Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
CA
ISSUE:
219 SCRA 115
Whether breach of promise to marry
FACTS: can give rise to cause claim for
damages.
Marilou Gonzales, filed a complaint
dated October 27, 1987 for damages HELD:
against the petitioner for the alleged
breach of their agreement to get Breach of promise to marry per se is
married. She met the petitioner in not an actionable wrong. The court
Dagupan, he was an Iranian medical held that when a man uses his
exchange student. He later courted promise of marriage to deceive a
her and proposed marriage. The woman to consent to his malicious
petitioner even went to Marilou’s desires, he commits fraud and
house to secure approval of her willfully injures the woman. In that
parents. instance, the court found that
petitioner’s deceptive promise to
The petitioner forced the respondent marry led Marilou to surrender her
to live with him in his apartment. She virtue and womanhood.
filed a complaint because the
petitioner started maltreating and Moral damages can be claimed when
threatening her. He even tied the such promise to marry was a
respondent in the apartment while he deceptive ploy to have carnal
was in school and drugged knowledge with the woman and
her. Marilou at one time became actual damages should be paid for
pregnant but the petitioner the wedding preparation
administered a drug to abort the expenses. Petitioner even
baby. committed deplorable acts in
disregard of the laws of the country.
Petitioner repudiated the marriage
agreement and told Marilou to not live DE JESUS vs. SYQUIA
with him since he is already married
to someone in Bacolod. He claimed
G.R. No. L-39110, November 28,
that he never proposed marriage,
1933
neither sought consent and approval
of Marliou’s parents. He claimed
that he asked Marilou to stay out of FACTS:
his apartment since the latter
deceived him by stealing money and Antonia Loanco was a cashier in a
his passport. The private barber shop owned by the
respondent prayed for damages and defendant’s brother in law Vicente
reimbursements of actual expenses. Mendoza. Cesar Syquia,the
defendant was an unmarried scion of
a prominent family in Manila. He got The letter written by Syquia to Rev.
acquainted with Antonio and had an Father and the other letters to
amorous relationship.As a Antonia are sufficient proof of
consequence, Antonia got pregnant paternity. The mere requirement is
and a baby boy was born on June 17, that the writing shall be indubitable.
1931.
“The law fixes no period during which
In the early months of Antonia’s a child must be in the continuous
pregnancy, defendant was a constant possession of the status of a natural
visitor. On February 1931, he even child; and the period in this case was
wrote a letter to a Rev Father long enough to reveal the father’s
confirming that the child is his and he resolution to admit the status”.
wanted his name to be given to the
child. Though he was out of the The Supreme Court upheld the
country, he continuously wrote letters decision of the lower court
which are solicitous of Antonia and compelling Syquia to provide support
the baby’s welfare. He made for the child Ismael Loanco.
hospital arrangements through his
friend for Antonia’s delivery.
WASSMER vs. VELEZ
FACTS:
It was declared that in the selection
of employees and agents, employers
The victim Evangeline Tangco was are required to examine them as to
depositor of Ecology Bank. She was
their qualifications, experience and
service records. Thus, due diligence
on the supervision and operation of
employees includes the formulation
of suitable rules and regulations for
the guidance of employees and the
issuance of proper instructions
intended for the protection of the
public and persons with whom the
employer has relations through his
employees. Thus, in this case,
Safeguard Security committed
negligence in identifying the
qualifications and ability of its agents.