G.R. No. 101749 - Bunag, Jr. vs. Court of Appeals

On September 8, 1973, petitioner Conrado Bunag, Jr. took private respondent Zenaida B. Cirilo to a motel or hotel where they had sexual intercourse.
Later that evening, Bunag, Jr. brought Cirilo to his grandmother’s house in Pamplona, Las Piñas, Metro Manila, where they cohabited as husband and wife for 21 days until September 29, 1973.
On September 10, 1973, both parties filed applications for a marriage license in Bacoor, Cavite. On October 1, 1973, Bunag, Jr. withdrew his application for a marriage license after leaving Cirilo.

Cirilo contended that on September 8, 1973, Bunag, Jr., accompanied by an unidentified male companion, abducted her near the San Juan de Dios Hospital in Pasay City and brought her to a motel where she was forcibly raped.
Cirilo was 26 years old at trial and testified she was single and a college Commerce graduate. At about 4:00 PM, while walking en route to a canteen, Bunag, Jr. invited her for merienda at the Aristocrat Restaurant, which she accepted, trusting him due to their prior relationship despite a recent quarrel.
Instead of going to the restaurant, Bunag, Jr.’s car abruptly turned to a motel, ignoring Cirilo’s protests and threatening her to remain silent under threat of death.
At the motel, Cirilo was forcibly dragged inside, where Bunag, Jr. deflowered her against her will, despite her struggles. His companion restrained her feet during the act, which caused pain and bleeding.
Afterward, Bunag, Jr. insisted they marry before releasing her, leading Cirilo to promise not to cause scandal and to marry him.
They then proceeded to the grandmother’s house, where they lived together as husband and wife for 21 days. On September 29, 1973, Bunag, Jr. left her abruptly, forcing her to return to her parents, ashamed and distressed.
Cirilo’s testimony was fully corroborated by her uncle, Vivencio Bansagan, who testified regarding efforts to find Cirilo after her absence and meetings with the Bunag family to settle the matter and arrange for marriage.

Bunag, Jr. and Cirilo allegedly eloped due to opposition by Bunag, Sr. to their relationship, with plans made beforehand and known to friends.
On September 8, 1973, Bunag, Jr., with a friend and Cirilo with an officemate, had snacks at a hospital canteen, then the group separated leaving Bunag, Jr. and Cirilo together.
Bunag, Jr. and Cirilo attempted to rent a hotel room but found none available until they succeeded at the Holiday Hotel, where Bunag, Jr. registered under his real name.
The couple stayed there for about three hours before going to Juana de Leon’s house where they stayed until September 19, 1973.
Disagreements over money and death threats caused Bunag, Jr. to abandon the plan to marry.
Bunag, Sr. denied visiting Juana de Leon’s house or promising marriage to Cirilo, claimed ignorance of son’s whereabouts until informed by his mother, and denied agreements with Cirilo’s relatives.

Cirilo filed a complaint for damages for breach of promise to marry against Bunag, Jr. and Bunag, Sr. (Civil Case No. N-2028).
On August 20, 1983, the trial court found Bunag, Jr. guilty of forcibly abducting and raping Cirilo, awarding damages: P80,000 moral, P20,000 exemplary, P20,000 temperate damages, and P10,000 attorney’s fees. Bunag, Sr. was absolved from liability.
Cirilo appealed the dismissal of liability against Bunag, Sr.; Bunags appealed the findings against Bunag, Jr., contesting forcible abduction with rape, promise to marry, and damages awarded.
The Court of Appeals on May 17, 1991 affirmed the trial court’s decision in toto and denied the motion for reconsideration on September 3, 1991.
Bunag, Jr. appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing misapprehension of facts, non-consideration of vital evidence, erroneous application of law, and excessive damages.

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in finding petitioner Bunag, Jr. forcibly abducted and raped private respondent Cirilo, or whether their relationship was a consensual elopement with intent to marry.
Whether the Court of Appeals erred in recognizing an agreement to marry and awarding damages for breach of promise to marry.
Whether moral and exemplary damages awarded are proper given the dismissal of the criminal complaint for forcible abduction with rape.