SARAO VS GUEVARA ISSUE:
May 31 1940
J A. Reyes
Sec. 30 of the Act No. 3613 states that marriage can be
annulled if “either party was, at the time of marriage, physically
incapable of entering into the married state, and such
incapacity continues and is incurable”
FACTS:
 On June 3, 1936, Felix Sarao and Pilar Guevara were
married in Manila
 On the same day, Felix Sarao initiated carnal
knowledge (sexual intercourse) with Pilar Guevara.
Although he found her vagina to be of adequate size,
Pilar complained of feeling pains when they had sex.
He likewise noticed purulent material from Pilar’s
vagina which was offensive to his smell.
 On August 7, 1936, Pilar underwent surgery to remove
her uterus and ovaries because they were found to be
infected by a tumor. According to the physician, the
operation rendered Pilar incapable of procreation but it
did not incapacitate her for copulation.
 After said operation, Felix declared that he has lost
interest to have sex with his wife. This prompted him to
file for the annulment of their marriage
 Even after claiming impotency as grounds for
annulment, the Court of First Instance of Laguna
dismissed Felix’s petition
As claimed by the petitioner, W/N the phrase “physically
incapable of entering into a married state” (Sec 30 of Act No.
3613) refers to incapacity to procreate
RATIO AND HOLDING:
NO
Since the country’s marriage law at that time was of American
origin, said provisions were interpreted following American
decisions. As such, citing Keezer, the test of impotency does
not refer to the ability to procreate, but the ability to copulate
(engage in sex). Moreover, it was cited that such impotency
must be permanent and lasting.
It should also be noted that Pilar was not impotent when she
married. It was the surgery which rendered her baren, but she
was still capable of intercourse. It was Felix’s disgust of Pilar’s
sexual organ during their honeymoon which made him
unwilling to copulate with her from then on out
Felix’s claim that his consent to marry was fraudulent because
he was unaware of Pilar’s disease is untenable. This was not
alleged in the filed complaint and it has not been proven in trial
RULING
Felix’s petition is dismissed with costs against him