FRANCISCO HERMOSISIMA, petitioner, vs. THE HON. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL., respondents.

No. L-14628. September 30, 1960

CONCEPCIÓN, J.:

FACTS:

Soledad Cagigas and Francisco Hermosisima, who was almost 10 years younger used to have an intimate relationship. They had sexual intercourse and Soledad then got pregnant, whereupon he promised to marry her. Their child, Chris Hermosisima, was born on June 17, 1954 however, subsequently, or on July 24, 1954, defendant married one Romanita Perez.

On October 4, 1954, Soledad, filed a complaint for the acknowledgment of her child, as natural child of said petitioner, support and moral damages for alleged breach of promise. Petitioner admitted the paternity of child and expressed willingness to support the later, but denied having ever promised to marry the complainant. The judgement was rendered in favor of Soledad including the award of P5,00 for the moral damages.

ISSUE:

W/N  moral damages are recoverable, under our laws, for breach of promise to marry.

RULING:

YES. An existing jurisprudence in the case of De Jesus vs. Syquia, states that breach of promise to marry is not actionable wrong. The Supreme Court held that no moral damages can be charged, because, the complainant “surrendered herself” to petitioner because, “overwhelmed by her love” for him, she “wanted to bind” him “by having a fruit of their engagement even before they had the benefit of clergy” .

abuse of rights (2) Administrative Law (5) Agency (4) alteration (2) Article 19 (2) Article 26 of the Family Code (2) article 36 (4) Article 148 of the Family Code (2) Article 153 of the Family Code (3) Bill of Rights (3) capacity to contract marriage (2) Case Digest (327) Chain of Custody (2) Civil Code (20) civil law (56) Civil Procedure (49) commercial law (80) Company Policies (2) Conflicts of Law (33) Constitutional Law (25) Constitutional Rights of Employers and Employees (2) Corporate Law (2) court of appeals (9) Credit Card (2) Credit Transactions (7) criminal law (3) criminal procedure (9) Different Kind Of Obligations (2) dismissal (2) divorce (2) Donation (2) Dreamwork (2) easements (2) ec2 (2) Effect of Partial payment (2) ejusdem generis (2) Election Law (2) Eminent Domain (4) Employee’s Rights (2) evidence (2) Expropriation (2) Extinguishment of Obligations – Compensation (2) family code (19) family home (4) Federico O Borromeo Inc (1) Foreclosure (2) foreign divorce (2) forgery (2) G.R. No. 107019 (1) G.R. No. 119122 (1) Government Service Insurance System (1) Injunction (2) instagram (2) Insurable Interest (2) Insurance (54) Intellectual Property (6) japan (5) Judicial review (2) Just Compensation (2) L-26002 (1) labor law (37) Law School (318) Local Government Code (2) marriage (12) NAIA Terminal 3 (2) National Labor Relations Commission (7) negotiable instrument (10) Oblicon (19) Obligation and Contracts (25) Payment through Agent (2) Persons and Family Relations (21) Philippine Airlines (2) Philippine Airlines Inc. (2) Philippine Basketball Association (1) Philippine citizenship (2) Police power (2) Political Law (33) Ponente (7) Premium Payment (2) programming (2) property (8) Provisional Remedies (2) Psychological Incapacity (4) public officers (2) R.S. Tomas Inc. (1) Reinsurance (3) Remedial Law (56) Residence (2) Rights to Security of Tenure and Due Process (2) San Miguel Properties (1) security (2) Seven (7) Cardinal Rights of Workers (2) shrines (2) Social justice (7) Sources of Labor Rights and Obligations (4) Succession (7) Taxation Law (6) temple (2) tokyo (3) TYPES of Employees (2)