JFC

FILIPINAS BROADCASTING NETWORK, INC., petitioner, vs. AGO MEDICAL AND EDUCATIONAL CENTER-BICOL
CHRISTIAN COLLEGE OF MEDICINE, (AMEC-BCCM) and ANGELITA F. AGO, respondents.
G.R. No. 141994. January 17, 2005.* | J. Carpio
Doctrine of separate juridical entity; corporation cannot claim moral damages generally

DOCTRINE: Generally, moral damages is not awarded to a corporation because it, as an artificial juridical entity,
cannot have wounded feelings. However, the Civil Code provides moral damages may be awarded for libel,
slander, or other forms of defamation. This provision of the Civil Code applies to both natural and juridical
persons.
SUMMARY: For calling a Bicol-based med school a “dumping ground, garbage,” two radio broadcasters and their
radio network/employer were held solidarily liable for moral damages. Before the SC, the radio network
contended that a corporation such as the med school could not be entitled to moral damages because it could not
have wounded feelings. The SC ruled that there are exceptions.

DISPOSITION: WHEREFORE, we DENY the instant petition. We AFFIRM the Decision of 4 January 1999 and
Resolution of 26 January 2000 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CV No. 40151 with the MODIFICATION that the
award of moral damages is reduced from P300,000 to P150,000 and the award of attorney’s fees is deleted. Costs
against petitioner. SO ORDERED.

FACTS: “Exposé” is a radio program aired in several Bicol areas and is hosted by Mel Rima and Jun Alegre. The program is
aired over DZRC-AM, owned by Filipinas Broadcasting Network, Inc.

The program for two consecutive mornings of December 1989 aired complaints by parents and teachers against Ago
Medical and Educational Center-Bicol Christian College of Medicine.

The School and its Dean, Angelita Ago, sued Mel Rima; Jun Alegre; and Filipinas Broadcasting for damages, alleging libelous
broadcasts such as “AMEC is a dumping ground, garbage, not merely of moral and physical misfits.” Note that Filipinas
Broadcasting was included for failing to exercise due diligence in the selection and supervision of its employees.

The RTC of Legazpi City held Filipinas Broadcasting and Jun Alegre (excluding Rima) liable for libel against the school
(excluding Dean Ago). They were jointly and severally liable for 300,000 PHP of moral damages, 30,000 attorney’s fees,
and cost of suit.

The defendants obviously appealed. Complainant Ago appealed because her claim to damages was not granted. The CA
affirmed the RTC, except that the former also held Mel Rima solidarily liable Jun Alegre and Filipinas Broadcasting.

Filipinas Broadcasting went to the Supreme Court when its MR was denied by the CA. Filipinas Broadcasting claimed that
the school was not entitled to moral damages because it was a corporation.

ISSUE: Whether or not a juridical person such as AMEC/the school may be entitled to moral damages—YES

A juridical person is generally not entitled to moral damages because, unlike a natural person, it cannot experience
physical suffering or such sentiments as wounded feelings, serious anxiety, mental anguish or moral justify the award of
moral damages. However, the Court’s statement in Mambulao that “a corporation may have a good reputation which, if
besmirched, may also be a ground for the award of moral damages” is an obiter dictum.

Nevertheless, AMEC’s claim for moral damages falls under item 7 of Article 2219 of the Civil Code. This provision expressly
authorizes the recovery of moral damages in cases of libel, slander or any other form of defamation. Article 2219(7) does
not qualify whether the plaintiff is a natural or juridical person. Therefore, a juridical person such as a corporation can
validly complain for libel or any other form of defamation and claim for moral damages.

Moreover, where the broadcast is libelous per se, the law implies damages. In such a case, evidence of an honest mistake or
the want of character or reputation of the party libeled goes only in mitigation of damages. Neither in such a case is the
plaintiff required to introduce evidence of actual damages as a condition precedent to the recovery of some damages. In
this case, the broadcasts are libelous per se. Thus, AMEC is entitled to moral damages.

The record shows that even though the broadcasts were libelous per se, AMEC has not suffered any substantial or material
damage to its reputation. Therefore, we reduce the award of moral damages from P300,000 to P150,000.

NOTES: The statements of the broadcasters were libelous because they were not based on established facts. Moreover,
Filipinas Broadcasting was held to be vicariously liable.