NOTES & DOCTRINES ON Taxation 1 1
TORTS SOURCES OF OBLIGATIONS
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
Tort Defined
Etymology: Taken directly from the French and is a
derivation of the Latin word ‘torquere’ meaning ‘to twist.’
It is also defined as a “private or civil wrong or injury, other
than breach of contract,” for which the court will provide a
remedy in the form of an action for damages.
Common Law: Tort is an unlawful violation of private right,
not created by contract, and which gives rise to an action for
damages. It is an act or omission producing an injury to
another, without any previous existing lawful relation of
which the said act or omission may be said to be a natural
outgrowth or incident.
(Robles vs. Castillo, 61 O.G. 1220, 5 C.A.R. [2s] 213).
NOTE: There must always be violation of some duty that
must arise by operation of law and not by mere agreement of
the parties.
No Universal Formula for Tort Liability
Although some rules or principles are common to various
torts or groups of torts, there is no universal formula for tort
liability. As thus defined, tort in common law includes
intentional torts, negligence, and strict liability in tort.
Intentional Torts
Include conduct where the actor desires to cause the
consequences of his act or believes the consequences are
substantially certain to result from it.
Examples:
(a) Assault
(b) Battery
(c) False imprisonment
(d) Defamation
(e) Invasion of privacy
(f) Interference of property
Negligence
Involves voluntary acts or omissions which result in injury to
others, without intending to cause the same. The actor fails to
exercise due care in performing such acts or omissions.
Strict Liability in Tort
There is strict liability in tort where the person is made liable
independent of fault or negligence upon submission of proof
of certain facts.
JB Suarez @therainsantiago © 2018
ARTICLE 1157. Obligations arise from:
(1) Law;
(2) Contracts;
(3) Quasi-contracts;
(4) Acts or omissions punished by law; and
(5) Quasi-delicts
Sources of Obligations
1. Law – imposed by the law
2. Contracts – arise from the stipulation of the parties
3. Quasi-contracts – arise from lawful, voluntary and
unilateral acts and which are enforceable to the end
that no one shall be unjustly enriched or benefited
at the expense of another (Article 2142)
4. Crimes or acts or omissions punished by law – arise
from civil liability which is the consequence of a
criminal offense (Article 1161)
5. Quasi-delicts or torts – arise from damage caused to
another through an act or omission, there being fault
or negligence, but no contractual relation exists
between the parties (Article 2176)
Two Classifications of Sources of Obligations
1. Those emanating from laws; and
2. Those emanating from private acts
(a) Licit acts: contracts and quasi-contracts
(b) Illicit acts: delicts and quasi-delicts
Legal Obligations
They are not presumed because they are considered a burden
upon the obligor.
NOTE: To be demandable, they must be clearly set forth in
the law (ARTICLE 1158, Civil Code).
Contractual Obligations
Contract
A contract is a meeting of minds between two persons
whereby one binds himself, with respect to the other, to give
something or to render some service.
Binding Force of Contracts
Once perfected, valid contracts have the force of law between
the parties who are bound to comply fully and not selectively
with its terms in good faith, and neither one may without the
consent of the other, renege therefrom.
NOTE: The law will not permit a party to be set free from
liability for any kind of misperformance of the contractual
undertaking or a contravention of the tenor thereof. The mere
proof of the existence of the contract and the failure of its
compliance justify, prima facie, a corresponding right of
relief.
Liability for breach of contract
Our law on contracts recognizes the principle that actionable
injury inheres in every contractual breach. Interest may, in the
discretion of the court, on equitable grounds, be allowed upon
damages awarded for breach of contract.

Quasi-contractual obligations
A quasi-contract is that juridical relation resulting from
certain lawful, voluntary and unilateral acts by virtue of
which the parties become bound to each other to the end that
no one will be unjustly enriched or benefited at the expense
of another.
Kinds of Quasi-contract
1. Negotiorum gestio
This is the voluntary management of the property or affairs of
another without the knowledge or consent of the latter.
NOTE: Negotiorum gestio is not applicable in the following:
(a) When the property or business is not neglected or
abandoned, in which case the provisions of the Civil
Code regarding unauthorized contracts shall
govern; or
(b) The manager has been tacitly authorized by the
owner, in which case the rules on agency shall
govern.
Essential Requisites of Negotiorum gestio
(a) No meeting of the minds;
(b) Taking charge of another’s business or property;
(c) Property or business must have been abandoned or
neglected;
(d) The officious manager must not have been expressly
or implicitly authorized; and
(e) The officious manager (gestor) must have
voluntarily taken charge – there must be no vitiated
consent, such as error in thinking that he owned the
property or the business.
2. Solutio indebiti
The juridical relation which is created when something is
received when there is no right to demand it and it was unduly
delivered through mistake.
NOTE: Whoever in bad faith accepts undue payment, shall
pay legal interest if a sum of money is involved, or shall be
liable for fruits received or which should have been received
if the thing produces fruits. He shall furthermore be
answerable for any loss or impairment of the thing from any
cause, and for damages to the person who delivered the thing
until it is recovered (ARTICLE 2159, Civil Code)
Other Cases
Quantum meruit. Allows recovery of the reasonable value
regardless of any agreement as to value.it entitles the party to
“as much as he reasonably deserves.”
Quantum valebant. “As much as what is reasonably worth.”
Civil Liability Arising from Crimes or Delicts
1. Civil liability in addition to criminal liability – there
is civil liability when there is criminal liability
2. Criminal liability without civil liability – In crimes
which cause no material damage, there is no civil
liability to be enforced.
NOTE: A person not criminally responsible may still be
liable civilly when the obligation arises from quasi-delict or
tort not alleged and proved as constituting a criminal offense.
JB Suarez @therainsantiago © 2018
NOTES & DOCTRINES ON Taxation 1 2
Right to Recover Civil Liability
Reservation and waiver
Only the civil liability, arising from the offense charged is
deemed instituted with the criminal action unless the offended
party waives the civil action, reserves his right to institute it
separately, or institutes the civil action prior to the criminal
action. No need under Articles 32, 33, 34 and 2176 of the
NCC.
Independent civil action
Reservation and waiver do not include recovery of civil
liability under Articles 32, 33, 34 and 2176 of the NCC
arising from the same act or omission which may be
prosecuted separately even without a reservation.
Scope of Civil Liability
The extent of this arising from crimes is governed by Revised
Penal Code of the Philippines and the NCC. It includes:
(a) Restitution
(b) Reparation
(c) Indemnification
NOTE: On appeal, the Supreme Court may modify the
decision by ordering indemnification of the offended party
pursuant to Articles 100, 104(3), and 107 of the RPC.
Obligations Arising from Quasi-delicts
A quasi-delict is an act or omission by a person (tortfeasor)
which causes damage to another in his person, property, or
rights giving rise to an obligation to pay for the damage done,
there being fault or negligence but there is no preexisting
contractual relation between the parties.
Requisites of Quasi-delict
1. Damages suffered by the plaintiff;
2. Fault or negligence of the defendant, or some other
person for whose acts he must respond; and
3. The connection of cause and effect between the fault
or negligence of the defendant and the damages
incurred by the plaintiff.
(Dr. Genevieve L. Huang v. Philippine Hoteliers, Inc., G.R.
No. 180440, December 5, 2012)
NOTE: The liability from tort may exist even if there is a
contract, for the act that breaks the contract may be also a tort.
When such a contractual relation exists, the obligor may
break the contract under such conditions that the same act
which constitutes a breach of the contract would have
constituted the source of an extra-contractual obligation had
no contract existed between the parties.
(Regino v. Pangasinan Colleges of Science and Technology,
G.R. No. 156109, November 18, 2004)

PHILIPPINE TORT LAW
SOURCES
As a source of obligation
Quasi-delict as a source of obligation (ARTICLE 1157, NCC)
This source of obligation is classified as “extra-contractual
obligation” and is governed by Chapter XVII, Chapter 2 of
the Code consisting of Articles 2176 to 2194.
NOTE: Other provisions that are considered “tort”
provisions can be found in other titles of the Code and in
special laws.
Derivation:
The project of the Civil Code is based upon the Civil Code of
1889, which is of Spanish and French origin. The proposed
Code has been strengthened and enriched with new provisions
chosen with care from the codes, laws and judicial decisions
of various countries as well as from the works of jurists of
various nations. Among them are: Spain, the various States of
the American Union, — especially California and Louisiana,
— France, Argentina, Germany, Mexico, Switzerland,
England, and Italy. In addition, there are a number of articles
which restate the doctrines laid down by the Supreme Court
of the Philippines. Finally, there are hundreds of amendments
and new rules agreed upon by the Commission originally and
not having in mind any code, decision or treatise, in order to
consecrate Filipino customs, or to rectify unjust or unwise
provisions heretofore in force, or to clarify doubtful articles
and clauses in the present Code, or to afford solutions to
numerous questions and situations not foreseen in the Civil
Code of 1889 and other laws.
Code Commission
Reliance on the laws of other countries
It is not surprising that various torts in other countries are
likewise recognized as such in this jurisdiction. It is also not
surprising that the Supreme Court borrows heavily from the
decisions of the Court in other countries especially Spain and
the United States.
Roman Law as the main inspiration
Roman Law served as the main inspiration of the New Civil
Code. The influence of Roman Law is quite evident in the
field of quasi-delict.
It should be noted that the “Institutes’’ in Roman law added
the category of obligations that arise quasi ex delicto. Four
are listed within such category:
(a) liability of a judge who misconducts a case or gives
a wrong decision,
(b) the liability of an occupier of a building for double
the damage caused by anything thrown or forced out
of the building, no matter by whom, on to a public
place,
NOTE: This has been embodied in ARTICLE 2193 of the
New Civil Code of the Philippines.
JB Suarez @therainsantiago © 2018
NOTES & DOCTRINES ON Taxation 1 3
(c) liability of the occupier if he keeps any object
suspended from the building which would do
damage if it fell, and
(d) the liability of the shop keeper, innkeeper or keeper
of a stable for any theft or damage caused by slaves
or employees, or in case of the innkeepers, of
permanent residents. (Barry Nicholas, An
Introduction to Roman Law, 1962 Ed., pp. 224-225).
NOTE: This has been embodied in ARTICLE 2000 of the
NCC. However, the liability is now part of contract law rather
than tort law. [Contract of DEPOSIT]
SCOPE AND APPLICABLE LAWS
Tort as a Source of Liability
Although the word tort does not appear in the New Civil
Code, there are statutory provisions that use the word thereby
recognizing tort as a source of liability. The provisions that
recognize tort liability and use the term “tort” include
Sections 22 and 100 of the Corporation Code, Art. 68 of the
Child and Youth Welfare Code and Sec. 17(a)(6) of the Ship
Mortgage Decree.
Tort involving intentional acts
The Supreme Court had, in fact, repeatedly used the term tort
in deciding cases involving negligent acts or omissions as
well as those involving intentional acts.
Tort as a breach of legal duty
The Supreme Court broadly defined tort as a breach of legal
duty. The Supreme Court explained that tort essentially
consists in the violation of a right given or omission of
statutory duty imposed by law. (Naguiat vs. NLRC, 269 SCRA
564 [1997]).
Incorporation of Common Law Torts
The New Civil Code as enacted and the Report of the Code
Commission itself, reveal an evident intent to adopt the
common law concept of tort and to incorporate the different,
intentional and unintentional common law torts in the New
Civil Code. Tortious conduct for which civil remedies are
available are embodied in different provisions of the New
Code.
Examples: Independent civil actions (Arts. 32, 33, 34, 35 and
36 of the Civil Code)
Inclusion of Anglo-American Rules
The same intent to incorporate Anglo-American rules is
present in the rules regarding proximate cause and
contributory negligence (Article 2199, NCC).
Enlarged Concept of Tortious Acts
The intent to adopt the expanded common law concept of
intentional and unintentional tort is more evident in Articles
19, 20, and 21 of the Civil Code.
NOTE: It introduces malice in the commission of torts.
Article 20 is the “general sanction for all other provisions of
law which do not especially provide their own sanction” and
“is broad enough to cover all legal wrongs which do not
constitute violations of contract.”
 NOTES & DOCTRINES ON Taxation 1 4

Included Torts in the Philippine Laws PURPOSES OF TORT LAW

Philippine laws include the following torts, some of which are
also considered torts in American law:
(a) Defamation,
(b) Fraud,
(c) Physical Injuries,
(d) Violation of Constitutional Rights,
(e) Negligence,
(f) Interference with Contractual Relations,
(g) Violation of Privacy,
(h) Malicious Prosecution,
(i) Product liability,
(j) Strict liability for possession of animals,
(k) Abuse of right (Article 19, Civil Code), and
(l) Acts which violate good morals and customs.
(Article 21, NCC).
NOTE: Tort is even broad enough to include civil liability
arising from criminal liability.
Catch-all Provisions
Articles 19, 20 and 21 of Civil Code are likewise “catch-all”
provisions that serve as basis of any imaginable tort action.
Under the Anglo-American law, each tort is usually named
and defined. On the other hand, Articles 19, 20 and 21 of the
New Civil Code provide for general concepts that make
persons liable for every conceivable wrongful acts.
Quasi-delict involves intentional acts
It is noteworthy that the same broad interpretation of quasi-
delict had been given to ARTICLE 2176, the provision on
quasi-delict under the New Civil Code. The Supreme Court
observed in a number of cases that Article 2176 includes
intentional acts.
Major Purposes of Tort Law
1. to provide a peaceful means for adjusting the rights
of parties who might otherwise take the law into
their own hands;
2. deter wrongful conduct;
3. to encourage socially responsible behaviour; and
4. to restore injured parties to their original condition,
insofar as the law can do this, by compensating them
for their injury.
(William L. Prosser, John W. Wade, Victor E. Schwartz,
Cases and Materials on Torts, 1988 Ed., p.1).
NOTE: In one case, the Supreme Court observed that the
governing law (Article 2176, Civil Code) seeks to reduce the
risks and burden of living in the society and to allocate them
among the members of society. (Phoenix Construction, Inc.
vs. Intermediate Appellate Court, 148 SCRA 353 [1987]).
Physical Integrity of One’s Body
When the law provides for compensation to another for
personal injuries, the law is protecting the person’s interest
over his body. A person is entitled to the physical integrity of
his or her body; if the integrity is violated or diminished,
actual injury is suffered for which actual or compensatory
damages are due and assessable. (Gatchalian vs. Delim, 203
SCRA 126, 137 [1991]).
NOTE: It also protects other interests such as reputation,
personal freedom, enjoyment of property, and commercial
interests.

…thereby making it clear that the concept of culpa aquiliana Interests Protected under the Civil Code
includes acts which are criminal in character or in violation of Interest Protected Torts and/or Provisions
the penal law, whether voluntary or negligent. Involved
Person
… Such distinction between criminal negligence and “culpa Freedom from contract Physical Injuries (Art. 32);
extra-contractual’’ or “cuasi-delito’’ has been sustained by Quasi-delict (ART. 2176)
decision of the Supreme Court of Spain and maintained as
Freedom from distress Moral damages (ARTS.
clear, sound and perfectly tenable by Maura, an outstanding
2217-2220)
Spanish jurist. Therefore, under the proposed Article 2177,
acquittal from an accusation of criminal negligence, whether Dignity
on reasonable doubt or not, shall not be a bar to a subsequent Reputation Defamation (ART. 33)
civil action, not for civil liability arising from criminal Privacy Violation of Privacy (ART.
negligence, but for damages due to a quasi-delict or “culpa 26)
aquiliana.’’ But said article forestalls a double recovery.” Freedom from wrongful Malicious Prosecution
(Elcano and Elcano vs. Hill and Hill, 77 SCRA 98) actions (ARTS. 20 and 21)
Property
Real Property Nuisance (ARTS. 694-770);
Quasi-delict (ART. 2176)
Economic/Pecuniary
Contracts Interference with
contractual rights (ART.
1314)
Freedom from Deception Fraud (ART. 33)

JB Suarez @therainsantiago © 2018


FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES
Equity and Justice
These general considerations are embodied in Articles 21 and
26 of the Civil Code. Thus, justice and equity demand that
persons who may have been damaged by the wrongful or
negligent act of another are compensated.
NOTE: Acting with justice involves the duty
(a) to indemnify for damage caused under Arts. 20, 21,
28, 27;
(b) to indemnify by reason of unjust enrichment under
Arts. 22 and 23; and
(c) to protect the weaker party under Article 24
Equity
Equity has broadly been defined as justice according to
natural law and right. It is also described as justice outside
legality.
NOTE: Equity is often invoked in justifying the rule
regarding mitigation of liability if the plaintiff was guilty of
contributory negligence.
Democracy
Such concern for the democratic way of life is the reason why
the Code includes provisions that implement the civil liberties
guaranteed by the Constitution.
Human Personality Exalted
The sacredness of human personality is a concomitant of
every plan for human amelioration. The touchstone of every
system of laws, of the culture and civilization of every
country, is how far it dignifies man.
JUSTIFICATIONS OF TORT LIABILITY
Wrongful or negligent act or omission creates
vinculum juris
The fundamental distinction between obligations of this
character and those which arise from contract, rests upon the
fact that in cases of non-contractual obligation it is the
wrongful or negligent act or omission itself which creates the
vinculum juris, whereas in contractual relations the vinculum
exists independently of the breach of the voluntary duty
assumed by the parties when entering into the contractual
relation. (Cangco vs. Manila Railroad Company)
Moral Perspective
Tort liability may be justified because the conduct is
considered a moral wrong. For instance, Senator Tolentino
explained that Articles 19 and 20 provide adequate legal
remedy for moral wrongs.
The law of torts abounds in moral phraseology. It has much
to say of wrongs, of malice, fraud, intent and negligence.
Hence, it may naturally be supposed that the risk of a man’s
conduct is thrown upon him as a result of some moral
shortcoming. (The Common Law, 77-80 [1881] reproduced
in Robert L. Rabin, Perspectives on Tort Law).
JB Suarez @therainsantiago © 2018
NOTES & DOCTRINES ON Taxation 1 5
NOTE: Consistent with the moral perspective is the maxim
Ubi jus ibi remedium — there is no wrong without a remedy.
Consequently, the focus of tort law from the moral
perspective is the wrong committed and the moral
shortcoming of the actor.
Social and Economic Perspective
Each interest which receives recognition and protection by
the law, receives such protection to the extent of the social
significance of the individual interest, as compared with the
other conflicting individual interests. In other words, public
policy requires that some interests not be invaded too far in
the advancement of other interests.
The social function of tort may also be viewed from an
economic perspective. “Economic analysis of tort law
focuses on the allocation of the risks of loss due to the
destruction of property or injury to persons created by those
activities. Tort law may be viewed as a system of rules
designed to maximize wealth by allocating risks so as to
minimize the costs associated with engaging in daily
activities.
PERSON WHO CAN SUE AND BE SUED FOR TORT
Plaintiffs: Persons who are entitled to damages
Such plaintiff can be a natural person or an artificial person
like a corporation.
For example, if a taxi driver was physically injured when his
vehicle was bumped by another vehicle, both the driver and
the corporation that owns the taxi unit can sue the negligent
driver of the other. A defendant may be held liable even if he
does not know the identity of the plaintiff at the time of the
accident. (Gilchrist vs. Cuddy, 29 Phil. 542 [1915]).
An unborn child, however, is not entitled to damages.
Although the bereaved parents may be entitled to damages, all
such damages must be those inflicted directly upon them as
distinguished from the injury or violation of the rights of the
unborn child, his right to life and physical integrity. (Geluz vs.
Court of Appeals, 2 SCRA 802 [1961]).
Defendants: Persons who may be held liable
Defendants in tort cases can either be natural or artificial
beings.
NOTE: The employee or officer concerned is not free from
liability but the corporation may be held directly and
primarily liable under the concept of vicarious liability.
Close Corporations
With respect to close corporations, the stockholders who are
personally involved in the operation of the corporation may
be personally liable for corporate torts under Section 100 of
the Corporation Code.
Corporation by Estoppel
A corporation by estoppel is not a real corporation but the
members make it appear or represent themselves to be
members of a corporation in dealing with third persons.
Under Section 21 of the Corporation Code, all persons who
 NOTES & DOCTRINES ON Taxation 1 6

assume to act as a corporation knowing it to be without ALTERNATIVE COMPENSATION SCHEMES

authority to do so shall be liable as general partners for all
debts, liabilities and damages incurred or arising as a result
thereof.
Partnerships
Articles 1823 and 1824 of the New Civil Code provide that
the partnership is solidarily liable with the partner if the latter
commit tortious acts while acting in the pursuit of partnership
business. This principle is consistent with the mutual agency
rule in partnership.
State, its political subdivisions and GOCCs
Subject to rules regarding waiver of immunity from suits,
defendants may include the State, its political subdivisions,
and government-owned and -controlled corporations.
(National Irrigation Administration vs. Intermediate
Appellate Court, 214 SCRA 35 [1992]).
REMEDIES
Legal remedies are either preventive or compensatory.
Every remedy in a certain sense is preventive because it
threatens certain undesirable consequences to those who
violate the rights of others.
To help victims secure compensation, the legislature usually
provides for alternative means of recovering compensation
for losses suffered by the parties. These alternative systems
of compensation include laws imposing compulsory
insurance as well as employees compensation.
Insurance
An example of an alternative compensation scheme is that
what is provided for under the Insurance Code.
Article 378 provides that “any claim not exceeding five
thousand pesos (P5,000.00) for death or injury to any
passenger or third party shall be paid without the necessity of
proving fault or negligence of any kind.’’
Worker’s Compensation
Article 166 of the Labor Code provides that the State shall
promote and develop a tax-exempt employee’s compensation
program whereby employees and their dependents may
promptly secure adequate income benefits and medical or
related benefits in the event of work connected disability or
injury.

The primary purpose of a tort action is to provide

compensation to a person who was injured by the tortious
conduct of the defendant. The remedy of the injured person is
therefore primarily an action for damages against the
defendant.

Preventive Remedy
A prayer for injunction and a writ of preliminary injuction
and a temporary restraining order may be justified under
certain circumstances. Thus, in proper cases, the defendant
may be enjoined from continuing with the performance of a
tortious conduct.

a person may ask for a restraining order and/or writ of

injunction to prevent a wrongful interference with contracts
by strangers to such contracts where the legal remedy is
insufficient and the resulting injury is irreparable.

If a building that is about to be constructed will unnecessarily

pollute the environment, the persons affected may go to court
and ask for injunctive relief.

NOTE: The issuance of a writ of preliminary injunction

may be justified under Rule 58 of the 1997 Rules of Civil
Procedure.

JB Suarez @therainsantiago © 2018


NEGLIGENCE
Kinds of Negligence
Actionable negligence may either be
(a) culpa contractual,
(b) culpa aquiliana and
(c) criminal negligence
Manresa: He believed that there is a difference between
culpa, substantive and independent, which of itself
constitutes the source of an obligation between persons not
formerly connected by any legal tie and culpa considered as
an incident in the performance of an obligation already
existing.
STATUTORY BASIS AND REQUISITES
QUASI-DELICT (Culpa-aquiliana)
ARTICLE 2176. Whoever by act or omission causes damage
to another, there being fault or negligence, is obliged to pay
for the damage done. Such fault or negligence, if there is no
pre-existing contractual relation between the parties, is called
quasi-delict and is governed by the provisions of this Chapter.
Essential Requisites of Quasi-delict
1. Damages suffered by the plaintiff;
2. Fault or negligence of the defendant, or some other
person for whose acts he must respond; and
3. The connection of cause and effect between the fault
or negligence of the defendant and the damages
incurred by the plaintiff.
(Dr. Genevieve L. Huang v. Philippine Hoteliers, Inc., G.R.
No. 180440, December 5, 2012)
NOTE: It should be noted, however, that the Supreme Court
added a fourth requisite in some cases, that is, the absence of
contractual relation between the plaintiff and the defendant.
HOWEVER, it is no longer being cited because it is now
well-settled that an action based on quasi-delict can be
maintained even if there is an existing contractual relation
between the parties.
DELICT
Criminal Negligence
ARTICLE 365. Imprudence and negligence. — Any person
who, by reckless imprudence, shall commit any act which,
had it been intentional, would constitute a grave felony, shall
suffer the penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to
prision correccional in its maximum period; if it would have
constituted a less grave felony, the penalty of arresto mayor
in its minimum and medium periods shall be imposed.
Any person who, by simple imprudence or negligence, shall
commit an act which would otherwise constitute a grave
felony, shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor in its medium
and maximum periods; if it would have constituted a less
serious felony, the penalty of arresto mayor in its minimum
period shall be imposed.
xxx
JB Suarez @therainsantiago © 2018
NOTES & DOCTRINES ON Taxation 1 7
Reckless imprudence consists in voluntary, but without
malice, doing or failing to do an act from which material
damage results by reason of inexcusable lack of precaution on
the part of the person performing or failing to perform on the
part of the person performing or failing to perform such act,
taking into consideration his employment or occupation,
degree of intelligence, physical condition and other
circumstances regarding persons, time and place.
Simple imprudence consists in the lack of precaution
displayed in those cases in which the damage impending to be
caused is not immediate nor the danger clearly manifest. x x
x”
Elements of Crime under Article 365 of the RPC
1. that the offender does or fails to do an act;
2. that the doing or the failure to do that act is
voluntary;
3. that it be without malice;
4. that material damage results from the reckless
imprudence; and
5. that there is inexcusable lack of precaution on the
part of the offender, taking into consideration his
employment or occupation, degree of intelligence,
physical condition, and other circumstances
regarding persons, time and place.
(Cruz vs. Court of Appeals, 282 SCRA 188)
CONTRACT
Culpa contractual is governed by the Civil Code provisions
on Obligations and Contracts particularly Articles 1170 to
1174.
Article 1170 provides that those, who in the performance of
the obligation are guilty of fraud, negligence, or delay, are
liable for damages.
Responsibility arising from negligence in the performance of
every kind of obligation is demandable, but such liability may
be regulated by courts, according to the circumstances.
(Article 1172, Civil Code).
NOTE: By express provision of Article 2178, Articles 1172
to 1174 are applicable to quasi-delict cases.
 NOTES & DOCTRINES ON Taxation 1 8

DISTINCTIONS been breached by tort, thereby allowing the rules on tort to

Culpa Aquiliana VS. Culpa Contractual
In culpa contractual, the foundation of the liability of the
defendant is the contract. The obligation to answer for the
damage that the plaintiff has suffered arises from breach of
the contract by reason of defendant’s failure to exercise due
care in its performance.
Culpa aquiliana is a separate source of obligation
independent of contract.
For instance, when breach of contract was committed through
the negligence of an employee, the employer cannot erase his
primary and direct liability by setting up the defense of the
diligence of a good father of a family in the selection and
supervision of the employee. That is to say the employer’s
liability is direct and immediate, differing essentially from his
presumptive responsibility for the negligence of his servants
based on quasi-delict under Article 2180 of the Civil Code,
which can be rebutted by proof of the exercise of due care in
their selection and supervision.
apply (Light Rail Transit Authority et al. v. Marjorie Navidad,
et al., G.R. No. 145804, February 6, 2003).
Example of Concurrence of Causes of Action
There may also be concurrence of causes of action even if
only one person is sought to be held liable. Thus, a common
carrier’s liability may arise ex contractu and at the same time
quasi ex-delicto even if there is only a single act or omission.
A contract to transport passengers is quite different in kind
and degree from any other contractual relation. And this,
because of the relation which an air-carrier sustains with the
public. Its business is mainly with the travelling public. It
invites people to avail of the comforts and advantages it
offers. The contract of air carriage, therefore, generates a
relation attended with a public duty. Neglect or malfeasance
of the carrier’s employees, naturally, could give ground for an
action for damages.
Air France vs. Carrascoso
(L-21438, September 28, 1966)

Culpa Aquiliana VS. Crimes

(a) Crimes affect the public interest, while cuasi-delitos
are only of private concern;

(b) The Penal Code punishes or corrects criminal act,

while the Civil Code, by means of indemnification,
merely repairs the damage;

(c) Delicts are not as broad as quasi-delicts, because

the former are punished only if there is a penal law
clearly covering them, while the latter, cuasi-delitos,
include all acts in which any kind of fault or
negligence intervenes; and

(d) The liability of the employer of the actor-employee

is subsidiary in crimes while his liability is direct
and primary in quasi-delict.

CONCURRENCE OF CAUSES OF ACTION

It should be noted, however, that a single act or omission may
give rise to two or more causes of action. That is, an act or
omission may give rise to an action based on delict, quasi-
delict and even contract.

When Two Persons are Involved

Whenever a contractual obligation can be breached by tort, it
is also possible that two persons are liable for such breach
even if there is only one act or omission that causes the injury.
The same act or omission may result in both culpa
contractual and culpa aquiliana, in which event, Article 2194
of the Civil Code can well apply when two persons are
involved.

Tort as a Breach of Contract

A liability for tort may arise even under a contract, where tort
is that which breaches the contract. When an act which
constitutes a breach of contract would have itself constituted
the source of a quasi-delictual liability had no contract
existed between the parties, the contract can be said to have

JB Suarez @therainsantiago © 2018