Club Dynasty
Jerkmate

B.C. woman granted annulment of marriage due to husband's impotence. He tried

canada-man

Well-known member
Jun 17, 2007
24,514
127
63
Toronto, Ontario
private.kinky-blogging.com
A judge has granted a B.C. woman an annulment of her marriage after she was able to prove that her husband was impotent and had not consummated the union.

The couple, who are only identified by initials in a court ruling, had attended pre-marriage counselling at a church during which no sexual health issues were disclosed.


They had not lived together with one another before their marriage in August 2018 nor did they attempt to have sex before the marriage.

B.C. Supreme Court Justice Wendy Baker was told that from August 2018 until approximately March 2019, the couple attempted sexual intercourse regularly.

The wife claimed that they’d attempted sex twice a week while the husband said he tried to initiate sex at least three times a week.

But they were unable to have sexual intercourse because the husband was not able to obtain or maintain an erection.

In June 2019, the wife asked her husband to see a doctor about his sexual problems but he put off seeing a physician and when he did see a doctor, tests indicated there was nothing wrong with him.




The couple, who had discussed having children, separated in September 2019 with the wife seeking an annulment, or a declaration that the marriage had not existed, rather than a divorce, for reasons based on her religious faith.

“The marriage contract which she entered into with the respondent is, in her submission, void as a result of his inability to complete an essential implied term of the contract, namely engaging in sexual intercourse,” the judge said in her ruling.

The judge also noted that a declaration of annulment must be based on facts which existed at the date of the marriage.

“Notwithstanding months of attempts during their marriage, at no time was the respondent able to perform sexual intercourse with the claimant,” said the judge.

“The incapability of the respondent arises not from a refusal to have sexual intercourse, but rather from a disability of some sort, whether physical or psychological. … The marriage contract made Aug. 11, 2018 between the claimant and respondent is null and void.”

 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
23,230
207
63
This could be a slippery slope decision. Is it based on the fact they can't have children because of him? Because if that's the case then it opens up a slew of possibilities. Including if she can't.
 

Perry Mason

Well-known member
Aug 20, 2001
4,460
40
48
Here
Nothing noteworthy here...

Annulment based on inability to consummate the marriage has been the law for quite a long time... even in Ecclesiastical Courts! ;)

Perry
 

icespot

Well-known member
Jul 8, 2005
1,685
61
48
Just a guess here, but I'm thinking he is probably not into women. Being that religion is being mentioned means he has to live by those rules which are contrary to his nature, which is as natural as breathing....
 

fall

Well-known member
Dec 10, 2010
993
44
48
A judge has granted a B.C. woman an annulment of her marriage after she was able to prove that her husband was impotent and had not consummated the union.

The couple, who are only identified by initials in a court ruling, had attended pre-marriage counselling at a church during which no sexual health issues were disclosed.


They had not lived together with one another before their marriage in August 2018 nor did they attempt to have sex before the marriage.

B.C. Supreme Court Justice Wendy Baker was told that from August 2018 until approximately March 2019, the couple attempted sexual intercourse regularly.

The wife claimed that they’d attempted sex twice a week while the husband said he tried to initiate sex at least three times a week.

But they were unable to have sexual intercourse because the husband was not able to obtain or maintain an erection.

In June 2019, the wife asked her husband to see a doctor about his sexual problems but he put off seeing a physician and when he did see a doctor, tests indicated there was nothing wrong with him.




The couple, who had discussed having children, separated in September 2019 with the wife seeking an annulment, or a declaration that the marriage had not existed, rather than a divorce, for reasons based on her religious faith.

“The marriage contract which she entered into with the respondent is, in her submission, void as a result of his inability to complete an essential implied term of the contract, namely engaging in sexual intercourse,” the judge said in her ruling.

The judge also noted that a declaration of annulment must be based on facts which existed at the date of the marriage.

“Notwithstanding months of attempts during their marriage, at no time was the respondent able to perform sexual intercourse with the claimant,” said the judge.

“The incapability of the respondent arises not from a refusal to have sexual intercourse, but rather from a disability of some sort, whether physical or psychological. … The marriage contract made Aug. 11, 2018 between the claimant and respondent is null and void.”

I am just wondering, how lesbians can get married: none of them have an erection. IMHO, lesbian marriage creates a precedent that erection is not required for expected sexual intercourse in a marriage. On the other hand, this ruling creates a precedent that any gay marriage between two women can be annulled.
 

Jenesis

Fabulously Full Figured
Supporting Member
Jul 14, 2020
333
227
43
www.jenesis.ch
Just a guess here, but I'm thinking he is probably not into women. Being that religion is being mentioned means he has to live by those rules which are contrary to his nature, which is as natural as breathing....
Good point. He may very well be gay. The doctor said there was nothing medically wrong with him.

Can you imagine having to hide yourself so much that you married a gender you are not attracted too? I mean I know it has happened a lot. I have a gay friend that did it because he could not come out of the closet. It is so sad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: icespot

rhuarc29

Active member
Apr 16, 2009
8,527
21
38
Imagine getting married and this is all it takes to derail it. They really should never have been married in the first place.
Of course, it may have simply been the premise for the annulment and not that main cause for seeking one.
 

icespot

Well-known member
Jul 8, 2005
1,685
61
48
Good point. He may very well be gay. The doctor said there was nothing medically wrong with him.

Can you imagine having to hide yourself so much that you married a gender you are not attracted too? I mean I know it has happened a lot. I have a gay friend that did it because he could not come out of the closet. It is so sad.
Can't imagine how hard it most be to conceal their true nature.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jenesis and lomotil

lomotil

Well-known member
Mar 14, 2004
4,766
69
48
Oblivion
Just a guess here, but I'm thinking he is probably not into women. Being that religion is being mentioned means he has to live by those rules which are contrary to his nature, which is as natural as breathing....
Maybe he is not into women or maybe just not into her. How did the doctor determine that there was nothing wrong with him in terms of his ability to have sexual intercourse ? What where the diagnostic tests and the results? This doesn’t, sound like an arranged marriage . If he was found to be a homosexual then this alone would be sufficient grounds for divorce .
 
Toronto Escorts