THE HEIRS OF REDENTOR COMPLETO AND ELPIDIO ABIAD v. SGT. AMANDO C. ALBAYDA, JR.

G.R. No. 172200

July 06, 2010

NACHURA, J.:

FACTS:
Amando Albayda (Albayda) is a Master Sergeant of the PH Air Force, and Rendetor
Completo (Completo) was the taxi driver of a Toyota Corolla which was owned by Elpidio Abiad
(Abiad). Albayda was riding a bike on his way to the office, when Completo's taxi bumped and side
swept him, causing serious physical injuries. Albayda was brought to the PH Air Force General
Hospital, but he was transferred to the AFP Medical Center because he sustained a fracture and
there was no orthopedic doctor available in the first hospital. He was confined from 27 Aug 1997 to
11 Feb 1998, and again in 23 Feb to 22 Mar 1998 [approx. 7 months].

Conciliation before the barangay failed, so Albayda filed a complaint for physical injuries
through reckless imprudence against Completo before the Office of the City Prosecutor of Pasay.
Completo filed a counter-charge of damage to property through reckless imprudence against
Albayda. The Office of the City Prosecutor recommended the filing of an information for Albayda's
complaint, and Completo's complaint [against Albayda] was dismissed. Albayda manifested his
reservation to file a separate civil action for damages against Completo and Abiad.

Albayda alleged that Completo's negligence is the proximate cause of the incident. He
demanded the following damages and their respective amounts: Actual damages - 276,550; Moral
damages - 600,000; Exemplary damages - 200,000; Attorney's fees - 25,000 + 1,000 per court
appearance.

On the other hand, Completo alleged that he was carefully driving the taxicab when he
heard a strange sound from the taxicab's rear right side. He found Albayda lying on the road, holding
his left leg, so he brought Albayda to PH Air Force General Hospital. Completo asserted that he was
an experienced driver, and that he already reduced his speed to 20km even before reaching the
intersection. In contrast, Albayda rode his bicycle at high speed, causing him to lose control of the
bicycle. Completo said that Albayda had no cause of action.

Several people testified for each side, but here are some notes on the testimony of the owner
of the taxi driver, Abiad. Abiad said that aside from being a soldier, he also held franchises of taxicabs
and passenger jeepneys, and being a taxicab operator, he would wake up early to personally check
the taxicabs. When Completo applied as a taxicab driver, Abiad required him to show his bio-data,
NBI clearance, and driver's license. Completo never figured in a vehicular accident since he was
employed, and according to Abiad, he [Completo] was a good driver and good man.

RTC rendered judgment in favor of Albayda, and the defendants are ordered to pay actual
[46k] and moral [400k] damages, and attorney's fees [25k]. Upon appeal at the CA, the court
affirmed RTC's decision with modifications [no more actual damages; awarded temperate damages
[40k]; moral damages only 200k; Completo and Abiad are solidarily liable to pay Albayda; added
legal interest].

ISSUE:
1. WON CA erred in finding that Completo was the one who caused the collision. NO
2. WON Abiad failed to prove that he observed the diligence of a good father of the family.
YES
HELD:
On Negligence
It is a rule in negligence suits that the plaintiff has the burden of proving by a preponderance
of evidence the motorist's breach in his duty of care owed to the plaintiff, that the motorist was
negligent in failing to exercise the diligence required to avoid injury to the plaintiff, and that such
negligence was the proximate cause of the injury suffered. NCC 2176 quoted, and said that the
question of the motorist's negligence is a question of fact. Usually, more will be required of a
motorist [25mi/hr = 37ft/sec] than a bicyclist [10mi/hr = 15ft/sec] in discharging the duty of care
because of the physical advantages the former has over the latter.

It was proven by a preponderance of evidence that Completo failed to exercise reasonable diligence.
 He was overspeeding at the time he hit Albayda's bicycle; he did not slow down even when
he approached the intersection
 Such negligence was the sole and proximate cause of the injuries sustained by Albayda
 It was proven that Albayda had the right of way since he reached the intersection ahead of
Completo

NCC 2180 cited - obligation imposed by NCC 2176 is demandable also for those persons for
whom one is responsible. Employers are liable for damage caused by employees, but the
responsibility ceases upon proof that employers observed the diligence of the good father of the
family in the selection and supervision of employees. The burden of proof is on the employer. The
responsibility of two or more persons who are liable for QD is solidary. The employer's civil liability
for his employee's negligent acts is also primary and direct, owing to his own negligence in selecting
and supervising them, and this liability attaches even if the employer is not in the vehicle at the time
of collision.

In the selection of employees, employers are required to examine them as to their

qualifications, experience, and service records. With respect to supervision, employers should
formulate SOPs and monitor their implementation, and impose disciplinary measures for
breaches. To establish these factors in a trial involving the issue of vicarious [secondary] liability,
employers must submit concrete proof, including documentary evidence.

ABIAD'S EVIDENCE CONSISTED ENTIRELY OF TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE, AND THIS IS INSUFFICIENT TO

OVERCOME THE LEGAL PRESUMPTION THAT HE WAS NEGLIGENT IN THE SELECTION AND
SUPERVISION OF COMPLETO.
On Damages
CA rightfully deleted the award of actual damages because Albayda failed to present documentary
evidence to establish the amount incurred. Temperate damages may be recovered when the court
finds that some pecuniary loss has been suffered but its amount cannot be proved with certainty.

Moral damages
The court vicariously feels the pain the plaintiff [Albayda] suffered a number of times. After he was
bumped by defendants' cab, he cried in pain. When the doctors bore holes into his left knee, he
cried in pain. When he was tractioned, when he was subjected to an operation after operation he
suffered pain. When he took the witness stand to testify, he walked with crutches, his left knee in
bandage, stiff and unfuctional. Pain was written [on] his face. He does deserve moral damages.

The award of attorney's fees is deleted for failure to prove that petitioners acted in bad faith in
refusing to satisfy respondent's just and valid claim.