Hiding One’s Homosexuality is a Ground for Annulment - ALBURO ALBURO AND ASSOCIATES LAW OFFICES

The following post does not create a lawyer-client relationship between Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices (or any of its lawyers) and the reader. It is still best for you to engage the services of a lawyer or you may directly contact and consult Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices to address your specific legal concerns, if there is any.

Also, the matters contained in the following were written in accordance with the law, rules, and jurisprudence prevailing at the time of writing and posting, and do not include any future developments on the subject matter under discussion.

AT A GLANCE:

In the case of Salva-Roldan v. Roldan, G.R. No. 268109, March 3, 2024, the Supreme Court held that hiding one’s homosexuality from a spouse can be considered fraud and may be used as a ground to annul a marriage.

Under Article 1 of the Family Code, marriage is a special contract of permanent union between a man and a woman entered into accordance with law for the establishment of conjugal and family life. It is the foundation of the family and an inviolable social institution whose nature, consequences, and incidents are governed by law and not subject to stipulation, except that marriage settlements may fix the property relations during marriage within the limits provided by this Code.

Article 45 and 46 of the same Code provides:

“Article 45. A marriage may be annulled for any of the following causes, existing at the time of the marriage:

) 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;
) That either party was of unsound mind, unless such party after coming to reason, freely cohabited with the other as husband and wife;
) 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;
) That the consent of either party was obtained by force, intimidation or under the influence, unless the same having disappeared or ceased, such party thereafter freely cohabited with the other as husband and wife;
) That either party was affiliated with a sexually transmissible disease found to be serious and appears to be incurable.”

Article 46. Any of the following circumstances shall constitute fraud referred to in Number 3 of the preceding Article:

) Non-disclosure of a previous conviction by final judgment of the other party of a crime involving moral turpitude;
) Concealment by the wife of the fact that at the time of the marriage, she was pregnant by a man other than her husband;
) Concealment of sexually transmissible disease, regardless of its nature, existing at the time of the marriage; or
) Concealment of drug addiction, habitual alcoholism or homosexuality or lesbianism existing at the time of marriage.

No other misrepresentation or deceit as to the character, health, rank, fortune or chastity shall constitute such fraud as will give grounds for action for the annulment of marriage. In one of the decided cases of the Supreme Court, Jaaziel alleged that in 2010, Lory, who was then working in Saudi Arabia, sent her a friend request which she initially ignored despite Lory being a coworker of Jaaziel’s friend in the province. Due to Lory’s persistence Jaaziel gave her phone number to Lory which led to their constant communication.

In 2011, Jaaziel and Lory became sweethearts. Lory returned to the Philippines for a vacation and met Jaaziel in 2012. On their first date, Jaaziel noticed Lory being distant from her and wondered why they neither kissed nor held hands. To Jaaziel it was as if they were mere friends. Jaaziel confronted Lory about his behavior, but Lory only confessed his timidity and lack of confidence. At the same time, Jaaziel learned that she was Lory’s first girlfriend despite being 31 years old.

Lory had to go back to Saudi Arabia for work. Thus, Jaaziel and Lory were engaged in a long-distance relationship which often involved arguments over flimsy matters. Notwithstanding, they got married in 2013.

After their wedding, they went home to Cavite and had an unusual honeymoon. Whenever Jaaziel would initiate intimate activities, Lory would make an excuse either to spend his time alone or for the two of them to talk about Lory’s work and plans.

In 2015, Jaaziel found bundles of magazines of male models who were either half-naked or naked in Lory’s belongings. Jaaziel then confronted Lory who admitted that he was homosexual. It was at that moment when Jaaziel not only realized that their marriage must end due to fraud, but also, understood the behavior of Lory before and after their marriage. Such discovery prompted Jaaziel to leave the conjugal dwelling and return to her parents. More than two (2) years later, Jaaziel filed a Petition for Annulment before the RTC.

The Supreme Court ruled that first, there was no free cohabitation after Jaaziel’s discovery of Lory’s supposed fraudulent concealment of his homosexuality which would operate to ratify Jaaziel’s vitiated consent, and second, she filed the action within the five-year prescriptive period.

With the lies and deception, coupled by their failure to cohabit as husband and wife, it is evident that Lory merely tricked Jaaziel to marry him by making her believe that he is heterosexual. The admission of Lory and the unexplained prolonged silence to negate the allegation as to his homosexuality cannot be taken lightly by the Court.

No woman would put herself in a shameful position if the fact that she married a homosexual was not true. More so, no man would keep silent when his sexuality is being questioned thus creating disgrace in his name. Hence, their marriage must be annulled on the ground of fraudulent concealment of homosexuality pursuant to Article 45 (3) in relation to Article 46 (4) of the Family Code.

Related Articles:

Click here to subscribe to our newsletter

Alburo Alburo and Associates Law Offices specializes in business law and labor law consulting. For inquiries regarding legal services, you may reach us at info@alburolaw.com, or dial us at (02)7745-4391/ 09175772207/ 09778050020.

0 Shares

Leave a Reply Cancel reply