Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 200 views

    Answer To Complaint of Breach of Promise To Marry

    Uploaded by

    Marilou Agustin
    1) The defendant admits some facts from the plaintiff's complaint but denies others, including that the plaintiff paid for all wedding expenses. 2) The defendant claims that bank records in Annex A show the defendant, not the plaintiff, paid wedding expenses. 3) The defendant argues reimbursing the plaintiff would result in unjust enrichment as the defendant already paid the expenses.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Answer To Complaint of Breach of Promise To Marry

    Uploaded by

    Marilou Agustin
    200 views8 pages
    1) The defendant admits some facts from the plaintiff's complaint but denies others, including that the plaintiff paid for all wedding expenses. 2) The defendant claims that bank records in Annex A show the defendant, not the plaintiff, paid wedding expenses. 3) The defendant argues reimbursing the plaintiff would result in unjust enrichment as the defendant already paid the expenses.

    Original Title

    Answer to Complaint of Breach of Promise to Marry

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) The defendant admits some facts from the plaintiff's complaint but denies others, including that the plaintiff paid for all wedding expenses. 2) The defendant claims that bank records in Annex A show the defendant, not the plaintiff, paid wedding expenses. 3) The defendant argues reimbursing the plaintiff would result in unjust enrichment as the defendant already paid the expenses.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    200 views8 pages

    Answer To Complaint of Breach of Promise To Marry

    Uploaded by

    Marilou Agustin
    1) The defendant admits some facts from the plaintiff's complaint but denies others, including that the plaintiff paid for all wedding expenses. 2) The defendant claims that bank records in Annex A show the defendant, not the plaintiff, paid wedding expenses. 3) The defendant argues reimbursing the plaintiff would result in unjust enrichment as the defendant already paid the expenses.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 8

    REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

    Third Judicial Region


    REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
    Branch ___
    Tarlac City, Tarlac

    DAPHNE SANTOS,
    Plaintiff,

    -versus- CIVIL CASE NO.


    FOR:

    SIMON DELA CRUZ,


    Defendant.
    x--------------------------------------------x

    ANSWER

    Defendant SIMON DELA CRUZ, through the undersigned counsel


    and unto this Honorable Court, most respectfully avers:

    I
    ADMISSIONS

    1. The defendant admits the contents of paragraph 2, of the complaint


    insofar as the it relates to the personal circumstances of Defendant
    Dela Cruz with additional averment that they may be served with all
    court processes through the undersigned counsel;

    2. The defendant admits paragraph 3,4, and 5 of the complaint.

    II.
    DENIALS
    A. SPECIFIC DENIAL

    3. The defendant denies the allegations in paragraph 13 of the complaint


    that the plaintiff used her savings and separation pay to cover all the
    expenses of their wedding;

    4. Paragraphs 18 and 19 are likewise denied because in truth, the


    defendant never entered to other relationship.

    B. LACK OF KNOWLEDGE
    5. That defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form
    beliefs as to the veracity of the averments in paragraphs 16, 17, 20,
    21, and 22 of the complaint.

    III.
    AFFIRMATIVE ALLEGATIONS

    6. Based on the foregoing, the money used for the payment of the
    expenses dated February 2020, March 16, 2020, and April 9, 2020 is
    not from the plaintiff.

    7. Moreover, her resignation took effect on May 1, 2020, and that would
    render her allegation that her separation pay and savings covered all
    the expenses for the wedding impossible (ANNEX B);

    8. That all payment made under the name of the plaintiff were all given
    by the defendant as evidence by the withdrawals made by the
    defendant (ANNEX A);

    9. Based on the all the foregoing, the plaintiff clearly has no cause of
    action to order the reimbursement of the wedding expenses amounting
    to four hundred thousand six hundred pesos (Php 406,000.00).

    IV.
    SPECIAL AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

    A. THE CLAIM OF FOUR HUNDRED THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED


    PESOS SHOULD BE DISMISSED BECAUSE THE
    DEFENDANT IS THE ONE WHO PAID ALL THE WEDDING
    EXPENSES;

    B. THE CLAIM FOR PSYCHOLOGICAL TREATMENT


    AMOUNTING TO FIFTY THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED
    PESOS(Php 50,800.00) HAS NO BASIS;

    C. THE CLAIMS FOR MORAL AND EXEMPLARY ARE


    EXCESSIVE.

    V
    DISCUSSION.
    10. Wassmer vs. Velez (G. R. No. L-20089; December 26, 1964;
    wherein the Supreme Court declared:
    “As stated, mere breach of promise to marry is not an
    actionable wrong. But to formally set a wedding and go through
    all the above-described preparation and publicity, only to walk
    out of it when the matrimony is about to be solemnized, is quite
    different. This is palpably and unjustifiably contrary to good
    customs for which defendant must be held answerable in
    damages in accordance with Article 21 aforesaid.”

    11. In this jurisprudence, the defendant was liable for the damages
    due to breaching his promise to marry the plaintiff after all the
    preparations had been made. In the present case, though all the
    preparation had already set, the defendant would like to reiterate
    that all the wedding expenses were paid by the plaintiff, thus, it will
    unjustly enrich the plaintiff if the court allows such claim.

    12. PLAINTIFF WILL BE UNJUSTLY ENRICHED IF CLAIMS


    ALLOWED

    The case of Jalandoni vs Encomienda, (GR 205578, March 1,


    2017) provides:

    There is unjust enrichment under Article 22 of the Civil Code


    when (1) a person is unjustly benefited, and (2) such benefit is
    derived at the expense of or with damages to another. The
    principle of unjust enrichment essentially contemplates
    payment when there is no duty to pay, and the person who
    receives the payment has no right to receive it.

    13. In this case, since the defendant paid all the expenses for the
    preparation of the wedding, the claims pertaining to wedding
    expenses should be denied because it will unjustly enrich the
    plaintiff at the expense of the defendant who has no duty to pay the
    amount that he already loss.

    14. CLAIMS ARE BASELESS

    A. The psychological treatment has no supporting evidence to


    prove such claim;
    B. Moral and Exemplary are excessive.

    TIMELINESS
    15. This ANSWER is submitted seasonably, or within the 30 days
    from the date of receipt on February 4, 2021, today being February
    8, 2021.

    PRAYER

    WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most respectfully


    prayed that this Honorable Court render judgment as follows:

    DISMISS the CLAIM of four hundred thousand six hundred


    pesos (Php 406,000.00);

    GRANT such other relief as may be just and equitable under the
    premises.

    Tarlac City, February 8, 2021.

    Codiban Barrientos Perez LAW OFFICE


    2nd Floor, PTR Building, Ligtasan,
    Tarlac City

    By:

    Atty. Crisanto M. Perez


    Counsel for the Defendant
    Roll No.
    PTR No.
    MCLE Compliance No.
    ___dated

    Copy furnished:

    Atty. Anthony Gonzales


    Counsel for the Plaintiff

    Daphne Santos
    #2 Ilang0-ilang St., Brgy. Pablo, Tarlac City
    ANNEX “A”
    “ANNEX “B”

    You might also like