You are on page 1of 16

(2) Natural Persons (a).

Civil Personality
Concepts and Classes of Persons Person- any being that can be subject of legal relations. Classes of Persons: >Natural Persons- Human beings > Juridical Persons- entities formed by the association of men. Personality- aptitude of becoming subject of, active or passive, juridical relations Status of Persons- Legal condition or class which one belongs in society - It is the legal or the juridical position of the individual in society, or with regard to the rest of the community - It is determined by a series of personal qualities, which respectively carry with them certain rights and obligations. - A persons status serves to determine the nature and number of rights and obligations. Kinds of Status > Political or Civil, depending on whether he is considered in the light of public law or private law. >Rights and obligations in connection with suffrage refer to Political status while those arising from family relations refer to Civil status. Civil Status - Status as a member of society (i.e. resident or nonresident) - Status as a member of a family - Status with respect to the person himself (i.e. age, mental condition, sex) - Profession cannot be considered status because the qualities which create a status should be inherent in the person himself. Characteristics of Status- the status of a person is outside the commerce of man hence: - It is inalienable in that it cannot be transferred to another; - It is imprescriptible in that it cannot be imposed on a person; - It cannot be the subject of compromise; - It cannot be renounced; - It cannot be exercised by creditors CC Article 37: Juridical Capacity is the fitness to be the subject of legal relations. It is inherent in every natural person and is lost only through death. Capacity to act which is the power to do acts that have legal effect, is acquired and may be lost. Juridical Capacity- legal capacity

Capacity to Act- aptitude for the exercise of rights which is conditional and variable, requiring intelligence and will.

(a) Commencement of Civil Personality CC Article 40 (Commencement of Civil Personality) : Birth determines personality; but the conceived child shall be considered born for all purposes that are favorable to it, provided, it be born later with conditions specified in the following article. Birth determines personality. The conceived shall be considered born for all purposes that are favorable to it provided that it be born later. Birth- removal of the fetus from the mothers womb Conceived Child- can be given inheritance by will or donations *Note: Birth determines personality but the conceived child shall be considered born for all purposes
that are favorable to it. Provided that the conceived child is later born with the conditions in Art. 41.

CC Article 41 (Conditions to determine whether the child is conceived): For civil purposes, the fetus is considered born if it is alive at the time it is completely delivered from the mothers womb. However, if the fetus had and intra-uterine life of less than seven months, it is not deemed born if it dies within twenty-four hours after its complete delivery from the maternal womb. The fetus is considered born if it is alive at the time it is completely delivered from the mothers womb. For premature birth of less than seven months, it is considered born if it survives for at least 24 hours after its delivery. Separation- cutting of the umbilical cord Test of life- complete respiration or in the case of a deceased child, the lungs should float in water. Viability- the childs ability to live which is presumed if it survives separation from the mother *Note: delivered from the mothers womb. BUT if the fetus was alive in the womb for less than 7
months it is not deemed born if it dies within 24 hours it is delivered form the womb.

GELUZ v COURT OF APPEALS FACTS: Nita Villanueva came to know the defendant (Antonio Geluz) for the first time in 1948 through her aunt Paula Yambot. In 1950 she became pregnant by her present husband before they were legally married. Desiring to conceal her pregnancy from her parent, and acting on the advice of her aunt, she had herself aborted by the defendant. After her marriage with the plaintiff, she again became pregnant. As she was then employed in the Commission on Elections and her pregnancy proved to be inconvenient, she had herself aborted again by the

defendant in October 1953. Less than two years later, she again became pregnant. On February 21, 1955, accompanied by her sister Purificacion and the latter's daughter Lucida, she again repaired to the defendant's clinic on Carriedo and P. Gomez streets in Manila, where the three met the defendant and his wife. Nita was again aborted, of a two-month old foetus, in consideration of the sum of fifty pesos, Philippine currency. The plaintiff was at this time in the province of Cagayan, campaigning for his election to the provincial board; he did not know of, nor gave his consent, to the abortion. It is the third and last abortion that constitutes plaintiff's basis in filing this action and award of damages. Upon application of the defendant Geluz we granted certiorari. ISSUE: Did the Plaintiff have the right for damages in behalf of his unborn child? HELD: No. The fetus was not yet born and thus does not have civil personality. According to Article 40, birth determines personality. In this case, the fetus does not yet possess a personality to speak of because it was aborted in uterus. The child should be born before the parents can seek any recovery for damages. Action for pecuniary damages on account of personal injury or death pertains primarily to the one injured. There could be no action for such damages that can be instituted on behalf of the unborn child for the injuries it received because it lacked juridical personality. The damages which the parents of an unborn child can recover are limited to moral damages, in this case, for the act of the appellant Geluz to perform the abortion. However, moral damages cannot also be recovered because the wife willingly sought the abortion, and the husband did not further investigate on the causes of the abortion. Furthermore, the husband did not seem to have taken interest in the administrative and criminal cases against the appellant, but was more concerned in obtaining from the doctor a large money payment. (b) Extinguishment of Civil Personality CC: Article 42 (Extinguish at death): Civil personality is extinguished by death. The effect of death upon the rights and obligations of the deceased is determined by law, by contract and by will. Civil personality is extinguished by death. The effect of death upon the rights and obligations of the deceased shall be determined by law, by contract or by will. -For certain purposes, the personality is deemed to continue in the estate of the deceased which has a legal personality independent of the heirs. *Note: Death puts an end to civil personality. - Dead person continues to have personality only through contract, will, or as determined by law. --Creditors can still claim from the estate of the deceased any obligation due to them. - No human body shall be buried unless the proper death certificate has been presented and recorded however during an epidemic bodies may be buried provided that the death certificate be secured within 5 days after the burial.

*Example: People vs. Tirol Facts: Ciriaco Baldesco and Bonifacio Tirol were among the fourteen who murdered 7 members of the family of Manibpol Kosain. They were convicted of 7 murders and 2 frustrated murders as Manibpol, the father and his daughter, Undang, survived. In the course of the appeal,while awaiting the final sentence, Baldesco died in prison. Held: Baldescos civil and criminal liabilities are extinguished by his death however, indemnities shall be paid for through his estate. CC Article 43 (Doubt between the death of two or more persons [survivor]): If there is a doubt, as between two or more persons who are called to succeed each other, as to which of them died first, whoever alleges the death of one prior to the other, shall prove the same; in the absence of proof, it is presumed that they died at the same time and there shall be no transmission of rights from one to the other. If there is doubt between two or more persons called to succeed each other, as to which of them died first, the one who alleges the death of one prior to another shall have the burden of proof. If no proof is available then it shall be presumed that they died at the same time. *Note 1: - Applies to persons who are called to succeed each other like mother and child. (Necessary to determine the amount of inheritance one is to receive, transmission of rights, etc.) - If there is no proof as to who died first, they are presumed to have died at the same time and thus no transmission of rights from one to the other. - Proof of death cannot be established from mere inference or presumptions. It must be established by clear positive evidence. *Note 2: There is an issue of succession and not just survivorship. -Rule 123, section 69, paragraph ii: If two or more persons die in a calamity and it cannot be shown who died first and there are no circumstances by which it can be inferred, survivorship is presumed from the probabilities resulting from the strength and age of sexes. 1. <15 years, the older is presumed to have survived 2. > 60 years, the younger is presumed to have survived 3. <15 and >60, the younger is presumed to have survived 4. >15, <60 for both; male is presumed to have survived if sexes are the same, then the older one. 5. <15 or > 60 and >15 ,<60, the younger is presumed to have survived *Example: Joaquin vs. Navarro Facts: During the Liberation of Manila, Joaquin Navarro Sr., his wife Angela Joaquin, his three daughters, Pilar, Conception and Natividad and Joaquin Navarro Jr together with his wife Adela Conde and friend Francisco Lopez, sought refuge inside German Club. The three daughters were instantly killed. Joaquin Sr., Joaquin Jr., with his wife and friend, fled the place leaving Angela

Joaquin in the German Club. Immediately after leaving the place, as attested by Francisco Lopez, Joaquin Jr. was shot in the head. Minutes later, German Club collapsed presumably killing Angela Joaquin inside. Days later, Joaquin Sr. died in a confrontation. The victims were survived by Ramon Joaquin, natural child of Angela Joaquin by her first marriage and Antonio C. Navarro, and son of Joaquin Navarro by his first marriage. The Court of Appeals invoked the statutory provision on the presumption of survivorship. Held: The statutory provision cannot be invoked because there are evidences as attested to by Francisco Lopez, from which it can be inferred that Angela Joaquin survived Joaquin Navarro Jr. before having died herself.

(3) Juridical Persons


(a) Enumeration CC Article 44 (Who are juridical persons): The following are juridical persons (1) The State and its political subdivisions; (2) Other corporations, institutions and entities for public interest or purpose, created by law; their personality begins as soon as they have been constituted according to law; (3) Corporations, partnership and associations for private interest or purpose to which the law grants a juridical personality, separate and distinct from that of each shareholder, partner or member. The following are juridical persons: 1. The State and its Political Subdivisions 2. Public corporations, institutions and entities which are created by law 3. Private corporations, partnerships and associations to which the law grants juridical personality. *Note: Being of legal existence susceptible of rights and obligations 1. State: organized corporate society under a government with the legal competence to exact obedience of its commands. It can enter into treaties and contracts. - The state cannot be sued without its consent (implied or expressed) 2. Political subdivisions: municipal corporations that consist of provinces, cities and municipalities. They can be sued because it is granted by their charters but they are generally not liable for torts committed in the discharge of their governmental functions. 3. Corporation: An artificial being created by operation of law and has the powers and attributes granted to it by the law, which created it. 4. Partnership: 2 or more persons bind themselves to make contributions to a common fund with the intention of dividing the profits among themselves. *Corporations, partnerships, and associations for private interest and purpose may be granted a separate and distinct personality from the shareholders or members (this is known as the veil of corporate fiction). However, this veil may be pierced, thus making the shareholders and members liable, when the fiction is used to defeat public convenience, justify wrong, protect fraud, defend crime, perpetrate
deception, etc.

*State and political subdivisions, other corporations, institutions, and entities for public interest or purpose are governed by the laws creating them. *Private corporations are regulated by laws of general application on the subject *Partnerships are governed by the provisions of this Code concerning partnerships *Juridical persons may acquire and possess property of all kinds and incur obligations in conformity with the laws and regulations of their organization.

(b) Governing Laws CC Article 45 (What governs juridical persons): Juridical persons mentioned in Nos. 1 and 2 of the preceding article are governed by the laws creating or recognizing them. Private corporations are regulated by laws of general application on the subject. Partnerships and associations for private interest or purpose are governed by the provisions of this Code concerning partnerships. Juridical Persons such as the state and public corporations are governed by laws recognizing them. Private corporations are governed by laws of general application on the subject. *Note: Corporations are governed by its charter and the Corporation Law -Private Partnerships are governed by its articles of association and their contract. CC Article 47 (Dissolution of corporations): Upon the dissolution of corporations, institutions and other entities for public interest or purpose mentioned in No. 2 of Art. 44, their property of and other assets shall be disposed of in pursuance of law or the charter creating them. IF nothing has been specified on this point, the property and other assets shall be applied to similar purposes for the benefit of the region, province, city or municipality which during the existence of the institution derived the principal benefits from the same. Properties and assets of dissolved corporations or other entities shall be disposed of in pursuance to the law or the charter creating them. If nothing is specifically written, then it shall be applied for the benefit of the region, province or municipality which it derived principal benefits from. *Note: Upon the dissolution of such entities mentioned above, their properties and other assets should be disposed of in pursuance of law or the charter creating it. - If there is nothing in the law, it shall be applied for a similar purpose for the benefit of the region/province/city it is in. (c) Rights and Obligations CC Article 46 (Rights and obligations of juridical persons): Juridical persons may acquire and possess property of all kinds, as well as incur obligations and bring civil or criminal actions, in conformity with the laws and regulations of their organization. Juridical Persons may acquire and possess property, incur obligations and liability or criminal actions in conformity with laws and regulations of the organization. - Juridical capacity is extinguished upon dissolution of the corporation, association or partnership.

II. Citizenship and Domicile


CC Article 15 (Nationality Rule): Laws relating to family rights and duties, or to the status, condition and legal capacity of persons are binding upon citizens of the Philippines, even though living abroad. *Note: Regardless of where a citizen of the Philippines might be he or she will still be governed by Philippine laws when it comes to family rights, duties, or to his or her legal status and legal capacity - Thus a Filipino cannot get a divorce even if he or she goes abroad, since divorce is not recognized in the Philippines CC Article 16 (Real and Personal Property): Real property as well as personal property is subject to the law of the country where it is situated. However, intestate and testamentary successions, both with respect to the order of succession and to the amount of successional rights and to the intrinsic validity of testamentary provisions, shall be regulated by the national law of the person whose succession is under consideration, whatever may be the nature of the property and regardless of the country wherein said property may be found. *Note: Real and Personal Property are subject to the law of the country where it is found. However, when it comes to the order, amount, and intrinsic validity of the succession it shall be regulated by the law of the person whose succession is being considered regardless of where the property is to be found. CC Article 48 (Who are citizens of the Philippines): The following are the citizens of the Philippines: 1. Those who were citizens of the Philippines at the time o the adoption of the Constitution of the Philippine; 2. Those born in the Philippines of foreign parents who, before the adoption of said constitution, had been elected to public office in the Philippines; 3.Those whose fathers are citizens of the Philippines; 4. Those whose mothers are citizens of the Philippines and, upon reaching the age of majority, elected Philippine citizenship; 5. Those who are naturalized in accordance with law. *Note: >Jus Sanguinis: Refers to citizenship by blood. This is the concept followed in the Philippines.
>Jus Soli: Refers to citizenship on the basis of the place of birth

CC Article 49 (Naturalization and reacquisition of loss citizenship): Naturalization and the loss and reacquisition of citizenship of the Philippines are governed by special laws. *Note: >Acquisition of Citizenship: for a foreigner to be able to become a Philippine citizen, a proper petition shall be filed in the proper court. >Ground for Reacquisition of Citizenship: 1.By naturalization

2.Repatriation of deserters of the Army, Navy or Air Corps.(Woman who has lost her citizenship by reason of marriage to an alien may be repatriated after the termination of her marital status) CC Article 50 (Domicile of Natural Persons): For the exercise of civil rights and the fulfillment of civil obligations, the domicile of natural persons is the place of their habitual residence. *Note: DOMICILE-Fixed permanent resident, a place wherein, although one may be absent from, one still has the intention of returning and remaining for an unlimited time. There is only one domicile. - A minor follows the domicile of his parents Change in Domicile: 1. An actual removal or an actual change or domicile 2. A bona fide intention of abandoning the former domicile and establishing a new one. 3. Act, which correspond with the purpose (physical presence in the area, move family in area, register as a voter in the area, etc.) RESIDENCE:-Indicates a place of abode whether permanent or temporary, not necessarily the domicile. There may be more than one residence. Romualdez-Marcos vs. COMELEC Facts: Imelda Romualdez-Marcos, filed her certificate of candidacy for the position of Representative of Leyte First District. On March 23, 1995, private respondent Cirilio Montejo, also a candidate for the same position, filed a petition for disqualification of the petitioner with COMELEC on the ground that petitioner did not meet the constitutional requirement for residency. On March 29, 1995, petitioner filed an amended certificate of candidacy, changing the entry of seven months to since childhood in item no . 8 in said certificate. However, the amended certificate was not received since it was already past deadline. She claimed that she always maintained Tacloban City as her domicile and residence. The Second Division of the COMELEC with a vote of 2 to 1 came up with a resolution finding private respondents petition for disqualification meritorious. Issue: Whether or not petitioner lost her domicile of origin by operation of law as a result of her marriage to the late President Marcos. Held: For election purposes, residence is used synonymously with domicile. The Court upheld the qualification of petitioner, despite her own declaration in her certificate of candidacy that she had resided in the district for only 7 months, because of the following: (a) a minor follows the domicile of her parents; Tacloban became petitioners domicile of origin by operation of law when her father brought the family to Leyte; (b) domicile of origin is lost only when there is actual removal or change of domicile, a bona fide intention of abandoning the former residence and establishing a new one, and acts which correspond with the purpose; in the absence of clear and positive proof of the concurrence of all these, the domicile of origin should be

deemed to continue; (c) the wife does not automatically gain the husbands domicile because the term residence in Civil Law does not mean the same thing in Political Law; when petitioner married President Marcos in 1954, she kept her domicile of origin and merely gained a new home, not a domicilium necessarium; (d) even assuming that she gained a new domicile after her marriage and acquired the right to choose a new one only after her husband died, her acts following her return to the country clearly indicate that she chose Tacloban, her domicile of origin, as her domicile of choice.

III. The Constitution and the Regulation of Family Relations


(a) The Family Constitution Article 15 (The Family) Sec. 1: The State recognizes the Filipino family as the foundation of the nation. Accordingly, it shall strengthen its solidarity and actively promote its total development. (b) Policy of protection and government support to family Constitution Article 2 (Declaration of Principles and State Policies) Sec. 12: The State recognizes the sanctity of family life and shall protect and strengthen the family as a basic autonomous social institution. It shall equally protect the life of the mother and the life of the unborn form conception. The natural and primary right and duty of parents in the rearing of the youth for civic efficiency and the development of moral character shall receive the support of the government. (c) Equal protection Constitution Article 2 (Declaration of Principles and State Policies) Sec. 14: The State recognizes the role of women in nation-building, and shall ensure the fundamental equality before the law of women and men. Constitution Article 2 (Declaration of Principles and State Policies) Sec. 1: The Philippines is a democratic and republican State. Sovereignty resides in the people and all government authority emanates from them.

IV. Marriage 1. Definition and Nature of Marriage


FC Article 1 (Definition of Marriage): Marriage is a special contract of permanent union between a man and a woman entered into accordance with law for the establishment of conjugal and family life. It is the foundation of the family and inviolable social institution whose nature, consequences, and incidents are governed by law and not subject to stipulation, except that marriage settlements may fix the property relations during the marriage within the limits provided by this Code. *Note: >Nature of Marriage

-Marriage is one of the basic civil rights of man. The freedom to marry has been recognized as a vital personal right towards the pursuit of mans happiness. -Still considered as a special civil contract regulated by law due to the high state interest in protecting and safeguarding the family. -A contract to marry, unlike other contracts, cannot be modified or changed. Once it is executed a relation is formed between the parties that cannot be altered. The law steps in to hold or bind the parties together. -A subsequent marriage between the rapist and raped victim extinguishes the criminal action or penalty of the rapist. In case of marital rape2 >Marriage Status -Marriage creates a social status, which the state is interested in protecting. It is a case where a double status is created, involves and affects two persons. >Marriage in International Law -men and women of full age without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion have the right to marry and found a family. 1. Universal Declaration of Human Rights 2. International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights 3. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. >Constitutional Protection -The State recognizes the sanctity of family life and shall protect and strengthen it. -The state also recognizes marriage as an inviolable social institution and the foundation of the family and shall be protected by the state. * The constitutional provisions on marriage however do NOT mean that legislature cannot enact a law allowing absolute divorce. Marriage is subject to the control of the legislature but it must not contravene mandates of Constitution. >Property Relations -Only property relations may be fixed and arranged in a marriage settlement prior to the marriage ceremony. However it must still follow the mandatory provisions of the Family Code. *Marriage as a special contract cannot be restricted by discriminatory policies of private individuals or corporations. >MAIL-ORDER BRIDE -considered as a criminal offense because marriage is vested with public interest. -(Connected with the Anti-Trafficking Act) Acts punished: 1. Carry on such a business 2. To advertise the promotion of such acts. 3. Solicit or attract or any Filipino woman to become a member in a club that matches women for marriage to foreign nationals for a fee. 4. Use the postal service to promote the prohibited acts. >VALIDITY OF MARRIAGE -governed by the law effective at the time of the celebration of the marriage.

>Marital rape is now considered a crime wherein the legal husband is the offender and the wife is the victim. Prior to this marital rape was not considered a crime because it was considered the right of the husband to have sexual intercourse with his wife whenever he pleased. >Ordinary Contracts vs. Marriage Contracts: - Ordinary contracts may be entered into by any number of persons of whatever sex while marriage can be entered into only by one man and one woman. - In ordinary contracts the agreement of the parties have the force of law between them while in marriage, the law fixes the duties and rights of the parties. - Ordinary contracts can be terminated by mutual agreement of the parties while marriage cannot be so terminated. Neither can it be terminated even though one of the parties subsequently becomes incapable of performing his part. - Breach of ordinary contracts gives rise to an action for damages while breach of the obligations of a husband or a wife does not give rise to such an action. >PC Article XV *The states role is to protect the family as the foundation of society. Section 1: State recognizes the Filipino family as the foundation of the nation. Section 2: Marriage is an inviolable social institution. Section 3: State shall defend1. The right of spouses to found a family in accordance with their religion and the demands of responsible parenthood. 2. The right of children to assistance, and special protection. 3. The right of family to a family living wage income. 4. The right of families to participate in the planning and implementation of policies and programs that affects them. Section 4: The family has the duty to care for its elderly members. Breach of Promise to Marry CC Article 19 (Abuse of Right Doctrine): Every person must, in the exercise of his rights and in the performance of his due, and observe honesty and good faith. Everyone must act with justice, give everyone his due and observe honesty and good faith. -The exercise of a right ends where the right disappears and it disappears when it is abused, to the prejudice of others. Good Faith- abstaining from taking advantage of others. -A bride or groom who breaks an engagement without reason causing moral and material injury to the other party is liable for damages especially if the decision is made just before the wedding and after a long engagement. *Note: Meant to be a law of justice and fairness especially in instances wherein there is no specific law to prevent acts of abuse to another

CC Article 20 (Willfully or negligently causes damage to another): Every person who, contrary to law, willfully or negligently causes damage to another, shall indemnify the latter for the same. Every person who willfully or negligently causes damage to another shall be liable for indemnity. -A person is required to act with prudence and diligence. *Note: - Speaks of the general sanction for all other provisions of law, which do not especially provide their own sanction. - Designed to fill in the countless gaps in the statues, which leave many victims without recourse. CC Article 21 (Contrary to good customs, morals and public policy): Any person who willfully causes loss or injury to another in a manner that is contrary to morals, good customs or public policy shall compensate the latter for damages. Any person who willfully causes loss or injury to another in a manner contrary to morals, good customs or public policy is liable for damages. -Acts which are not unlawful but are likewise contrary to morals or good customs, public order or policy shall fall under this provision. This article was created to provide adequate legal remedy. Willful Act- an act done with knowledge of the effect - Seduction, wherein a woman who was promised with marriage gives herself to a man but was later left by the man qualifies as deceit and may be used as basis for indemnity. - So long as there is a wrongful act and a resulting injury, there should be civil liability. -The injury must be the proximate cause of an act. -No person shall unjustly enrich himself at the expense of another *Note: Elements 1. There is an act which is legal 2. But which is contrary to morals, good customs, public order, public policy 3. And it is done with intent to injure - Presupposes material or other loss which one may suffer as a result of another persons act CC Article 2176 (Contrary to good customs, morals and public policy): Any person who willfully causes loss or injury to another in a manner that is contrary to morals, good customs or public policy shall compensate the latter for damages. Whoever by act or omission causes damage to another, there being fault or negligence, is obliged to pay for the damage done. Such fault or negligence is considered a quasi-delict and is governed by law. *Note: Elements 1. There is an act which is legal 2. But which is contrary to morals, good customs, public order, public policy

3. And it is done with intent to injure - Presupposes material or other loss which one may suffer as a result of another persons act

Wassmer vs Velez G.R. No. L-20089 December 26, 1964 Facts: Francisco Velez and Beatriz Wassmer are to be wed. 2 days prior the ceremony, Francisco left, leaving a telegram he will come back but never did. Beatriz filed for damages, and judgment was rendered ordering defendant to pay actual, moral and exemplary damages. Defendant now asserts that the judgment against him is contrary to law, given that there is no provision in the Civil Code authorizing an action for breach of promise to marry. Issue: Whether or not breach of promise to marry is actionable. Held: No it is not, but this case is not a mere breach of promise to marry. He must be held answerable for the damages in accordance with Art. 21. The SC maintained that though breach of promise to marry is not actionable, the defendants act is still punishable under Article 21 of the Civil Code which states that any person who willfully causes loss or injury to another in a manner that is contrary to morals, good customs or public policy shall compensate the latter for th e damage. In this case, plaintiff already arranged everything for the wedding, like the wedding gowns, invitations, matrimonial bed, etc. The SC held that this is not a case of mere breach of promise to marry A wedding has been formally set and all the preparations have been made, only for the groom to walk out 2 days before. This is contrary to good customs, since defendant acted in a reckless and oppressive manner. *Note: Wassamer vs. Velez
Facts:Francisco Velez and Beatrice Wassmer decided to get married on Septemeber4, 1954. On Sept. 2, Velez left a note saying that the said marriage has to be postponed. The following day, another note arrived saying the marriage was still going to push through. After that, plaintiff has never heard from him. When plaintiff filed for evidence before the clerk of court, the defendant was held in default and as such, plaintiff was awarded P2,000 actual damages, P25,000 moral damages and P2,500 for attorneys fees. Defendant filed a motion for relief and court gave both parties enough time to settle outside of court. No such settlement happened and several times, the defendant asked for extension. Held: The manner by which the defendant left the plaintiff, only a few days before the wedding, was contrary to good customs. At that time, the wedding has been aptly prepared and the visitors had been notified and so, that the plaintiff was affected is no longer in question. Civil indemnity is due in this case.

Tanjanco v. CA Facts:

Apolonio Trajanco courted Araceli Santos. Since he promised her marriage, she consented to his pleas for carnal knowledge. As a result, she conceived a child, and due to her condition, she had to resign from her work. Because she was unable to support herself and the baby, and the Apolonio refused to marry her, she instituted an action for damages, compelling the defendant to recognize the unborn child, pay her monthly support, plus P100,000 in moral and exemplary damages. Issue: Whether or not the acts of petitioner constitute seduction as contemplated in Art. 21. Held: No, it is not. Seduction is more than mere sexual intercourse or a breach of promise to marry. It connotes essentially the idea of deceit, enticement superior power or abuse of confidence on the part of the seducer to which the woman has yielded. In this case, for 1 whole year, the woman maintained intimate sexual relations with the defendant, and such conduct is incompatible with the idea of seduction. Plainly here there is voluntariness and mutual passion, for had the plaintiff been deceived, she would not have again yielded to his embraces for a year. *Note:
Facts: Apolinario Tanjanco and Arceli Santos are both of adult age. Santos consented to have sexual intercourse with Tanjanco with the promise of marriage. After almost a year of such relationship, Santos conceived of a child and due to humiliation she left her job at IBM Philippines where she received P230/ month. Tanjanco, then refused to marry Santos who was no longer able to support herself and the child. She was then prompted to sue for moral damages and to compel the defendant to support herself and the child. Held: Article 21 cannot be invoked in this case as it was already evident to the woman that Tanjanco no longer had any intention of marrying her even before she conceived of a child. Seduction, an example given by the code commission under Article 21 connotes deceit, enticement, and abuse of confidence. Such features are not present in the case wherein there where several instances of sexual intercourse for a period of almost one year.

De Jesus v Syquia Facts: This is an action by Antonia Loanco de Jesus, as mother of two infants, for the purpose of recovering from the defendant, Cesar Syquia damages arising from (1) breach of promise to marry, (2) to compel the defendant to recognize Ismael and Pacita as natural children and pay maintenance for them. Cesar met Antonia at the barbership where she works as a cashier. Soon, she became pregnant. Cesar was a constant visitor at her home, and wrote a letter to the priest saying that if the child was a boy, it will be christened in his name. On his trip to China, he was writing letters to Antonia cautioning her to keep in good condition so that junior will be strong. When she gave birth, Syquia took her and the child to live in a house where they lived together for 1 year as a family, with expenses being shouldered by Syquia. She became pregnant again, but soon Syquia left her to marry another woman. Issue: (1) Whether or not breach of promise to marry is actionable. (2) Whether the letters written by the defendant to the appellant proves paternity.

Held: The SC upheld the decision of the trail court in refusing to give damages to Antonia for breach of promise to marry. The action for breach of promise to marry has no standing in civil law, apart from the right to recover money or property advanced by the plaintiff upon the faith of such promise. As for the recognition of the child, the acknowledgment of paternity is satisfied by the production of more than 1 document of indubitable authenticity, containing, all together, the admission of the father recognizing a particular child as of his paternity, the admission of one writing being supplemented by those of another.
*Note: De Jesus vs. Syquia
Facts:Cesar Syquia had sexual relations with Antonia Loanco. Through a letter to a priest, he had made it apparent that he wanted the child carried by Antonia to be recognized as his. In several other letters, he referred to the child as junior. For a while the two partners lived under one roof with Antonias mother, after the birth of the child. Another child was conceived, upon which, Syquia left, never to be heard from again. At the christening of the child, Antonia named the child Ismael Loanco. Antonia then filed a suit against Syquia, to recover P30,000 for damages for breach of promise to marry and to pay for her maintenance along with the two children. Trial court ordered that the first child be recognized and for Syquia to pay a monthly maintenance of P50. Held: Supreme Court affirmed the judgment on the grounds that the breach of promise was not satisfactorily proven, owing to the fact that the sexual relations continued even after the birth of the first child and even though there was still no marriage. In relation to the second child being recognized, there was no proof to compel such action.

Gashem Shookat Baksh v CA Facts: This is an appeal by certiorari. On October 27, 1987, without the assistance of counsel, private respondent filed with the aforesaid trial court a complaint for damages against petitioner for the alleged violation of their agreement to get married. She alleges in said complaint that she is 20 years old, single, Filipino and a pretty lass of good moral character and reputation duly respected in her country; other petitioner, on the other hand, is an Iranian citizen residing at Lozano Apartments, Guilig, Dagupan City, and is an exchange student, before August 20, 1987 the latter courted and proposed to marry her, she accepted his love on the condition that they get married; they therefore agreed to get married. The petitioner forced her to live with him in the Lozano apartments. She was a virgin at that time; after a week before the filing of complaint, petitioners attitude towards her started to change. He maltreated and threatened to kill her; as a result of the complaint. Petitioner repudiated the marriage agreement and asked her not to live with him anymore and that the petitioner is already married to someone in Bacolod City. Private respondent then prayed for judgment ordering petitioner to pay her damages. On the other hand, petitioner claimed that he never proposed marriage to or agreed to be married with the private respondent and denied all allegations against him. After trial on the merits, the lower court ordered petitioner to pay the private respondent damages. ISSUE: Whether or not Article 21 of the Civil Code applies to the case at bar. HELD: The existing rule is that a breach of promise to marry per se is not an actionable wrong. Notwithstanding, Article 21, which is designed to expand the concepts of torts and quasi-delicts in this jurisdiction by granting adequate legal remedy for the untold number of moral wrongs

which is impossible for human foresight to specifically enumerate and punish in the statute books. Article 2176 of the Civil Code, which defines quasi-delicts thus: Whoever by act or omission causes damage to another, there being fault or negligence, is obliged to pay for the damage done. Such fault or negligence, if there is no pre-existing contractual relation between the parties, is called a quasi-delict and is governed by the provisions of this Chapter. In the light of the above laudable purpose of Article 21, the court held that where a mans promise to marry in fact the proximate cause of the acceptance of his love by a woman and his representation to fulfill that promise thereafter becomes the proximate cause of the giving of herself unto him in sexual congress, proof that he had, in reality, no intention of marrying her and that the promise was only subtle scheme or deceptive device to entice or inveigle her to accept him and obtain her consent to sexual act could justify the award of damages pursuant to Article 21 not because of such breach of promise of marriage but because of the fraud and deceit behind it, and the willful injury to her honor and reputation which followed thereafter. It is essential however, that such injury should have been committed in a manner contrary to morals, good customs, or public policy.