Anda di halaman 1dari 4

TSOIvsCA(BASAHINNIYOFULLTEXTNITOPLEEEASE!HAHA.MAHALKONASIJUSTICETORRES!) Facts: PetitionerChimingTsoimarriedprivaterespondentGinaLaoonMay22,1988.

TheyhadtheirhoneymooninBaguio,butthepetitionerinvitedtheirparentstocomewiththem Theyhaveneverengagedinasexualintercourseandhaveneverseentheirprivateparts

TheysubmittedthemselvesforamedicalexaminationtoDr.EufemioMacalalag(aurologist) GinaLaoTsoiwasfoundouttobehealthy,normalandstillavirgin TheresultsofChiMingTsoiwasundisclosedandkeptconfidential Thehusbandwasgivenprescriptions(alsoconfidential)andwasaskedtoreturnbutneverdid

GinaLaoTsoipetitionedforannulmentoftheirmarriageonthegroundofpsychologicalincapacity.She claimsthat: herhusbandisimpotentandthatheisaclosethomosexualforhehasnevershownhispenis shehadobservedhishusbandusinghismotherseyebrowpencil(ohalandinikuya)and cleansingcream. heonlymarriedhertoacquireandmaintainhisresidencystatushereinthePhilippinesandto publiclymaintaintheappearanceofanormalman

Ontheotherhand,ChiMingTsoidoesnotwanttheirmarriagetobeannulledforthereasons: helovesherverymuch heisphysicallyorpsychologicallycapable theycanstillreconciletheirdifferencesfortheirmarriageisstillveryyoung

Thehusbandadmittedthattherewasneverasexualcontactbetweenthem,butaccordingtohim, wheneverhetriestohavesexwithher,shealwaysstoppedhim Therearetworeasons,accordingtohim,whyherwifefiledthiscaseagainsthim 1. sheisafraidthatshewillbeforcedtoreturnthepiecesofjewelriesofhismother 2. thathewillconsummatetheirmarriage HethenhadaphysicalexaminationwithDr.Alteza.Results: heisnotimpotent heiscapableoferection fromoriginalsizeof2inches,hispenislengthenedby1inchand1centimeteruponerection capableofhavingsexualintercourse

ThelowercourtdeclaredtheirmarriageasVoidandtheCourtofAppealsaffirmedthisdecision.

Hence,thisappeal. Issue:W/NChiMingTsoiispsychologicallyincapacitatedbecauseofhisrefusaltohavesexual intercoursewithhiswife. Held: TheSCheldthathisrefusaltoengageinasexualintercoursewithhiswifeconstitutesapsychological incapacityonhispart. (KailangankoiquoteangSCnakakatuwayungrulingeh) Evidently,oneoftheessentialmaritalobligationsundertheFamilyCodeis"Toprocreatechildrenbased ontheuniversalprinciplethatprocreationofchildrenthroughsexualcooperationisthebasicendof marriage."Constantnonfulfillmentofthisobligationwillfinallydestroytheintegrityorwholenessof themarriage.Inthecaseatbar,thesenselessandprotractedrefusalofoneofthepartiestofulfillthe abovemaritalobligationisequivalenttopsychologicalincapacity. Senselessandprotractedrefusaltohavesexwithyourwifeisequivalenttopsychologicalincapacity. OneoftheessentialmaritalobligationsundertheFamilyCodeistoprocreatechildrenbasedonthe universalprinciplethatprocreationofchildrenthroughsexualcooperationisthebasicendofmarriage. Whenaspouseconstantlyrefusestohavesexandtoprocreate,itwillutterlydestroythemarriage. SabinganiJusticeTorres,Loveisuselessunlessitissharedwithanother. TheSCaffirmsthedecisionoftheCAanddeniesChiMingTsoisappeal.

Republicvs.Nolasco Facts: GregorioNolascoisaseamanandhemetJanetMonicaParkerinabarinLiverpool,England.Shelived withhimonhisshipfor6monthsuntiltheyreturnedtohishouseinAntique. TheygotmarriedonJan15,1982.(WithoutknowingthepersonalbackgroundofJanet) Nolascohadanothercontractandboardedtheshipaftertheirmarriage. InJan.1983,hereceivedaletterfromhismothersayingthatJanetgavebirthtotheirsonandleft Antique. Heaskedpermissiontoleave,buthearrivedinAntiqueinNov.1983 OnAug.51988,NolascopetitionedforthedeclarationofpresumptivedeathofJanet,invokingArt.41 Upontrial,hesaidthattofindJanet: hegotanothercontracttoboardtheshipandwenttoLondon. HeaskedtheircommonacquaintancesaboutJanetandwherehecouldfindher,butnoone couldtell Hewrotelettersaddressedtothebarwheretheymetbuttheletterswereallreturnedtohim

HeclaimsthathehasdoneeverythingtofindJanet. ThelowercourtgrantedthepetitionandtheCAaffirmedit. TheSolicitorGeneralappealsonthegroundsthatNolascohasnotpresentedoneoftherequisitesfor thedeclarationofpresumptivedeathwhichisawellfoundedbeliefthatJanetisdead. Issue:W/Ntherespondenthasawellfoundedbeliefthathiswifeisdead. Held:NONE. TheSCsaidthatNolascofailedtosearhforhismissingwifeastogiverisetoawellfoundedbelief. TheSCdidnotbelievethathehasnoinformationregardingthepersonalbackgroundofJanetevenafter theygotmarried. TheSCalsodidnotbelievethathehaslostallthelettersthatwerereturnedtohim. TheSCalsopointedouttheycannotaccepthismistakeofthinkingLondonisthesameasLiverpool. (BecausehesaidthathewenttoLondontolookforher) Lastly,hefailedtoexplainwhyhedidnotaskhelpfromtheBritishEmbassyortothepoliceorother authoritiesinLondonandLiverpooltofindhiswife. TheSCnullifiedthedecisionoftheCAindeclaringthepresumptivedeathofJanet.

ERLINDA K. ILUSORIO, petitioner, vs. ERLINDA I. BILDNER and SYLVIA K. ILUSORIO, JOHN DOE and JANE DOE, respondents. [G.R. No. 139808. May 12, 2000] POTENCIANO ILUSORIO, MA. ERLINDA I. BILDNER, and SYLVIA ILUSORIO, petitioners, vs. COURT OF APPEALS and ERLINDA K. ILUSORIO, respondents.

Facts: PotencianoIlusorio(alawyer)marriedErlindaKalawIlusorioonJuly11,1942. Theyseparatedin1972.PotencianolivedinMakatiwhenheisinManilaandinhispenthouseinBaguio CountryClubwhenhisinBaguio,whileErlindalivedinAntipolo. In1997,PotencianostayedwithErlindainAntipolowhenhereturnedfromtheUS. SylviaIlusorioandErlindaI.Bildnerallegedthattheirmother,ErlindaK.Ilusorio,overdosedPoteciano withtheantidepressantdrugthatwasprescribedtohim.Thisresultedtothedeteriorationof Potencianoshealth. InFeb1998,Erlindapetitionedforguardianshipoverherhusband,Potenciano,andhisproperties becauseofhisoldageandweakhealthandimpairedjudgment. InMay1998,PotencianohadacorporatemeetinginBaguioanduponhisreturn,hestayedinMakati anddidnotcomebacktoErlinda. In1999,ErlindafiledawritforhabeascorpustohavecustodyoverPotenciano.Sheclaimsthather childrendidnotwanthertovisitPotencianoandprohibitedhimfromreturningtoher. TheCAgaveErlindavisitationrightsbutdeniedthepetitionforhabeascorpus. ErlindaappealstotheSCforthegrantofhabeascorpus. PotencianoandhischildrenappealfortheannulmentofthedecisionwhereErlindawasgivenvisitation rights. ISSUE:W/NErlindacansecureawritofhabeascorpustocompelPotencianotolivewithher. HELD:No. TheSCdismissesthepetitionforhabeascorpusbecauseupontrial,theyfoundoutthatPotencianoisof soundandalertmind.Tojustifythegrantofthepetition,therestraintoflibertymustbeanillegaland involuntarydeprivationoffreedomofaction.Theillegalrestraintoflibertymustbeactualandeffective, notmerelynominalormoral. Heispossessedwiththecapacitytomakechoicesregardinghisresidenceandpeoplehewantstoseeor livewith. Also,Potencianomaynotbethesubjectofvisitationrightsbecauseheisstillinrightmindandwithfull mentalcapacity. TheSCgrantsthepetitionfornullificationoftheCAsdecisioningivingErlindatherighttovisit Potenciano.