Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 1
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Phoenix Construction vs. IAC ................ 36 Chapman vs. James M. Underwood ......50
Glan Peoples Lumber vs. IAC................ 38 Marcial T. CAedo vs. Yu Khe Thai ...........51
Pantranco vs. Maricar Bascos Baesa ..... 38 Felina Rodriguez-Luna vs. IAC ................53
Philippine Bank vs. CA ........................... 39 B. VICARIOUS LIABILITY
Amador C. Ong vs. Metropolitan 40
1. PARENTS
Gregorio Anuran vs. Pepito Buno ......... 41
Sabina Exconde vs. Delfin Capuno .........53
Edna A. Raynera vs. Freddie Hiceta ...... 42
Severino Salen vs. Jose Balce .................54
Osmundo S. CAnlas vs. CA..................... 42
Agapito Fuellas vs. Elpidio Cadano.........55
Consolidated Bank vs. CA ...................... 43
Gutierrez vs. Bonifacio Gutierrez ...........56
Rogelio Engada vs. CA ........................... 43
Felina Rodriguez-Luna vs. IAC ................57
V. LIABILITY Cresencio Libi vs. IAC .............................58
Purita Miranda Vestil vs IAC .................. 44 Maria Teresa Y. Cuadra vs. Monfort ......60
C. S. Gilchrist vs. E. A. Cuddy Et Al. ........ 47 Maximino Soliman, Jr. vs. Tuazon ..........68
So Ping Bun vs. CA ................................. 48 St. Mary's Academy vs. Carpitanos ........69
Florentina A. Guilatco vs. Dagupan ....... 48 Philippine Rabbit vs. Phil-American .......70
5. EMPLOYERS
VI. PERSONS LIABLE
Philtranco vs. CA ....................................71
A. THE TORTFEASOR
Castilex Industrial Vs. Vasquez ...............72
Dean C. Worcester vs. Martin Ocampo 50
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 2
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 3
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
2. MORAL
X. DAMAGES
a. CONCEPT
A. DEFINITION AND CONCEPTS
Victor Kierulf vs. CA..............................120
People vs. Felipe Ballesteros ............... 110
Spouses Custodio vs. CA ..................... 111 b. PROOF OF PROXIMATE CAUSE
Heirs Of Borlado vs. CA ....................... 111 Miranda-Ribaya vs. Bautista ................121
Lazatin vs. Twao ................................ 112 Virgilio M. Del Rosario vs. CA ...............122
Raagas vs. Octavio Traya ......................122
B. DAMNUM ABSQUE INJURIA
Roque Enervida vs. De La Torre ...........123
Board Of Liquidators vs. Kalaw ........... 112
People vs. Rodelio Bugayong ...............124
Spouses Custodio vs. CA ..................... 113
c. CASES WHERE ALLOWED
C. KINDS OF DAMAGES
Trinidad J. Francisco vs. GSIS ...............124
1. ACTUAL OR COMPENSATORY
Expertravel vs. CA ................................124
Lucio Algarra vs. Sixto Sandejas .......... 113
d. UNFOUNDED SUITS
a. KINDS
Editha M. Mijares vs. CA ......................126
Pnoc Shipping vs. CA ........................... 114
Pantaleon De La Pea vs. CA................127
Integrated Packaging vs. CA ................ 115
J Marketing Corp. vs. Felicidad Sia....127
b. EXTENT Reynaldo T. Cometa vs. CA ..................128
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 4
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
e. FACTORS IN DETERMINING
AMOUNT
PNB vs. CA ........................................... 130
Gregorio Fule vs. CA ............................ 131
Philippine Airlines vs. CA ..................... 132
Arturo P. Valenzuela vs. CA ................. 132
Aurelio Sumalpong vs. CA ................... 133
Fernando Lopez vs. Pan American ...... 134
Producers Bank vs. CA......................... 135
3. NOMINAL
Robes-Francisco Realty vs. Cfi ............. 137
People vs. Agustin Gopio .................... 138
Herman Armovit vs. CA ....................... 139
4. TEMPERATE
Maximo Pleno vs. CA........................... 139
People vs. Balwinder Singh ................. 140
People vs. Edison Plazo ....................... 140
5. LIQUIDATED
6. EXEMPLARY OR CORRECTIVE
PNB vs. CA ........................................... 141
Virgilio M. Del Rosario vs. CA .............. 141
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 5
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 6
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 7
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
GR NO. 57079, September 29, 1989 cannot charge PLDT for their injuries
where their own failure to exercise
PLDT VS. CA due and reasonable care was the
The perils of the road were known to, cause thereof. It is both a societal
hence appreciated and assumed by, norm and necessity that one should
private respondents. By exercising exercise a reasonable degree of
reasonable care and prudence, caution for his own
respondent Antonio Esteban could protection. Furthermore, respondent
have avoided the injurious Antonio Esteban had the last clear
consequences of his act, even chance or opportunity to avoid the
assuming arguendo that there was accident, notwithstanding the
some alleged negligence on the part negligence he imputes to petitioner
of petitioner. PLDT. As a resident of Lacson Street,
The presence of warning signs could he passed on that street almost
not have completely prevented the everyday and had knowledge of the
accident; the only purpose of said presence and location of the
signs was to inform and warn the excavations there. It was his
public of the presence of excavations negligence that exposed him and his
on the site. The private respondents wife to danger, hence he is solely
already knew of the presence of said responsible for the consequences of
excavations. It was not the lack of his imprudence.
knowledge of these excavations which
caused the jeep of respondents to fall
into the excavation but the
unexplained sudden swerving of the 2.CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE
jeep from the inside lane towards the
accident mound. As opined in some
quarters, the omission to perform a GR NO. L-40452, October 12, 1989
duty, such as the placing of warning
GREGORIO GENOBIAGON VS. CA
signs on the site of the excavation,
constitutes the proximate cause only The alleged contributory negligence
when the doing of the said omitted of the victim, if any, does not
act would have prevented the injury. It exonerate the accused. The defense
is basic that private respondents of contributory negligence does not
apply in criminal cases committed
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 8
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 9
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 10
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
In Lasam v. Smith (45 Phil. 657), we know the correct measures to take
laid down the following essential when a tire blows up thus insuring the
characteristics of caso fortuito: safety of passengers at all times.
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 11
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
This provision has since then been GR NO. 87584, June 16, 1992
reiterated, with some slight
modification, in Section 73 of P.D. No. GOTESCO INVESTMENT VS. CHATTO
It is true that the petitioner This implied warranty has given rise
miscalculated, but the Court feels he to the rule that, Where a patron of a
theater or other place of public
should not be blamed for that. The
amusement is injured, and the thing
decision he made seemed logical at
that caused the injury is wholly and
that time and was one that could be
exclusively under the control and
expected of a reasonable and prudent management of the defendant, and
person. And if, as it happened, the the accident is such as in the ordinary
two robbers attacked him in broad course of events would not have
daylight in the jeep while it was on a happened if proper care had been
exercised, its occurrence raises a
busy highway, and in the presence of
presumption or permits of an
other passengers, it cannot be said
inference of negligence on the part of
that all this was the result of his the defendant.
imprudence and negligence. This was
That presumption or inference was
undoubtedly a fortuitous event not overcome by the petitioner.
covered by the said provisions,
Besides, even assuming for the sake
something that could not have been
of argument that, as petitioner
reasonably foreseen although it could vigorously insists, the cause of the
have happened, and did. collapse was due to force majeure,
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 12
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 13
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 14
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 15
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
In the present case, the animal was in defendant to produce an injury, the
the custody and under the control of defendant is liable if the injury would
the caretaker, who was paid for his not have resulted but for his own
caretakers business to try to prevent Likewise, the maxim volenti non fit
the animal from causing injury or injurid relied upon by petitioner finds
damage to anyone, including himself. no application in the case at bar. It is
And being injured by the animal imperative to note the surrounding
under those circumstances, where one circumstances which impelled the
of the risks of the occupation which deceased to leave the comforts of a
he had voluntarily assumed and for roof and brave the subsiding typhoon.
which he must take the As testified by Linda Alonzo Estavillo
consequences. and Aida Bulong, the deceased,
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 16
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 17
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 18
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 19
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
would not have occurred. And more vehicle. But in the present case and
comprehensively, the proximate legal under the circumstances obtaining in
cause is that acting first and the same, we do not hesitate to hold
producing the injury, either
that the proximate cause of the death
immediately or by setting other events
of Bataclan was the overturning of the
in motion, all constituting a natural
and continuous chain of events, each bus, this for the reason that when the
having a close causal connection with vehicle turned not only on its, side
its immediate predecessor, the final but completely on its back, the
event in the chain immediately leaking of the gasoline from the tank
effecting- the injury as a natural and
was not unnatural or unexpected; that
probable result of the cause which
the coming of the men with a lighted
first acted, under such circumstances
torch was in response to the call for
that the person responsible for the
first event should, as an ordinarily help, made not only by the
prudent and intelligent person, have passengers, but most probably, by the
reasonable ground to expect at the driver and the conductor themselves,
moment ofhis act or default that an and that because it was very dark
injury to some person might probably
(about 2:30 in the morning), the
result therefrom.
rescuers had to carry a light with
It may be that ordinarily, when a
them; and coming as they did from a
passenger bus overturns, and pins
rural area where lanterns and
down a passenger, merely causing
flashlights were not available, they
him physical injuries, if through some
had to use a torch, the most handy
event, unexpected and extraordinary,
and available; and what was more
the overturned bus is set on fire, say,
natural than that said rescuers should
by lightning, or if some highwaymen
innocently approach the overturned
after looting the vehicle sets it on fire,
vehicle to extend the aid and effect
and the passenger is burned to death,
the rescue requested from them.
one might still contend that the
proximate cause of his death was the
fire and not the overturning of the
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 21
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
GR NO. 92087, May 08, 1992 GR NO. 72964, January 07, 1998
relation between the omission and the subsequent infection, for failure to
take necessary precautions, with
damage. He must prove under Article
tetanus may have been the proximate
2179 of the New Civil Code that the
cause of Javiers death with which the
defendants negligence was the petitioner had nothing to do.
immediate and proximate cause of his
A prior and remote cause cannot be
injury. Proximate cause has been made the basis of an action if such
defined as that cause, which, in remote cause did nothing more than
natural and continuous sequence furnish the condition or give rise to
unbroken by any efficient intervening the occasion by which the injury was
made possible, if there intervened
cause, produces the injury, and
between such prior or remote cause
without which the result would not
and the injury a distinct, successive,
have occurred (Vda. De Bataclan, et al.
unrelated, and efficient cause of the
v. Medina, 102 Phil 181, 186). injury, even though such injury would
not have happened but for such
Proof of such relation of cause and
condition or occasion. If no danger
effect is not an arduous one if the
existed in the condition except
claimant did not in any way contribute because of the independent cause,
to the negligence of the defendant. such condition was not the proximate
However, where the resulting injury cause. And if an independent
was the product of the negligence of negligent act or defective condition
sets into operation the circumstances,
both parties, there exists a difficulty
which result in injury because of the
to discern which acts shall be
prior defective condition, such
considered the proximate cause of the
subsequent act or condition is the
accident. proximate cause.
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 22
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
GR NO. 65295, March 10, 1987 GR NO. 105410, July 25, 1994
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 23
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
failed to exercise the degree of care GR NO. 150304, June 15, 2005
required in the performance of his
QUEZON CITY VS. FULGENCIO
duties. As earlier stated, the bank
DACARA
employee posted the cash deposit in
Proximate cause is defined as any
the account of Florencio Amador from
cause that produces injury in a natural
his assumption that the name and continuous sequence, unbroken
Florencio appearing on the ledger by any efficient intervening cause,
without, however, going through the such that the result would not have
full name, is the same Florencio occurred otherwise. Proximate cause
is determined from the facts of each
stated in the deposit slip. He should
case, upon a combined consideration
have continuously gone beyond mere
of logic, common sense, policy and
assumption, which was proven to be
precedent.
erroneous, and proceeded with clear
What really caused the subject vehicle
certainty, considering the amount
to turn turtle is a factual issue that
involved and the repercussions it this Court cannot pass upon, absent
would create on the totality of the any whimsical or capricious exercise
person notable of which is the credit of judgment by the lower courts or an
standing of the person involved ample showing that they lacked any
basis for their conclusions. The
should a mistake happen. The checks
unanimity of the CA and the trial
issued by the plaintiff in the course of
court in their factual ascertainment
his business were dishonored by the that petitioners negligence was the
bank because the ledger of Florencio proximate cause of the accident bars
Reyes indicated a balance insufficient us from supplanting their findings
to cover the face value of checks. and substituting these with our own.
The function of this Court is limited to
the review of the appellate courts
alleged errors of law. It is not required
to weigh all over again the factual
evidence already considered in the
proceedings below. Petitioners have
not shown that they are entitled to an
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 24
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
exception to this rule. They have not who testified for the defendant gave a
sufficiently demonstrated any special more credible account of the affair
circumstances to justify a factual than the witnesses for the plaintiff.
review. According to the witnesses for the
defendant, it was Julio who jerked the
rein, thereby causing the bit to come
B. DISTINGUISHED FROM out of the horses mouth; and they
OTHER KINDS
say that Julio, after alighting, led the
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 25
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
and the injury a distinct, successive, which the injury would not have
unrelated, and efficient cause of the resulted to as great an extent, and
injury, even though such injury would that such cause is not attributable to
not have happened but for such the person injured. It is no defense to
condition or occasion. If no danger one of the concurrent tortfeasors that
existed in the condition except the injury would not have resulted
because of the independent cause, from his negligence alone, without the
such condition was not the proximate negligence or wrongful acts of the
cause. And if an independent other concurrent tortfeasor. Where
negligent act or defective condition several causes producing an injury are
sets into operation the circumstances, concurrent and each is an efficient
which result in injury because of the cause without which the injury would
prior defective condition, such not have happened, the injury may be
subsequent act or condition is the attributed to all or any of the causes
proximate cause. and recovery may be had against any
or all of the responsible persons
although under the circumstances of
2. CONCURRENT the case, it may appear that one of
them was more culpable, and that the
GR NO. 130068, October 01, 1998 duty owed by them to the injured
person was not the same. No actors
FAR EASTERN SHIPPING CO. VS CA
negligence ceases to be a proximate
Negligence in order to render a
cause merely because it does not
person liable need not be the sole
exceed the negligence of other actors.
cause of an injury. It is sufficient that
Each wrongdoer is responsible for the
his negligence, concurring with one or
entire result and is liable as though
more efficient causes other than
his acts were the sole cause of the
plaintiffs, is the proximate cause of
injury.
the injury. Accordingly, where several
causes combine to produce injuries, a There is no contribution between joint
person is not relieved from liability tortfeasors whose liability is solidary
because he is responsible for only one since both of them are liable for the
of them, it being sufficient that the total damage. Where the concurrent
negligence of the person charged with or successive negligent acts or
injury is an efficient cause without omissions of two or more persons,
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 26
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 27
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
in motion, all constituting a natural bus, this for the reason that when the
and continuous chain of events, each vehicle turned not only on its, side
having a close causal connection with but completely on its back, the
its immediate predecessor, the final
leaking of the gasoline from the tank
event in the chain immediately
was not unnatural or unexpected; that
effecting- the injury as a natural and
probable result of the cause which the coming of the men with a lighted
first acted, under such circumstances torch was in response to the call for
that the person responsible for the help, made not only by the
first event should, as an ordinarily passengers, but most probably, by the
prudent and intelligent person, have
driver and the conductor themselves,
reasonable ground to expect at the
and that because it was very dark
moment of his act or default that an
(about 2:30 in the morning), the
injury to some person might probably
result therefrom. rescuers had to carry a light with
them; and coming as they did from a
It may be that ordinarily, when a
rural area where lanterns and
passenger bus overturns, and pins
flashlights were not available, they
down a passenger, merely causing
had to use a torch, the most handy
him physical injuries, if through some
and available; and what was more
event, unexpected and extraordinary,
natural than that said rescuers should
the overturned bus is set on fire, say,
innocently approach the overturned
by lightning, or if some highwaymen
vehicle to extend the aid and effect
after looting the vehicle sets it on fire,
the rescue requested from them.
and the passenger is burned to death,
one might still contend that the
proximate cause of his death was the
GR NOS. 66102-04, August 30, 1990
fire and not the overturning of the
vehicle. But in the present case and PHILIPPINE RABBIT VS. IAC
under the circumstances obtaining in It is the rule under the substantial
the same, we do not hesitate to hold factor test that if the actors conduct
that the proximate cause of the death is a substantial factor it bringing
of Bataclan was the overturning of the about harm to another, the fact that
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 28
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
the actor neither foresaw nor should created only a passive static condition
have foreseen the extent of the harm which made the damage possible, the
or the manner in which it occurred defendant is said not to be liable. But
does not prevent him from being so far as the fact of causation is
liable (Restatement, Torts, 2d). Here, concerned, in the sense of necessary
We find defendant bus running at a antecedents which have played an
fast speed when the accident occurred important part in producing the
and did not even make the slightest result, it is quite impossible to
effort to avoid the accident, distinguish between active forces and
x x x. The bus drivers conduct is passive situations, particularly since,
thus a substantial factor in bringing as is invariably the case, the latter are
about harm to the passengers of the result of other active forces which
the jeepney, not only because he was have gone before. The defendant who
driving fast and did not even attempt spills gasoline about the premises
to avoid the mishap, but also because creates a condition; but the act may
it was the bus which was the physical be culpable because of the danger of
force which brought about the injury fire. When a spark ignites the
and death to the passengers of gasoline, the condition has done quite
the jeepney. as much to bring about the fire as the
spark; and since that is the very risk
which the defendant has created, the
defendant will not escape
responsibility. Even the lapse of a
GR NO. 65295, March 10, 1987
considerable time during which the
PHOENIX CONSTRUCTION VS. IAC condition remains static will not
Many courts have sought to necessarily affect liability; one who
distinguish between the active cause digs a trench in the highway may still
of the harm and the existing be liable to another who falls into it a
conditions upon which that cause month afterward. CAuse and
operated. If the defendant has condition still find occasional
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 29
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
mention in the decisions; but the remote cause did nothing more than
distinction is now almost entirely furnish the condition or give rise to
discredited. So far as it has any the occasion by which the injury was
made possible, if there intervened
validity at all, it must refer to the type
between such prior or remote cause
of case where the forces set in
and the injury a distinct, successive,
operation by the defendant have come unrelated, and efficient cause of the
to rest in a position of apparent injury, even though such injury would
safety, and some new force not have happened but for such
intervenes. But even in such cases, it condition or occasion. If no danger
existed in the condition except
is not the distinction between cause
because of the independent cause,
and condition which is important,
such condition was not the proximate
but the nature of the risk and the
cause. And if an independent
character of the intervening cause. negligent act or defective condition
sets into operation the circumstances
which result in injury because of the
prior defective condition, such
subsequent act or condition is the
GR NO. L-8328, May 18, 1956 proximate cause.
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 31
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 32
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 33
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
cause did nothing more than There is a likelihood that the wound
furnish the condition or give was but the remote cause and its
rise to the occasion by which subsequent infection, for failure to
the injury was made take necessary precautions, with
possible, if there intervened tetanus may have been the proximate
between such prior or cause of Javiers death with which the
remote cause and the injury petitioner had nothing to do.
a distinct, successive, A prior and remote cause cannot be
unrelated, and efficient cause made the basis of an action if such
of the injury, even though remote cause did nothing more than
such injury would not have furnish the condition or give rise to
happened but for such the occasion by which the injury was
condition or occasion. If no made possible, if there intervened
danger existed in the between such prior or remote cause
condition except because of and the injury a distinct, successive,
the independent cause, such unrelated, and efficient cause of the
condition was not the injury, even though such injury would
proximate cause. And if an not have happened but for such
independent negligent act or condition or occasion. If no danger
defective condition sets into existed in the condition except
operation the circumstances because of the independent cause,
which result in injury such condition was not the proximate
because of the prior cause. And if an independent
defective condition, such negligent act or defective condition
subsequent act or condition sets into operation the circumstances,
is the proximate cause. which result in injury because of the
prior defective condition, such
subsequent act or condition is the
proximate cause.
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 34
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 35
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
compared with the wrongful act or time of the plaintiffs and the
omission of the defendant. The defendants negligent acts or
common law notion of last clear omissions, is only one of the relevant
chance permitted courts to grant factors that may be taken into
recovery to a plaintiff who had also account. Of more fundamental
been negligent provided that the importance are the nature of the
defendant had the last clear chance to negligent act or omission of each
avoid the casualty and failed to do so. party and the character and gravity of
Accordingly, it is difficult to see what the risks created by such act or
role, if any, the common law last clear omission for the rest of the
chance doctrine has to play in a community. The petitioners urge that
jurisdiction where the common law the truck driver (and therefore his
concept of contributory negligence as employer) should be absolved from
an absolute bar to recovery by the responsibility for his own prior
plaintiff, has itself been rejected, as it negligence because the unfortunate
has been in Article 2179 of the Civil plaintiff failed to act with that
Code of the Philippines. increased diligence which had become
necessary to avoid the peril precisely
Is there perhaps a general concept of
created by the truck drivers own
last clear chance that may be
wrongful act or omission. To accept
extracted from its common law matrix
this proposition is to come too close
and utilized as a general rule in
to wiping out the fundamental
negligence cases in a civil law
principle of law that a man must
jurisdiction like ours? We do not
respond for the foreseeable
believe so. Under Article 2179, the
task of a court, in technical terms, is consequences of his own negligent
act or omission. Our law on quasi-
to determine whose negligence the
delicts seeks to reduce the risks and
plaintiffs or the defendants was
burdens of living in society and to
the legal or proximate cause of the
allocate them among the members of
injury. That task is not simply or even
society. To accept the petitioners
primarily an exercise in chronology or
proposition must tend to weaken the
physics, as the petitioners seem to
very bonds of society.
imply by the use of terms like last or
intervening or immediate. The
relative location in the continuum of
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 37
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
GR NO. 70493, May 18, 1989 The doctrine of the last clear chance
provides as valid and complete a
GLAN PEOPLES LUMBER VS. IAC defense to accident liability today as it
Both drivers, as the Appellate Court did when invoked and applied in the
found, had had a full view of each 1918 case of Picart vs. Smith, which
others vehicle from a distance of one involved a similar state of facts.
hundred fifty meters. Both vehicles
were travelling at a speed of
approximately thirty kilometers per
hour. The private respondents have
admitted that the truck was already at GR NOS. 79050-51, November 14,
a full stop when the jeep plowed into 1989
it. And they have not seen fit to deny
or impugn petitioners imputation PANTRANCO VS. MARICAR BASCOS
that they also admitted the truck had BAESA
been brought to a stop while the jeep For the doctrine to be applicable, it is
was still thirty meters away. From necessary to show that the person
these facts the logical conclusion who allegedly had the last opportunity
emerges that the driver of the jeep
to avert the accident was aware of the
had what judicial doctrine has
existence of the peril or should, with
appropriately called the last clear
chance to avoid the accident, while exercise of due care, have been aware
still at that distance of thirty meters of it. One cannot be expected to
from the truck, by stopping in his turn avoid an accident or injury if he does
or swerving his jeep away from the not know or could not have known the
truck, either of which he had
existence of the peril. In this case,
sufficient time to do while running at
there is nothing to show that
a speed of only thirty kilometers per
the jeepney driver David Ico knew of
hour. In those circumstances, his
duty was to seize that opportunity of the impending danger. When he saw
avoidance, not merely rely on a at a distance that the approaching bus
supposed right to expect, as the was encroaching on his lane, he did
Appellate Court would have it, the not immediately swerve the jeepney to
truck to swerve and leave him a clear
the dirt shoulder on his right since he
path.
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 38
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
must have assumed that the bus attributed to the incident, the one
driver will return the bus to its own who had the last clear opportunity to
lane upon seeing avoid the impending harm and failed
the jeepney approaching from the to do so is chargeable with the
opposite direction. consequences thereof. Stated
differently, the rule would also mean
the last clear chance doctrine can
that an antecedent negligence of a
never apply where the party charged
person does not preclude the recovery
is required to act instantaneously, and
of damages for the supervening
if the injury cannot be avoided by the
negligence of, or bar a defense
application of all means at hand after
against liability sought by another, if
the peril is or should have been
the latter, who had the last fair
discovered [Ong v. Metropolitan
chance, could have avoided the
Water District].
impending harm by the exercise of
due diligence. Here, assuming that
private respondent RMC was negligent
in entrusting cash to a dishonest
GR NO. 97626, March 14, 1997 employee, thus providing the latter
with the opportunity to defraud the
PHILIPPINE BANK VS. CA
company, as advanced by the
Under the doctrine of last clear
petitioner, yet it cannot be denied that
chance (also referred to, at times as
the petitioner bank, thru its teller, had
supervening negligence or as
the last clear opportunity to avert the
discovered peril), petitioner bank
injury incurred by its client, simply by
was indeed the culpable party. This
faithfully observing their self-imposed
doctrine, in essence, states that where
validation procedure.
both parties are negligent, but the
negligent act of one is appreciably Coming now to the doctrine of last
later in time than that of the other, or clear chance, it is my considered view
when it is impossible to determine that the doctrine assumes that the
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 39
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
In the case at bar, the bank was not simply means that the negligence of a
remiss in its duty of sending monthly claimant does not preclude a recovery
bank statements to private for the negligence of defendant where
respondent RMC so that any error or it appears that the latter, by
discrepancy in the entries therein exercising reasonable care and
could be brought to the banks
prudence, might have avoided
attention at the earliest opportunity.
injurious consequences to claimant
Private respondent failed to examine
these bank statements not because it notwithstanding his negligence. Or,
was prevented by some cause in not As the doctrine usually is stated, a
doing so, but because it was person who has the last clear chance
purposely negligent as it admitted or opportunity of avoiding an
that it does not normally check bank
accident, notwithstanding the
statements given by banks.
negligent acts of his opponent or the
It was private respondent who had the negligence of a third person which is
last and clear chance to prevent any
imputed to his opponent, is
further misappropriation by Yabut had
considered in law solely responsible
it only reviewed the status of its
current accounts on the bank for the consequences of the accident.
statements sent to it monthly or
Since it is not known how minor Ong
regularly. Since a sizable amount of
came into the big swimming pool and
cash was entrusted to Yabut, private
it being apparent that he went there
respondent should, at least, have
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 40
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 41
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
GR NO. 120027, April 21, 1999 that where both parties are negligent
but the negligent act of one is
EDNA A. RAYNERA VS. FREDDIE appreciably later in point of time than
HICETA that of the other, or where it is
It has been said that drivers of impossible to determine whose fault
vehicles who bump the rear of or negligence brought about the
another vehicle are presumed to be occurrence of the incident, the one
the cause of the accident, unless who had the last clear opportunity to
contradicted by other evidence. The avoid the impending harm but failed
rationale behind the presumption is to do so, is chargeable with the
that the driver of the rear vehicle has consequences arising therefrom.
full control of the situation as he is in Stated differently, the rule is that the
a position to observe the vehicle in antecedent negligence of a person
front of him. does not preclude recovery of
collision with the front vehicle lies negligence of the latter, who had the
with the driver of the rear vehicle. last fair chance to prevent the
was the one who bumped his Assuming that Osmundo CAnlas was
motorcycle into the rear of the Isuzu negligent in giving Vicente Maosca
truck. He had the last clear chance of the opportunity to perpetrate the
avoiding the accident. fraud, by entrusting to latter the
owners copy of the transfer
certificates of title of subject parcels
of land, it cannot be denied that the
bank had the last clear chance to
GR NO. 112160, February 28, 2000 prevent the fraud, by the simple
expedient of faithfully complying with
OSMUNDO S. CANLAS VS. CA
the requirements for banks to
Under the doctrine of last clear
ascertain the identity of the persons
chance, which is applicable here, the
transacting with them.
respondent bank must suffer the
resulting loss. In essence, the doctrine
of last clear chance is to the effect
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 42
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
GR NO. 138569, September 11, 2003 the plaintiff but does not exculpate
the defendant from his breach of
CONSOLIDATED BANK VS. CA contract.
The doctrine of last clear chance
states that where both parties are
negligent but the negligent act of one GR NO. 140698, June 20, 2003
is appreciably later than that of the
other, or where it is impossible to ROGELIO ENGADA VS. CA
determine whose fault or negligence The doctrine of last clear chance
caused the loss, the one who had the states that a person who has the last
last clear opportunity to avoid the loss clear chance or opportunity of
but failed to do so, is chargeable with
avoiding an accident, notwithstanding
the loss. Stated differently, the
the negligent acts of his opponent, is
antecedent negligence of the plaintiff
does not preclude him from considered in law solely responsible
recovering damages caused by the for the consequences of the
supervening negligence of the accident. But as already stated on this
defendant, who had the last fair point, no convincing evidence was
chance to prevent the impending
adduced by petitioner to support his
harm by the exercise of due diligence.
invocation of the abovecited doctrine.
We do not apply the doctrine of last
Instead, what has been shown is the
clear chance to the present
presence of an emergency and the
case. Solidbank is liable for breach of
proper application of the emergency
contract due to negligence in the
performance of its contractual rule. Petitioners act of swerving to
obligation to L.C. Diaz. This is a case the Tamaraws lane at a distance of
of culpa contractual, where neither 30 meters from it and driving the
the contributory negligence of the Isuzu pick-up at a fast speed as it
plaintiff nor his last clear chance to
approached the Tamaraw, denied Iran
avoid the loss, would exonerate the
time and opportunity to ponder the
defendant from liability. Such
contributory negligence or last clear situation at all. There was no clear
chance by the plaintiff merely serves chance to speak of. Accordingly, the
to reduce the recovery of damages by CA did not err in holding petitioner
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 43
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
responsible for the vehicular collision hardly be faulted for whatever she
and the resulting damages, including might have done to the animal.
the injuries suffered by Mrs. Sheila
Seyan and the total loss of the
Tamaraw jeepney. It also did not err
in imposing on petitioner the B. THINGS THROWN OR
sentence of four (4) months of arresto FALLING FROM A BUILDING
mayor.
GR NO. 47033, April 25, 1941
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 44
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
drainage, and if you just put a pan pursuance of his employment. At the
under it that, when filled, the water time that he was run over by the truck
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 45
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 46
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 47
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
case beyond the desire to make an GR NO. 120554, September 21, 1999
unlawful gain to the detriment of one
of the contracting parties. SO PING BUN VS. CA
The elements of tort interference are:
In the case at bar the only motive for
(1) existence of a valid contract; (2)
the interference with the Gilchrist-
knowledge on the part of the third
Cuddy contract on the part of the
person of the existence of contract;
appellants was a desire to make a
and (3) interference of the third
profit by exhibiting the film in their
person is without legal justification or
theater. There was no malice beyond
excuse.
this desire; but this fact does not
relieve them of the legal liability for Section 1314 of the Civil Code
interfering with that contract categorically provides also that, Any
and causing its breach. It is, third person who induces another to
therefore, clear, under the above violate his contract shall be liable for
authorities, that they were liable to damages to the other contracting
Gilchrist for the damages caused by party. Petitioner argues that damage
their acts, unless they are relieved is an essential element of tort
from such liability by reason of the interference, and since the trial court
fact that they did not know at the time and the appellate court ruled that
the identity of the original private respondents were not entitled
lessee (Gilchrist) of the film. to actual, moral or exemplary
damages, it follows that he ought to
The liability of the appellants arises
be absolved of any liability, including
from unlawful acts and not from
attorneys fees.
contractual obligations, as they were
under no such obligations to induce
Cuddy to violate his contract with
Gilchrist.
F. LIABILITY OF LOCAL
GOVERNMENT UNITS
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 48
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 49
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
VI. PERSONS LIABLE Joint tort feasors are not liable pro
A. THE TORTFEASOR rata. The damages can not be
apportioned among them, except
G.R. No. L-5932; February 27, 1912 among themselves. They can no insist
upon an apportionment, for the
DEAN C. WORCESTER VS. MARTIN
purpose of each paying an aliquot
OCAMPO part. They are jointly and severally
The joint tort feasors are all the liable for the full amount.
persons who command, instigate,
promote, encourage, advise,
countenance, cooperate in, aid or abet
the commission of a tort, or who GR NO. 9010, March 28, 1914
approve of it after it is done, if done
for their benefit. They are each liable CHAPMAN VS. UNDERWOOD
as principals, to the same extent and The defendant, however, is not
in the same manner as if they had responsible for the negligence of his
performed the wrongful act driver, under the facts and
themselves. circumstances of this case. As we
Joint tort feasors are jointly and have said in the case of
severally liable for the tort which they Johnson vs. David (5 Phil. Rep., 663),
commit. The person injured may sue the driver does not fall within the list
all of them, or any number less than of persons in article 1903 of the Civil
all. Each is liable for the whole Code for whose acts the defendant
damage caused by all, and all would be responsible.
together are jointly liable for the Although in the David case the owner
whole damage. It is no defense for of the vehicle was not present at the
one sued alone, that the others who time the alleged negligent acts were
participated in the wrongful act are committed by the driver, the same
not joined with him as defendants; rule applies where the owner is
nor is it any excuse for him that his present, unless the negligent acts of
participation in the tort was the driver are continued for such a
insignificant as compared with that of length of time as to give the owner a
the others. reasonable opportunity to observe
them and to direct his driver to desist
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 50
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
therefrom. An owner who sits in his In the case before us it does not
automobile, or other vehicle, and appear from the record that, from the
permits his driver to continue in a time the automobile took the wrong
violation of the law by the side of the road to the commission of
performance of negligent acts, after the injury, sufficient time intervened
he has had a reasonable opportunity to give the defendant an opportunity
to observe them and to direct that the to correct the act of his driver.
driver cease therefrom, becomes Instead, it appears with fair clearness
himself responsible for such acts. The that the interval between the turning
owner of an automobile who permits out to meet and pass the street car
his chauffeur to drive up the Escolta, and the happening of the accident
for example, at a speed of 60 miles an was so small as not to be sufficient to
hour, without any effort to stop him, charge defendant with the negligence
although he has had a reasonable of the driver.
opportunity to do so, becomes Whether or not the owner of an
himself responsible, both criminally
automobile driven by a competent
and civilly, for the results produced driver, would be responsible, whether
by the acts of his chauffeur. On the present or not, for the negligent acts
other hand, if the driver, by a sudden of his driver when the automobile was
act of negligence, and without the a part of a business enterprise, and
owner having a reasonable was being driven at the time of the
opportunity to prevent the act or its accident in furtherance of the owners
continuance, injures a person or business, we do not now decide.
violates the criminal law, the owner of
the automobile, although present
therein at the time the act was
committed, is not responsible, either
GR NO. L-20392, December 18, 1968
civilly or criminally, therefor. The act
complained of must be continued in MARCIAL T. CAEDO VS. YU KHE THAI
the presence of the owner for such a
Article 2184 provides that, In motor
length of time that the owner, by his
vehicle mishaps, the
acquiescence, makes his drivers act
owner is solidarily liable with his
his own.
driver, if the former, who was in the
vehicle, could have, by the use of due
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 51
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
GR NO. 62988, February 28, 1985 the determination of the trial court
which it had previously affirmed.
FELINA RODRIGUEZ-LUNA VS. IAC
The deceased Roberto R. Luna had
been engaged in car racing as a sport,
having participated in tournaments
B. VICARIOUS LIABILITY
both here and abroad; it said that
Lunas habit and manner of life 1. PARENTS
should be one of the factors affecting
the value of mortality table in actions G. R. No. L-10134, June 29, 1957
for damages; and, consequently,
SABINA EXCONDE VS. DELFIN CAPUNO
concluded that Luna could not have
lived beyond 43 years. The result was Under the law above quoted, teachers
that the 30-year life expectancy of or directors of arts and trades are
Luna was reduced to 10 years only. liable for any damages caused by
their pupils or apprentices while they
The CA, in reducing Lunas life
are under their custody, but this
expectancy from 30 to 10 years said
provision only applies to an institution
that his habit and manner of life
of arts and trades and not to any
should be taken into account, i.e. that
academic educational institution.
he had been engaged in car racing as
Here Dante CApuno was then a
a sport both here and abroad a
student of the Balintawak Elementary
dangerous and risky activity tending
School and as part of his extra-
to shorten his life expectancy. That
curricular activity, he attended the
Luna had engaged in car racing is not
parade in honor of Dr. Jose Rizal
based on any evidence on
upon instruction of the city schools
record. That Luna was engaged in
supervisor. And it was in connection
go-kart racing is the correct
with that.
statement but then go-kart racing
cannot be categorized as a dangerous The civil liability which the law
sport for go-karts are extremely low impose upon the father, and, in case
slung, low powered vehicles, only of his death or incapacity, the
slightly larger than foot-pedalled four mother, for any damages that may be
wheeled conveyances. It was error on caused by the minor children who
the part of the CA to have disturbed live with them, is obvious. This is
a necessary consequence of the
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 53
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
parental authority they exercise over under 15 years of age, who acts
them which imposes upon the without discernment, unless it
parents the duty of supporting them, appears that there is no fault or
keeping them in their company, negligence on his part. This is
educating them and instructing them because a son who commits the act
in proportion to their means, while, under any of those conditions is by
on the other hand, gives them the law exempt from criminal liability
right to correct and punish (Article 12, subdivisions 1, 2 and 3,
them in moderation (Articles 154 Revised Penal Code). The idea is not
and 155, Spanish Civil Code). The to leave the act entirely unpunished
only way by which they can relieve but to attach certain civil liability to
themselves of this liability is if they the person who has the delinquent
prove that. minor under his legal authority or
control. But a minor over 15 who acts
with discernment is not exempt from
GR NO. L-14414, April 27, 1960 criminal liability, for which reason the
Code is silent as to the subsidiary
SEVERINO SALEN VS. JOSE BALCE liability of his parents should he stand
In holding that the civil liability of the convicted. In that case, resort should
son of appellee arises from his be had to the general law which is our
criminal liability and, therefore, the Civil Code.
subsidiary liability of appellee must be The particular law that governs this
determined under the provisions of case is Article 2180, the pertinent
the Revised Penal Code, and not portion of which provides: The father
and, in case of his death or incapacity,
under Article 2180 of the new Civil
the mother, are responsible for
Code which only applies to
damages caused by the minor
obligations which arise from quasi- children who lived in their company.
delicts. To hold that this provision does not
apply to the instant case because it
Under Article 101 of the Revised Penal
only covers obligations which arise
Code, a father is made civilly liable for
from quasi-delicts and not obligations
the acts committed by his son only if
which arise from criminal offenses,
the latter is an imbecile, an insane,
would result in the absurdity that
under 9 years of age, or over 9 but
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 54
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
while for an act where mere discernment, Art. 101 of the same
negligence intervenes the father or Code can not include him. And as par.
mother may stand subsidiarily liable 2, of Art. 101, states that the
for the damage caused by his or her
exemption from criminal liability
son, no liability would attach if the
established in subdivisions 1, 2, 3, 5
damage is caused with criminal intent.
Verily, the void that apparently exists and 6 of Article 12 and in subdivision
in the Revised Penal Code is 4 of Art. 11 of this Code does not
subserved by this particular provision include exemption from civil liability,
of our Civil Code, as may be gleaned which shall be enforced subject to the
from some recent decisions of this
following rules: First, in cases of
Court which cover equal or identical
subdivisions 1, 2 and 3 of Article 12,
cases.
the civil liability for acts committed by
an imbecile or insane person and by a
person under nine years of age or by
one over nine but under fifteen years
GR NO. L-14409, October 31, 1961
of age, who has acted without
AGAPITO FUELLAS VS. ELPIDIO discernment, shall devolve upon those
CADANO having such person under their legal
The only way by which a father can be authority or control, unless it appears
made responsible for the criminal act that there was no fault or negligence
of his son committed with deliberate on their part, the appellant
intent and with discernment, is an concluded that this provision covers
action based on the provisions of the only a situation where a minor under
Revised Penal Code on subsidiary 15 but over 9 years old commits a
liability of the parents; that the criminal act without discernment.
minor-Fuellas having been convicted
Under Art. 101 of the Revised Penal
of serious physical injuries at the age
Code, a father is made civilly liable for
of 13, the provisions of par. 3 of Art. the acts committed by his son only if
12, Revised Penal Code, could have the latter is an imbecile, an insane,
been applied, but having acted with under 9 years of age, or over 9 but
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 55
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
under 15 years of age, who acts while for an act where mere
without discernment, unless it negligence intervenes the father or
appears that there is no fault or mother may stand subsidiarily liable
negligence on his part. This is for the damage caused by his or her
because a son who commits the act son, no liability would attach if the
under any of those conditions is by damage is caused with criminal intent.
law exempt from criminal liability Verily, the void apparently exists in
(Article 12, subdivisions 1, 2 and 3, the Revised Penal Code is subserved
Revised Penal Code). The idea is not by this particular provision of our Civil
to leave the act entirely unpunished Code, as may be gleaned from some
but to attach certain civil liability to recent decisions of this Court which
the person who has the delinquent cover equal or identical cases.
minor under his legal authority or
control. But a minor over 15 who acts
with discernment is not exempt from
criminal liability, for which reason the GR NO. 34840, September 23, 1931
Code is silent as to the subsidiary
liability of his parents should he stand NARCISO GUTIERREZ VS. BONIFACIO
convicted. In that case, resort should GUTIERREZ
be had to the general law which is our In the United States, it is uniformly
Civil Code. held that the head of a house, the
The particular law that governs this owner of an automobile, who
case is Article 2180, the pertinent maintains it for the general use of his
portion of which provides: The father family is liable for its negligent
and, in case of his death or incapacity, operation by one of his children,
the mother, are responsible for whom he designates or permits to
damages caused by the minor run it, where the car is occupied and
children who lived in their company. being used at the time of the injury
To hold that this provision does not for the pleasure of other members of
apply to the instant case because it the owners family than the child
only covers obligations which arise driving it. The theory of the law is
from quasi-delicts and not obligations that the running of the machine by a
which arise from criminal offenses, child to carry other members of the
would result in the absurdity that family is within the scope
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 56
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 57
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
the determination of the trial court mother. This was amplified by the
which it had previously affirmed. Child and Youth Welfare Code which
provides that the same shall devolve
upon the father and, in case of his
death or incapacity, upon the mother
or, in case of her death or incapacity,
GR NO. 70890, September 18, 1992
upon the guardian, but the liability
CRESENCIO LIBI VS. IAC may also be voluntarily assumed by a
The parents are and should be held relative or family friend of the
primarily liable for the civil liability youthful offender. However, under the
arising from criminal offenses Family Code, this civil liability is now,
committed by their minor children without such alternative qualification,
under their legal authority or control, the responsibility of the parents and
or who live in their company, unless those who exercise parental authority
it is proven that the former acted with over the minor offender. For civil
the diligence of a good father of a liability arising from quasi-delicts
family to prevent such damages. That committed by minors, the same rules
primary liability is premised on the shall apply in accordance with Articles
provisions of Article 101 of the 2180 and 2182 of the Civil Code.
Revised Penal Code with respect to In the case at bar, whether the death
damages ex delicto caused by their of the hapless Julie Ann Gotiong was
children 9 yrs of age or under, or over caused by a felony or a quasi-delict
9 but under 15 years of age who committed by Wendell Libi,
acted without discernment; and, with respondent court did not err in
regard to their children over 9 but holding petitioners liable for damages
under 15 yrs of age who acted with arising therefrom. Subject to the
discernment, or 15 yrs or over but preceding modifications of the
under 21 years of age, such primary premises relied upon by it therefor
liability shall be imposed pursuant to and on the bases of the legal
Article 2180 of the Civil Code. imperatives herein explained, we
Under said Article 2180, the conjoin in its findings that said
enforcement of such liability shall be petitioners failed to duly exercise the
effected against the father and, in requisite diligentissimi patris familias
case of his death or incapacity, the to prevent such damages.
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 58
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
GR NO. 85044, June 03, 1992 upon such parents. The civil law
assumes that when an unemancipated
MACARIO TAMARGO VS. CA child living with its parents commits a
The law imposes civil liability upon tortious act, the parents were
the father and, in case of his death or negligent in the performance of their
incapacity, the mother, for any legal and natural duty closely to
damages that may be caused by a supervise the child who is in their
custody and control. Parental liability
minor child who lives with them.
is, in other words, anchored upon
Article 2180 of the Civil Code.
parental authority coupled with
This principle of parental liability is a presumed parental dereliction in the
discharge of the duties accompanying
species of what is frequently
such authority. The parental
designated as vicarious liability, or the
dereliction is, of course, only
doctrine of imputed negligence presumed and the presumption can
under Anglo-American tort law, where be overturned under Article 2180 of
a person is not only liable for torts the Civil Code by proof that the
committed by himself, but also for parents had exercised all the diligence
of a good father of a family to prevent
torts committed by others with whom
the damage.
he has a certain relationship and for
whom he is responsible. Thus, In the instant case, the shooting of
Jennifer by Adelberto with an air rifle
parental liability is made a natural or
occured when parental authority was
logical consequence of the duties and
still lodged in respondent Bundoc
responsibilities of parents their spouses, the natural parents of the
parental authority which includes minor Adelberto. It would thus follow
the instructing, controlling and that the natural parents who had then
disciplining of the child. actual custody of the minor Adelberto,
are the indispensable parties to the
The civil liability imposed upon suit for damages.
parents for the torts of their minor
children living with them, may be seen
to be based upon the parental
authority vested by the Civil Code
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 59
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
GR NO. L-24101, September 30, 1970 herein mentioned prove that they
observed all the diligence of a good
CUADRA VS. ALFONSO MONFORT father of a family to prevent damage.
The liability of a parent for an act of
The underlying basis of the liability
his minor child which causes damage
imposed by Article 2176 is the fault
to another under the specific facts
or negligence accompanying the act
related above and the applicable
or the omission, there being no
provisions of the Civil Code,
willfulness or intent to cause damage
particularly Articles 2176 and 2180
thereby. When the act or omission is
thereof, which read:
that of one person for whom another
ART. 2176. Whoever by act or is responsible, the latter then
omission causes damage to becomes himself liable under Article
another, there being fault or 2180, in the different cases
negligence, is obliged to pay for enumerated therein, such as that of
the damage done. Such fault or the father or the mother under the
negligence, if there is no pre- circumstances above quoted. The
existing contractual relation basis of this vicarious, although
between the parties, is called a primary, liability is, as in Article 2176,
quasi-delict and is governed by fault or negligence, which is
the provisions of this Chapter. presumed from that which
ART. 2180. The obligation accompanied the causative act or
imposed by Article 2176 is omission. The presumption is
demandable not only for ones merely prima facie and may therefore
own acts or omissions, but also be rebutted. This is the clear and
for those of persons for whom logical inference that may be drawn
one is responsible. from the last paragraph of Article
2180, which states that the
The father and, in case of his death or responsibility treated of in this Article
incapacity, the mother, are shall cease when the persons herein
responsible for the damages caused mentioned prove that they observed
by the minor children who live in their all the diligence of a good father of a
company. family to prevent damage.
The responsibility treated of in this
Article shall cease when the persons
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 60
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
pupil lives and boards with the their custody, is that they stand, to a
teacher, such that the control, certain extent, as to their pupils and
direction and influence on the pupil students, in loco parentis and are
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 61
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
called upon to exercise reasonable G.R. No. L-47745; April 15, 1988
supervision over the conduct of the
JOSE S. AMADORA VS. CA
child. This is expressly provided for
in Articles 349, 350 and 352 of the The high school principal and the
Civil Code. In the law of torts, the dean of boys cannot be held liable
governing principle is that the because none of them was the
protective custody of the school teacher-in-charge as previously
defined. Each of them was exercising
heads and teachers
only a general authority over the
is mandatorily substituted for that of
student body and not the direct
the parents, and hence, it becomes control and influence exerted by the
their obligation as well as that of the teacher placed in charge of particular
school itself to provide proper classes or sections and thus
supervision of the students activities immediately involved in its discipline.
The evidence of the parties does not
during the whole time that they are at
disclose who the teacher-in-charge of
attendance in the school, including
the offending student was. The mere
recess time, as well as to take the
fact that Alfredo Amadora had gone
necessary precautions to protect the to school that day in connection with
students in their custody from his physics report did not necessarily
dangers and hazards that would make the physics teacher, respondent
reasonably be anticipated, including Celestino Dicon, the teacher-in-
charge of Alfredo's killer.
injuries that some student themselves
may inflict willfully or through At any rate, assuming that he was the
negligence on their fellow students. teacher-in-charge, there is no
showing that Dicon was negligent in
enforcing discipline upon Daffon or
that he had waived observance of the
rules and regulations of the school or
condoned their non-observance. His
absence when the tragedy happened
cannot be considered against him
because he was not supposed or
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 62
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 63
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 64
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
cannot be held liable for the reason long as they are at attendance in the
that the school he heads is an school, including recess time."
academic school and not a school of
arts and trades. Besides, as clearly In the case at bar, in holding that
admitted by private respondent Jimmy B. Abon was stin in the
Aquino, private respondent Soriano protective and supervisory custody of
did not give any instruction regarding the Baguio Colleges Foundation when
the digging. he shot Napoleon CAstro, the
respondent Court ruled that:
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 65
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
activities where the student still also for those of persons for whom
remains within call of his mentor and one is responsible.
is not permitted to leave the school Employers shall be liable for the
premises, or the area within which the damages caused by their
school activity is conducted. Recess employees and household helpers
by its nature does not include acting within the scope of their
dismissal. Likewise, the mere fact of assigned tasks, even though the
being enrolled or being in the former are not engaged in any
premises of a school without more business or industry.
does not constitute "attending school"
or being in the "protective and Under this par., it is clear that before
supervisory custody' of the school, as an employer may be held liable for the
contemplated in the law. negligence of his employee, the act or
omission which caused damage or
Upon the foregoing considerations, prejudice must have occurred while an
we hold that Jimmy B. Abon cannot be employee was in the performance of
considered to have been "at his assigned tasks.
attendance in the school," or in the
In the case at bar, the
custody of BCF, when he shot
teachers/petitioners were not in the
Napoleon CAstro. Logically, therefore,
actual performance of their assigned
petitioners cannot under Art. 2180 of
tasks. The incident happened not
the Civil Code be held solidarity liable
within the school premises, not on a
with Jimmy B. Abon for damages
school day and most importantly
resulting from his acts.
while the teachers and students were
holding a purely private affair, a
picnic. It is clear from the beginning
GR NO. 82465, February 25, 1991 that the incident happened while
some members of the I-C class of St.
ST. FRANCIS HIGH SCHOOL VS. CA Francis High School were having a
Article 2180, par. 4 states that: picnic at Talaan Beach. This picnic
The obligation imposed by article had no permit from the school head
2176 is demandable not only for or its principal, Benjamin Illumin
ones own acts or omissions, but because this picnic is not a school
sanctioned activity neither is it
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 66
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 67
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
GR NO. 66207, May 18, 1992 Soliman, Jr. Private respondent school
was not the employer of Jimmy
SOLIMAN, JR. VS. JUDGE RAMON Solomon. The employer of Jimmy
TUAZON Solomon was the R.L. Security Agency
Under Article 2180 of the Civil Code, Inc., while the school was the client or
the obligation to respond for damage customer of the R.L. Security Agency
inflicted by one against another by Inc. It is settled that where the
fault or negligence exists not security agency, as here, recruits,
only for ones own act or omission, hires and assigns the work of its
but also for acts or omissions of a watchmen or security guards, the
person for whom one is by law agency is the employer of such guards
responsible. Among the persons held or watchmen. Liability for illegal or
vicariously responsible for acts or harmful acts committed by the
omissions of another person are the security guards attaches to the
following: employer agency, and not to the
helpers acting within the scope of hand in selecting who among the pool
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 69
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 70
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 71
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 72
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
In the present case, the petitioner With respect to the liability of NPC as
has not shown that it has set forth the direct employer, Article 2180 of
such rules and guidelines as would the Civil Code explicitly provides:
prohibit any one of its employees Employers shall be liable for
from taking control over its vehicles if the damages caused by their
one is not the official driver or employees and household
prohibiting the driver and son of the helpers acting within the scope
Filamer president from authorizing of their assigned tasks, even
another employee to drive the school though the former are not
vehicle. Furthermore, the petitioner engaged in any business or
has failed to prove that it had
industry.
imposed sanctions or warned its
employees against the use of its In this regard, NPCs liability is direct,
vehicles by persons other than the primary and solidary with PHESCO and
driver. the driver. Of course, NPC, if the
judgment for damages is satisfied by
it, shall have recourse against PHESCO
GR NO. 119121, August 14, 1998 and the driver who committed the
negligence which gave rise to the
NPC VS. CA action.
Article 2180 of the Civil Code and not
Finally, NPC, even if it truly believed
the Labor Code will determine the
that it was not the employer of the
liability of NPC in a civil suit for
driver, could still have disclaimed any
damages instituted by an injured
liability had it raised the defense of
person for any negligent act of the
due diligence in the selection or
employees of the labor only
supervision of PHESCO and
contractor. This is consistent with the
Ilumba. However, for some reason or
ruling that a finding that a contractor
another, NPC did not invoke said
was a labor-only contractor is
defense. Hence, by opting not to
equivalent to a finding that an
present any evidence that it exercised
employer-employee relationship
due diligence in the supervision of the
existed between the owner (principal
activities of PHESCO and Ilumba, NPC
contractor) and the labor-only
has foreclosed its right to interpose
contractor, including the latters
the same on appeal in conformity with
workers.
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 73
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
the rule that points of law, theories, injury, one resulting in culpa
issues of facts and arguments not contractual and the other in culpa
raised in the proceedings below aquiliana, Article 2194 of the Civil
cannot be ventilated for the first time Code can well apply. In fine, a liability
on appeal. Consequently, its liability for tort may arise even under a
stands. contract, where tort is that which
breaches the contract. Stated
differently, when an act which
constitutes a breach of contract would
GR NO. 145804, February 06, 2003 have itself constituted the source of a
quasi-delictual liability had no
LRT VS. MARJORIE NAVIDAD contract existed between the parties,
For the employers liability is the contract can be said to have been
negligence or fault on the part of the breached by tort, thereby allowing the
employee. Once such fault is rules on tort to apply.
established, the employer can then be Regrettably for LRT, as well as
made liable on the basis of the perhaps the surviving spouse and
presumption juris tantum that the heirs of the late Nicanor Navidad, this
employer failed to Court is concluded by the factual
exercise diligentissimi patris finding of the CA that there is
families in the selection and nothing to link (Prudent) to the death
supervision of its employees. The of Nicanor (Navidad), for the reason
liability is primary and can only be that the negligence of its employee,
negated by showing due diligence in Escartin, has not been duly proven.
the selection and supervision of the
employee, a factual matter that has
not been shown. Absent such a
showing, one might ask further, how
then must the liability of the common GR NO. 68102, July 16, 1992
carrier, on the one hand, and an
independent contractor, on the other GEORGE MCKEE VS. IAC
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 74
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Employers shall be liable for the ultimately falls upon the employer, for
former are not engaged in any however, that our agreement with the
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 75
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
found in Art. 218 of the Family Code The state is liable in this sense
which generally encompasses all when it acts through a special
authorized school activities, whether agent, but not when the
inside or outside school premises. damage should have been
relation to Art. 2176) of the Civil Code the provisions of the preceding
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 76
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Islands) is only liable, according to the the functions which are inherent in
and naturally pertain to his office and
above quoted decisions of the
which are regulated by law and
Supreme Court of Spain, for the acts
regulations.
of its agents, officers and employees
That according to paragraph 5 of
when they act as special agents within
article 1903 of the Civil Code and the
the meaning of paragraph 5 of article principle laid down in a decision,
1903, and that the chauffeur of the among others, of the 18th of May,
1904, in a damage case, the
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 77
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 78
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
NIA essentially and purely a Under Article 2189 of the Civil Code,
corporation. NIA was created for the therein established to attach that the
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 79
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 80
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 81
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 82
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 83
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
pretext of justifiable motives or good was liable to the same extent as the
officers themselves. So with the
faith in the performance of their
petitioner corporation which even
duties. Precisely, the object of the
received for safekeeping the goods
Article is to put an end to official unreasonably seized by the PC raiding
abuse by plea of the good faith. In the team and de Guzman, and refused to
United States this remedy is in the surrender them for quite a time
nature of a tort. despite the dismissal of its complaint
for unfair competition.
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 85
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 87
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
therefrom.
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 88
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
constitute a basis for an action for Although the gist of an action for
defamation in the absence of an defamation is an injury to reputation,
allegation for special damages. The the focus of a defamation action is
fact that the language is offensive to upon the allegedly defamatory
the plaintiff does not make it statement itself and its predictable
actionable by itself. effect upon third persons. A
statement is ordinarily considered
Defamation is made up of the twin
defamatory if it tend[s] to expose one
torts of libel and slander the one
to public hatred, shame, obloquy,
being, in general, written, while the
contumely, odium, contempt, ridicule,
other in general is oral. In either form,
aversion, ostracism, degradation or
defamation is an invasion of the
disgrace The Restatement of Torts
interest in reputation and good name.
defines a defamatory statement as
This is a relational interest since it
one that tends to so harm the
involves the opinion others in the
reputation of another as to lower him
community may have, or tend to have
in the estimation of the community or
of the plaintiff.
to deter third persons from
The law of defamation protects the
associating or dealing with him.
interest in reputation the interest in
acquiring, retaining and enjoying
ones reputation as good as ones
character and conduct warrant. The
mere fact that the plaintiffs feelings 2. FRAUD
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 90
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
for damages could have been vs. Yatco, et al., GR NO. L-9623,
commenced by appellants January 22, 1957, this Court held that
immediately upon the death of their the term physical injuries used in
decedent, Cipriano CApuno,
article 33 of the Civil Code includes
on January 3, 1953 or thereabouts,
homicide, it is to be borne in mind
and the same would not have been
stayed by the filing of the criminal that the charge
action for homicide through reckless against Felardo Paje was for reckless
imprudence. But the complaint here imprudence resulting in homicide,
was filed only on September 26, and not for homicide and physical
1958, or after the lapse of more than
injuries.
five years.
The offense of criminal negligence
under article 365 of the Revised Penal
Code lies in the execution of an im-
evidence. Said article mentions only homicide but for reckless imprudence,
Although in the case of Dyogi, et al. Marcia) and double physical injuries
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 91
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 92
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
property was not due to the fault or In determining whether or not the
negligence of the defendant, the latter principle of abuse of rights may be
shall be liable for indemnity if through invoked, there is no rigid test which
the act or event he was benefited. can be applied. While the Court has
With mere much more reason the not hesitated to apply Article 19
Defendant should be liable for whether the legal and factual
indemnity for acts it committed in bad
circumstances called for its
faith and with betrayal of confidence.
application the question of whether or
not the principle of abuse of rights
has been violated resulting in
damages under Article 20 or Article
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 93
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 94
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
to the legal protection that the bar exams, cannot be said to have
principle accords. And when damage acted in good faith. Absence of good
or prejudice to another is occasioned faith must be sufficiently established
thereby, liability cannot be obscured, for a successful prosecution by the
much less abated.
aggrieved party in a suit for abuse of
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 95
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
right under Article 19 of the Civil control over the instrumentality which
Code. Good faith connotes an honest caused the damage or injury.
intention to abstain from taking
undue advantage of another, even
though the forms and technicalities of
the law, together with the absence of
GR NO. 96126, August 10, 1992
all information or belief of facts,
would render the transaction ESTERIA F. GARCIANO VS. CA
unconscientious. It is the school that Liability for damages under Articles
has access to those information and it 19, 20 and 21 of the Civil Code arises
is only the school that can compel its only from unlawful, willful or
professors to act and comply with its negligent acts that are contrary to
rules, regulations and policies with law, or morals, good customs or
respect to the computation and the public policy.
prompt submission of grades.
The right to recover damages under
Students do not exercise control,
Article 21 is based on equity, and he
much less influence, over the way an
who comes to court to demand
educational institution should run its
equity, must come with clean hands.
affairs, particularly in disciplining its
Article 21 should be construed as
professors and teachers and ensuring
granting the right to recover damages
their compliance with the schools
to injured persons who are not
rules and orders. Being the party that
themselves at fault. Moral damages
hired them, it is the school that
are recoverable only if the case falls
exercises general supervision and
under Article 2219 in relation to
exclusive control over the professors
Article 21. In the case at bar,
with respect to the submission of
petitioner is not without fault. Firstly,
reports involving the students
she went on an indefinite leave of
standing. Exclusive control means
absence and failed to report back in
that no other person or entity had any
time for the regular opening of
classes. Secondly, for reasons known
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 96
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
to herself alone, she refused to sign a right is unjust, or when there has
written contract of employment. been an abuse of right.
Lastly, she ignored the Board of
It is an elementary rule in this
Directors order for her to report for
jurisdiction that good faith is
duty on July 5, 1982.
presumed and that the burden of
proving bad faith rests upon the party
alleging the same. In the case at bar,
petitioner has failed to prove bad faith
GR NO. 126486, February 09, 1998 on the part of private respondent.
Petitioners allegation that private
BARONS MARKETING VS. CA
respondent was motivated by a desire
The law, as set forth in Article 19 of
to terminate its agency relationship
the Civil Code, prescribes a
with petitioner so that private
primordial limitation on all rights by
respondent itself may deal directly
setting certain standards that must be
with Meralco is simply not supported
observed in the exercise thereof.
by the evidence.
There is undoubtedly an abuse of
right when it is exercised for the only
purpose of prejudicing or injuring
another. The exercise of a right must
be in accordance with the purpose for GR NO. 120639, September 25, 1998
which it was established, and must
BPI VS. CA
not be excessive or unduly harsh;
To find the existence of an abuse of
there must be no intention to injure
right under Article 19 the following
another. Ultimately, however, and in elements must be present: (1) There
practice, courts, in the sound exercise is a legal right or duty; (2) which is
of their discretion, will have to exercised in bad faith; (3) for the sole
determine all the facts and intent of prejudicing or injuring
another.
circumstances when the exercise of a
The Court has held that good faith is
presumed and the burden of proving
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 97
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 98
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
a. BREACH OF PROMISE TO
MARRY, SEDUCTION AND SEXUAL
ASSAULT GR NO. L-18630, December 17, 1966
GR NO. L-20089, December 26, 1964 The Court ruled that to constitute
seduction there must in all cases be
BEATRIZ P. WASSMER VS. FRANCISCO some sufficient promise or
X. VELEZ Inducement and the woman must
Mere breach of promise to marry is yield because of the promise or other
not an actionable wrong. But to inducement. If she consents merely
formally set a wedding and go from carnal lust and the intercourse is
through all the above-described from mutual desire, there is no
preparation, and publicity, only to seduction. She must be induced to
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 99
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
depart from the path of virtue by the apart from the right to recover money
use of some species of arts, or property advanced by the plaintiff
persuasions and wiles, which are upon the faith of such
calculated to have and do have that promise.[8] Generally, therefore, a
effect, and which result in her breach of promise to marry per se is
ultimately submitting her person to not actionable, except where the
the sexual embraces of her seducer plaintiff has actually incurred
expenses for the wedding and the
And in American Jurisprudence the
necessary incidents thereof.
Court find: On the other hand, in an
action by the woman, the enticement, However, the award of moral damages
persuasion or deception is the is allowed in cases specified in or
essence of the injury; and a mere analogous to those provided in Article
proof of intercourse is insufficient to 2219 of the Civil Code. Correlatively,
warrant a recovery. Accordingly it is under Article 21 of said Code, in
not seduction where the willingness relation to paragraph 10 of said
arises out of sexual desire or curiosity Article 2219, any person who wilfully
of the female, and the defendant causes loss or injury to another in a
merely affords her the needed manner that is contrary to morals,
opportunity for the commission of the good customs or public policy shall
act. It has been emphasized that to compensate the latter for moral
allow a recovery in all such cases damages. Article 21 was adopted to
would tend to the demoralization of remedy the countless gaps in the
the female sex, and would be a statutes which leave so many victims
reward for unchastity by which a class of moral wrongs helpless even though
of adventuresses would be swift to they have actually suffered material
profit. and moral injury, and is intended to
vouchsafe adequate legal remedy for
that untold number of moral wrongs
which is impossible for human
foresight to specifically provide for in
GR NO. 101749, July 10, 1992
the statutes.
CONRADO BUNAG, JR. VS CA Under the circumstances obtaining in
An action for breach of promise to the case at bar, the acts of petitioner
marry has no standing in the civil law, in forcibly abducting private
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 100
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
respondent and having carnal desire. At the time she met Ivan at
knowledge with her against her will, Tonys Restaurant, Amelita was
and thereafter promising to marry her already 28 years old and she admitted
in order to escape criminal liability, that she was attracted to Ivan. Her
only to thereafter renege on such attraction to Ivan is the reason why
promise after cohabiting with her for she surrendered her womanhood. Had
twenty-one days, irremissibly she been induced or deceived because
constitute acts contrary to morals and of a promise of marriage, she could
good customs. These are grossly have immediately severed her relation
insensate and reprehensible with Ivan when she was informed after
transgressions which indisputably their first sexual contact sometime in
warrant and abundantly justify the August, 1974, that he was a married
award of moral and exemplary man. Her declaration that in the
damages, pursuant to Article 21 in months of September, October and
relation to paragraphs 3 and 10, November, 1974, they repeated their
Article 2219, and Articles 2229 and sexual intercourse only indicates that
2234 of the Civil Code. passion and not the alleged promise
of marriage was the moving force that
made her submit herself to Ivan.
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 101
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
that is contrary to morals, good eventually fell in love with each other
customs or public policy shall and conducted clandestine love affairs
compensate the latter for the not only in Gasan but in Boac where
damage.
Lolita used to teach in a barrio school.
The rule of Article 21 is supported by When the rumors about their ilicit
Article 2219 of the same Code that
affair reached the knowledge of her
moral damages may be recovered in
parents, defendant was forbidden
Seduction, abduction, rape or other
lascivious acts. from going to their house and even
from seeing Lolita. Plaintiffs even filed
deportation proceedings against
defendant who is a Chinese national.
Nevertheless, defendant continued his
GR NO. L-17396, May 30, 1962
love affairs with Lolita until she
CECILIO PE VS. ALFONSO PE disappeared from the parental home.
The circumstances under which Indeed, no other conclusion can be
defendant tried to win Lolitas drawn from this chain of events than
affection cannot lead to any other that defendant not only deliberately,
conclusion than that it was he who, but through a clever strategy,
thru an ingenious scheme or trickery, succeeded in winning the affection
seduced the latter to the extent of and love of Lolita to the extent of
making her fall in love with him. This having illicit relations with her.
is shown by the fact that defendant
The wrong he has caused her and her
frequented the house of Lolita on the
family is indeed immeasurable
pretext that he wanted her to teach
considering the fact that he is a
him how to pray the rosary. Because
married man. Verily, he has
of the frequency of his visits to the
committed an injury to Lolitas family
latters family who was allowed free
in a manner contrary to morals, good
access because he was a collateral
customs and public policy as
relative and was considered as a
contemplated in Article 21 of the new
member of her family, the two
Civil Code.
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 102
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 103
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
public justice if prosecotors, who had regularly, for the mere purpose of
a tolerable ground of suspicion, were vexation or injury.
liable to be sued at law when their The statutory basis for a civil action
indictments miscarried. for damages for malicious
prosecution are found in the
provisions of the New Civil Code on
Human Relations and on damages
particularly Articles 19, 20, 21, 26,
GR NO. 107019, March 20, 1997 29, 32, 33, 35, 2217 and 2219 (8). To
constitute malicious prosecution,
FRANKLIN M. DRILON VS. CA however, there must be proof that the
The term malicious prosecution has prosecution was prompted by a
been defined in various ways. In sinister design to vex and humiliate a
American jurisdiction, it is defined as: person, and that it was initiated
One begun in malice without deliberately by the defendant knowing
probable cause to believe the charges that his charges were false and
can be sustained. Instituted with groundless. Concededly, the mere act
intention of injuring defendant and of submitting a case to the authorities
without probable cause, and which for prosecution does not make one
terminates in favor of the person liable for malicious prosecution. Thus,
prosecuted. For this injury an action in order for a malicious prosecution
on the case lies, called the action of suit to prosper, the plaintiff must
malicious prosecution. prove three (3) elements: (1) the fact
of the prosecution and the further fact
In Philippine jurisdiction, it has been
that the defendant was himself the
defined as: An action for damages
prosecutor and that the action finally
brought by one against whom a
terminated with an acquittal; (2) that
criminal prosecution, civil suit, or
in bringing the action, the prosecutor
other legal proceeding has been
acted without probable cause; and (3)
instituted maliciously and without
that the prosecutor was actuated or
probable cause, after the termination
impelled by legal malice, that is by
of such prosecution, suit, or other
improper or sinister motive.
proceeding in favor of the defendant
therein. The gist of the action is the
putting of legal process in force,
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 104
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 105
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
leave of absence without pay. This, governing statute is the Civil Code
coupled with the further averment and not the Labor Code.
that Cruz maliciously and with bad
faith violated the terms and
conditions of the conversion training
course agreement to the damage of
petitioner removes the present IX. OTHER TORTS
controversy from the coverage of the
Labor Code and brings it within the
purview of Civil Law. A. DERELICTION OF DUTY
Clearly, the complaint was anchored
not on the abandonment per se by
GR NO. L-14986, July 31, 1962
private respondent Cruz of his jobas
the latter was not required in the CORNELIO AMARO VS. AMBROCIO
Complaint to report back to work SUMANGUIT
but on the manner and consequent
the facts set out constitute an
effects of such abandonment of work
actionable dereliction on appellees
translated in terms of the damages
which petitioner had to suffer. part in the light of Article 27 of the
Civil Code. That appellants were
harassed and terrorized may be a
conclusion of law and hence
improperly pleaded. Their claim for
R NO. 59825, September 11, 1982
relief, however, is not based on the
ERNESTO MEDINA VS. ASTRO- fact of harassment and terrorization
BARTOLOME but on appellees refusal to give them
It is obvious from the complaint that assistance, which it was his duty to do
the plaintiffs have not alleged any as an officer of the law. The
unfair labor practice. Theirs is a requirement under the aforesaid
simple action for damages for tortious provision that such refusal must be
acts allegedly committed by the without just cause is implicit in the
defendants. Such being the case, the context of the allegation. The
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 107
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
that he is about to order the arrest of The damages fixed by Judge Leuterio
the plaintiffs to make them sign are sanctioned by Articles 2200, 2208
and 2219 of the Civil Code. Article
affidavits of exculpation in favor of
2219 allows moral damages for acts
the policeman.
mid actions mentioned in Article 26.
As lengthily explained by Justice
Gafmailan, the acts and omissions of
B. UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE the firm fall under Article 26.
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 108
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 109
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 110
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
GR NO. 116100, February 09, 1996 underlying basis for the award of tort
damages is the premise that an
SPOUSES CUSTODIO VS. CA individual was injured in
To warrant the recovery of damages, contemplation of law. Thus, there
there must be both a right of action must first be the breach of some duty
for a legal wrong inflicted by the and the imposition of liability for that
defendant, and damage resulting to breach before damages may be
the plaintiff therefrom. Wrong awarded; it is not sufficient to state
without damage, or damage without that there should be tort liability
wrong, does not constitute a cause of merely because the plaintiff suffered
action, since damages are merely part some pain and suffering).
of the remedy allowed for the injury
Many accidents occur and many
caused by a breach or wrong.
injuries are inflicted by acts or
There is a material distinction omissions which cause damage or
between damages and injury. Injury is loss to another but which violate no
the illegal invasion of a legal right; legal duty to such other person, and
damage is the loss, hurt, or harm consequently create no cause of
which results from the injury; and action in his favor. In such cases, the
damages are the recompense or consequences must be borne by the
compensation awarded for the injured person alone. The law affords
damage suffered. Thus, there can be no remedy for damages resulting
damage without injury in those from an act which does not amount to
instances in which the loss or harm a legal injury or wrong.
was not the result of a violation of a
legal duty. These situations are often
called damnum absque injuria.
In order that a plaintiff may maintain GR NO. 114118, August 28, 2001
an action for the injuries of which he
complains, he must establish that HEIRS OF BORLADO VS. CA
such injuries resulted from a breach As a matter of law, the trial court and
of duty which the defendant owed to the CA erred in holding petitioners
the plaintiff a concurrence of injury liable to pay respondents one
to the plaintiff and legal responsibility hundred (100) cavans of palay every
by the person causing it. The
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 111
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
year from 1972 until they vacate the profits of the business, during the
premises of the land in question. time of its stoppage.
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 112
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
As the trial court correctly observed, legal duty. These situations are often
this is a case of damnum absque called damnum absque injuria.
injuria. Conjunction of damage and In order that a plaintiff may maintain
wrong is here absent. There cannot an action for the injuries of which he
be an actionable wrong if either one complains, he must establish that
or the other is wanting. such injuries resulted from a breach
of duty which the defendant owed to
the plaintiff a concurrence of injury
to the plaintiff and legal responsibility
GR NO. 116100, February 09, 1996 by the person causing it. The
underlying basis for the award of tort
SPOUSES CUSTODIO VS. CA damages is the premise that an
To warrant the recovery of damages, individual was injured in
there must be both a right of action contemplation of law. Thus, there
for a legal wrong inflicted by the must first be the breach of some duty
defendant, and damage resulting to and the imposition of liability for that
the plaintiff therefrom. Wrong breach before damages may be
without damage, or damage without awarded; it is not sufficient to state
wrong, does not constitute a cause of that there should be tort liability
action, since damages are merely part merely because the plaintiff suffered
of the remedy allowed for the injury some pain and suffering).
caused by a breach or wrong.
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 113
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
above definitions, Anything short of repair that of which one has been
that would not repair the damages deprived by the wrong of another.
and anything beyond that would be
Compensatory damages are such as
excessive. Actual compensatory
awarded to compensate the injured
damages are those allowed for
party for caused by the wrong, and
tortious wrongs under the Civil Code;
must be only such as make just and
nothing more, nothing less.
fair compensation, and are due when
The purpose of the law in awarding the wrong is established, whether it
actual damages is to repair the wrong was committed maliciously that is,
that has been done, to compensate with evil intention or not.
for the injury inflicted, and not to
impose a penalty. Actual damages are
not dependent on nor graded by the a. KINDS
intent with which the wrongful act is
GR NO. 107518, October 08, 1998
done. The words "actual damages"
shall be construed to include all PNOC SHIPPING VS. CA
damages that the plaintiff may he has Under Article 2199 of the Civil Code,
suffered in respect to his property, actual or compensatory damages are
business, trade, profession, or those awarded in satisfaction of, or in
occupation, and no other damages recompense for, loss or injury
whatever. sustained. They proceed from a sense
of natural justice and are designed to
Actual damages are compensatory
repair the wrong that has been done,
only. `Compensatory damages' as
to compensate for the injury inflicted
indicated by the word employed to
and not to impose a penalty. In
characterize them, simply make good
actions based on torts or quasi-
or replace the loss caused by the
delicts, actual damages include all the
wrong. They proceed from a sense of
natural and probable consequences of
natural justice, and are designed to
the act or omission complained of.
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 114
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 115
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 116
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
In addition, nominal damages are case, where the resulting injury might
awarded in every obligation arising be continuing and possible future
from law, contracts, quasi-contracts, complications directly arising from
acts or omissions punished by law, the injury, while certain to occur, are
and quasi-delicts, or in every case difficult to predict.
where property right has been
Established medical procedures and
invaded. Under Article 2223 of the
practices, though in constant flux are
Civil Code, (t)he adjudication of
devised for the purpose of preventing
nominal damages shall preclude
complications. A physicians
further contest upon the right
experience with his patients would
involved and all accessory questions,
sometimes tempt him to deviate from
as between the parties to the suit, or
established community practices, and
their respective heirs and assigns.
he may end a distinguished career
using unorthodox methods without
incident. However, when failure to
follow established procedure results
e. PERSONAL INJURY AND in the evil precisely sought to be
DEATH averted by observance of the
procedure and a nexus is made
between the deviation and the injury
GR NO. 124354, December 29, 1999
or damage, the physician would
ROGELIO E. RAMOS VS. CA necessarily be called to account for it.
Actual or compensatory damages In the case at bar, the failure to
generally assume that at the time of observe pre-operative assessment
litigation, the injury suffered as a protocol which would have influenced
consequence of an act of negligence the intubation in a salutary way was
has been completed and that the cost fatal to private respondents case.
can be liquidated. However, these
provisions neglect to take into
account those situations, as in this
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 117
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
G.R. No. L-56487, October 21, 1991 litigation has been decided and the
subject of recovery is at the
GATCHALIAN VS. ARSENIO DELIM
disposition of the court. The issue
A person is entitled to the physical
over attorneys fee only arises when
integrity of his or her body; if that
something has been recovered from
integrity is violated or diminished,
which the fee is to be paid.
actual injury is suffered for which
actual or compensatory damages are Well settled is the rule that counsels
due and assessable. Petitioner claim for attorneys fees may be
Gatchalian is entitled to be placed as asserted either in the very action in
nearly as possible in the condition which the services in question have
that she was before the mishap. A been rendered, or in a separate
scar, especially one on the face of the action. If the first alternative is
woman, resulting from the infliction chosen, the Court may pass upon said
of injury upon her, is a violation of claim, even if its amount were less
bodily integrity, giving raise to a than the minimum prescribed by law
legitimate claim for restoration to for the jurisdiction of said court, upon
her conditio ante. If the scar is the theory that the right to recover
relatively small and does not attorneys fees is but an incident of
grievously disfigure the victim, the the case in which the services of
cost of surgery may be expected to be counsel have been rendered. It also
correspondingly modest. rests on the assumption that the court
trying the case is to a certain degree
already familiar with the nature and
f. ATTORNEYS FEES extent of the lawyers services. The
rule against multiplicity of suits will in
effect be subserved.
GR NO. 73886, January 31, 1989
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 118
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Because the amount due in this case that damages resulting from
arose from a contract for a piece of avoidable consequences of the breach
work, not from a loan or forbearance of a contract or other legal duty are
of money, the legal interest of six not recoverable. It is the duty of one
percent (6%) per annum should be
injured by the unlawful act of another
applied. Furthermore, since the
to take such measures as prudent
amount of the demand could be
established with certainty when the men usually take under such
Complaint was filed, the six percent circumstances to reduce the damages
(6%) interest should be computed as much as possible.
from the filing of the said Complaint.
But after the judgment becomes final When the existence of a loss is
and executory until the obligation is established, absolute certainty as to
satisfied, the interest should be its amount is not required. The
reckoned at twelve percent (12%) per benefit to be derived from a contract
year.
which one of the parties has
A forbearance in the context of the absolutely failed to perform is of
usury law is a contractual obligation necessity to some extent, a matter of
of lender or creditor to refrain, during
speculation, but the injured party is
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 119
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 120
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 121
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
GR NO. 118325, January 29, 1997 GR NO. L-20081, February 27, 1968
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 122
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
GR NO. 126518, December 02, 1998 years of age and the offender is the
common-law spouse of her mother.
PEOPLE VS. RODELIO BUGAYONG The amendatory law, however, cannot
Appellant sexually assaulted be applied in this case, because there
complainant in 1993 when she was 10 is no showing that the crime was
years old. Thus, the trial court committed after the effectivity of the
correctly convicted him of statutory said law.
rape under Article 335 (3) of the
Revised Penal Code. Moreover,
appellant is also guilty of acts of c. CASES WHERE ALLOWED
lasciviousness committed on October
15, 1995. GR NO. L-18287, March 30, 1963
the fact of the commission of rape. wounded feelings, anxiety, etc., as the
decision holds, but primarily because
Consistent with recent jurisprudence,
appellant should also be ordered to a breach of contract like that of
pay the victim the additional amount defendant, not being malicious or
of P50,000 as moral damages. fraudulent, does not warrant the
In People v. Prades, the Court resolved award of moral damages under Article
that moral damages may additionally
2220 of the Civil Code.
be awarded to the victim in the
criminal proceeding, in such amount
as the Court deems just, without the
need for pleading or proof of the
basis thereof as has heretofore been
GR NO. 130030, June 25, 1999
the practice.
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 124
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 125
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
rise to a claim for moral damages. inquiry as to the truth and had
The term analogous cases, referred available means for ascertaining it, at
to in Article 2219, following least where actual fraud has not been
the ejusdem generis rule, must be practised on the party claiming the
held similar to those expressly estoppel.
enumerated by the law.
It is evident in this case that private
respondent was barking up the wrong
tree when it sought to hold
d. UNFOUNDED SUITS petitioners liable for the value of the
pharmaceutical products delivered at
GR NO. 113558, April 18, 1997
the drugstore in question. The
EDITHA M. MIJARES VS. CA evidence clearly shows that
petitioners were not the owners of
One who claims the benefit of an
said drugstore when the deliveries
estoppel on the ground that he has
were made. Hence, no meeting of the
been misled by the representations of minds between them and private
another must not have been misled respondent could have taken place;
through his own want of reasonable no contract of sale could have
care and circumspection. A lack of arisen. The absence of any privity of
diligence by a party claiming an relations between the parties at the
time of the deliveries precludes any
estoppel is generally fatal. If the party
cause of action in favor of private
conducts himself with careless
respondent against petitioners. The
indifference to means of information Regional Trial Court therefore did not
reasonably at hand, or ignores highly err when it dismissed private
suspicious circumstances, he may not respondents complaint against
invoke the doctrine of estoppel. Good petitioners.
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 126
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
the other party is improper. The right harass, embarrass, annoy or ridicule
private respondent.
to litigate is so precious that a penalty
should not be charged on those who Moreover, the adverse result of an
action dismissal of petitioners
may exercise it erroneously.
complaint does not per se make an
act unlawful and subject the actor to
the payment of moral damages. It is
not a sound public policy to place a
premium on the right to litigate. No
GR NO. 127823, January 29, 1998
damages can be charged on those
J MARKETING CORP. VS. FELICIDAD who may exercise such precious right
in good faith, even if done
SIA
erroneously.
A persons right to litigate should not
be penalized by holding him liable for The award of exemplary damages has
damages. This is especially true when likewise no factual basis. It is a
the filing of the case is to enforce requisite that the act must be
what he believes to be his rightful accompanied by bad faith or done in
claim against another although found wanton, fraudulent or malevolent
to be erroneous. In this case, manner circumstances which are
petitioner precisely instituted the absent in this case. In addition,
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 127
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 128
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
belief, in a reasonable mind, acting on The Court concur with the trial courts
the facts within the knowledge of the award of P50,000.00 each from
prosecutor, that the person charged appellant Florencio Pirame and co-
was guilty of the crime for which he accused Teodorico Cleopas as death
was prosecuted. In this case, even if
indemnity to the victims heirs, which
we consider the allegations in the
is in line with current jurisprudence.
complaint as true, as well as the order
of the trial court annexed thereto, we The Court also find the amount of
do not find the same sufficient to P23,214.00 awarded by the trial court
establish the absence of probable as burial and incidental expenses
cause. supported by the records. The award
of P50,000.00 from each accused as
moral and exemplary damages,
however, is unsupported. The widow
GR NO. 129584, December 03, 1998 of the victim did not testify on any
mental anguish or emotional distress,
TRIPLE EIGHT VS. NLRC
which she suffered as a result of her
The rule is that moral damages are
husbands death. The absence of any
recoverable where the dismissal of the
generic aggravating circumstance
employee was attended by bad faith
attending the crime likewise precludes
or fraud or constituted an act
the award of exemplary damages.
oppressive to labor, or was done in a
manner contrary to morals, good
customs, or public policy. Likewise,
exemplary damages may be awarded
if the dismissal was effected in a GR NO. 134784, December 09, 2002
wanton, oppressive or malevolent
CARLOS ARCONA VS. CA
manner.
On the other hand, the award of moral
damages in the sum of P 10,000.00
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 129
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
torment, pain and anger when a loved The doctrine on the grant of moral
one becomes the victim of a violent or and exemplary damages, as follows:
brutal killing. Such violent death or To begin with, there is no hard and
brutal killing not only steals from the fast rule in the determination of
family of the deceased his precious what would be a fair amount of
life, deprives them forever of his love, moral damages, since each case
affection and support, but often must be governed by its own
leaves them with the gnawing feeling peculiar circumstances.
that an injustice has been done to
Article 2217 of the Civil Code
them. For this reason, moral damages
recognizes that moral damages
must be awarded even in the absence
which include physical suffering,
of any allegation and proof of the
mental anguish, fright, serious
heirs emotional suffering.
anxiety, besmirched reputation,
Finally, the award of actual damages wounded feelings, moral shock,
in the amount of P10,000.00 does not social humiliation and similar injury,
appear to have been substantiated. are incapable of pecuniary
Only those expenses which are duly estimation.
proven, or those that appear to have
As to exemplary damages, Article
been genuinely incurred in connection
2229 of the Civil Code provides that
with the death, wake or burial of the
such damages may be imposed by
victim, will be recognized in court.
way of example or correction for the
Hence, the same must be deleted.
public good. While exemplary
damages cannot be recovered as a
matter of right, they need not be
proved, although plaintiff must
show that he is entitled to moral,
temperate or compensatory
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 130
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
damages before the court may claim for moral damages could be
consider the question of whether or based, such indemnity could not be
not exemplary damages should be outrightly awarded. The same holds
awarded. true with respect to the award of
exemplary damages where it must be
shown that the party acted in a
wanton, oppressive or malevolent
manner.
GR NO. 112212, March 02, 1998
As a rule, moral damages cannot be
GREGORIO FULE VS. CA recovered from a person who has filed
Moral and exemplary damages may be a complaint against another in good
awarded without proof of pecuniary faith because it is not sound policy to
loss. In awarding such damages, the
place a penalty on the right to litigate,
court shall take into account the
the same, however, cannot apply in
circumstances obtaining in the case
the case at bar. The factual findings of
and assess damages according to its
discretion. To warrant the award of the courts a quo to the effect that
damages, it must be shown that the petitioner filed this case because he
person to whom these are awarded was the victim of fraud; that he could
has sustained injury. He must likewise not have been such a victim because
establish sufficient data upon which
he should have examined the jewelry
the court can properly base its
in question before accepting delivery
estimate of the amount of
damages. Statements of facts should thereof, considering his exposure to
establish such data rather than mere the banking and jewelry businesses;
conclusions or opinions of witnesses. and that he filed the action for the
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 131
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 132
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 133
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
FERNANDO LOPEZ VS. PAN AMERICAN (Domingding vs. Ng, 55 Off. Gaz. 10).
The rules and principles in awarding And further considering the present
moral damages are the following: rate of exchange and the terms at
defendant acted fraudulently or in bad U.S. dollars, this Court is all the more
faith (Art. 2220, New Civil Code). of the view that said award is proper
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 134
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
GR NO. 111584, September 17, 2001 damages: one is the loss of what a
person already possesses, and the
PRODUCERS BANK VS. CA
other is the failure to receive as a
In this case, the damage to private
benefit that which would have
respondents reputation and social
pertained to him. In the latter
standing entitles them to moral
instance, the familiar rule is that
damages. Article 2217, in relation to
damages consisting of unrealized
Article 2220, of the Civil Code
profits, frequently referred
explicitly provides that moral
as ganacias frustradas or lucrum
damages include physical suffering,
cessans, are not to be granted on the
mental anguish, fright, serious
basis of mere speculation, conjecture,
anxiety, besmirched reputation,
or surmise, but rather by reference to
wounded feelings, moral shock, social
some reasonably definite standard
humiliation, and similar
such as market value, established
injury. Obviously, petitioner banks
experienced, or direct inference from
wrongful act caused serious anxiety,
known circumstances.
embarrassment, and humiliation to
private respondents for which they are
entitled to recover moral damages in
the amount of P300,000.00 which the
Court deem to be reasonable. f. WHO MAY RECOVER
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 135
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
anothers suffering, or for fright due by the plaintiff, of moral damages for
to a wrong against a third person. So the temporary transfer of Dr.
the anguish of mind arising as to the Hernandez. If the mental anguish
safety of others who may be in allegedly suffered by plaintiff in
personal peril from the same cause consequence thereof ware sufficient
cannot be taken into consideration. to give him a cause of action therefor,
there would be no valid legal reason
As stated in the American
to deny the same relief to any other
Jurisprudence, Injury or Wrong to
Another.In law mental. anguish is person who might have thus been
restricted as a rule, to such mental inconvenienced, such as the friends of
pain or suffering as arises from an Dr. Hernandez, and public officials
injury or wrong to the person himself, similarly situated, as veil as those who
as distinguished from that form of
may have been adversely affected by
mental suffering which is the
the deterioration, if any, in the service
accompaniment of sympathy or
of the office or bureau which had
sorrow for anothers suffering or
which arises from a contemplation of been temporarily deprived of the
wrongs committed on the person services of said physician.
of another. Pursuant to the rule
stated, a husband or wife cannot
recover for mental suffering caused
by his or her sympathy for the others
suffering. GR NO. 128690, January 21, 1999
In this case, plaintiff is not even
ABS-CBN VS. CA
related to Dr. Hernandez. The latters
The award of moral damages cannot
wife is a daughter of Mrs. Strebel by a
be granted in favor of a corporation
previous marriage. Hence, Dr.
because, being an artificial person
Hernandez is merely related by
and having existence only in legal
affinity, not to Strebel, but to
contemplation, it has no feelings, no
a relative by affinity of said plaintiff. It
emotions, no senses. It cannot,
would be extremely dangerous, apart
therefore, experience physical
from unjust, to sanction a recovery,
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 136
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 137
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
plaintiff for any loss suffered by Under Article 2221 of the Civil Code,
him. nominal damages are adjudicated in
order that the right of the plaintiff,
which has been violated or invaded by
Art. 2222. The Court may award
nominal damages in every the defendant, may be vindicated or
obligation arising from any source recognized, and not for the purpose
enumerated in article 1157, or in of indemnifying the plaintiff for any
every case where any property loss suffered by him. As has been
right has been invaded.
held, whenever there has been a
Under the foregoing provisions violation of an ascertained legal right,
nominal damages are not intended for although no actual damages resulted
indemnification of loss suffered but or none are shown, the award of
for the vindication or recognition of a nominal damages is proper. In this
right violated or invaded. They are case, the victims family clearly
recoverable where some injury has incurred medical expenses due to the
been done the amount of which the rape committed by accused-
evidence fails to show, the appellant. The victim suffered from
assessment of damages being left to pains in her navel which required her
the discretion of the court according physical examination. An award of
to the circumstances of the case. P2,000.00 as nominal damages is
thus appropriate under the
The facts in this case show that the
circumstances.
right of the vendee to acquire title to
the lot bought by her was violated by
petitioner and this entitles her at the
very least to nominal damages.
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 138
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
GR NO. 88561, April 20, 1990 course, subject to the condition that
the award for damages is not
HERMAN ARMOVIT VS. CA
excessive under the attendant facts
The purpose of nominal damages is to
and circumstance of the case.
vindicate or recognize a right that has
been violated, in order to preclude Temperate damages are included
further contest thereon; and not for within the context of compensatory
the purpose of indemnifying damages. In arriving at a reasonable
the Plaintiff for any loss suffered by level of temperate damages to be
awarded, trial courts are guided by
him (Articles 2221, 2223, new Civil
the Supreme Courts ruling that:
Code.)
... There are cases where from the
Hence, the deletion of the nominal
nature of the case, definite proof
damages by the appellate court in this
of pecuniary loss cannot be
case is well-taken since there is an offered, although the court is
award of actual damages. Nominal convinced that there has been such
damages cannot co-exist with actual loss. For instance, injury to one's
or compensatory damages. commercial credit or to the
goodwill of a business firm is often
hard to show certainty in terms of
money. Should damages be denied
4. TEMPERATE
for that reason? The judge should
G.R. No. L-56505; May 9, 1988 be empowered to calculate
moderate damages in such cases,
MAXIMO PLENO VS. CA rather than that the plaintiff should
The employer's liability in quasi-delict suffer, without redress from the
is primary and solidary. The award of defendant's wrongful act.
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 139
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
GR NO. 129782, June 29, 2001 GR NO. 120547, January 29, 2001
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 140
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Jurisprudence has set down the GR NO. 118325, January 29, 1997
requirements for exemplary damages
VIRGILIO M. DEL ROSARIO VS. CA
to be awarded:
Article 2229 of the Civil Code
1. they may be imposed by way of
provides that such damages may be
example in addition to compensatory
imposed by way of example or
damages, and only after the
correction for the public good. While
claimants right to them has been
exemplary damages cannot be
established;
recovered as a matter of right, they
2. they cannot be recovered as a need not be proved, although plaintiff
matter of right, their determination must show that he is entitled to
depending upon the amount of moral, temperate or compensatory
compensatory damages that may be damages before the court may
awarded to the claimant; consider the question of whether or
3. the act must be accompanied by not exemplary damages should be
bad faith or done in a wanton, awarded. Exemplary damages are
fraudulent, oppressive or malevolent imposed not to enrich one party or
manner. impoverish another but to serve as a
deterrent against or as a negative
In the case at bench, while there is a
incentive to curb socially deleterious
clear breach of petitioners obligation
actions.
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 141
TORTS AND DAMAGES Principles and Doctrines
Submitted by: Clifford Cubian | Submitted to: Atty. Jennifer N. Asuncion Page 142