ILAO-ORETA vs. RONQUILLO GR No. 172406 | October 17, 2007 | CarpioMorales, J.

| Petition for Review on Certiorari of a Decision of the CA Petitioner: Concepcion Ilao-Oreta Respondent: Spouses Eva Marie and Benedicto Noel Ronquillo Facts: Despite several years of marriage, Spouses Ronquillo is still childless. They consulted Dr. Concepcion Ilao-Oreta, an obstetrician-gynecologistconsultant at St. Lukes and Chief of the Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility Section. Eva Marie agreed to undergo a laparoscopic procedure where a laparoscope would be inserted through her abdominal wall to get a direct view of her internal reproductive organ in order to determine the real cause of her infertility. The procedure was scheduled on April 5, 1999 at 2 pm. Dr. Ilao-Oreta did not arrive at the schedules time and no prior notice of its cancellation was received by the Ronquillos. Dr. Ilao-Oreta was on her honeymoon in Hawaii. She estimated that she would arrive in Manila in the early morning of April 5. However, she failed to consider the time difference between Hawaii and Philippines. Ronquillos filed a complaint against Dr. Ilao-Oreta and St. Lukes for breach of professional and service contract and for damages. RTC: awarded Eva Marie only actual damages upon finding that the doctors failure to arrive on time was not intentional CA: found Dr. Ilao-Oreta grossly negligent Issue: WON Dr. Ilao-Oreta was grossly negligent in not arriving on time for the scheduled laparoscopy Ratio: Gross negligence implies a want or absence of or failure to exercise slight care or diligence, or the entire absence of care. It evinces a thoughtless disregard of consequences without exercising any effort to avoid them. It is characterized by want of even slight care, acting or omitting to act in a situation where there is a duty to act, not inadvertently but wilfully and intentionally with a conscious indifference to consequences in so far as other persons may be affected.

Records show that Dr- Ilao-Oreta left an admitting order with her secretary for one of the spouses to pick up, apprised Eva Marie of the necessary preparations for the procedure and instructed the hospital staff to perform pre-operative treatments before leaving for Hawaii. These acts reflect an earnest intention to perform the procedure on the day and time scheduled. On realizing that she missed the scheduled procedure, Dr. Ilao-Oreta, upon arrival in Manila, immediately called the hospital and asked the nurses about Eva Marie. She also wanted to call the Ronquillos but she didnt have their number at that time. So the next morning, she went to her office to get the Ronquillos contact number, which is written on Eva Maries chart, and called them right away. Noel admitted that indeed Dr. IlaoOreta called him up after she arrived in Manila. Although Dr. Ilao-Oretas act is not grossly negligent, she was negligent when she scheduled to perform professional service at 2 pm without considering the time difference between Philippines and Hawaii. Having travelled to the US, where she obtained a fellowship in Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, more than twice, she should have been mindful of said difference. The procedure to be conducted on Eva Marie was only elective in nature thus the situation did not present any clear and apparent harm or injury that even a careless person may perceive. According to the SC, it bears noting that when Dr. Ilao-Oreta was scheduling the date of her performance of the procedure, she had just gotten married and was preparing for her honeymoon. It is common knowledge that excitement attends its preparations. Her negligence could then be partly attributed to human frailty which rules out its characterization as gross. Dispositive: Petition is granted.