LEUS v. ST. SCHOLASTICAS COLLEGE
VINCENT
WESTGROVE AND/OR SR. EDNA
QUIAMBAO, OSB
G.R. No. 187226, January 28, 2015, (REYES, J.)
The petitioners pregnancy out of wedlock is not a
disgraceful or immoral conduct since she and the
father of her child have no impediment to marry
each other.
The totality of the circumstances surrounding
the conduct alleged to be
disgraceful or immoral must be assessed against the
prevailing norms of conduct.
the determination of whether a conduct is
disgraceful or immoral involves a two-step process:
first, a consideration of the totality of the
circumstances surrounding the conduct; and second,
an assessment of the said circumstances vis--vis the
prevailing norms of conduct, i.e., what the society
generally considers moral and respectable.
Public and secular morality should determine the
prevailing norms of conduct, not religious morality.
CHRISTINE JOY CAPIN-CADIZ v. BRENT ZAIDA R. INOCENTE v. ST.
HOSPITAL AND COLLEGES, INC. FOUNDATION FOR CHILDREN AND AGING,
INC./VERONICA MENGUITO
G.R. No. 187417, February 24, 2016, (REYES, J.)
G.R. No. 202621, June 22, 2016, (BRION, J.)
The foregoing circumstances, however, do not readily In this case, we note that both Zaida and Marlon at all
equate to disgraceful and immoral conduct. Brent's times had no impediments to marry each other. They were
Policy Manual and Employee's Manual of Policies do adults who met at work, dated, fell in love and became
not define what constitutes immorality; it simply stated sweethearts. The intimate sexual relations between them
immorality as a ground for disciplinary action. Instead, were consensual, borne by their love for one another and
Brent erroneously relied on the standard dictionary which they engaged in discreetly and in strict privacy. They
definition of fornication as a form of illicit relation andcontinued their relationship even after Marlon left St.
proceeded to conclude that Cadiz's acts fell under such Vincent in 2008. They took their marriage vows soon after
classification, thus constituting immorality. Zaida recovered from her miscarriage, thus validating their
union in the eyes of both men and God.
The totality of the circumstances of this case does not The totality of the attendant circumstances must be
justify the conclusion that Cadiz committed acts of considered in determining whether an employee's conduct is
immorality. Similar to Leus, Cadiz and her boyfriend immoral.
were both single and had no legal impediment to marry
at the time she committed the alleged immoral conduct. In other words, it is the totality of the circumstances
In fact, they eventually married on April 15, 2008. surrounding the conduct per se viewed in relation with the
conduct generally accepted by society as respectable or
moral, which determines whether the conduct is disgraceful
or immoral. The determination of whether a particular
conduct is immoral involves: (1) a consideration of the
totality of the circumstances surrounding the conduct; and
(2) an assessment of these circumstances in the light of the
prevailing norms of conduct, i.e., what the society generally
considers moral and respectable, and of the applicable laws.
Jurisprudence has already set the standard of morality In dismissal situations, the sufficiency of a conduct claimed
with which an act should be gauged - it is public and to be immoral must be judged based on secular, not religious
secular, not religious.40 Whether a conduct is considered standards.
disgraceful or immoral should be made in accordance
with the prevailing norms of conduct, which, as stated
in Leus, refer to those conducts which are proscribed
because they are detrimental to conditions upon which
depend the existence and progress of human society.
The fact that a particular act does not conform to the
traditional moral views of a certain sectarian institution

To stress, pre-marital sexual relations between two
consenting adults who have no impediment to marry
each other, and, consequently, conceiving a child out
of wedlock, gauged from a purely public and secular
view of morality, does not amount to a disgraceful or
immoral conduct under Section 94(e) of the 1992
MRPS.
is not sufficient reason to qualify such act as immoral
unless it, likewise, does not conform to public and
secular standards. More importantly, there must be
substantial evidence to establish that premarital sexual
relations and pregnancy out of wedlock is considered
disgraceful or immoral.
the Court already stressed in Leus that premarital We thus reiterate that mere private sexual relations between
sexual relations between two consenting adults who two unmarried and consenting adults, even if the relations
have no impediment to marry each other, and, result in pregnancy or miscarriage out of wedlock and
consequently, conceiving a child out of wedlock, gauged without more, are not enough to warrant liability for illicit
from a purely public and secular view of morality, does behavior. The voluntary intimacy between two unmarried
not amount to a disgraceful or immoral conduct under adults, where both are not under any impediment to marry,
Section 94(e) of the 1992 MRPS. where no deceit exists, and which was done in complete
privacy, is neither criminal nor so unprincipled as to warrant
disciplinary action.