Impotent husband must pay damages

[pnutchuck]

An Italian man who married without telling his bride he was impotent must pay damages for abusing her "right to sexuality", a top court has ruled.
The man had failed to fulfil his conjugal duty and deprived his wife of the chance to be a mother, Italy's Supreme Court said.

His wife had already had the marriage annulled on the grounds of non-consummation.

The amount of damages will now be decided by a lower court in Sicily.

The Supreme Court's decision, published in the Italian media on Thursday, follows a lengthy legal battle by the woman, who argued that she deserved compensation for her husband's behaviour.

The couple had married without having had sex and their wedding night proved to be a disaster.

The woman said her husband should have warned her in advance and described his conduct as "contrary to the principles of loyalty, fairness and good faith".

more
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4541579.stm

Whatever happened to testing the merchandise first?

[Deja Q]

1. What happened to bonding for the sake of a relationship?

These twits shouldn't have married in the first place - if sex is what matters most.

And you're right, they should have tested the engines first.

[pnutchuck]

3. And can't he get Viagra? I mean why throw out the baby with the bath water

:shrug:

[BOSSHOG]

7. From Impotence to a four hour erection, overnight.

[smoogatz]

2. Two things:

1.Hasn't this guy ever heard of Viagra?
2.This is as good an argument as any for the virtues of pre-marital sex. Would you buy a car without taking it for a test drive?

[mhr]

4. Careful, Careful - The Fundie Sheeple Freeper People Will Be Knocking

eom

[BOSSHOG]

6. And any God fearing christian pharmacist would happily fill

a prescription for Viagra.

[pnutchuck]

9. and reserve their right to refuse birth control!

:mad:

[Massacure]

5. Did the guy know he was impotent?

[pnutchuck]

8. maybe she just decided Viagra wasn't worth it after checking out the

merchandise. :evilgrin:

[Inland]

10. He should allege it's her fault, countersue

"I was FINE before I married this ball busting harpy slag! I was a STALLION!"

[pnutchuck]

12. lmao!!

:rofl: :rofl: :spray: :spray:

[BlueIris]

15. I'm laughing, too. Loudly.

And y'all? This is a new one for me. Feeling that a member of the male half of the human race is getting cruelly and disgustingly abused by the freaking highest court in his country. Can't believe there's a situation in the world right now that would motivate me to type this, but: Poor guy.

[Inland]

11. dupe delete

[SoCalDem]

13. Talk about adding insult to injury..

They couldn't have been very compatible anyway..

[geniph]

14. Is that what marriage is for, sex and procreation only?

If there was a real bond between the couple - which, in my opinion, is the actual purpose of marriage, to formalize the bond - then, folks, there are other ways of having sex and there are plenty of children needing adoption. Get over yourself, lady!

Dumbest damn lawsuit I ever heard of. She's not deprived of anything. The marriage was annulled, so she can go get herself knocked up by someone else now, with Church sanction and everything. What a whiner.

[BlueIris]

16. Respectfully: "Whiner"? Come on, get creative.

There are a lot of other words for people who think their partners exist soley as objects to pleasure them sexually and provide them with offspring. Grrrr, now I'm thinking of my ex.

[LisaL]

24. What if the wife refused to have sex after the marriage?

Would you still feel the husband wasn't deprived of anything?

[neweurope]

17. Reading the answers so far I agree... BUT

on the other hand we don't know how the guy behaved. Yes, there are other ways to have sex - but does he know or care? What would you say if after marriage the woman had absolutely no interest in sex, for instance?

And while it's true that there are many kids waiting to be adopted: Adoption is always a major decision and not an easy one. Finding out after marriage that if you want to have children you have to adopt them is not exactly what every woman has been waiting for. If he couldn't trust her enough before marriage to tell her about his problems she doesn't need him. Quit whining, guys :)

---------------------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!

[BlueIris]

19. While I agree with your point that she shouldn't be

villified just for wanting out of the marriage--damages? That's horrible.

[BlueIris]

18. Ah, good thread. Shitty situation, but good thread.

Just when I thought the DU=smart, not-narrow-minded people dream was dead, again, all the smart people have returned.

[pnutchuck]

20. I just thought it would be a good reminder that the US isn't the only

source of frivolous law suits..:toast:

[ieoeja]

21. Well then, let me rain on your parade!

If he knew he was impotent (as the opening statement implies) and led her to believe otherwise, then she fell in love with the man he pretended to be, not with the man he truly was. If he married her under false pretenses then he has only himself to blame when she learns their relationship was built on his lies.

[BlueIris]

30. Oh, you didn't rain on my parade.

No one could at this point. Most people here recognize that it's disgusting to treat your partner like a breeding tool, and then be extra vicious about it with a lawsuit...with a request for damages attatched. That renews my faith in DU.

[Nevernose]

22. Impotence is bad enough w/o getting sued over it

Poor, poor bastard...

[pnutchuck]

23. I know, and why couldn't she just have left it annuled without dragging

his name into public scrutiny? The poor guy will never get another chance, at least not in Italy.

[LisaL]

26. What does he need another chance for?

:shrug:
Unless, of course, there is a way to fix his problem.
:evilgrin:

[LisaL]

25. Which is the reason he shouldn't have gotten married,

especially without telling his future wife about his problem.

[Nevernose]

27. I agree with you

But it's still no reason to sue someone.

[LisaL]

28. Oh, I think most people wouldn't sue in that situation.

Annulment would be enough for most people, I would think. But still it's pretty sneaky of the guy to get married and not mention his problem.

[WI_DEM]

29. Well, there is one good argument for premarital sex

at least the bride and groom will know what they are getting into (in that department).