Beatriz P. Wassmer v. Francisco X. Velez | GR No L-20089 | Dec. 26, 1964

Facts:

- Francisco and Beatriz decided to get married and set Sept. 4, 1954 as the big day. Two days before the wedding, Francisco got cold feet and left a note to Beatriz stating that they would have to postpone the wedding as Francisco’s mother opposes it, that he was leaving on the Convair that day, and not to inquire of the reasons why since it would create a scandal.

- The day after he left, he sent a telegram saying ‘Nothing change rest assured returning very soon apologize mama papa love Paking’. - Francisco did not appear nor was he heard from again. - Beatriz sued for damages. Velez was declared in default and the trial court ordered defendant to pay actual, moral and exemplary damages.

Issue: Whether damages should be awarded in a breach of promise to marry

Held: This is not merely a breach of promise to marry. It is held that a breach of promise to marry is not an actionable wrong, 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 for which defendant must be held answerable in damages in accordance with Article 21, which provides that: "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 the damage."

Art. 2219(10) of the NCC provides that moral damages are recoverable in cases mentioned in Art. 21 of NCC. As to exemplary damages, Wassmer is entitled thereto since Art. 2232 of the NCC sets that the condition precedent is that the “defendant acted in a wanton, fraudulent, reckless, oppressive or malevolent manner”. Velez clearly acted in such a manner. The amount for moral and exemplary damages was lowered to P15,000.