Title
Bunag, Jr. vs. Court of Appeals
Case
G.R. No. 101749
Decision Date
Jul 10, 1992
Conrado Bunag, Jr. allegedly abducted and raped Zenaida Cirilo, promising marriage to avoid liability. Courts awarded damages for breach of promise and moral wrongs.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 101749)

Factual Background and Material Dates

On the afternoon of September 8, 1973, Conrado Bunag, Jr. allegedly abducted Zenaida Cirilo in Pasay City, took her to a motel where he raped her, and later brought her to his grandmother's house in Pamplona, Las Piñas, where they lived together as husband and wife until September 29, 1973. Applications for a marriage license were filed on September 10, 1973, but petitioner later withdrew his application on October 1, 1973. Cirilo testified to the abduction and rape, which were corroborated by her uncle. The petitioner and his father denied these allegations, claiming the circumstances amounted to a consensual elopement based on mutual agreement to marry.

Trial Court’s Findings and Civil Suit for Damages

The Regional Trial Court, Branch XIX, Bacoor, Cavite, found Bunag, Jr. liable for damages due to forcible abduction, rape, and breach of promise to marry. The court ordered damages including moral, exemplary, temperate damages, and attorney’s fees totaling P130,000.00. The father, Conrado Bunag, Sr., was absolved from liability. Cirilo appealed to hold the father civilly liable, and the Bunags appealed the trial court’s findings on abduction, rape, promise to marry, and award of damages.

Court of Appeals’ Ruling

The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s decision, emphasizing that the evidence supported the finding of forcible abduction and rape, not a mere elopement and consensual agreement to marry. It upheld the moral and exemplary damages awarded, recognizing the grave violation of Cirilo’s rights and dignity.

Petitioner's Arguments on Appeal

Petitioner argued that the trial and appellate courts failed to consider vital exhibits and testimonies essential to his defense, misapprehended facts related to the agreement to marry, and improperly applied the law by treating the incident as forcible abduction with rape rather than a simple elopement. He also contended that the damages awarded were excessive and that the dismissal of the criminal complaint for abduction with rape precluded civil liability.

Jurisprudential Principles on Review of Factual Findings

The Supreme Court reiterated the well-established rule that findings of fact by the Court of Appeals are generally conclusive and will not be disturbed unless shown to be unsupported by the record or gravely erroneous. The Court is confined to reviewing errors of law and does not re-evaluate evidence or witness credibility.

Legal Analysis on Breach of Promise to Marry and Damages

The Court acknowledged that under Philippine law, breach of promise to marry is generally not actionable except where expenses were incurred based on such promise. However, the petitioner's acts of abduction and rape and subsequent false promise to marry, intended to evade criminal responsibility, constituted conduct contrary to morals, good customs, and public policy, justifying the award of moral and exemplary damages pursuant to Articles 21 and 2219 of the Civil Code.

Distinction Between Criminal and Civil Liabilities

The Court clarified that dismissal of the criminal complaint dur

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.