CARMEN QUIMIGUING, plaintiff-appellant, vs.

FELIX ICAO, defendant-appellee

G.R. No. 26795 July 31, 1970

FACTS:

Felix Icao, a married man, succeeded in having carnal intercourse with plaintiff Carmen Quimiguing, a minor, several
times by force and intimidation. As a result, the latter got impregnated and had to stop studying. She claimed
Php120.00 monthly, as damages and attorney’s fees.
Defendant Icao moved to dismiss the case for lack of cause of action since the complaint did not allege that the child
was born; thus, the trial judge sustained defendant’s motion and dismissed the complaint. Meanwhile, plaintiff moved
to amend the complaint to allege that she had later given birth to a baby girl

But the court sustained defendant’s objection, ruled that no amendment was allowable since the original complaint
averred no cause of action. Plaintiff then appealed directly to this court.

ISSUE:

Is a conceived child entitled to support?

RULING:

Yes, a conceived child, although as yet unborn, is given a provisional personality of its own for all purposes favorable
to it as explicitly provided in Article 40 of the Civil Code. The unborn child has a right to support from its progenitors;
and just as a conceived child, even if as yet unborn, may receive donations as prescribed by Article 742 of the same
Code.
The lower court’s theory is thus clear that Article 291 of the Civil Code declaring that support is an obligation of parents
and illegitimate children “does not contemplate support to children as yet unborn,: violates the Article 40 imposing a
condition that nowhere appears in the text of Article 291.
A second reason for reversing the orders appealed from, is that, for a married man to force a woman not his wife to
yield to his lust, constitutes a clear violation of the rights of his victim that entitles her to claim compensation for the
damage caused.
Article 21 of the Civil Code of the Philippines states that:
ART. 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.

The rule of Article 21 is then supported by Article 2219 of the same code which states:
ART. 2219 – Moral damages may be recovered in the following and analogous cases: (3) Seduction, abduction, rape
or other lascivious acts.
Hence, plaintiff herself had a cause of action for damages under the terms of the complaint; and the order dismissing
it for failure to state a cause of action was doubly in error.