I think you have well read the facts of the case
If you read the ruling of Judges was that there was a concurrent finding of fact in the courts that the marriage was never consummated due to the wifes unwillingness alone. There was no structural impediment to marital. What structual impendiment they are talking here is that there was no proved structural defect or incapacity of woman to consumate marriage. Just a mere obstinate or wilful refusal to consumate was not enough to annul marriage but incapacity of woman needed to be proved
Therefore a careful reading of the evidence in the case it made a conclusion to the judges that the appellant could not make a case for a decree of nullity. That is the way I can see from that case otherwise you still can read and found out more interpretation of the case