This case was originally commenced by a distraught wife against her uncaring husband, which decreed the annulment of the marriage on the ground of psychological incapacity.
Refusal of husband to have sex was interpreted to be psychological incapacity. A man who can but won’t is psychologically incapacitated.
“Love is useless unless it is shared with another… In the natural order, it is sexual intimacy which brings spouses wholeness and oneness. 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.” – Justice Justo Torres Jr.
Article 36 of the Family Code states: 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
CHI MING TSOI vs COURT OF APPEALS
GR No. 119190 January 16, 1997