Dear PAO,

My two brothers and I prepared for our father’s 80th birthday celebration. He has compromised physical and cognitive abilities, and we planned the event over the course of nearly six months, inviting several guests. Throughout the planning process, we remained in regular contact with our stepmother to remind her of the upcoming celebration. She confirmed that they would attend. However, much to our dismay, and that of our guests, our father was nowhere to be found at his 80th birthday celebration. We repeatedly tried to contact our stepmother, but we were unable to reach her. We later found out that they had gone to our stepmother’s hometown during the celebration without informing us. When asked why she broke her commitment to bring our father to the party, she simply replied, “I am the wife.” May I know if my brothers and I can file a legal action for damages due to their failure to appear at the celebration?

Leo

Dear Leo,

Under Article 19 of the New Civil Code of the Philippines, it is stated that:

“Article 19. Every person must, in the exercise of his rights and in the performance of his duties, act with justice, give everyone his due, and observe honesty and good faith.”

The principle embodied in this provision is more commonly known as the “abuse of right principle.” In the case, Adelaida C. Navarro-Banaria v. Banaria et al. (penned by Associate Justice Jose Reyes Jr., GR 222095, Aug. 7, 2017), the Supreme Court emphasized that:

“A right, though by itself legal because recognized or granted by law as such, may nevertheless become the source of some illegality. When a right is exercised in a manner which does not conform with the norms enshrined in Article 19 and results in damage to another, a legal wrong is thereby committed for which the wrongdoer must be held responsible. But while Article 19 lays down a rule of conduct for the government of human relations and for the maintenance of social order, it does not provide a remedy for its violation. Generally, an action for damages under either Article 20 or Article 21 would be proper.”

Thus, even if an act is technically legal, if it is done solely with the intention of injuring or causing damage to another person, it may constitute abuse of rights.

Moreover, the same case explains that:

“While Article 19 of the New Civil Code may have been intended as a mere declaration of principle, the “cardinal law on human conduct” expressed in said article has given rise to certain rules, e.g., that where a person exercises his rights but does so arbitrarily or unjustly or performs his duties in a manner that is not in keeping with honesty and good faith, he opens himself to liability.”

The elements of an abuse of rights under Article 19 of the New Civil Code are the following: (1) there is a legal right or duty; (2) which is exercised in bad faith; (3) for the sole intent of prejudicing or injuring another. (Tan v. Valeriano; penned by Associate Justice Samuel Martires, GR 185559, Aug. 2, 2017)

Consequently, when Article 19 of the said Code is violated, an action for damages is proper under its Articles 20 and 21, which provide:

“Article 20. Every person who, contrary to law, willfully or negligently causes damage to another, shall indemnify the latter for the same.

“Article 21. Any person who 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.”

In your case, your stepmother’s decision of bringing your father to her hometown without informing you and your brothers, despite being aware of a significant event prepared months in advance, does not conform to the standards of conduct enunciated in Article 19 of the New Civil Code. Therefore, you and your brothers may have the basis to claim for damages.

As stated in the above-mentioned case of Navarro-Banaria, “All in all, the foregoing shows that Adelaida intentionally failed to bring Pascasio to the birthday celebration prepared by the respondents, thus violating Article 19 of the Civil Code on the principle of abuse of right. Her failure to observe good faith in the exercise of her right as the wife of Pascasio caused loss and injury on the part of the respondents, for which they must be compensated by way of damages pursuant to Article 21 of the Civil Code.” Applying the said case to your situation, your stepmother may be liable for damages under Article 21 of the New Civil Code.

We hope that we were able to answer your queries. This advice was based solely on the facts you have narrated and our appreciation of the same. Our opinion may vary when other facts are changed or elaborated.

Thank you for your continued trust and support.

Editor’s note: Dear PAO is a daily column of the Public Attorney’s Office. Questions for Chief Acosta may be sent to [email protected].