Pe vs Pe TITLE: Pe vs.

Pe CITATION: 5 SCRA 200

FACTS: Alfonso Pe, a married man frequented the the plaintiffs house where their daughter/sister Lolita lives on the pretext that he wanted her to teach him how to pray the rosary. Alfonse Pe was treated like a son by Cecilio Pe. Cecilio introduced Alfonso to his children and was given access to visit their house. His frequent visits to Lolita ended up with a love affair between Lolita and him. There is no doubt that the claim of plaintiff for damages was based on the fact that defendant, being a married man, carried on a love affair with Lolita Pe. This has caused damage and injury in a manner contrary to morals, good customs and public policy and hence demands indemnity from the defendant. The Court of First Instance considered the plaintiffs complaint not actionable for the reason that they have failed to prove that the defendant deliberately and in bad faith tried to win Lolitas affection. ISSUE: Can the family of Lolita claim for moral damages under Art 21 of the New Civil Code? Held: Yes, decision appealed from is reversed. Indeed, no other conclusion can be drawn from this chain of events than that defendant not only deliberately but through a clever strategy succeeded in making Lolita fall for him to the extent of having a illicit affair with her. The wrong caused by Alfonso is immeasurable considering the fact that he is a married man. Verily, he has committed ab injury to Lolitas family in a manner contrary to morals, good customs and public policy as stated in Art 21 of the Civil Code. WHEREFORE, the decision appealed from is reversed. Defendant is hereby sentenced to pay the plaintiffs the sum of P5,000.00 as damages and P2,000.00 as attorney's fees and expenses of litigations. Costs against appellee.