Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Spouses Cuasos
June 27, 2008
Nachura, J.
Facts:
Issue:
Whether Corinthian was negligent under the circumstances and, if so,
whether such negligence contributed to the injury suffered by the Tanjangcos.
Decision:
Ratio:
Petitioner is found negligent under the TEST. The MRRC provides that no new
constructions can be started without the approval of the petitioner association.
Thus, it is reasonable to assume that Corinthian, through its representative, in
the approval of building plans, and in the conduct of periodic inspections of on-
going construction projects within the subdivision, is responsible in insuring
compliance with the approved plans, inclusive of the construction of perimeter
walls.
NB
1. The court here categorized the case as falling under tort. Take note that there
are discussions regarding similarity or difference of a QD and a tort. (just
thinking out loud)
2. This is another case where the court ruled using Article 2176 despite the fact
that there is an existing contractual obligation between the parties. (just a
thought to ponder on)