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” .
