Talaan ng mga Kaso

Filter by Subject

Text Search

There are 32 results on the current subject filter

Title	IDs & Reference #s	Background	Primary Holding	Subject Matter
Cabasal vs. BPI Family Savings Bank, Inc. (18th November 2020)	AK197938 963 SCRA 369 , G.R. No. 233846	Petitioners Spouses Nestor and Ma. Belen Cabasal were engaged in a build-and-sell business and obtained a credit line from BPI Family Savings Bank (BPI), secured by mortgages on two real properties. After three years, they found a buyer, Eloisa Guevarra Co, who agreed to purchase the properties through a sale with assumption of mortgage. At the time of this proposed transaction, the petitioners' loan accounts with BPI were already past due. The dispute arose from the interaction between the petitioners, their buyer, and a BPI employee when they attempted to process the transaction at the bank.	An act cannot be considered an abuse of right under Article 19 of the New Civil Code unless the claimant proves by clear and convincing evidence that the act was performed in bad faith or with a malicious intent to injure; merely enforcing a company policy or being blunt in communication, without a dishonest purpose or moral obliquity, does not give rise to liability for damages.	Persons and Family Law
Navarro-Banaria vs. Banaria (28th July 2020)	AK776525 945 SCRA 258 , G.R. No. 217806	The respondents are the children and grandchildren of the late Pascasio S. Banaria from his previous marriage. The petitioner, Adelaida C. Navarro-Banaria, is the legal wife of Pascasio and the stepmother to his children. At the time of the events, Pascasio was elderly, frail, and suffering from physical and mental infirmities that rendered him dependent on others. The dispute arose from the respondents' efforts to celebrate their patriarch's 90th birthday, an annual family tradition, and the petitioner's alleged malicious actions that prevented his attendance and caused the respondents significant distress and financial loss.	A person's exercise of a legal right, such as a wife's prerogative in matters concerning her husband, is not absolute and must conform to the standards of conduct prescribed by Article 19 of the Civil Code; exercising such a right in bad faith, with the intent to prejudice or injure another, constitutes an abuse of right that is legally actionable and gives rise to liability for damages under Article 21 of the Civil Code.	Persons and Family Law
Lomarda vs. Fudalan (17th June 2020)	AK894620 938 SCRA 613 , G.R. No. 246012	Respondent Engr. Elmer Fudalan applied for electrical service from Bohol I Electric Cooperative, Inc. (BOHECO I) for his farmhouse. The process required him to hire a BOHECO I-authorized electrician and secure a certification from the local Barangay Power Association (BAPA), which was chaired by petitioner Crispina Raso. The dispute arose from the petitioners' actions following the respondent's attempt to comply with these requirements.	The exercise of a legal right, such as enforcing the rules of an electric cooperative, becomes an actionable tort under Articles 19 and 21 of the Civil Code if it is done in a manner contrary to morals and good customs, with the intent to injure another; such an abuse of rights warrants the award of damages to the aggrieved party.	Persons and Family Law
Coca-Cola Bottlers Philippines, Inc. vs. Bernardo (7th November 2016)	AK790851 807 SCRA 29 , G.R. No. 190667	The dispute arose from a long-standing business relationship between petitioner Coca-Cola Bottlers Philippines, Inc. (CCBPI), a large-scale beverage manufacturer, and respondents Spouses Bernardo, who operated "Jolly Beverage Enterprises" as a wholesaler and exclusive distributor of CCBPI's products in certain areas of Quezon City since 1987. Their partnership, formalized through exclusive dealership agreements, deteriorated when CCBPI, towards the end of their last contract, implemented strategic actions that the respondents claimed were aimed at eliminating them as a competitor and taking over their established customer base.	A manufacturer that employs deceit, oppression, and high-handed business methods to unjustly take over the market of its own distributor, such as by using a customer list obtained through a false promise and implementing discriminatory pricing schemes, is liable for damages under the principles of abuse of rights (Articles 19, 20, and 21) and unfair competition (Article 28) of the Civil Code.	Persons and Family Law
Araullo vs. Aquino (1st July 2014)	AK306263 728 SCRA 1 , 737 Phil. 457 , G.R. No. 209287 , G.R. NO. 209135 , G.R. NO. 209136 , G.R. NO. 209155 , G.R. NO. 209164 , G.R. NO. 209260 , G.R. NO. 209442 , G.R. NO. 209517 , G.R. NO. 209569	The Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP) was a mechanism introduced by the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) under Secretary Florencio Abad. It allowed the executive branch to pool savings from various government agencies and realign them to other projects to accelerate economic growth. However, petitioners argued that it violated the constitutional power of Congress over appropriations.	The Supreme Court issued a ruling declaring several aspects of the DAP (Disbursement Acceleration Program) unconstitutional, including: the withdrawal of unobligated allotments and their designation as savings before the fiscal year's end, the cross-border transfers of savings to offices outside the Executive branch, and the use of savings to fund programs, activities, or projects not covered by the GAA (General Appropriations Act). In applying the Operative Fact Doctrine, the Court established that while projects already implemented under the DAP in good faith would remain intact, the officials responsible for these actions could still be held accountable.	Constitutional Law I Persons and Family Law Philosophy of Law Statutory Construction
Nagkakaisang Maralita ng Sitio Masigasig, Inc. vs. Military Shrine Services-Philippine Veterans Affairs Office, Department of National Defense (5th June 2013)	AK977863 697 SCRA 359 , G.R. No. 187587	The dispute originates from the status of land within the Fort Bonifacio military reservation. In 1957, President Carlos P. Garcia reserved the area for military use through Proclamation No. 423. Over the years, subsequent proclamations excluded certain portions for other purposes. In 1986, President Ferdinand E. Marcos issued Proclamation No. 2476, declaring specific barangays within the reservation as alienable and disposable. The core of the controversy is a handwritten note he allegedly added to this proclamation to include Western Bicutan, which was omitted from the official publication, leading petitioners to claim rights over the land they occupy therein.	An unpublished portion of a law, such as a handwritten addendum to a presidential proclamation, has no legal force or effect; publication in full is an indispensable condition for the effectivity of all laws to ensure the public is duly informed of their contents and to comply with the due process requirement.	Persons and Family Law
Hacienda Luisita, Inc. vs. Presidential Agrarian Reform Council, et al. (24th April 2012)	AK280291 686 Phil. 377 , G.R. No. 171101	The case revolves around the implementation of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) in Hacienda Luisita, a large sugar plantation. Instead of direct land distribution, HLI implemented a Stock Distribution Plan (SDP) in 1989, approved by the Presidential Agrarian Reform Council (PARC). Years later, PARC revoked the SDP, leading to legal challenges by HLI. The Supreme Court initially affirmed PARC's revocation but allowed FWBs the option to remain HLI stockholders. Subsequent motions led to the revocation of this option and clarifications on just compensation and the distribution of proceeds from land sales, which are further addressed in this resolution.	The date of "taking" of Hacienda Luisita's agricultural lands for agrarian reform purposes is November 21, 1989, the date PARC approved HLI's Stock Distribution Plan (SDP); the option previously granted to FWBs to remain HLI stockholders is revoked, and control over agricultural lands must be in the hands of the farmers; the FWBs are entitled to the proceeds from the sale of converted lands (less specified deductions); and HLI is entitled to just compensation from the government for the homelots distributed to the FWBs.	Constitutional Law I Persons and Family Law
Yuchengco vs. Manila Chronicle Publishing Corporation (25th November 2009)	AK525473 605 SCRA 684 , G.R. No. 184315	The case arose from a business rivalry between petitioner Alfonso T. Yuchengco and respondent Roberto Coyiuto, Jr., particularly concerning their competing interests for control over Oriental Petroleum Mineral Corporation. In the months leading up to a crucial stockholders' meeting for Oriental, a series of articles critical of Yuchengco were published in The Manila Chronicle, a newspaper owned and controlled by Coyiuto. These articles formed the basis of Yuchengco's civil complaint for damages due to libel.	When actual malice (malice in fact) is proven, the defense that libelous articles are qualifiedly privileged communications becomes futile, as such a defense merely negates the legal presumption of malice (malice in law) but does not overcome proven actual malice.	Persons and Family Law
Lazatin vs. Desierto (5th June 2009)	AK190398 588 SCRA 285 , G.R. No. 147097	The case originated from a complaint-affidavit filed by the Fact-Finding and Intelligence Bureau of the Office of the Ombudsman against then Congressman Carmelo F. Lazatin and his co-petitioners. The complaint alleged irregularities in the use of Lazatin's Countrywide Development Fund (CDF) for 1996, where he was accused of being both the proponent and implementer of projects, signing disbursement vouchers, and receiving checks as claimant, effectively converting public funds into cash.	The Ombudsman possesses prosecutorial powers and exercises supervision and control over the Office of the Special Prosecutor (OSP) as constitutionally sanctioned by Congress through Republic Act No. 6770; consequently, the Ombudsman has the authority to approve, disapprove, or overturn any resolution issued by the OSP.	Persons and Family Law
Garcillano vs. The House of Representatives Committees on Public Information, et al. (23rd December 2008)	AK185298 595 Phil. 775 , G.R. No. 170338 , G.R. No. 179275	The "Hello Garci" tapes, allegedly containing a wiretapped conversation between then-President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and COMELEC Commissioner Virgilio Garcillano discussing the manipulation of the 2004 presidential election results, surfaced and caused a major political controversy. Both Houses of Congress initiated separate legislative inquiries into the matter, leading to the petitions filed in this case.	The Senate or its committees may conduct inquiries in aid of legislation only in accordance with duly published rules of procedure; publication of such rules is mandatory for each Congress and failure to do so renders any such inquiry procedurally infirm and unconstitutional.	Constitutional Law I Constitutional Law II Persons and Family Law
Garcillano vs. House of Representatives Committees on Public Information, Public Order and Safety, National Defense and Security, Information and Communications Technology, and Suffrage and Electoral Reforms (23rd December 2008)	AK565763 575 SCRA 170 , 595 Phil. 775 , G.R. No. 170338	The controversy arose from the release of wiretapped recordings allegedly involving then-President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and a Commission on Elections official discussing electoral manipulation. These tapes became a subject of public and legislative scrutiny, with both Houses of Congress initiating separate inquiries.	The Supreme Court dismissed the first petition (G.R. No. 170338) for being moot and academic but granted the second petition (G.R. No. 179275), prohibiting the Senate from conducting its legislative inquiry due to a lack of duly published procedural rules as required by the Constitution.	Constitutional Law I Constitutional Law II Persons and Family Law
Mata vs. Agravante (6th August 2008)	AK929535 561 SCRA 66 , G.R. No. 147597	The dispute originated from a labor issue where former security guards of the Bessang Pass Security Agency, the respondents, filed complaints against their employer, the petitioner, for non-payment of salaries and other benefits. To pursue their claims, they not only filed a case with the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) but also sought the cancellation of the agency's license from the Philippine National Police (PNP), sending copies of their complaint to multiple government bodies.	The exercise of a legal right, such as filing complaints with appropriate government agencies to seek redress for grievances, does not give rise to liability for damages unless it is proven that such an act was done with malice or bad faith and with the intent to injure another, in violation of the principle of abuse of rights under Articles 19 and 21 of the Civil Code.	Persons and Family Law
Commissioner of Internal Revenue vs. Primetown Property Group, Inc. (28th August 2007)	AK150634 531 SCRA 436 , G.R. No. 162155	The case originated from a claim for a tax refund by Primetown Property Group, Inc. (Primetown) for taxes paid in 1997. Due to the Asian Financial Crisis, the real estate industry slowed down, causing Primetown to suffer significant losses for that year. Despite these losses, the company had paid quarterly corporate income taxes and remitted creditable withholding taxes. Believing it was not liable for income tax due to its net loss, Primetown filed an administrative claim for a refund with the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR), which was not acted upon, prompting the company to seek judicial relief.	A "year" for the purpose of computing legal periods is understood to be twelve calendar months, as provided in Section 31, Chapter VIII, Book I of the Administrative Code of 1987, which has impliedly repealed the definition of a "year" as 365 days under Article 13 of the Civil Code.	Persons and Family Law Statutory Construction
DM. Consunji, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals (20th April 2001)	AK928097 357 SCRA 249 , G.R. No. 137873	The case arose from a fatal workplace accident on November 2, 1990, where Jose Juego, a construction worker for petitioner D.M. Consunji, Inc. (DMCI), died after falling 14 floors when the platform he was on collapsed. The incident prompted his widow, Maria Juego, to seek compensation. This led to a legal conflict over whether her initial claim for statutory death benefits under the Labor Code prevented her from later seeking higher damages from the employer through a civil lawsuit based on negligence.	An employee's dependent who has claimed and received benefits from the State Insurance Fund under the Labor Code is not barred from subsequently suing the employer for damages under the Civil Code if the initial choice of remedy was made without knowledge of the employer's negligence or of the existence of the alternative remedy, as such ignorance negates a knowing and intelligent waiver.	Persons and Family Law
University of the East vs. Jader (17th February 2000)	AK405597 325 SCRA 804 , G.R. No. 132344	The case arose from the relationship between an educational institution and its student concerning the fulfillment of academic requirements for a law degree. The dispute centered on the university's responsibility to communicate a student's final grade and academic standing, especially when the student's eligibility for graduation and the bar examinations was at stake.	An educational institution has a contractual obligation to timely inform its students of their academic status and can be held liable for damages if its negligence misleads a student into believing they have completed all graduation requirements, thereby causing injury; this liability is anchored on Articles 19 and 20 of the Civil Code concerning the principle of abuse of rights and liability for negligent acts.	Persons and Family Law
Gashem Shookat Baksh vs. Court of Appeals (19th February 1993)	AK910606 219 SCRA 115 , G.R. No. 97336	The case arose from a romantic relationship between Gashem Shookat Baksh, an Iranian medical student residing in Dagupan City, and Marilou T. Gonzales, a 22-year-old Filipina working at a luncheonette. Baksh courted Gonzales and promised to marry her, which led her to live with him with her parents' consent. The dispute began when Baksh later repudiated his promise, prompting Gonzales to file a suit for damages based on the alleged fraudulent promise and the resulting injury to her honor.	A breach of promise to marry is not actionable per se, but it can be the basis for recovering damages under Article 21 of the Civil Code if the promise was made in a fraudulent and deceptive manner to entice a woman into sexual congress (moral seduction), thereby causing willful injury to her honor and reputation in a manner contrary to morals, good customs, or public policy.	Persons and Family Law
Albenson Enterprises Corp. vs. Court of Appeals (11th January 1993)	AK134873 217 SCRA 16 , G.R. No. 88694	Albenson Enterprises Corporation delivered mild steel plates to Guaranteed Industries, Inc. but was paid with a check that was subsequently dishonored for "Account Closed." The check was drawn against the account of E.L. Woodworks. In an attempt to collect the payment, Albenson conducted inquiries which led them to believe that Eugenio S. Baltao, the president of Guaranteed Industries, was the same "Eugenio Baltao" who owned E.L. Woodworks and issued the check. This belief was based on records from the SEC, the Ministry of Trade and Industry, and the drawee bank. This case of mistaken identity led to the filing of a criminal complaint and the subsequent civil suit for damages.	A party who files a criminal complaint against another based on probable cause and in good faith cannot be held liable for damages under the principle of abuse of rights or for malicious prosecution, even if it is later discovered that the complaint was filed against the wrong person due to an honest mistake of identity. The law does not penalize the right to litigate, and an adverse result of an action does not, by itself, make the act wrongful or subject the actor to payment of damages.	Persons and Family Law
Amelita Constantino and Michael Constantino vs. Ivan Mendez and the Honorable Court of Appeals (14th May 1992)	AK349766 G.R. No. 57227	In August 1974, Amelita Constantino, a 28-year-old waitress in Manila, met Ivan Mendez, a prosperous businessman from Davao City. Mendez allegedly professed his love and, through a promise of marriage, convinced Constantino to have sexual intercourse with him in his hotel room. Immediately after, he confessed that he was already married. Despite this revelation, they continued their sexual relationship in the succeeding months. Constantino became pregnant and later gave birth to a son, Michael Constantino. When her pleas for support were ignored, she filed a suit for acknowledgment, support, and damages against Mendez.	Paternity and filiation must be established by clear and convincing evidence, and the burden of proof rests on the claimant. Furthermore, moral damages for breach of promise to marry are not recoverable when sexual intercourse is a product of voluntariness and mutual desire, rather than deceit or fraud.	Persons and Family Law
Valenzuela vs. Court of Appeals (19th October 1990)	AK911327 G.R. No. 83122 , 191 SCRA 1	Arturo P. Valenzuela had been a General Agent for the Philippine American General Insurance Company, Inc. (Philamgen) since 1965. Over thirteen years, he built a successful insurance agency. The dispute arose from a particularly large marine insurance account he secured from Delta Motors, Inc., which entitled him to a 32.5% commission. In 1977, Philamgen expressed its desire to share in this specific commission on a fifty-fifty basis, which Valenzuela consistently refused, asserting his rights under their existing General Agency Agreement.	A principal's power to revoke an agency agreement is not absolute and may not be exercised in bad faith or with an abuse of right; a termination tainted with bad faith makes the principal liable for damages. Furthermore, an agency is considered "coupled with an interest" and is not freely revocable by the principal when the agent has been induced to assume a responsibility or incur a liability, such that the agent would be exposed to personal loss if the authority were withdrawn.	Persons and Family Law
Tañada vs. Tuvera (29th December 1986)	AK242154 146 SCRA 446 , G.R. No. L-63915	This case arose from a prior petition where the petitioners demanded the publication of numerous presidential decrees issued during the Marcos administration, which had not been published as required by law. The Supreme Court's initial decision on April 24, 1985, ordered the government to publish all unpublished presidential issuances "which are of general application." Finding this directive ambiguous, the petitioners filed a motion for reconsideration and clarification to precisely define the scope of laws requiring publication, the meaning of "publication," and the proper medium and timing for such publication.	Publication in the Official Gazette is an indispensable prerequisite for the effectivity of all statutes, presidential decrees, executive orders, and administrative rules intended to enforce or implement existing laws; the clause "unless it is otherwise provided" in Article 2 of the Civil Code pertains only to the fifteen-day effectivity period and does not grant the legislature the power to dispense with the publication requirement itself.	Persons and Family Law
Floresca vs. Philex Mining Corporation (30th April 1985)	AK256751 136 SCRA 141 , G.R. No. 30642	The case arose from a tragic mining accident where several employees of Philex Mining Corporation died. At the time, two distinct legal frameworks governed compensation for work-related injuries and deaths. The Workmen's Compensation Act (WCA) provided a system of limited, no-fault liability, ensuring that employees or their heirs received swift but modest compensation regardless of who was at fault. In contrast, the Civil Code allowed for actions based on tort (quasi-delict) or breach of contract, which could result in significantly higher awards for actual, moral, and exemplary damages, but required the claimant to prove the employer's fault or negligence. This created a legal conflict over which remedy was proper, particularly in cases where an employer's negligence was the direct cause of the accident.	An injured worker or their heirs have a choice of remedies between availing of the limited, no-fault compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act or suing for greater damages under the Civil Code where the injury or death is caused by the employer's gross negligence; however, these remedies are mutually exclusive. An initial choice to receive compensation under the Act will not bar a subsequent civil suit for damages if that choice was based on ignorance or a mistake of fact, such as being unaware of the employer's culpable negligence at the time.	Persons and Family Law
Manila Gas Corporation vs. Court of Appeals (30th October 1980)	AK184426 100 SCRA 602 , G.R. No. L-44190	Manila Gas Corporation, a public utility, supplied gas to the residence and 46-door apartment complex of Isidro M. Ongsip, a prominent businessman. After new appliances were installed in 1965, the gas meter readings remained unusually low, registering zero consumption in May and June 1966. This discrepancy prompted Manila Gas to investigate, leading to the discovery of an alleged illegal "jumper" or by-pass valve, which became the basis for the ensuing legal conflict.	A public utility corporation that files a baseless criminal complaint for qualified theft against a customer with malicious intent to vex and humiliate, and subsequently disconnects the customer's service without the required prior notice in breach of contract and in bad faith, is liable for moral and exemplary damages; however, the amount of such damages may be reduced by the court based on the specific circumstances of the case, including the financial capacity of the utility and any mitigating actions or faults of the customer.	Persons and Family Law
People vs. Licera (22nd July 1975)	AK629032 G. R. No. L-39990 , 65 SCRA 270	The case arose from a legal uncertainty created by two conflicting Supreme Court decisions regarding the illegal possession of firearms. The earlier doctrine, established in _People vs. Macarandang_, interpreted Section 879 of the Revised Administrative Code to include secret agents appointed by governors as "peace officers" exempt from firearm licensing requirements. A later case, _People vs. Mapa_, explicitly overturned this interpretation. The accused, Rafael Licera, was appointed as a secret agent and apprehended for possessing a firearm while the _Macarandang_ doctrine was still in effect, but was tried and convicted after the _Mapa_ doctrine had been established.	A new judicial doctrine in the field of penal law that abrogates a previous one must be applied prospectively and cannot be given retroactive effect if it would be prejudicial to an accused who acted in reliance on the old doctrine.	Persons and Family Law
People vs. Jabinal (27th February 1974)	AK908521 55 SCRA 607 , G.R. No. L-30061	The legal context of this case revolves around the interpretation of firearm laws, specifically the exemption for "peace officers." Initially, in the cases of _People vs. Macarandang_ (1959) and _People vs. Lucero_ (1958), the Supreme Court held that individuals appointed as secret agents with duties related to maintaining peace and order were considered "peace officers" and thus exempt from the requirement of a license to possess firearms. This interpretation was abruptly overturned in 1967 by the ruling in _People vs. Mapa_, which adopted a strict and literal interpretation of the law, holding that secret agents are not included in the list of exempted persons and are therefore liable for illegal possession. The present case arose from an act committed in 1964, when the old, more lenient doctrine was still in effect, but was decided by the trial court in 1968, after the new, stricter doctrine was established.	When a judicial doctrine is overruled and a new one is adopted, the new doctrine should be applied prospectively and should not retroactively prejudice parties who had relied on the old doctrine and acted on the faith thereof, especially in the construction and application of criminal laws.	Persons and Family Law
Gongon vs. Court of Appeals (30th April 1970)	AK161579 32 SCRA 412 , G.R. No. L-24421	The case arose from the government's acquisition of the Tambobong Estate in Malabon, Rizal, from the Roman Catholic Church on December 31, 1947, under Commonwealth Act No. 539. This law authorized the President to acquire private lands and subdivide them for resale to bona fide tenants, occupants, or other qualified individuals. The lot in question, Lot 18-B, Block 23, was part of this estate. Amada Aquino was the original lessee, who then sublet the property to Matias Gongon in 1934. When the government began reselling the lots, both Aquino (as lessee) and Gongon (as occupant) filed applications to purchase the same lot, leading to a legal conflict over who had the preferential right.	The preferential right to purchase a lot under Commonwealth Act No. 539, which gives preference first to "bona fide tenants" and second to "occupants," is not absolute and must be interpreted in line with the constitutional principle of social justice. Where the parties are not on an equal footing, as when the lessee is a non-occupant and already a landowner while the sublessee is the actual occupant and landless, equity and justice demand that the preferential right be granted to the actual occupant to fulfill the law's purpose of giving land to the landless.	Persons and Family Law
Bellis vs. Bellis (6th June 1967)	AK036910 20 SCRA 358 , G.R. No. L-23678	Amos G. Bellis, a citizen of Texas, U.S.A., had legitimate children from two marriages and three illegitimate children. He executed a will in the Philippines, where some of his assets were located, providing specific legacies for his first wife and his three illegitimate children, with the remainder of his estate going to his seven legitimate children. At the time of his death, he was a resident of Texas. The will did not conform to the Philippine system of legitimes, which grants compulsory shares to illegitimate children.	The national law of a foreign decedent determines the intrinsic validity of their will, the order of succession, the amount of successional rights, and the capacity to succeed, even if the properties are located in the Philippines; Philippine laws on legitimes and public policy do not apply to the succession of foreign nationals.	Persons and Family Law
Wassmer vs. Velez (26th December 1964)	AK912210 12 SCRA 648 , G.R. No. L-20089	Francisco Velez and Beatriz Wassmer were engaged and had formally planned their wedding. This included securing a marriage license, distributing invitations, purchasing attire, and receiving bridal shower gifts. Two days before the set date, Velez suddenly left a note cancelling the wedding, citing his mother's opposition. He then sent a telegram promising to return but never did, prompting Wassmer to sue for damages due to the public humiliation and expenses incurred.	While a mere breach of promise to marry is not an actionable wrong in itself, a person who, after making formal wedding preparations (such as applying for a license, sending invitations, and preparing for the ceremony), abruptly and unjustifiably cancels the wedding, causing public humiliation and injury, commits an act contrary to good customs and can be held liable for damages under Article 21 of the Civil Code.	Persons and Family Law
Brehm vs. Republic (30th September 1963)	AK978065 9 SCRA 172 , G.R. No. L-18566	Gilbert R. Brehm, an American citizen serving in the U.S. Navy and temporarily assigned at Subic Bay, married Ester Mira, a Filipina citizen. Ester had a daughter, Elizabeth, from a previous relationship with another American who had left the country. After their marriage, the couple and the child resided in Manila, with Gilbert providing care and support. To formalize their family unit and give the child a legitimate status, the spouses filed a joint petition to adopt Elizabeth.	The absolute prohibition in Article 335(4) of the New Civil Code, which states that non-resident aliens "cannot adopt," is a mandatory provision that disqualifies a non-resident alien from adopting in the Philippines, even if he is the step-father of the child to be adopted.	Persons and Family Law
Aznar vs. Garcia (31st January 1963)	AK099588 7 SCRA 95 , No. L-16749	Edward E. Christensen, a citizen of the State of California, lived for most of his life in the Philippines, where he died. He left a will that provided a legacy of P3,600 to Helen Christensen Garcia, who had been judicially declared his acknowledged natural child in a separate proceeding, while leaving the bulk of his substantial estate to his other daughter, Maria Lucy Christensen. This disposition was valid under the internal law of California, which grants testators complete freedom of disposition. However, it contravened Philippine law, which designates acknowledged natural children as forced heirs entitled to a specific portion of the estate known as the legitime. The conflict arose as to which law should govern the intrinsic validity of the will's provisions.	When Philippine law directs the application of a foreign national's law to matters of succession, the term "national law" is understood to encompass the entirety of that foreign law, including its conflict-of-laws rules. If the foreign law contains a conflict-of-laws rule that refers the matter back to the law of the decedent's domicile, the Philippine court shall accept this referral (renvoi) and apply its own internal law on succession.	Persons and Family Law
Hermosisima vs. Court of Appeals, et al. (30th September 1960)	AK130576 109 Phil. 629 , G.R. No. L-14628	The case originated from an intimate relationship between Soledad Cagigas, a 36-year-old former teacher, and Francisco Hermosisima, an apprentice pilot nearly ten years her junior. Their relationship led to Cagigas becoming pregnant. Hermosisima promised to marry her but subsequently married another woman. Cagigas filed a suit for acknowledgment of their child, support, and moral damages for the broken promise. The lower courts granted the moral damages, framing the petitioner's actions as a form of seduction, which prompted the petitioner to elevate the issue to the Supreme Court.	An action for breach of a promise to marry is not a valid basis for recovering moral damages under Philippine law, as Congress deliberately omitted provisions from the Civil Code that would have sanctioned such claims.	Persons and Family Law
Velayo, etc. vs. Shell Co. of the Phils., et al. (31st October 1956)	AK120965 100 Phil. 186 , G.R. No. L-7817	Commercial Air Lines, Inc. (CALI), a Philippine corporation, was in a state of insolvency, owing significant debts to multiple creditors, including a substantial amount to Shell Company of the Philippine Islands, Ltd. (Shell) for fuel supplies. CALI's management, seeking to avoid formal insolvency proceedings and ensure an equitable settlement, convened a meeting of its principal creditors to disclose its financial situation and discuss a plan for the fair distribution of its remaining assets, one of which was a valuable Douglas C-54 airplane located in California, USA.	A creditor who, after participating in a meeting with other creditors of an insolvent debtor to arrange for a fair pro-rata distribution of assets, takes advantage of information obtained therein to secretly assign its credit to another entity to attach the debtor's property abroad, acts in bad faith and contrary to morals and public policy, and is liable for damages to the insolvent's estate under the Civil Code.	Persons and Family Law
Republic of the Philippines vs. Encarnacion (29th December 1950)	AK028894 87 Phil. 843 , G.R. No. L-3936	The case arose from a naturalization proceeding governed by the then-existing law. A new statute, Republic Act No. 530, was enacted, fundamentally altering the naturalization process by mandating that a decision granting citizenship would only become executory after a two-year waiting period from its promulgation. The dispute centered on whether this new law applied to the respondent, Si Kee, whose naturalization decision was set to become final and executory on the very same day that R.A. 530 was approved by the President. The core of the conflict was the interpretation of the law's effective date and its applicability to cases that were on the cusp of finality.	A law that states it shall take effect on the day of its approval becomes effective from the very first moment of that day, as the law does not recognize fractions of a day for the purpose of determining a statute's effectivity.	Persons and Family Law