A Reaction to the Case of Chi

Ming Tsoi v. Court of Appeals

It is a well-established and popular fact that not all marriages in the history
of marriage end up in a blissful and peaceful relationship among the two
contracting parties, and a whole lot of reasons, excuses or even accusations tend
to cloud up the already muddled union of the two. Numerous cases had and will
arise concerning such a special contract according to the Family Code of the
Philippines, and this has not escaped the eyes and intellect of the drafters of the
said Code. However, it is also inevitable that very minimal and an almost
inexistent number of extraordinary cases come to the attention of the legal world
regarding those seemingly loose and grey areas of the laws governing
marriages. One such example of a very catching case is of Chi Ming Tsois. It
may strike the ordinary reader of the case as hilarious or amusing as he read the
facts of the case, but digging deeper, this actually was a landmark case inciting a
precedent helpful to all future cases having similar circumstances and situations.
Basically the case is about the Tsoi couple who got married but
unfortunately failed to consummate such marriage through what is known as
sexual intercourse. The two of them just slept together in one bed and nothing of a
sexual sort occurred between the two. This went on for about 10 months. The wife
initially commenced the suit against her husband to declare their marriage void on
the ground of psychological incapacity. Article 36 of the Family Code states about
such:

Art. 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.

(As

amended by Executive Order 227)

Psychological incapacity here is not exactly defined by the Code, and this
creates a somewhat loose and confusing basis when cases relevant to such
incapacity arise. However, the non-defining of the legislators of this article proves
to be flexible and more open to possibilities, because now psychological
incapacity is taken up on a case-to-case basis, varying each time and each
circumstance and the facts surrounding it. In this particular case of Mr. and Mrs.
Tsoi, the wife asserts that her husband is uncaring and that he refuses to have
carnal knowledge with her, and saying that it should be a ground for annulling
their marriage. She contests that not consummating their marriage obviously has
its implications that it was not working between them. She alleges that Mr. Tsoi
was the one refusing to have sexual intercourse with her, thereby not fulfilling and
complying with the essential marital obligations of marriage, one of which is the
mentioned consummation. Psychological incapacity should not be interpreted as

something of the scientific kind, where it is a known and diagnosable affliction or

disease. This refers to the inability of the person to be responsible enough to act
upon the marriage in a manner which was established by tradition and law. To not
have carnal knowledge with ones wife or husband after the marriage ceremony,
and especially after many months, is an issue that should not be left with ease. If
this non-consummation of their marriage continued and prolonged for a much
longer period of time, it would substantially defeat the purpose of their marriage,
which the law boasts as the foundation of the family and the inviolable institution
of our society. The interest of the state in such marital affairs cannot be
underestimated and ignored, for they always protect and prolong our society for
the better.
To properly review if this was indeed a ground for annulment of a
marriage which the wife originally initiated, Article 45 of the Family Code
enumerates the grounds:

Art. 45. A marriage may be annulled for

any of the following causes, existing at the time of
the marriage:
(1) That the party in whose behalf it is sought to
have the marriage annulled was eighteen years of
age or over but below twenty-one, and the
marriage was solemnized without the consent of
the parents, guardian or person having substitute
parental authority over the party, in that order,
unless after attaining the age of twenty-one, such
party freely cohabited with the other and both
lived together as husband and wife;
(2) That either party was of unsound mind, unless
such party after coming to reason, freely
cohabited with the other as husband and wife;
(3) That the consent of either party was obtained
by fraud, unless such party afterwards, with full
knowledge of the facts constituting the fraud,
freely cohabited with the other as husband and
wife;
(4) That the consent of either party was obtained
by force, intimidation or undue influence, unless
the same having disappeared or ceased, such

party thereafter freely cohabited with the other as

husband and wife;
(5) That either party was physically incapable of
consummating the marriage with the other, and
such incapacity continues and appears to be
incurable; or
(6) That either party was afflicted with a sexuallytransmissible disease found to be serious and
appears to be incurable. (85a)
It can be observed that annulment of marriage due to psychological
incapacity of one of the contracting parties is not found on mentioned Article,
because such incapacity is only found on the grounds on which a marriage can be
declared void and not annulled, because to declare a marriage void is different
from the declaring of annulment of the marriage, as stated in the original case by
J. Torres, Jr.. It should have been declared the nullity of the marriage and not
declared the annulment of the marriage. However, this observation can be
ignored because this referred to the decision of the Regional Trial Court of
Quezon City. But this is worthy of minimal attention.
Going back to the case at hand, it was also needed to ascertain whether the
Tsoi couple may have had conspired and a collusion among them was present.
This possibility is always kept in check by the prosecuting attorney or the fiscal,
according to what Article 48 of the Family Code states:

Art. 48. In all cases of annulment or

declaration of absolute nullity of marriage, the
Court shall order the prosecuting attorney or
fiscal assigned to it to appear on behalf of the
State to take steps to prevent collusion between
the parties and to take care that evidence is not
fabricated or suppressed.
In the cases referred to in the preceding
paragraph, no judgment shall be based upon a
stipulation of facts or confession of judgment.
(88a)

It was concluded that no collusion was present among the two, mainly due
to the reluctance of Chi Ming Tsoi to annul their marriage. He by then admitted to
the court that the two of them indeed have not had carnal knowledge with each
other. However, he alleged that is was her wife who was the one not wanting or
willing to do the sexual act, always making excuses and avoiding confrontations
with his so-called loving husband. She counter-alleges that she saw him at times
doing acts which could be concluded as if Mr. Tsoi is a homosexual, but this did
not push through as a relevant fact to the case.
Even the controversy of the physical condition and capability of Mr. Tsoi
was tackled, and his wife alleged him to be impotent. Despite that impotence is
always presumed in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the husband was
determined to prove just that. He subjected himself to a special medical check-up,
even up to the point of letting the doctor measure his penis and test his virility and
impotence. Regardless of the size and length of said reproductive organ, it was
concluded to still be functional and it was successful in being erect, contrary to
what the wife alleged against him. This physical incapability is mentioned in
Article 45 of the Family Code. It is considered to be a ground for annulment, and
not for the nullity of the marriage, which is clearly different. Annulment of
marriage refers to voidable marriage, while nullity, or absolute nullity, refers to
void marriages. Simple differences of this sort should always be taken note of.
Still, the main issue is the psychological incapacity of Mr. Tsoi,
specifically, his incapacity to fulfill his marital obligations in their marriage. But
since he also alleges the same to his wife, it was not clearly known which one of
the couple was really refusing to consummate the marriage. It is fortunately
irrelevant whether he or she was the person at fault, because either the husband or
the wife can invoke and initiate a proceeding to declare the nullity of their
marriage, given justifiable grounds mentioned in the Family Code. It was then
concluded by the Supreme Court that their marriage be declared void due to the
said grounds. This was because the couple lacked empathy for each other, and that
it completely contravenes what the essence of marriage is. The court made the
right decision because these two people cannot be made to agree to each other,
and given the consistent refusal of either of the two to consummate their marriage
is a very material problem especially when we talk about marriage. As Justice
Torres Jr. had said, Man has not invented a reliable compass by which to steer a
marriage in its journey over troubled waters. XXX Who is to blame when a
marriage fails?. It is indeed difficult to gauge all kinds of predicaments in
marriage, and the courts could only do so much to settle these disputes of love and
union.

RICHARD L. CHICO

LLB-1

PERSONS AND FAMILY RELATIONS