Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • GELUZ Vs COA (Digest and Dicta)

    Uploaded by

    chiclets777
    98 views1 page
    The petitioner Oscar Lazo sought damages from a physician for performing his wife's third abortion without his knowledge. The Court of Appeals reversed the lower court's decision in favor of Lazo. It ruled that an unborn child does not have juridical personality under Philippine law and therefore Lazo cannot recover damages for the death of his unborn child. The Court of Appeals also noted that Lazo showed indifference to his wife's first two abortions, so there was no legal basis for awarding him damages.

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    GELUZ vs COA (Digest and Dicta)

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The petitioner Oscar Lazo sought damages from a physician for performing his wife's third abortion without his knowledge. The Court of Appeals reversed the lower court's decision in favor of Lazo. It ruled that an unborn child does not have juridical personality under Philippine law and therefore Lazo cannot recover damages for the death of his unborn child. The Court of Appeals also noted that Lazo showed indifference to his wife's first two abortions, so there was no legal basis for awarding him damages.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    98 views1 page

    GELUZ Vs COA (Digest and Dicta)

    Uploaded by

    chiclets777
    The petitioner Oscar Lazo sought damages from a physician for performing his wife's third abortion without his knowledge. The Court of Appeals reversed the lower court's decision in favor of Lazo. It ruled that an unborn child does not have juridical personality under Philippine law and therefore Lazo cannot recover damages for the death of his unborn child. The Court of Appeals also noted that Lazo showed indifference to his wife's first two abortions, so there was no legal basis for awarding him damages.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 1

    GELUZ VS.

    COURT OF APPEALS

    FACTS
    • Nature of the case is a petition for review by certiorari (Court of First Instance
    in Manila favored Lazo)
    • Oscar Lazo petitions recovery of damages from the physician that performed
    his wife’s third abortion (P3,000+P700 attorney’s fees+costs of suit)
    • The petitioner claims he has no knowledge of the third abortion therefore has
    the right to recovery of damages

    ISSUE
    • WON the unborn child have juridical personality
    • WON Lazo can recover damages for the death of his unborn child

    DECISION
    • Decision is reversed and complaint ordered dismissed. No costs.

    REASON
    • The unborn child lacked juridical personality (acc. To Art. 41 of the Civil Code)

    DICTA
    • “The immorality or illegality of the act does not justify an award of damage
    that, under the circumstances on record, have no factual or legal basis.”---
    this is not a criminal case!!
    • The damages that can be collected are only those inflicted directly upon the
    parents, and because of Lazo’s indifference in the first two abortions, there is
    no basis even for moral damages.

    You might also like