II.

HUMAN RELATIONS
B. Breach of Promise to Marry
1. WASSMER vs. ELE! 1" S#RA $%&
'A#TS
On August 23, 1954 plaintif and defendant applied for a license to contract
marriage, which was subsequentl issued! "heir wedding was set for
#eptember 4, 1954! $n%itations were printed and distributed to relati%es,
friends and acquaintances! "he bride&to&be's trousseau, part dresses and
other apparel for the important occasion were purchased! (resses for the
maid of honor and the )ower girl were prepared! A matrimonial bed, with
accessories, was bought! *ridal showers were gi%en and gifts recei%ed! And
then, with but two das before the wedding, defendant, who was then 2+
ears old,, simpl left a note for plaintif stating, -.ill ha%e to postpone
wedding / 0 mother opposes it !!! - 1e enplaned to his home cit in
0indanao, and the ne2t da, the da before the wedding, he wired plaintif,
-3othing changed rest assured returning soon!- *ut he ne%er returned and
was ne%er heard from again!
ISSUE
$s breach of promise to marr is actionable wrong4
HEL(
3o! *reach of promise to marr is not actionable wrong! *ut running awa a
da before the wedding because of our mother5s opposition without ta6ing
into consideration all the preparations and publicit is un7usti8abl contrar
to good customs for which defendant must be held answerable in damages
in accordance with Article 21 of the 9i%il 9ode which states that, :An person
who wilfull cause loss or in7ur to another in manner that is contrar to
morals, good customs or public polic shall compensate the latter for the
damage;!
2!< BU)A* +r. vs. #A "11 S#RA %%,
'A#TS
On the afternoon of #eptember +, 19=3, defendant&appellant *unag, >r!
brought plaintif&appellant to a motel where the had se2ual intercourse!
?ater that e%ening, said defendant&appellant brought plaintif&appellant to
the house of his grandmother >uana de ?eon in @amplona, ?as @iAas, 0etro
0anila, where the li%ed together as husband and wife for 21 das, or until
#eptember 29, 19=3! On #eptember 1B, 19=3, defendant&appellant *unag, >r!
and plaintif&appellant 8led their respecti%e applications for a marriage
license with the OCce of the ?ocal 9i%il Degistrar of *acoor, 9a%ite! On
October 1, 19=3, after lea%ing plaintif&appellant, defendant&appellant *unag,
>r! 8led an aCda%it withdrawing his application for a marriage license!
ISSUE
#hould damages be awarded based on a breach of a promise to marr4
RULIN*
3o! $n this 7urisdiction, a breach of promise to marr per se is not actionable,
e2cept where the plaintif has actuall incurred e2penses for the wedding
and the necessar incidents thereof!
1owe%er, the award of moral damages is allowed in cases speci8ed in or
analogous to those pro%ided in Article 2219 of the 9i%il 9ode! 9orrelati%el,
under Article 21 of said 9ode, in relation to paragraph 1B of said Article
2219, an person who wilfull causes loss or in7ur to another in a manner
that is contrar to morals, good customs or public polic shall compensate
the latter for moral damages!
Article 21 was adopted to remed the countless gaps in the statutes which
lea%e so man %ictims of moral wrongs helpless e%en though the ha%e
actuall sufered material and moral in7ur, and is intended to %ouchsafe
adequate legal remed for that untold number of moral wrongs which is
impossible for human foresight to speci8call pro%ide for in the statutes!