Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 66 views

    Date: December 26, 1964 Ponente: Bengzon, J.P., J. Plaintiff-Appellee: Beatriz P. Wassmer Defendant-Appellant: Francisco X. Velez Facts

    Uploaded by

    Jlo Hehe
    Beatriz Wassmer sued Francisco Velez for damages after he abruptly left two days before their wedding without explanation, only leaving a note saying his mother opposed the marriage. He later sent a telegram saying the wedding was only postponed but never returned or contacted Beatriz again. The trial court ordered Francisco to pay P2,000 in actual damages, P25,000 in moral and exemplary damages, and P2,500 in attorney's fees. The Supreme Court affirmed the ruling, finding that while merely breaking a marriage promise may not be actionable, Francisco's actions of formally planning the wedding and then abandoning Beatriz right before was contrary to good customs and caused her loss and injury under the Civil Code, for

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Date: December 26, 1964 Ponente: Bengzon, J.P., J. Plaintiff-Appellee: Beatriz P. Wassmer Defendant-Appellant: Francisco X. Velez Facts

    Uploaded by

    Jlo Hehe
    66 views3 pages
    Beatriz Wassmer sued Francisco Velez for damages after he abruptly left two days before their wedding without explanation, only leaving a note saying his mother opposed the marriage. He later sent a telegram saying the wedding was only postponed but never returned or contacted Beatriz again. The trial court ordered Francisco to pay P2,000 in actual damages, P25,000 in moral and exemplary damages, and P2,500 in attorney's fees. The Supreme Court affirmed the ruling, finding that while merely breaking a marriage promise may not be actionable, Francisco's actions of formally planning the wedding and then abandoning Beatriz right before was contrary to good customs and caused her loss and injury under the Civil Code, for

    Original Description:

    Digest

    Original Title

    Wassmer v Velez

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Beatriz Wassmer sued Francisco Velez for damages after he abruptly left two days before their wedding without explanation, only leaving a note saying his mother opposed the marriage. He later sent a telegram saying the wedding was only postponed but never returned or contacted Beatriz again. The trial court ordered Francisco to pay P2,000 in actual damages, P25,000 in moral and exemplary damages, and P2,500 in attorney's fees. The Supreme Court affirmed the ruling, finding that while merely breaking a marriage promise may not be actionable, Francisco's actions of formally planning the wedding and then abandoning Beatriz right before was contrary to good customs and caused her loss and injury under the Civil Code, for

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    66 views3 pages

    Date: December 26, 1964 Ponente: Bengzon, J.P., J. Plaintiff-Appellee: Beatriz P. Wassmer Defendant-Appellant: Francisco X. Velez Facts

    Uploaded by

    Jlo Hehe
    Beatriz Wassmer sued Francisco Velez for damages after he abruptly left two days before their wedding without explanation, only leaving a note saying his mother opposed the marriage. He later sent a telegram saying the wedding was only postponed but never returned or contacted Beatriz again. The trial court ordered Francisco to pay P2,000 in actual damages, P25,000 in moral and exemplary damages, and P2,500 in attorney's fees. The Supreme Court affirmed the ruling, finding that while merely breaking a marriage promise may not be actionable, Francisco's actions of formally planning the wedding and then abandoning Beatriz right before was contrary to good customs and caused her loss and injury under the Civil Code, for

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 3

    Date: December 26, 1964

    Ponente: Bengzon, J.P., J.


    Plaintiff-Appellee: Beatriz P. Wassmer
    Defendant-Appellant: Francisco X. Velez
    Facts:
    2 days before the wedding, with everything already set and
    prepared, the groom Francisco Velez suddenly flew to his home
    in Cagayan de Oro, leaving the bride, Beatriz Wassmer, only
    this note:
    Will have to postpone wedding my mother opposes it.
    The next day (day before the wedding) he sent this message
    through telegram:
    Nothing changed rest assured returning soon.
    But he never returned and was never heard from again.
    Beatriz sued for damages, and judgment was rendered ordering
    the defendant to pay plaintiff:
    P2,000 as actual damages
    P25,000 as moral and exemplary damages
    P2,500 as attorneys fees

    Costs
    Defendant has appealed to the SC. His arguments:
    His failure to marry the plaintiff as scheduled is due to fortuitous
    event or circumstances beyond his control
    No provision of the Civil Code authorizing an action for breach
    of promise to marry
    Issue:
    W/N breach of promise to marry is actionable

    Held:
    This is not the case of mere breach of promise to marry. Mere
    breach of promise to marry is not an actionable wrong.
    But to formally set a wedding and go through all the
    preparations and publicity, only to walk out of it when the
    matrimony is about to be solemnized is quite different.
    This is contrary to good customs for which the defendant must
    be held answerable in damages in accordance with Art. 21 NCC.
    Art. 21: 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 damage.

    Art. 2219 (10) NCC: Moral damages are recoverable in the


    cases mentioned in Article 21 of said Code
    Art. 2232 NCC: Condition precedent for exemplary damages is
    that "the defendant acted in a wanton, fraudulent, reckless,
    oppressive, or malevolent manner."
    Defendant clearly acted in a "wanton ... , reckless [and]
    oppressive manner in this case.
    Defendant is liable for actual damages, as well as to moral and
    exemplary damages. Judgment affirmed with modifications
    (moral and exemplary damages reduced to P15,000)

    You might also like