NATIONAL
Advocates Philippines
Supreme Court Affirms: Concealing One's Homosexuality From A Spouse Can Be Grounds For Annulment
FILE
The Supreme Court of the Philippines has underscored that hiding one’s homosexuality from a future spouse may constitute fraud, providing valid grounds for annulment.
In a recent decision penned by Associate Justice Antonio T. Kho, Jr., the Court’s Second Division annulled the marriage of a woman who discovered—only after their wedding—that her husband was homosexual, a fact he had deliberately concealed during their courtship.
The couple’s story began online. They met through social media and went on their first date, during which the woman noticed that her companion was unusually reserved and avoided sitting next to her. When asked about his distant demeanor, he attributed it to shyness and lack of confidence.
Despite the physical distance—he worked abroad—the two maintained a long-distance relationship for two years and eventually decided to marry. But after the wedding, the husband continued to shy away from intimacy, frequently starting arguments and avoiding his wife altogether. Just two months later, he returned overseas and ceased communication with her.
It was only then, while going through his belongings, that the woman discovered magazines featuring nude and semi-nude male models. When confronted, her husband admitted to being homosexual. This prompted the woman to file a petition for annulment, claiming she would never have consented to the marriage had she known the truth.
The Supreme Court ruled in her favor, finding that her consent was indeed obtained through fraud. The decision invoked Article 45(3) of the Family Code, which allows a marriage to be annulled if consent was secured by fraud, provided the spouses did not voluntarily live together after the fraud was discovered. Article 46(4) of the Family Code further clarifies that hiding one’s homosexuality or lesbianism from the other party is considered fraudulent.
The Court gave weight to the husband’s own admission as well as his silence when confronted about his sexuality—concluding that he deliberately misled the woman into marrying him.
In reaffirming this legal principle, the Supreme Court highlighted the importance of honesty and good faith between parties entering into marriage. Concealing fundamental truths about oneself, it stressed, undermines the mutual trust that marriage requires, and the law provides recourse for those who are deceived.
This ruling serves as a reminder that the right to marry carries with it the duty to be forthright about matters that strike at the very foundation of marital consent.
In a recent decision penned by Associate Justice Antonio T. Kho, Jr., the Court’s Second Division annulled the marriage of a woman who discovered—only after their wedding—that her husband was homosexual, a fact he had deliberately concealed during their courtship.
The couple’s story began online. They met through social media and went on their first date, during which the woman noticed that her companion was unusually reserved and avoided sitting next to her. When asked about his distant demeanor, he attributed it to shyness and lack of confidence.
Despite the physical distance—he worked abroad—the two maintained a long-distance relationship for two years and eventually decided to marry. But after the wedding, the husband continued to shy away from intimacy, frequently starting arguments and avoiding his wife altogether. Just two months later, he returned overseas and ceased communication with her.
It was only then, while going through his belongings, that the woman discovered magazines featuring nude and semi-nude male models. When confronted, her husband admitted to being homosexual. This prompted the woman to file a petition for annulment, claiming she would never have consented to the marriage had she known the truth.
The Supreme Court ruled in her favor, finding that her consent was indeed obtained through fraud. The decision invoked Article 45(3) of the Family Code, which allows a marriage to be annulled if consent was secured by fraud, provided the spouses did not voluntarily live together after the fraud was discovered. Article 46(4) of the Family Code further clarifies that hiding one’s homosexuality or lesbianism from the other party is considered fraudulent.
The Court gave weight to the husband’s own admission as well as his silence when confronted about his sexuality—concluding that he deliberately misled the woman into marrying him.
In reaffirming this legal principle, the Supreme Court highlighted the importance of honesty and good faith between parties entering into marriage. Concealing fundamental truths about oneself, it stressed, undermines the mutual trust that marriage requires, and the law provides recourse for those who are deceived.
This ruling serves as a reminder that the right to marry carries with it the duty to be forthright about matters that strike at the very foundation of marital consent.
Jul 15, 2025
We are dedicated storytellers with a passion for bringing your brand to life. Our services range from news and media features to brand promotion and collaborations.
Interested? Visit our
Contact Us page for more information. To learn more about what we offer, check out our latest article on services and opportunities.
