Page 1 of 2

Diane C. Dapitanon
LE104

JOEL JIMENEZ v REMEDIOS CAIZARES
G.R. No. L-12790
August 31, 1960

FACTS: Joel Jimenez, herein appellant, married Remedios Caizares,
herein defendant, before a judge at the municipal court of Zamboanga City
on August 3, 1950.

After two nights and one day as married couple, herein appellant left home
because he claimed that his wife is impotent and that his wifes vagina is too
small for copulation.

Thus, the appellant petitioned for the nullity of his marriage to herein
defendant on the ground that his wife is impotent and that this has been
existing before the inception of the marriage.

The defendant was summoned and served a copy of the complaint but she
failed to file an answer. The court then required the defendant to submit
herself for physical examination to determine whether herein appellants
claim is not concocted or fabricated. But the defendant failed to submit a
medical certificate on the result thereof within the 10-day grace period from
the receipt of the order. She was given another five additional more days to
comply with the courts requirement with a warning that her failure to
execute such requisite will be deemed lack of interest on her part in the case
and that the judgment of the case upon the evidence presented by herein
appellant would be rendered.

Since herein defendant abstained from attending the hearing and submitting
the required medical certificate, the court ruled that the marriage between
appellant and defendant be nullified.

However, the city attorney filed a motion for reconsideration of the decree
upon the ground that the defendants impotency has not been satisfactorily
established, thus, he asserted that the complaint be dismissed for lack of
substantial evidence or that the wife be compelled to submit herself for
physical examination.

ISSUE: Whether or not the marriage in question be annulled upon only on
the sole testimony of the husband who claims that his wife is impotent.

HELD: The court set aside the judgment and remanded the case for further
proceedings, finding that the lone testimony of the husband does not suffice
to annul their union.
Page 2 of 2

The defendants attitude towards the complaint is expected from a Filipina.
Women in this country are by nature shy and the defendants submission to a
physical examination would be deemed outrageous on her end. Her refusal
to submit herself for such examination is not an offense to be taken against
her. The court with its power should compel the defendant to submit the
required medical certificate to render judgment based on medical findings
and not on pure assumptions alone.

Since marriage is uphold with so much respect in our country, the husbands
claim that his wife has a small vagina should not be a ground for annulment
to a tie bound by law and safeguarded by the state to maintain its purity,
continuity, and permanence.