- Statute
- Civil Code
- Article
- Art. 21
- Topic
- Acts contrary to morals, good customs or public policy (abuse of rights)
- Status
- In force
- Book
- Preliminary Title
- Chapter
- CHAPTER 2 Human Relations (n)
- Year
- 1949
- Cited by
- Multiple Supreme Court decisions
The provision
ARTICLE 21. 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.
Intellegal Wiki · In plain terms
A person who wilfully causes loss or injury to another in a manner contrary to morals, good customs, or public policy must compensate the victim. This fills gaps left by specific laws, giving a remedy for wilful conduct contrary to good morals that is not otherwise punishable. It is a cornerstone of the law on human relations and abuse of rights.
An editorially maintained plain-language explanation of this provision — not legal advice.
Intellegal Wiki · How the courts apply it
In Gashem Shookat Baksh v. Court of Appeals, the Supreme Court held: Denied the petition and affirmed the CA; a breach of promise to marry is not actionable per se, but Article 21 applies where the promise was made with fraud and deceit to obtain sexual congress.
One leading Supreme Court case applying this provision.
Key points
Article 21 is a cornerstone of the Civil Code's chapter on human relations. It provides that any person who wilfully causes loss or injury to another in a manner contrary to morals, good customs, or public policy shall compensate the latter for the damage.
The article fills gaps left by specific statutes: conduct may be technically lawful yet still actionable if it is wilful and offends morals, good customs, or public policy. It is the basis often invoked for awards of moral damages under Article 2219(10), and is read alongside Article 19 (the abuse-of-rights standard) and Article 20 (acts contrary to law).
Article 21 expands the abuse-of-rights framework of Article 19 to acts that are not necessarily a breach of any specific statute. Its elements, as applied by the courts, are an act that is legal, done wilfully, and contrary to morals, good customs, or public policy, causing loss or injury to another. A classic field of application is conduct in personal and commercial dealings that the positive law does not specifically penalize but that offends fair dealing, for which the remedy is compensation for the resulting damage.
Cases applying this article
- Gashem Shookat Baksh v. Court of Appeals G.R. No. 97336
- Joaquina Ventura v. Eusebio Bernabe G.R. No. L-26760
- Barons Marketing Corp. v. Court of Appeals G.R. No. 126486
- Far East Bank v. The Honorable Court of Appeals G.R. No. 108164
- St. Martin Polyclinic v. Lwv Construction Corporation G.R. No. 217426
- Former Mayor Brigido R. Simon, Jr. v. Florida R. Martinez G.R. No. 156025
- Philippine School of Business Administration v. Court of Appeals G.R. No. 84698
- Sps. Melchor v. Sps. BBB G.R. No. 235737
Other Supreme Court decisions also apply this article.