I am not sure if the husband should be paying the damages for his failure to fulfil his conjugal duty…
*Impotent husband must pay damages*
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 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”.
The court ruling said Cristina S had suffered “a violation of her fundamental right to fulfilment, in the family and in society, as a woman, a wife and possibly as a mother”.
The case has now been sent back to the Court of Appeal in Palermo, which will decide how much compensation Stefano B should have to pay.
Source: BBC News
…But one thing is for sure – that woman _did not_ engage with pre-marital sex with the man.
Possibly related: