ELCANO V HILL o The Court held that the concurrence of the Penal
NO. L-24803 | MAY 26, 1977
Barredo, J.
Marbee S. Musngi | Group 2
PETITONERS/PROSECUTORS: Pedro Elcano and Patricia Elcano
(as ascendants of Agapito Elcano)
RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS: Reginald Hill (minor) and Marvin
Hill (father and natural guardian)
TOPIC:
 The Philippine Civil Law Context
CASE SUMMARY: In granting the spouses' action for recovery of
damages, the Court explained that the concept of culpa aquiliana
does not only involve negligent or not voluntary intentional acts. It
also includes criminal acts or those committed in violation of the
penal law, whether voluntary or negligent. Moreover, Art. 2180
applies to parents notwithstanding their child's emancipation by
marriage.
TERMS:
 negligence – involves deficiency of perception, or the
failure to pay proper attention and due diligence in
foreseeing the impending injury or damage (Law Dictionary
by Ernesto C. Salao)
PRECEDENT:
 Barredo vs. Garcia: This case firmly established the dual
character, criminal and civil, of fault or negligence as a
source of obligation. It showed that the same act may come
under both the Penal Code and the Civil Code. Stated
differently, the same act of negligence can be a proper
subject-matter either of a criminal action with its
consequent civil liability arising from a crime, or of an
entirely separate and independent civil action for fault or
PROVISIONS:
negligence under Art. 1902 of the Civil Code.
FACTS:
 Spouses Elcano filed an action for recovery of damages
from Reginald Hill and Marvin Hill for the killing by Reginald
of the former's son, Agapito.
 Reginald was a married minor at the time of the
occurrence, and was living with and getting subsistence
from his father, Marvin.
 The Hills filed a motion to dismiss, arguing (1) that the
spouses' civil action was barred by Reginald's acquittal in
the criminal case for lack of intent to kill, coupled with
mistake, and (2) that the spouses had no cause of action
against Marvin as he was already relieved as Reginald's
guardian through emancipation by marriage.
 Upon defendants-appellees' motion for reconsideration,
their motion to dismiss was granted. Hence, this appeal.
ISSUES:
 WON the spouses' civil action for damages is barred by
Reginald's acquittal in the criminal case
 WON Art. 2180 applies to Marvin notwithstanding
Reginald's emancipation by marriage
RULING:
 1st issue: No.
Code and the Civil Code is not limited to acts that
are characterized as negligent. It extends to fault
or culpa.
o The Court explained that the new Civil Code,
which was enacted after the Garcia doctrine, no
longer uses the phrase "not punishable by law"
found in Article 1093 of the Civil Code of Spain.
And while Article 2177 seems to literally refer to
only acts of negligence, Justice Bocobo's
argument in Garcia about construction that
upholds "the spirit that giveth life" rather than that
which is literal that killeth the intent of the
lawmaker should be observed in its application.
o Therefore, Article 2176, where it refers to "fault or
negligence," covers not only acts "not punishable
by law," but also acts criminal in character,
whether intentional and voluntary, or negligent. In
other words, a separate civil action based on an
act, negligent or otherwise, which was the subject
of a dismissed criminal case, the act then being
considered as a quasi-delict and not as a crime,
would still stand.
 2nd issue: Yes.
o Emancipation by marriage of the minor is neither
full nor absolute. It does not carry with it freedom
to enter into transactions or do any act that can
give rise to judicial litigation.
o Further, factually, Reginald was still subservient
to and dependent on his father.
o Thus, Art. 2180 applies to Marvin. But since
Reginald had already come of age, as a matter of
equity, Marvin's liability had become merely
subsidiary to that of his son.
 NCC: 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 a
quasi-delict and is governed by the provisions of this Chapter."
 NCC: Article 2177: "Responsibility for fault or negligence under
the preceding article is entirely separate and distinct from the civil
liability arising from negligence under the Penal Code. xxx"
 NCC: Article 2180: "xxx The father and, in case of his death or
incapacity, the mother, are responsible for the damages caused
by the minor children who live in their company. xxx"