Manila: The Supreme Court (SC) has determined that concealing one's homosexuality from a spouse can constitute fraud, providing sufficient grounds for annulling a marriage. This landmark ruling, as detailed in an eight-page decision by the SC's Second Division, involved a woman's marriage annulment after her husband concealed his homosexuality.

According to Philippines News Agency, the couple first connected on social media while the man was working in Saudi Arabia. Their year-long communications blossomed into a romantic relationship. When the man returned to the Philippines in 2012, the woman observed his reluctance to engage in physical affection, which he attributed to shyness and a lack of confidence.

Their relationship continued long-distance, leading to their marriage in 2013. However, intimacy issues persisted, and the man frequently instigated arguments to avoid closeness. Merely two months post-wedding, he returned overseas and ceased communication, save for a solitary message on their first anniversary.

The woman later discovered magazines featuring male models among his belongings, prompting a confrontation where he admitted his homosexuality. Feeling deceived, she left to live with her parents and subsequently filed for annulment, citing fraudulent consent. Her case, supported only by her testimony and her father's, faced rejection from the Regional Trial Court and Court of Appeals due to insufficient evidence of the man's homosexuality or deliberate concealment.

The Supreme Court, however, overturned these decisions, emphasizing the necessity of free consent for a valid marriage. Citing Articles 45 and 46 of the Family Code, the SC highlighted that hiding one's homosexuality is deemed fraud if it influences consent and the couple ceases cohabitation upon discovering the deception.

The court acknowledged the man's admission and silence regarding his sexuality as significant, concluding that he intentionally misled the woman into marriage. His emotional distance and lack of intimacy were seen as efforts to conceal his true orientation, leading the SC to rule that the woman's consent was indeed obtained through fraud.