Posted on 05/12/2005 9:02:54 AM PDT by Jimmyclyde
Impotent ex-husband must pay damages
An impotent Italian man who kept his problem a secret from his wife until after their wedding must pay her damages for 'eroding' her right to have a family, Italy's Supreme Court has ruled.
The woman, identified by the Italian media as Cristina S., was quick to get her marriage annulled in the 1990s after learning to her horror that her husband could not consummate it.
She then demanded damages, saying she had been robbed of her "right to sexuality" and the promise of a family. Despite losing legal battles in lower courts, she kept appealing, and finally the Supreme Court found in her favor.
"Her fundamental right (was) eroded to fully realize a family, as a woman and a wife, and eventually as a mother," according to excerpts from the court ruling published in Italian newspapers Thursday.
The amount of damages will be settled by a lower court in Sicily, where the unhappy couple were married.
bump
maybe he could have subcontracted those duties?
Cialis to the rescue.
Narrow urethra?
Did the guy really think he could hide this after the wedding? What in blazes did he think a marriange involved? hugs?
Courts just LOVE to invent "new fundamental rights", like one to sexuality. BAH! This is simply a matter of FRAUD, plain and simple. It would be like marrying a person, who later told you they were a transvestite. Hey, you could still have sex with them, there's no violation of your right to sexuality, but in this case as well, you were DEFRAUDED, thus you should get your due (so to speak)..
Heh Heh, I'll tell you what....
Men do it to women too, though not as often.
Going from 4-5x a week down to 1x a week.....
I guess she didn't really mean it when she said she loved him.
You are correct.
This is very OLD common law, even in England/America and actually recognized as a right for an annulment.
Usually, though, it was code for, "He's like Barney Frank or maybe Michael Jackson."
Yes, hugs. But a special kind, called "jumpy hugs."
actually there is nothing new here (exactly for the reasons you state), it is all in the reporting.
Fraud, mistake, or misrepresentation has always been grounds for an anulment. Even before the USA came to be.
I suppose that argument could be made, but it would be tantamount to the shameless hijacking of the thread.
To many Mama's boys.
Yeah, he defrauded her, but now his name and shame have been through numerous Italian courts all the way their Supreme Court. I'd say she's had her revenge already.:)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.