CHI MING TSOI VS CA –

1997 (DIGEST)
November 10, 2016

G.R. No. 119190, 266 SCRA 324, January 16, 1997

Facts:
Petitioner was married to private respondent (Gina Lao-Tsoi). During their 10 months of
cohabitation (i.e., from May 22, 1998 to March 15, 1989), they never have sexual intercourse. The
wife claimed that her husband was impotent that even they sleep in the same room and bed, nothing
happened. The wife initiated the nullity case of their marriage on the ground of psychological
incapacity under Article 36 of the Family Code. Though the husband does not want to end their
marriage, he claimed that he was not impotent as evidenced by his medical report and that it is his
wife who avoid to have sexual intercourse.
Issue:
WON Chi Ming Tsoi’s refusal to have sexual intercourse with his wife constitute psychological
incapacity.
Held:
Yes, Chi Ming Tsoi’s refusal to have sexual intercourse with his wife constitute psychological
incapacity. Supposed that wife refused to have sexual intercourse, the husband could have asked
his wife or discussed what was wrong or what is ailing her that she avoids him everytime he wanted
to have sexual intercourse. But he never did. Since he claimed that it was his wife who has physical
disorder, it is his burden to prove such claim.
One of the essential marital obligation is to procreate children through sexual cooperation. A
refusal of one party to consummate the marriage is considered a psychological incapacity.
Senseless and protracted refusal of one party to fulfill the above marital obligation is equivalent to
psychological incapacity.
“Love is useless unless it is shared with another.”