Breach of Promise to Marry

Dateline : June 14, 1623, the first breach-of-promise lawsuit was filed  by  Rev Gerville Pooley of Virginia  against the rich widower Cicely Jordan who chose another man..  He lost. .

Breach of promise or heart balm is a former common law tort. It was also called breach of contract to marry. From at least medieval times until the early 20th century, a man's promise of engagement to marry a woman was considered, in many jurisdictions, a legally binding contract. If the man were to subsequently change his mind, he would be said to be in "breach" of this promise and subject to litigation for damages.

Typically, a breach of promise lawsuit will seek some type of compensation from the party who chose to withdraw from the engagement. The underlying concept is that the injured party is entitled to damages, since he or she presumably began to rearrange personal affairs in preparation for the impending marriage. Jurisdictions that do still recognize a breach of promise as a valid reason for legal action usually provide specific guidelines for determining if damages are indeed merited, as well as the amount of damages that the injured party should receive.

In other countries around the world, the idea of a breach of promise is still very much a part of the legal options that can take place when a promised marriage does not take place. This is especially true in countries where marriages are arranged as part of the cultural norm. When one or both of the parties in the engagement have significant financial resources, and the marriage was intended to combine those resources as a way of increasing the net worth of both parties, a breach of promise is more likely to be considered a grave offense, both socially and legally. Since the injured party can sometimes demonstrate a loss of wealth or resources as a direct result of the broken engagement, there is at least some possibility that the court of jurisdiction will determine that damages are appropriate, and render some sort of award to the injured party.

Love is not totally alien to law. The  Philippine Supreme Court once quoted the truism that “the heart has reasons of its own which reason does not know.” Now, what if someone you love promises to marry you but then refuses to honor that promise?

This, of course, is a breach of promise to marry. However, a breach of promise to marry does not automatically entitle the offended party to an award of damages. This is the issue in the 1964 case of Wassmer vs. Velez (12 SCRA 648). In the words of the Supreme Court, the facts that culminated in that case started with dreams and hopes, followed by appropriate planning and serious endeavors, but terminated in frustration and, what is worse, complete public humiliation. A couple, following their mutual promise of love, decided to get married and set a date for the wedding. They applied for and was issued a marriage license. Invitations were printed and distributed to relatives, friends and acquaintances. The bride-to-be’s trousseau, party dresses and other apparel for the important occasion were purchased. Dresses for the maid of honor and the flower girl were prepared. A matrimonial bed, with accessories, was bought. Bridal showers were given and gifts received. 

And then, with but two days before the wedding, defendant, who was then 28 years old,: simply left a note for plaintiff stating: “Will have to postpone wedding. My mother opposes it. I Am leaving on the Convair today. Please do not ask too many people about the reason why That would only create a scandal."  He enplaned to his home city in Mindanao, and the next day, the day before the wedding, he wired plaintiff: “Nothing changed rest assured returning soon.” But he never returned and was never heard from again. The would-be bride sued the runaway groom.

The case is not merely for a breach of promise to marry, which is not an actionable wrong. In fact, Congress deliberately eliminated from the draft of the new Civil Code the provisions that would have it so. It must not be overlooked, however, that the extent to which acts not contrary to law may be perpetrated with impunity, is not limitless for Article 21 of said Code provides that 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.

To formally set a wedding and go through all the preparations 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 Cebu City, A jilted young bride sought  damages against her would-be groom who left her standing at the altar on their wedding day in 2008 to run off with another woman. Like a scene from a telenovela, the bride was left in tears after the groom simply walked away. The groom allegedly walked out of his wedding at the Our Lady of Sacred Heart Parish Church here last Dec. 22, leaving his bride weeping in front of many witnesses. The bride filed a damage suit seeking a total of P549,630.71 in actual and moral damages on top of the P2,500 appearance fee of the lawyer for every hearing.

This legal concept of breach of promise to marry has been the plot of several novels, plays, movies, and telenovelas.

In "Pickwick Papers - Sam Weller's Evidence"  of Charles Dickens - " A famous judge said something to the effect that the damages would be more severe if the gentleman had used the engagement to take advantage of the lady - which may be presumed to mean that he had been receiving the ultimate kind of female hospitality."

Trial by Jury: an 1875  operetta of the second opera the genesis of which brought Gilbert and Sullivan together,. It detailed a "breach of promise" trial going awry, in the process spoofing the law, lawyers and the legal system.

Runaway Bride : After being fired for writing a trumped up story about Maggie Carpenter (Julia Roberts), a woman notorious for leaving grooms at the altar, columnist Ike Graham (Richard Gere) tries to get back into the business by tracking Maggie down and writing a fact-based report on her upcoming fourth wedding attempt