Supreme Court Affirms Fraud in Hiding Sexual Orientation
The Supreme Court has decisively ruled that concealing one’s sexual orientation from a spouse qualifies as fraud and can be a valid ground for annulment. This landmark decision clarifies the legal implications of nondisclosure in marriage, reinforcing the importance of honest consent.
In a detailed eight-page decision, the court annulled a marriage after a woman successfully argued that her husband hid his sexual orientation before they wed. The 4-word keyphrase “hiding sexual orientation grounds” plays a crucial role in understanding this case’s impact.
Legal Basis for Annulment
The court cited Article 45 of the Family Code, which permits annulment if consent was obtained through fraud. Additionally, Article 46 explicitly states that the concealment of homosexuality or lesbianism from a spouse constitutes fraud. The ruling emphasized that marriage is a “special contract of permanent union between a man and a woman entered into in accordance with law for the establishment of conjugal and family life.”
To be valid, consent must be freely and fully given by both parties. When a spouse’s consent is based on deceit, the marriage can legally be annulled.
Case Background and Evidence
The case originated from a 2017 petition where the wife claimed her consent was fraudulently obtained because she was unaware of her husband’s sexual orientation. She testified that her husband was emotionally distant even before their wedding.
They maintained a long-distance relationship while he worked abroad in Saudi Arabia. After the wedding, they briefly lived together, but the husband avoided intimacy and frequently caused arguments to keep distance between them.
Two months post-marriage, he returned overseas and cut off regular communication, only sending a message on their first anniversary. Later, the wife discovered magazines featuring half-naked male models among his belongings. When confronted, he admitted his homosexuality. Heartbroken, she left and returned to her parents’ home.
Lower Courts’ Decisions and Supreme Court Reversal
Her annulment petition was initially denied by the Regional Trial Court and the Court of Appeals, citing insufficient evidence to prove her husband’s homosexuality or intentional concealment. They deemed her testimony self-serving and uncorroborated.
However, the Supreme Court disagreed with these findings. It stressed that the wife’s evidence must be weighed by its preponderance — meaning the evidence was more convincing than any opposition. The husband’s silence further supported her claims.
Ultimately, the SC ruled that the marriage must be annulled due to fraudulent concealment of homosexuality, referencing Articles 45(3) and 46(4) of the Family Code.
Implications of the Ruling
This ruling sets a significant precedent in Philippine family law, highlighting that hiding one’s true sexual orientation can invalidate consent and justify annulment. It underscores the court’s recognition of individual rights within marriage and the necessity of transparency.
For more news and updates on hiding sexual orientation grounds, visit Filipinokami.com.
