will amount to condonation of the wifes cruelty even though the husband was driven to it by his wifes violence 2. Though he did not wish it but eventually for the sake of peace he had intercourse with her 3. Petitioner was free to have run away 4. He showed unwillingness but did not act involuntarily