Sunday, September 26, 2021

[CASE DIGEST] Baksh v. CA (G.R. No. 97336)

February 19, 1993

FACTS:

Gashem Shookat Baksh, an Iranian exchange student taking a medical course at the Lyceum Northwestern Colleges in Dagupan, courted and proposed marriage to Marilou T. Gonzales, a 22-year old single Filipino and a pretty lass of good moral character and reputation duly respected in her community. Marilou accepted the marriage proposal.

Subsequently, Gashem forced her to live with him. Marilou, who was a virgin before she began living with Gashe, became pregnant. She was later provided some medicine for abortion by Gashem.

Marilou was subjected to threats and maltreatment by Gashem, who later on repudiated their marriage agreement, saying that he is already married to someone living in Bacolod City.

Marilou sought damages against Gashem for the alleged violation of their agreement to get married. The trial Court ruled in her favor and awarded her moral damages in the sum of P20,0000, attorney's fees in the sum of P3,000, and litigation expenses in the sum of P2,000.

In his appeal, Gashem argued that Article 21 of the Civil Code does not apply in this case because of the following: (1) he claims to have not committed any moral wrong or injury or violated any good custom or public policy; (2) he has not professed love or proposed marriage to Marilou; (3) he never maltreated her; (4) the trial court liberally invoked Filipino customs, traditions and culture, to his prejudice; (5) his actions were tolerable under his Muslim upbringing; and (6) the mere breach of promise to marry is not actionable.

ISSUE:

Whether Marilou may recover damages from Gashem on the basis of Article 21. -- YES.

HELD:

Consent to sexual intercourse obtained through a promise to marry (by a subtle scheme or deceptive device, when he actually had no intention to marry) may justify an 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 which followed thereafter.

Article 21 is designed to expand the concept of torts or quasi­delict in this jurisdiction by granting adequate legal remedy for the untold number of moral wrongs which is impossible for human foresight to specifically enumerate and punish in the statute books.

It is essential, however, that such injury should have been committed in a manner contrary to morals, good customs or public policy.

In the instant case it was Gashem's fraudulent and deceptive protestations of love for and promise to marry Marilou that made her surrender her virtue and womanhood to him and to live with him on the honest and sincere belief that he would keep said promise, and it was also what made Marilou's parents agree to their daughter's living­in with him preparatory to their supposed  marriage.