Non-disclosure of ‘virginity’ does not constitute fraud

Persida Acosta

Persida Acosta

Dear PAO,
My friend Adrian married Ponciana in 2008. After one year, their relationship turned sour. They always quarrel with each other. Adrian revealed to me that his wife defrauded him, because she did not disclose to him that she is no longer a “virgin.” Adrian wishes to file an annulment of marriage based on fraud. Is he correct?                                     

Dear Janice,
Adrian is not correct in his view. Under Number 3 of Article 45 of the Family Code of the Philippines, it is provided that “a marriage may be annulled for any of the following causes, existing at the time of marriage:

(3) That the consent of either party was obtained by fraud, unless such party afterwards, with full knowledge of the facts constituting fraud, freely cohabited with the other as husband and wife.

Correlative to the abovementioned provision of the law is Article 46 (Ibid.) which states,  “Any of the following circumstances shall constitute fraud referred to in Number 3 of the preceding Article:

(1)    Non-disclosure of a previous conviction by final judgment of the other party of a crime involving moral turpitude;

(2)    Concealment by the wife of the fact that at the time of marriage, she was pregnant by a man other than her husband;

(3)    Concealment of a sexually transmissible disease, regardless of its nature, existing at the time of the marriage; or

(4)    Concealment of drug addiction, habitual alcoholism or homosexuality or lesbianism existing at the time of marriage.

No other misrepresentation or deceit as to character, health, rank, fortune or chastity shall constitute such fraud as will give grounds for the annulment of marriage.

From the above provisions of law, it is very clear that non-disclosure of matters relative to “virginity” does not constitute fraud as contemplated by law.

We hope that we were able to answer your queries. Please be reminded that this advice is based solely on the facts that you have narrated and our appreciation of the same. Our opinion may vary when other facts are changed or elaborated.

Editor’s note: Dear PAO is a daily column of the Public Attorney’s Office. Questions for Chief Acosta may be sent to


Please follow our commenting guidelines.

Comments are closed.