Cagayan II Electric Cooperative, Inc. v.

Tangonan
GR No. 199886
Dec 3, 2014

VILLARAMA, JR., J.:

FACTS:
9:00 pm – a motorcycle incident with 3 passengers figured in mishap along the National
Highway of Maddalero, Buguey, Cagayan. It was driven by Camilio Tangonan (Camilio) who died
from the accident, while his companions Allan Rapanan (Rapanan) and Erwin Coloma (Coloma)
Suffered injuries. The common law wife of Camilio, Mary Gine Tangonan (Mary) filed before the
RTC a complaint for damages against Cagayan II Electric Cooperative, Inc. (CECI) for damages.

Rapanan and Coloma alleged that they were hit by a live tension wire due to strong winds
from one of the electric posts owned by CECI. The mishap was due the failure of CECI to fix said
tension wire despite being immediately informed by residents in the area that it might pose an
immediate danger to persons, animals and vehicles passing along the highway. Due to such incident
they suffered physical injuries including burns from the live tension wire.

On the other hand, CECI alleges that it was due to the storm that the poles fell and the wires
cut, that they moved them to the side 5m away from the road, and that it was probably due to the
negligence pf Camilio.

The Rapanan and Coloma, along with the body of Camilio were brought to Alfonso Ponce
Medical Memorial District Hospital and were attended by Dr. Tiffany Hassim (Dr. Hassim) who
alleged that there were no burn marks as alleged by Rapanan and Coloma, and the autopsy of
Camilio also did not show burn marks but instead strangle marks, probably due to the wires.

For CECI’s witnesses they presented SPO2 Pedro Tactac (Tactac) who testified that there
was a skid mark 30m from the motorcycle and that it was caused by the foot rest and was probably
due to the motorcycle over speeding. Tranquilino (Rasos) and Rodolfo (Adviento) corroborated
that there was a typhoon and the lines were cut and poles fell, and that they moved the debris 5m
away from the road.

The RTC ruled in favor of CECI, but CA reversed said decision.

ISSUE:
Whether it was CECI’s negligence in maintenance of its facilities the proximate cause of the
death of Camilio and injuries of Rapanan.

HELD:
No.

The foregoing shows that the motorcycle was probably running too fast that it lost control
and started tilting and sliding eventually which made its foot rest caused the skid mark on the road.
Therefore, the mishap already occurred even while they were on the road and away from
petitioner’s electric wires and was not caused by the latter as alleged by respondents. It just so
happened that after the motorcycle tilted and slid, the passengers were thrown off to the shoulder
where the electric wires were.

This Court hence agrees with the trial court that the proximate cause of the mishap was the
negligence of Camilo. Had Camilo driven the motorcycle at an average speed, the three passengers
would not have been thrown off from the vehicle towards the shoulder and eventually strangulated
by the electric wires sitting thereon. Moreover, it was also negligent of Camilo to have allowed two
persons to ride with him and for Rapanan to ride with them when the maximum number of
passengers of a motorcycle is two including the driver. This most likely even aggravated the situation
because the motorcycle was overloaded which made it harder to drive and control. When the
plaintiff’s own negligence was the immediate and proximate cause of his injury, he cannot recover
damages. As to the second issue, assuming arguendo that petitioner was indeed negligent, the
appellate court erred in awarding damages in favor of Camilo’s legal heirs since they were not
impleaded in the case. It should be noted that it was Mary Gine, the common law wife of Camilo,
who is the complainant in the case. As a mere common law wife of Camilo, she