Breach of promise to marry is not an actionable wrong.  [De Jesus vs. Syquia, 58 Phil., 866]  But to formally set a wedding and go...

Breach of promise to marry is not an actionable wrong.  [De Jesus vs. Syquia, 58 Phil., 866] 

But to formally set a wedding and go through all the above-described preparation and publicity, only to walk out of it when the matrimony is about to be solemnized, is quite different. This is palpably and unjustifiably contrary to good customs xxx. (BEATRIZ P. WASSMER vs. FRANCISCO X. VELEZ, G.R. No. L-20089)

Where a man's promise to marry is 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 a sexual congress, proof that he had, in reality, no intention of marrying her and that the promise was only a subtle scheme or deceptive device to entice or inveigle her to accept him and to obtain her consent to the sexual act, could justify the award of damages pursuant to Article 21 not because of such promise to marry but because of the fraud and deceit behind it and the willful injury to her honor and reputation. It is essential, however, that such injury should have been committed in a manner contrary to morals, good customs or public policy. (GASHEM SHOOKAT BAKSH vs. CA and MARILOU T. GONZALES, G.R. No. 97336 February 19, 1993)

However, when for one whole year, the plaintiff, a woman of legal age, maintained sexual relations with the defendant, with repeated acts of intercourse, there is here voluntariness. No case under Article 21 is made.(APOLONIO TANJANCO vs. CA and ARACELI SANTOS,  GR. No. L-18630)

In some cases our Supreme Court in this wise held:

We cannot castigate a man for seeking out the partner of his dreams, for marriage is a sacred and perpetual bond which should be entered into because of love, not for any other reason. 

Marital union is a two-way process. An expressive interest in each other’s feelings at a time it is needed by the other can go a long way in deepening the marital relationship. Marriage is definitely not for children but for two consenting adults who view the relationship with love amor gignit amorem, respect, sacrifice and a continuing commitment to compromise, conscious of its value as a sublime social institution. (Chi Ming Tsoi vs. Court of Appeals and Gina Lao- Tsoi, GR No. 119190)

Love happens to everyone. It is dubbed to be boundless as it goes beyond the expectations people tagged with it. In love, “age does matter.” People love in order to be secure that one will share his/her life with another and that he/she will not die alone. Individuals who are in love had the power to let love grow or let love die – it is a choice one had to face when love is not the love he/she expected. (Padilla-Rumbaua v. Rumbaua, G.R. No. 166738)
The author takes no responsibility for the validity, correctness and result of this work. The information provided is not a legal advice and it should not be used  as a substitute for a competent legal advice from a licensed lawyer. See the disclaimer

You Might Also Like