Torts and Damages

What are the sources of obligations?

Law
Contracts
Quasi-contract
Delict
Quasi-delict

Tort - unlawful violation of a private right, not created by contract, and which
gives rise to an action for damages.
Intentional torts
Negligence
Strict liability tort independent of fault or negligence

Art. 2176. Whoever by act or omission causes damage to another,

there being fault or negligence, is obliged to pay for the damage
done. Such fault or negligence, if there is no pre-existing contractual
relation between the parties is called a uas-delict, and is governed
by the provisions of this chapter.

Quasi-delict

Is a civil wrong; not a crime (ART 365 of the RPC)

not intentional or malicious act; but by negligence

What is fault or negligence? Article 1173 of the CC: The fault or negligence
of the obligor consists in the omission of that diligence which is required by
the nature of the obligation and corresponds with circumstances of
thePERSONS, of the TIME, and of the PLACE.

What is the test of Negligence? Would a prudent man in his position foresee
harm to the person injured as a reasonable consequence of the course about
to be pursued? If so, the law imposes a duty on the actor to refrain from that
course, or to take precaution against its mischievous results, and the failure
to do so constitutes negligence.

Damages sum of money which the law awards or imposes as pecuniary

compensation, recompense, or satisfaction for the injury done or a wrong
sustained

Requisites in order that defendant may be held liable for damages:

1. Fault/negligence
2. Damage suffered/incurred
3. Relation of cause and effect

What if there is a pre-existing contractual relation between the parties, that

does bar the plaintiff from recovering damages on the basis of Article 2176 of
the Civil Code? (e.g. employer-employee relationship or contract of carriage)

NO. The existence of a contract between the parties constitutes no bar

to the commission of a tort by one against the other and the
consequent recovery of damages. In fact, the action for recovery of
damages may even be predicated on both breach of contract and
tort at the same time.

The act which breaks the contract may be a tort

Examples:
 Bankfiduciary relationship
Carriage -

Culpa contractual culpa aquiliana culpa

criminal

Contract YES NO NO

Quantum of proof Preponderance Preponderance beyond

reasonable doubt

defense of a good father not valid; mitigate proper defense no. employer is
subsidiarily liable

contract to be proven negligence, prove innocence

presumed

Negligence incidental direct, substantive,

independent

Doctrine of last clear chance

Contributory negligence mitigate damages
Proximate cause -
Damnun absque injuria
Caso fortuito
Volenti non fit injuria

Article 2177: THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR FAULT OR NEGLIGENCE

UNDER THE PRECEDING ARTICLE IS ENTIRELY SEPARATE AND
DISTINCT FROM THE CIVIL LIABILITY ARISING FROM NEGLIGANCE
UNDER THE PENAL CODE. BUT THE PLAINTIFF CANNOT RECOVER
DAMAGES TWICE FOR THE SAME ACT OR OMISSION OF THE
DEFENDANT.

Civil liability arising from quasi- Civil liability arising from crime
delict
Preponderance of evidence Guilt beyond reasonable doubt
Exercise of due diligence in the Not a proper defense
selection and supervision of
employees is a valid and complete
defense

PROCEDURAL ASPECT

Rule 111 of the RRC

Civil action for the recovery of the civil liability arising from the offense
charged is deemed instituted, unless:
1. Waives

2. Reservesbefore the prosecution starts presenting its evidence and

under such circumstances affording the offended party the
opportunity to make such reservation

3. Civil action is instituted ahead of the criminal

When Criminal action is instituted, the separate civil action cannot be
instituted or will be suspendedbefore judgment on the merits. BUT THERE
CAN BE CONSOLIDATION OF THE CIVIL AND THE CRIMINAL ACTIONS IN THE
CRIMINAL ACTION UPON MOTION OF THE OFFENDED PARTY.

INDEPENDENT CIVIL ACTIONS: Articles 32, 33, 34 and 2176

It shall proceed independently of the criminal action and shall require

only preponderance of evidence.
In no case may the offended party recover damages twice for the same
act or omission.

Application of Article 2177:

Paul was run over by a passenger jeepney. B is the owner of the jeepney. X is
the driver of the jeepney.

If the parents want to sue, what are their options?

1. Reckless imprudence resulting to homicide
Proof:
If acquitted, can they sue based on 2176?

2. Culpa aquiliana
Proof
Defense of B: due diligence

Is reservation required for the institution for the institution of the

civil action?

Must he choose between two remedies?

NO. What is proscribed is double recovery, not double remedies.

Varying amounts are awarded? He may recover only the bigger amount.

If there has been recovery already in one action and in the other action, a
bigger amount is awarded, he shall be entitled to the excess.

Bigger amount in the first case? No more recovery in the second.

Liliusvs Manila Railroad, 27 SCRA 674

Picartvs Smith, 37 Phil 8
Phoenix vs IAC, GR No. 65295
McKee vs IAC, GR No. 68102
Lambert Ramos vs COL Realty Corp, GR No. 184905, August 28, 2009
IlocosNorte Electric Company vs CA, GR No. 53401, November 6, 1989