Quimiging v Icao Case Digest – G.R. No. 26795 July 31, 1970
REYES, J.B.L., J.:
Facts
Carmen Quimiguing (petitioner) and Felix Icao (defendant) were neighbors. They had a close and confidential relationship. The defendant succeeded in having carnal intercourse with the petitioner several times although he is married. Also, the carnal intercourse was executed by force and intimidation, and without her consent.
As a result, despite efforts and drugs supplied by the defendant, she became pregnant. Likewise, the petitioner had to stop studying. Hence, she claimed support at P120.00 per month, damages, and attorney’s fees.
The defendant contended that the case be dismissed since it did not allege that the child had been born. After hearing arguments, the trial judge sustained the defendant’s motion and dismissed the complaint.
Petitioner moved to amend the complaint that as a result of the intercourse, she gave birth to a baby girl but the court ruled that “no amendment was allowable since the original complaint averred no cause of action”.
RELATED:
- People v Mendoza Case Digest G.R. No. L-5877, Sept. 28, 1954
- De Jesus vs Syquia Case Digest -58 Phil 866 – G.R. No. L-39110, November 28, 1933
- Geluz v. Court of Appeals Case Digest – G.R. No. L-16439 – July 20, 1961
- Tenchavez v Escaño Case Digest – L-19671, November 29, 1965
- Chi-Ming Tsoi vs Gina Lao – Case Digest G.R. №119190 January 16, 1997
- Tañada vs Tuvera Case Digest – G.R. No. L-63915 April 24, 1985
- Andal v Macaraig Case Digest. GR No. 2474, May 30, 1951
Issue
Whether or not the petitioner has the right to claim for support and damages.
Ruling
Yes. The Court ruled that plaintiff-appellant had right to support of the child she was carrying and an independent cause of action for damages.
A conceived child, although as yet unborn, is given by law a provisional personality of its own for all purposes favorable to it. It is explicitly provided in Article 40 of the Civil Code of the Philippines. Therefore, the unborn child has a right to support from its progenitors.
It is true that Article 40 prescribing that “the conceived child shall be considered born for all purposes that are favorable to it” adds further “provided it be born later with the conditions specified in the following article” (i.e., that the foetus be alive at the time it is completely delivered from the mother’s womb).
Auxiliary reason: A second reason for reversing the orders appealed from is that for a married man to force a woman not his wife to yield to his lust constitutes a clear violation of the rights of his victim that entitles her to claim compensation for the damage caused. Says Article 21 of the Civil Code of the Philippines:
ART. 21. 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.
The rule of Article 21 is supported by Article 2219 of the same Code:
ART 2219. Moral damages may be recovered in the following and analogous cases:
(3) Seduction, abduction, rape, or other lascivious acts
Hence, the girl has a cause of action.
Conclusion
WHEREFORE, the orders under appeal are reversed and set aside. Let the case be remanded to the court of origin for further proceedings conformable to this decision. Costs against appellee Felix Icao. So ordered.
Quimiging v Icao Case Digest – G.R. No. 26795 July 31, 1970
