G.R. No. 101749 July 10, 1992
CONRADO BUNAG, JR., v. HON.
COURT OF APPEALS, First Division, and ZENAIDA B. CIRILO,
REGALADO, J.:
FACTS:
On the afternoon of September 8, 1973,
defendant-appellant Bunag, Jr. brought plaintiff-appellant to a motel or hotel
where they had sexual intercourse. Later that evening, said defendant-appellant
brought plaintiff-appellant to the house of his grandmother Juana de Leon in
Pamplona, Las Piñas, Metro Manila, where they lived together as husband and
wife for 21 days, or until September 29, 1973. On September 10, 1973,
defendant-appellant Bunag, Jr. and plaintiff-appellant filed their respective
applications for a marriage license with the Office of the Local Civil
Registrar of Bacoor, Cavite. On October 1, 1973, after leaving plaintiff-appellant,
defendant-appellant Bunag, Jr. filed an affidavit withdrawing his application
for a marriage license.
Plaintiff-appellant contends that on the afternoon
of September 8, 1973, defendant-appellant Bunag, Jr., together with an
unidentified male companion, abducted her in the vicinity of the San Juan de
Dios Hospital in Pasay City and brought her to a motel where she was raped.
ISSUE:
Whether, since action involves a breach of promise
to marry, the trial court erred in awarding damages.
RULING:
It is true that in this jurisdiction, we adhere to
the time-honored rule that an action for breach of promise to marry has no
standing in the civil law, apart from the right to recover money or property
advanced by the plaintiff upon the faith of such promise. 8 Generally,
therefore, a breach of promise to marry per se is not
actionable, except where the plaintiff has actually incurred expenses for the
wedding and the necessary incidents thereof.
However, the award of moral damages is allowed in
cases specified in or analogous to those provided in Article 2219 of the Civil
Code. Correlatively, under Article 21 of
said Code, in relation to paragraph 10 of said Article 2219, any person who
wilfully causes loss or injury to another in a manner that is contrary to
morals, good customs or public policy shall compensate the latter for moral
damages. 9 Article 21 was adopted to
remedy the countless gaps in the statutes which leave so many victims of moral
wrongs helpless even though they have actually suffered material and moral
injury, and is intended to vouchsafe adequate legal remedy for that untold
number of moral wrongs which is impossible for human foresight to specifically
provide for in the statutes. 10
Under the circumstances obtaining in the case at
bar, the acts of petitioner in forcibly abducting private respondent and having
carnal knowledge with her against her will, and thereafter promising to marry
her in order to escape criminal liability, only to thereafter renege on such
promise after cohabiting with her for twenty-one days, irremissibly constitute acts contrary to morals and good customs.
These are grossly insensate and reprehensible transgressions which
indisputably warrant and abundantly justify the award of moral and exemplary
damages, pursuant to Article 21 in relation to paragraphs 3 and 10, Article
2219, and Article 2229 and 2234 of Civil Code.
Petitioner would, however, belabor the fact that
said damages were awarded by the trial court on the basis of a finding that he
is guilty of forcible abduction with rape, despite the prior dismissal of the
complaint therefor filed by private respondent with the Pasay City Fiscal's
Office.
Generally, the basis of civil liability from crime
is the fundamental postulate of our law that every person criminally liable for
a felony is also civilly liable. In other words, criminal liability will give
rise to civil liability ex delicto only if the same felonious
act or omission results in damage or injury to another and is the direct and
proximate cause thereof. 11 Hence, extinction of
the penal action does not carry with it the extinction of civil liability
unless the extinction proceeds from a declaration in a final judgment that the
fact from which the civil might arise did not exist. 12
In the
instant case, the dismissal of the complaint for forcible abduction with rape
was by mere resolution of the fiscal at the preliminary investigation stage.
There is no declaration in a final judgment that the fact from which the civil
case might arise did not exist. Consequently, the dismissal did not in any way
affect the right of herein private respondent to institute a civil action
arising from the offense because such preliminary dismissal of the penal action
did not carry with it the extinction of the civil action.
The reason most often given for this holding is
that the two proceedings involved are not between the same parties.
Furthermore, it has long been emphasized, with continuing validity up to now,
that there are different rules as to the competency of witnesses and the
quantum of evidence in criminal and civil proceedings. In a criminal action,
the State must prove its case by evidence which shows the guilt of the accused
beyond reasonable doubt, while in a civil action it is sufficient for the
plaintiff to sustain his cause by preponderance of evidence only. 13 Thus,
in Rillon, et al. vs. Rillon, 14 we
stressed that it is not now necessary that a criminal prosecution for rape be
first instituted and prosecuted to final judgment before a civil action based
on said offense in favor of the offended woman can likewise be instituted and
prosecuted to final judgment.
1xbet korean - legalbet.co.kr
ReplyDelete1xbet korean · 2. Live Casino · 3. Sports Betting · 4. 바카라 사이트 Online Casino · 5. Casino Games. More information. 온카지노 1xbet korean. 1xbet korean. 1xbet. 1xbet korean