0 Bewertungen0% fanden dieses Dokument nützlich (0 Abstimmungen)
4 Ansichten1 Seite
This document discusses a case involving a common carrier and establishes two key doctrines: 1) Article 2232 of the Civil Code allows courts to award exemplary damages against defendants who act in a reckless, wanton, or oppressive manner in contracts and quasi-contracts. 2) Article 2208 further provides that attorney's fees may be awarded when exemplary damages are granted. The established doctrine is that a common carrier can be liable for exemplary damages when it acts in a reckless manner.
This document discusses a case involving a common carrier and establishes two key doctrines: 1) Article 2232 of the Civil Code allows courts to award exemplary damages against defendants who act in a reckless, wanton, or oppressive manner in contracts and quasi-contracts. 2) Article 2208 further provides that attorney's fees may be awarded when exemplary damages are granted. The established doctrine is that a common carrier can be liable for exemplary damages when it acts in a reckless manner.
This document discusses a case involving a common carrier and establishes two key doctrines: 1) Article 2232 of the Civil Code allows courts to award exemplary damages against defendants who act in a reckless, wanton, or oppressive manner in contracts and quasi-contracts. 2) Article 2208 further provides that attorney's fees may be awarded when exemplary damages are granted. The established doctrine is that a common carrier can be liable for exemplary damages when it acts in a reckless manner.
• • Art. 2232 provides that in contracts and quasi-contracts, the court may award exemplary damages if the defendant acted in a “wanton, fraudulent, reckless, oppressive or malevolent manner” • • Furthermore, Art. 2208 provides that attorney’s fees may be awarded when exemplary damages are awarded. DOCTRINE: A COMMON CARRIER IS LIABLE FOR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES WHEN IT ACTS IN A RECKLESS MANNER.
G.R. No. 74886.december 8, 1992. Prudential Bank, Petitioner, vs. Intermediate Appellate Court, Philippine Rayon Mills Inc. and ANACLETO R. CHI, Respondents