Inson v. Belzunce
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Flora Inson commenced an action against Agustin Belzunce seeking damages for breach of an alleged contract of marriage and to compel the defendant to recognize and maintain children resulting from an alleged marital relation. Procedural History: The defendant demurred to the complaint, which was sustained. The plaintiff amended her complaint to ask for damages resulting from the breach of an alleged contract to marry. After trial, the Court of First Instance found the alleged contract of marriage to be illegal as it was contrary to good morals and absolved the defendant. The plaintiff appealed the decision. The Petition: The plaintiff appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that the lower court erred in absolving the defendant. The attorney de oficio for the appellant recommended affirmation of the judgment.
Issue(s)
Whether the alleged contract of marriage, based on the condition of prior cohabitation, is valid and enforceable. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to damages for the breach of the alleged contract of marriage.
Ruling
The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the lower court, holding that the alleged contract of marriage was illegal and void. The plaintiff is not entitled to damages.
Ratio Decidendi
On Issue 1: The alleged contract of marriage was based upon immoral and illegal considerations. The plaintiff herself testified that the defendant promised to marry her in consideration that she would first go to live with him. This clearly demonstrates that the consideration for the promise to marry was illegal, rendering the contract, if any was ever made, null and void. A promise of marriage founded upon carnal connection is based upon an unlawful consideration. On Issue 2: No action can be maintained by the woman against the man for breach of a promise of marriage based upon carnal connection. Furthermore, an action for damages cannot be maintained under article 1902 of the Civil Code where the party claiming such damages voluntarily consented thereto. The intercourse between the plaintiff and defendant, considering all the facts and circumstances, constituted a crime or misdemeanor common to both. Neither of them, under such circumstances, can claim damages against the other, as per Article 1305 of the Civil Code.
Main Doctrine
A promise of marriage based upon carnal connection is founded upon an unlawful consideration and is null and void. No action for damages can be maintained by the woman against the man for breach of such a promise, nor can damages be claimed under Article 1902 of the Civil Code where the party claiming damages voluntarily consented to the intercourse.