Cecilio Pe, et al vs Alfonso Pe

G.R. No. L-17396

May 30, 1962

Thesis Statement/Doctrine: ACTS CONTRARY TO MORALS (Article 21 of Civil Code)

In this case, defendant Alfonso Pe was held liable for damages to the plaintiff,
Lolita Pe’s family for the injury he caused which is against Article 21 of the Civil Code
which states that any person willfully 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. Here, the defendant, a Chinese married man, has won Lolita’s affection
by trickery and seduced her until she falls in love with him. Thereafter, when the plaintiff
had knowledge about their illicit affair, they forbid the defendant and Lolita for seeing
each other and later on filed a case against the defendant. The Supreme Court held that
the wrong caused by the defendant to Lolita and her family is immeasurable considering
the fact that he is a married man. Hence, a manner contrary to Article 21 of the Civil
Code.

Facts:

The plaintiffs in this case are the family of Lolita Pe, 24 years old and unmarried.
The defendant in this is Alfonso Pe, a married man, adopted son of Chinaman, Pe Beco,
a collateral relative of Lolita’s father. The defendant and Lolita became close due to their
similarities in their family name. Hence, the defendant was regarded by the plaintiff as
family member. With this, the defendant frequently goes to the house of Lolita’s family
on the pretext that he wanted her to teach him how to pray the rosary. The two eventually
fell in love and had clandestine love affairs. Later on, when the parents of Lolita had
known their illicit affairs, the defendant is forbidden to visit their house and from further
seeing Lolita. Nonetheless, the affairs between Lolita and the defendant continues.

Furthermore, during the stay of Lolita with her brothers and sisters at their house
in Quezon City, she disappeared from the said house. After she left, her siblings checked
up her things and found that Lolita’s clothes were gone, and they also found a note on a
crumpled piece of paper with handwriting recognized to be that of defendant. The note
reads: “Honey, suppose I leave here on Sunday night, and that’s 13th of this month and
we will have a date on the 14th, that’s Monday morning at 10 a.m.”

The disappearance of Lolita was reported to the police authorities and the NBI but
up to the present there is no news or trace of Lolita’s whereabouts.
Issue:

Whether or not the defendant, Alfonso Pe, committed injury to the plaintiff, Lolita’s
family in a manner contrary to morals, good customs, and public policy as contemplated
in Article 21 of the New Civil Code?

Ruling:

Yes, the defendant committed injury to the plaintiff in a manner contrary to morals,
good customs, and public policy as contemplated in Article 21 of the New Civil Code. The
Supreme Court held in this case that the wrong caused by the defendant is indeed
immeasurable considering the fact that he is a married man. Further, the defendant not
only deliberately but through a clever strategy, succeeded in winning the affection and
love of Lolita to the extent of having an illicit affair with her. Hence, his wrong actions
committed an injury to the plaintiffs in a manner contrary to morals, good customs, and
public policy.