Você está na página 1de 60

Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito,

Javier, Magculang

E. Tort distinguished from breach of contract There are two kinds of culpa: 1) extra-contractual culpa,
substantive and independent, w/c of itself constitutes the source of an
Jose Cangco vs Manila Railroad Co., (1918)
obligation between persons not formerly connected by any legal tie
Facts: (Art.1903) and 2) contractual culpa considered as an accident in the
Here, it was breach of contract plus tort
performance of an obligation already existing. On the first, the
Jose Cangco, herein plaintiff, was a clerk in the Manila obligation to make good the damage arises at the very instant that the
Railroad Company. By virtue of a pass issued to him, he would come unskillful servant, while acting within the scope of his employment,
to work daily through the companys trains free of charge. On January causes the injury. The liability of the master is personal and direct.
20, 1915, while he was returning home by rail, an accident occurred. There is a juris tantum presumption which may be rebutted by proof
When the plaintiff alighted when the train was barely moving, one or that the master has not been guilty of any negligence whatever in the
both of his feet came in contact with a sack of watermelons. As a selection and supervision of the servant. The proof of diligence and
result, he fell violently on the platform and was drawn under the care in the selection and control of the servant does not relieve the
moving car. As the train moved possibly six meters before it came to a master from liability, in fact, it prevents the birth of the said liability.
full stop, his right arm was badly crushed and lacerated. Considering This kind of culpa is always based upon a voluntary act or omission
that the accident occurred between 7-8pm and as the railroad station which, without willful intent, but by mere negligence or inattention,
was lighted dimly by a single light located some distance away, has caused damage to another. This Court has ruled that in cases of
objects on the platform where the accident occurred were difficult to extra-contractual culpa based upon negligence, it is necessary that
discern, especially to a person emerging from a lighted car. His arm there shall have been some fault attributable to the defendant
had to be amputated in two operations. Thus, he eventually filed a personally. The liability in this case is imposed by reason of the breach
complaint in the CFI of the City of Manila to recover damages. The of the duties inherent in the special relations of authority or superiority
lower court ruled that although negligence was attributable to the existing between the person called upon to repair the damage and the
defendant by reason of the fact that the sack of melons were so placed one who, by his act or omission, was the cause of it. On the other
as to obstruct passengers passing to and from the cars, nevertheless, hand, the liability of masters and employers for the negligent acts or
the plaintiff himself had failed to use due caution in alighting from the omissions of their servants or agents in cases of contractual culpa is
coach and was therefore precluded from recovering. not based upon a mere presumption of the masters negligence in their
selection or control, and proof of exercise of utmost diligence and care
Issue: WON defendant railroad company is liable
in this regard does not relieve the master of his liability for the breach
Decision: of his contract. Proof of the contract and of its non-performance is
sufficient prima facie to warrant a recovery.
The decision of the lower court is reversed and judgment is
hereby rendered in favor of the plaintiff. The fundamental distinction between these two kinds of culpa,
rests upon the fact that in cases of non-contractual obligation it is the
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

wrongful or negligent act or omission itself which creates the vinculum Japan Airlines vs Jesus Simangan (2008)
juris, whereas in contractual relations, the vinculum exists
Facts:
independently of the breach of the voluntary duty assumed by the
parties when entering into the contractual relation. In 1991, Jesus Simangan decided to donate a kidney to his
cousin, Loreto Simangan, after tests proved that their blood and tissue
With respect to extra-contractual obligation arising from
negligence, whether of act or omission, the liability is limited to types matched. Simangan needed to go to the United States to
persons who are morally culpable and for reasons of public policy, to complete his preliminary work-up and donation surgery. Having
extend the said liability, without regard to the lack of moral obtained an emergency U.S. visa, Simangan purchased a round trip
culpability, to others who are in a position to exercise an absolute or plane ticket from JAL bound to Los Angeles via Narita, Japan.
limited control over persons whose acts or omissions are imputable. Simangan was allowed to board the plane on July 29, 1992, but
The contract of defendant to transport plaintiff carried with it, while inside, the crew suspected that he was carrying falsified visa and
travel documents to work illegally in Japan. The stewardess asked him
by implication, the duty to carry him in safety and to provide safe
means of entering and leaving its trains (Civil Code, Art.1258). That to show his travel documents. Shortly after, the stewardess ordered
duty, being contractual, was direct and immediate, and its non- him out of the plane and it was only when the plane left that he was
performance could not be excused by proof that the fault was morally informed that his papers were in order. JAL refunded his ticket, but it
was deducted $500, and his emergency US visa was subsequently
imputable to defendants servants. As to the defendants defense of the
cancelled.
plaintiffs contributory negligence, it has been settled that the test to
determine whether the passenger has been guilty of negligence in Displeased by the turn of events, Simangan filed an action for
attempting to alight from a moving railway train, is that of ordinary or damages against JAL with RTC in Valenzuela. He claimed he was not
reasonable care. Thus, taking into consideration, the age, sex and able to donate his kidney to Loreto; and that he suffered terrible
physical condition of Cangco, this Court held that he has not been embarrassment and mental anguish. The RTC rendered a decision in
negligent for the following reasons: first, the circumstances of the favor of respondent Simangan. JAL appealed to the CA contending
location of accident barred him from clearly noticing the sacks of that it is not guilty of breach of contract of carriage, hence, not liable
watermelon; second, he was possessed of the vigor and agility of for damages. CA affirmed the decision of RTC with modification as to
young manhood, and it was by no means so risky for him to get off the amount of damages. Hence, this petition.
while the train was yet moving as the same act would have been in an
aged or feeble person; third, the place was perfectly familiar to the Issues:
plaintiff, as it was his daily custom to get on and off the train at this
1) WON JAL is guilty of breach of contract of carriage?
station and last, there are other passengers who were able to alight
safely from the train while it is slowly moving. 2) WON respondent is entitled to moral and exemplary damages?
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

Decision: example or correction for the public good, may be recovered in


contractual obligations, as in this case, if defendant acted in wanton,
JAL is guilty of breach of contract of carriage.
fraudulent, reckless, oppressive, or malevolent manner.
In an action for breach of contract of carriage, all that is Radio Communications of the Philippines Inc. vs Court of Appeals
required of plaintiff is to prove the existence of such contract and its
Res ipsa loquitur (1986)
non-performance by the carrier through the latter's failure to carry the
passenger safely to his destination. Respondent has complied with Facts:
these requisites. Damage was made by JAL when respondent was
bumped off despite his protestations and valid travel documents and A telegram was sent through the Manila office of Radio
notwithstanding his contract of carriage with JAL. Communications of the Philippines (RCPI) to the offended party.
Loreto Dionela, reading as follows:
Respondent is entitled to moral and exemplary damages.
LORETO DIOMELA-CABANGAN-WIRE
As a general rule, moral damages are not recoverable in actions ARRIVAL OF CHECK-PER
for damages predicated on a breach of contract for it is not one of the
items enumerated under Article 2219 of the Civil Code. As an 115 PM
exception, such damages are recoverable: (1) in cases in which the SA IYO WALANG PAKINABANG DUMATING
mishap results in the death of a passenger, as provided in Article 1764, KA DIYANWALA
in relation to Article 2206(3) of the Civil Code; and (2) in the cases in
which the carrier is guilty of fraud or bad faith, as provided in Article KANG PADALA DITOKAHIT
2220. BULBUL MO

The acts committed by JAL against respondent amounts to bad Dionela alleges that the defamatory words sent to him not only
faith. As found by the RTC, JAL breached its contract of carriage with wounded his feelings but also caused him undue embarrassment and
respondent in bad faith. JAL personnel summarily and insolently affected his business. A carbon copy of the telegram is readily
ordered respondent to disembark while the latter was already settled in available to the public as part of RCPIs files, making it possible for
his assigned seat. He was ordered out of the plane under the alleged third persons to read the message. Both the lower courts and the Court
reason that the genuineness of his travel documents should be verified. of Appeals ruled in favor of Dionela.

JAL is also liable for exemplary damages as its above- RCPI as a defense, alleges the following; (1) the additional
mentioned acts constitute wanton, oppressive and malevolent acts words were a private joke between the sending and receiving
against respondent. Exemplary damages, which are awarded by way of operators. It was never intended for Dionela; (2) RCPI as a petitioner-
employer should not be directly and primarily liable for the civil
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

liability arising from the criminal act of its employee; (3) there was no Juan J. Syquia, Corazon C. Syquia, Carlota C. Syquia and
sufficient publication of the telegram as to constitute libel and (4) Anthony C. Syquia vs The Honorable Court of Appeals, and the
RCPI is not liable under art 19 and 20 of the NCC. Manila Memorial Park Cemetery, Inc. (1993)
Here, no liabiliy, because mmpc did not guarantee a waterfree vault
Issue: WON the petitioner is liable for breach of contract Facts:

Decision: Juan Syquia, father of the deceased Vicente Syquia, entered in


a contract of Deed of Sale and Interment Order with Manila Memorial
Petition DENIED. Decision of Court of Appeals affirmed.
Park Cemetery Inc (MMPCI) . In the contract, there contained a
Petitioners contentions do not merit our consideration. The action for provision which stated that the coffin would be placed in a sealed
damages was filed in the lower court directly against respondent concrete vault to protect the remains of the deceased from the
corporation not as an employer subsidiarily liable under the provisions elements.
of Article 1161 of the New Civil Code. The cause of action of the
private respondent is based on Arts. 19 and 20 of the New Civil Code During the preparation for the transfer of Vicentes remains in
(supra). As well as on respondents breach of contract thru the the newly bought lot in Manila Memorial, it was discovered that there
negligence of its own employees. was a hole in the concrete vault which caused total flooding inside,
damaged the coffin as well as the body of the deceased and covered
There is a clear case of breach of contract by the petitioner in the same with filth.
adding extraneous and libelous matters in the message sent to the
private respondent. As a corporation, the petitioner can act only Syquia filed a complaint for recovery of damages arising from
through its employees. Hence the acts of its employees in receiving breach of contract and/or quasi- delict against the MMPCI for failure
and transmitting messages are the acts of the petitioner. In most cases, to deliver a defect-free concrete vault to protect the remains of the
negligence must be proved in order that plaintiff may recover, deceased. In its defense, MMPCI claimed that the boring of the hole
However, since negligence may be hard to substantiate in some cases, was necessary in order to prevent the vault from floating when water
we may apply the doctrine of RES IPSA LOQUITUR (the thing fills the grave. The trial court dismissed the complaint holding that
speaks for itself), by considering the presence of facts or there was no quasi-delict because the defendant is not guilty of any
circumstances surrounding the injury. fault or negligence and because there was a pre-existing contract
between the parties. The CA affirmed the decision of the trial court.
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the judgment of the
Hence, the present petition.
appellate court is hereby AFFIRMED.
Issue: WON the private respondent is guilty of tort
SO ORDERED.
Decision:
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

Denied. Decision of the CA affirmed. Some time in October 1986, private respondent Luis A. Luna
applied for, and was accorded, a FAREASTCARD issued by petitioner
We are more inclined to answer the foregoing questions in the
Far East Bank and Trust Company ("FEBTC") at its Pasig Branch. The
negative. There is not enough ground, both in fact and in law, to justify bank also issued a supplemental card to private respondent Clarita S.
a reversal of the decision of the respondent Court and to uphold the Luna.In August 1988, Clarita lost her credit card. FEBTC was
pleas of the petitioners. Although a pre -existing contractual relation forthwith informed. In order to replace the lost card, Clarita submitted
between the parties does not preclude the existence of a culpa
an affidavit of loss. In cases of this nature, the bank's internal security
aquiliana, We find no reason to disregard the respondents Court
procedures and policy would appear to be to meanwhile so record the
finding that there was no negligence. lost card, along with the principal card, as a "Hot Card" or "Cancelled
Article 2176. Whoever by act or omission causes damage to Card" in its master file. Luis tendered lunch for a close friend, at Hotel
another, there being fault or negligence, is obliged to pay for the Intercontinental Manila, Luis presented his FAREASTCARD. Since
damage done. Such fault or negligence, if there is no pre-existing the card was not honored, Luis was forced to pay in cash the bill
contractual relation between the parties, is called a quasi-delict x x amounting to P588.13. Naturally, Luis felt embarrassed by this
x. incident. In a letter, Luis Luna, through counsel, demanded from
FEBTC the payment of damages. Adrian V. Festejo, a vice-president
In this case, it has been established that the Syquias and the of the bank, expressed the bank's apologies to Luis. On 05 December
Manila Memorial Park Cemetery, Inc., entered into a contract entitled 1988, filed a complaint for damages with the Regional Trial Court
Deed of Sale and Certificate of Perpetual Care on August 27, 1969. ("RTC") of Pasig against FEBTC.
That agreement governed the relations of the parties and defined their
respective rights and obligations. Hence, had there been actual Trial Courts Ruling: On 30 March 1990, the RTC of Pasig, given
negligence on the part of the Manila Memorial Park Cemetery, Inc., it the foregoing factual settings, rendered a decision ordering FEBTC to
would be held liable not for a quasi-delict or culpa aquiliana, but for pay private respondents (a) P300,000.00 moral damages; (b)
culpa contractual as provided by Article 1170 of the Civil Code, to P50,000.00 exemplary damages; and (c) P20,000.00 attorney's fees.
wit: Those who in the performance of their obligations are guilty of CA: The appellate court affirmed the decision of the trial court.
fraud, negligence, or delay, and those who in any manner contravene
the tenor thereof, are liable for damages. M.R.: Its motion for reconsideration having been denied by the
appellate court, FEBTC has come to this Court with this petition for
Far East Bank and Trust Company vs The Honorable Court of review.
Appeals, Luis A. Luna and Clarita S. Luna (1995)
Issue: WON FEBTC can be held liable for moral damages?
Facts:
Decision:
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

There is merit in this appeal. The appealed decision is Malice or bad faith implies a conscious and intentional design
MODIFIED by deleting the award of moral and exemplary damages to to do a wrongful act for a dishonest purpose or moral obliquity; it is
private respondents; in its stead, petitioner is ordered to pay private different from the negative idea of negligence in that malice or bad
respondent Luis A. Luna an amount of P5,000.00 by way of nominal faith contemplates a state of mind affirmatively operating with furtive
damages. design or ill will. 6

RATIO: Art. 21. Any person who wilfully causes loss or injury
to another in a manner that is contrary to morals, good
In culpa contractual, moral damages may be recovered where customs or public policy shall compensate the latter for
the defendant is shown to have acted in bad faith or with malice in the the damage. Article 21 of the Code, it should be
breach of the contract. 2 The Civil Code provides:
observed, contemplates a conscious act to cause harm.
Art. 2220. Willful injury to property may be a legal Thus, even if we are to assume that the provision could
ground for awarding moral damages if the court should properly relate to a breach of contract, its application
find that, under the circumstances, such damages are can be warranted only when the defendant's disregard
justly due. The same rule applies to breaches of of his contractual obligation is so deliberate as to
contract where the defendant acted fraudulently or in approximate a degree of misconduct certainly no less
bad faith. (Emphasis supplied) worse than fraud or bad faith. Most importantly, Article
21 is a mere declaration of a general principle in human
Bad faith, in this context, includes gross, but not simple, relations that clearly must, in any case, give way to the
negligence. Exceptionally, in a contract of carriage, moral damages specific provision of Article 2220 of the Civil Code
are also allowed in case of death of a passenger attributable to the fault authorizing the grant of moral damages in culpa
(which is presumed) of the common carrier. contractual solely when the breach is due to fraud or
bad faith.
Concededly, the bank was remiss in indeed neglecting to
personally inform Luis of his own card's cancellation. Nothing in the By contrasting the provisions of these two articles it
findings of the trial court and the appellate court, however, can immediately becomes apparent that:
sufficiently indicate any deliberate intent on the part of FEBTC to
cause harm to private respondents. Neither could FEBTC's negligence (a) In case of breach of contract (including one of
in failing to give personal notice to Luis be considered so gross as to transportation) proof of bad faith or fraud (dolus), i.e., wanton or
amount to malice or bad faith. deliberately injurious conduct, is essential to justify an award of moral
damages; and
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

(b) That a breach of contract can not be considered included in Reasonable attorney's fees may be recovered where the court
the descriptive term "analogous cases" used in Art. 2219; not only deems such recovery to be just and equitable. We see no issue of
because Art. 2220 specifically provides for the damages that are sound discretion on the part of the appellate court in allowing the
caused contractual breach, but because the definition of quasi-delict in award thereof by the trial court.
Art. 2176 of the Code expressly excludes the cases where there is a
"preexisitng contractual relations between the parties." Kristine Rea M. Regino vs Pangasinan Colleges of Science and
Technology, Rachelle A. Gamurot and Elisa Baladad (2004)
The Court finds, therefore, the award of moral damages made
by the court a quo, affirmed by the appellate court, to be inordinate Facts:
and substantially devoid of legal basis. Khristine Rea M. Regino was a first year computer science
Exemplary or corrective damages, in turn, are intended to serve student at Pangasinan Colleges of Science and Technology (PCST).
as an example or as correction for the public good in addition to moral, Reared in a poor family, Regino went to college mainly through the
financial support of her relatives. During the second semester of
temperate, liquidated or compensatory. In criminal offenses,
exemplary damages are imposed when the crime is committed with school year 2001-2002, she enrolled in logic and statistics under
one or more aggravating circumstance. In quasi-delicts, such damages Rachelle A. Gamurot and Elissa Baladad, respectively, as teachers.
are granted if the defendant is shown to have been so guilty of gross Sometime in February, PCST held a fund raising campaign dubbed the
Rave Part and Dance Revolution, the proceeds of which were to go
negligence as to approximate malice. In contracts and quasi-contracts,
to the construction of the schools tennis and volleyball courts. Each
the court may award exemplary damages if the defendant is found to
have acted in a wanton, fraudulent, reckless, oppressive, or malevolent student was required to pay for two tickets at the price of P100.00
manner. each. The project was allegedly implemented by recompensing
students who purchased tickets with additional points in their test
Nevertheless, the bank's failure, even perhaps inadvertent, to scores; those who refused to pay were denied the opportunity to take
honor its credit card issued to private respondent Luis should entitle the final examinations. Financially strapped and prohibited by her
him to recover a measure of nominal damages. religion from attending dance parties and celebrations, Regino refused
to pay for the tickets. On the scheduled dates of the final examinations
Art. 2221. Nominal damages are adjudicated in order in logic and statistics, her teachers disallowed her from taking the
that a right of the plaintiff, which has been violated or tests. Reginos pleas ostensibly went unheeded by Gamurot and
invaded by the defendant, may be vindicated or Baladad, who unrelentingly defended their positions as compliance
recognized, and not for the purpose of indemnifying the
with PCSTs policy.
plaintiff for any loss suffered by him.
As a result, Regino filed, as a pauper litigant, a Complaint for
damages against PCST, Gamurot and Baladad (PCST et al.). In her
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

complaint, she prayed from P500,000 as nominal damages, P500,000 Article 26. Every person shall respect the dignity, personality,
as moral damages; at least P1,000,000 as exemplary damages; privacy and peace of mind of his neighbors and other persons. The following
P250,000 as actual damages; plus the costs of litigation and attorneys and similar acts, though they may not constitute a criminal offense, shall
fees. PCST et al. filed a Motion to Dismiss on the ground of failure to produce a cause of action for damages, prevention and other relief:
exhaust administrative remedies, contending that the complaint should (1) Prying into the privacy of anothers residence;
have been lodged with the Commission of Higher Education (CHED).
The RTC dismissed the complaint for lack of cause of action. (2) Meddling with or disturbing the private life or family relations of
Aggrieved, Regino filed the present Petition on pure questions of law. another;

(3) Intriguing to cause another to be alienated from his friends;


Issue: Whether PCST et al. can be made liable for damages
(4) Vexing or humiliating another on account of his beliefs, lowly
Decision: station in life, place of birth, physical defect, or other personal condition.
Court ruled in favor of Regino. PCST et al. can be made liable
Generally, liability for tort arises only between parties not
for damages.
otherwise bound by a contract. An academic institution, however, may
In her Complaint, Regino also charged that PCST et al. be held liable for tort even if it has an existing contract with its
inhumanly punish students x x x by reason only of their poverty, students, since the act that violated the contract may also be a tort. We
religious practice or lowly station in life, which inculcated upon ruled thus in PSBA vs. CA, from which we quote:
[petitioner] the feelings of guilt, disgrace and unworthiness; as a x x x A perusal of Article 2176 [of the Civil Code] shows that
result of such punishment, she was allegedly unable to finish any of obligations arising from quasidelicts or tort, also known as extracontractual
her subjects for the second semester of that school year and had to lag obligations, arise only between parties not otherwise bound by contract,
behind in her studies by a full year. The acts of respondents whether express or implied. However, this impression has not prevented this
supposedly caused her extreme humiliation, mental agony and Court from determining the existence of a tort even when there obtains a
demoralization of unimaginable proportions in violation of Articles contract. In Air France v. Carrascoso (124 Phil. 722; 18 SCRA 155), the
19, 21 and 26 of the Civil Code. These provisions of the law state thus: private respondent was awarded damages for his unwarranted expulsion from
a firstclass seat aboard the petitioner airline. It is noted, however, that the
Article 19. Every person must, in the exercise of his rights and in Court referred to the petitionerairlines liability as one arising from tort, not
the performance of his duties, act with justice, give everyone his due, and one arising form a contract of carriage. In effect, Air France is authority for
observe honesty and good faith. the view that liability from tort may exist even if there is a contract, for the
act that breaks the contract may be also a tort. x x x This view was not all
Article 21. Any person who willfully causes loss or injury to
that revolutionary, for even as early as 1918, this Court was already of a
another in a manner that is contrary to morals, good customs or public policy
similar mind. In Cangco v. Manila Railroad (38 Phil. 780), Mr. Justice
shall compensate the latter for the damage.
Fisher elucidated thus: x x x. When such a contractual relation exists the
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

obligor may break the contract under such conditions that the same act which was "pneumonia hypostatic, bilateral, secondary to traumatic injuries
constitutes a breach of the contract would have constituted the source of an of the head."
extracontractual obligation had no contract existed between the parties.
The prosecution claimed that Gabat grabbed the box of
Immediately what comes to mind is the chapter of the Civil Code cigarettes from Rosales and moved loose the latter's hand from the
on Human Relations, particularly Article 21 x x x.
window of the Kombi, resulting in the latter falling down and hitting
F. Tort distinguished from civil liability arising from crime the pavement. The defense, however, claims that as the vehicle sped
onward, the cigarette box which was squeezed between the right arm
The People of the Philippines vs Rogelio Ligon y Trias and of Gabat and the window frame fell inside the Kombi. Rosales then
Fernando Gabat y Almera and Fernando Gabat y Almera (1987) ran beside the vehicle and clung to the windowsill of the moving
vehicle. Gabat testified that when he saw the cigarette vendor clinging
Facts:
on the side of the front door, he told Ligon to veer to the right in order
On October 23, 1983, the accused, Fernando Gabat (Gabat), that Rosales could get off at the sidewalk. However, Gabat declared,
was riding in a 1978 Volkswagen Kombi owned by his father, Antonio that Ligon said that it could not be done because of the moving
Gabat, and driven by the other accused, Rogelio Ligon (Ligon). The vehicular traffic. Then, while the vehicle slowed down and Ligon was
Kombi was coming from Espana Street going towards the direction of maneuvering to the right in an attempt to go toward the sidewalk,
Quiapo. Fernando Gabat was seated beside the driver, in the front seat Rosales lost his grip on the window frame and fell to the pavement of
by the window on the right side of the Kombi. At the intersection of Quezon Boulevard. Gabat allegedly shouted at Ligon to stop but Ligon
Quezon Boulevard and Lerma Street before turning left towards the replied that they should go on to Las Pinas and report the incident to
underpass at C.M. Recto Avenue, the Kombi had to stop as the traffic the parents of Gabat, and later they would come back to the scene of
light was red. While waiting for the traffic light to change, Fernando the incident. However, while the Kombi was speeding along Dewey
Gabat beckoned a cigarette vendor, Jose Rosales y Ortiz (Rosales), the Boulevard, it was blocked by the taxi of Prudencio Castillo and a jeep
victim, to buy some cigarettes from him. Rosales approached the driven by policemen. Gabat and Ligon were brought to police
Kombi and handed Gabat two sticks of cigarettes. While this headquarters, but neither of them executed any written statement.
transaction was occurring, the traffic light changed to green, and the
Issue: WON the accused who was acquitted from any criminal
Kombi driven by Rogelio Ligon suddenly moved forward. Rosales
liability is free from any civil liability.
clung to the window of the Kombi but apparently lost his grip and fell
down on the pavement. Rosales was rushed by some bystanders to the Decision:
Philippine General Hospital, where he was treated for multiple
physical injuries and was confined thereat until his death on October It does not follow that a person who is not criminally liable is
30, 1983. In an autopsy, it was stated that the cause of death of Rosales also free from civil liability.
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

While the guilt of the accused in a criminal prosecution must upon the civil action arising from a crime; but the public action for the
be established beyond reasonable doubt, only a preponderance of imposition of the legal penalty shall not thereby be extinguished." It is
evidence is required in a civil action for damages. The judgment of just and proper that, for the purposes of the imprisonment of or fine
acquittal extinguishes the civil liability of the accused only when it upon the accused, the offense should be proved beyond reasonable
includes a declaration that the facts from which the civil liability might doubt. But for the purpose of indemnifying the complaining party, why
arise did not exist. should the offense also be proved beyond reasonable doubt? Is not the
invasion or violation of every private right to be proved only by a
The reason for the provisions of Article 29 of the Civil Code,
preponderance of evidence? Is the right of the aggrieved person any
which provides that the acquittal of the accused on the ground that his less private because the wrongful act is also punishable by the criminal
guilt has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt does not law?
necessarily exempt him from civil liability for the same act or
omission, has been explained by the Code Commission as follows: For these reasons, the Commission recommends the adoption
of the reform under discussion. It will correct a serious defect in our
The old rule that the acquittal of the accused in a criminal case law. It will close up an inexhaustible source of injustice a cause for
also releases him from civil liability is one of the most serious flaws in
disillusionment on the part of the innumerable persons injured or
the Philippine legal system. It has given rise to numberless instances of wronged.
miscarriage of justice, where the acquittal was due to a reasonable
doubt in the mind of the court as to the guilt of the accused. The
reasoning followed is that inasmuch as the civil responsibility is
derived from the criminal offense, when the latter is not proved, civil In the instant case, we find that a preponderance of evidence
liability cannot be demanded. exists sufficient to establish the facts from which the civil liability of
Gabat arises. On the basis of the trial court's evaluation of the
This is one of those cases where confused thinking leads to testimonies of both prosecution and defense witnesses at the trial and
unfortunate and deplorable consequences. Such reasoning fails to draw applying the quantum of proof required in civil cases, we find that a
a clear line of demarcation between criminal liability and civil preponderance of evidence establishes that Gabat by his act and
responsibility, and to determine the logical result of the distinction. omission with fault and negligence caused damage to Rosales and
The two liabilities are separate and distinct from each other. One should answer civilly for the damage done. Gabat's wilfull act of
affects the social order and the other, private rights. One is for the calling Rosales, the cigarette vendor, to the middle of a busy street to
punishment or correction of the offender while the other is for buy two sticks of cigarettes set the chain of events which led to the
reparation of damages suffered by the aggrieved party. The two death of Rosales. Through fault and negligence, Gabat (1) failed to
responsibilities are so different from each other that article 1813 of the prevent the driver from moving forward while the purchase was
present (Spanish) Civil Code reads thus: "There may be a compromise completed; (2) failed to help Rosales while the latter clung
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

precariously to the moving vehicle, and (3) did not enforce his order to 1. The dismissal of the criminal case against the accused-
the driver to stop. Finally, Gabat acquiesced in the driver's act of employee wipes out not only the employees primary civil
speeding away, instead of stopping and picking up the injured victim. liability, bu also the employers subsidiary liability because:
These proven facts taken together are firm bases for finding Gabat
civilly liable under the Civil Code for the damage done to Rosales. a. The criminal case is based on Article 100 of RPC wherein
criminal liability and exemption of criminal liability
Rufo Mauricio Construction and/or Rufo Mauricio vs Hon. implies exemption from civil liability arising from crime.
Intermediate Appellate Court and People of the Philippines (1987)
b. The civil liability of the employer is based, if any, on quasi-
Facts: delict, since the accused was exempted from criminal
liability.
On September 20, 1979, Illustre Cabiliza, driver of Izusu dump
truck owned by RUFO MAURICIO CONSTRUCTIONS, was charged 2. Exemplary damages cannot be imposed upon employer who at
before the RTC of Legazpi City with homicide and damage to the time of the alleged incident was not present nor inside the
property through reckless imprudence. The dump truck that he was vehicle.
driving sideswipe and hit a Colt Gallant driven and owned by the late
3. The petitioner-employer cannot be condemned to pay an
Judge Arsenio Solidum, thereby inflicting injuries upon him which
directly caused his untimely death and further causing damage to the exorbitant amount of damages without giving him opportunity
said vehicle and likewise causing damage to the house owned by Pablo to cross examine the witness and opportunity to adduce
Navarro. evidence to resist the claim.

Cabiliza filed a Notice of Appeal but he died and did not live to 4. The IAC misapplied the facts contrary to the physical evidence
pursue his appeal. Hence, the lower court issued an Order requiring the relied on conjectures that depicted a different picture of the
heirs of Cabiliza to appear and to substitute him with respect to the accident when the evidence shows that it was the victim who
was negligent at the time of the accident. (by invading the
civil aspect of the case. However, Cabiliza was found insolvent
evidenced by a certificate of insolvency. The victims widow Mrs. proper lane of the dump truck)
Aurora Solidum filed a motion for issuance of a subsidiary writ of Issue: WON Rufo Mauricio Construction is subsidiarily liable
execution to be enforced against the employer, Rufo Mauricio, which
was granted. Decision:

Petitioner filed MR but it was denied for lack of merit. The first contention of petitioner that the death of the accused-
Petitioner contends that --- employee wipes out not only the employee's primary civil liability but
also his employer's subsidiary liability is without merit. The death of
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

the accused during the pendency of his appeal or before the judgment Judge of the RTC, NCR, QC, Br. 84, Safeguard Investigation and
of conviction (rendered against him by the lower court) became final Security Co., Inc., and Safeguard Security Corporation (1995)
and executory extinguished his criminal liability meaning his
obligation to serve the imprisonment imposed and his pecuniary Facts:
liability for fines, but not his civil liability should the liability or An altercation between Benigno Torzuela and Atty. Napoleon
obligation arise (not from a crime, for here, no crime was Dulay occurred at the "Big Bang Sa Alabang," Alabang Village,
committed, the accused not having been convicted by final Muntinlupa as a result of which Benigno Torzuela, the security guard
judgment, and therefore still regarded as innocent) but from on duty at the said carnival, shot and killed Atty. Napoleon Dulay.
a quasi-delict (See Arts. 2176 and 2177, Civil Code), as in this case.
The liability of the employer here would not be subsidiary Maria Benita A. Dulay, widow of the deceased filed an action
but solidary with his driver (unless said employer can prove there was for damages against Benigno Torzuela and herein private respondents
no negligence on his part at all, that is, if he can prove due diligence in Safeguard Investigation and Security Co., Inc., ("SAFEGUARD")
the selection and supervision of his driver). and/or Superguard Security Corp. ("SUPERGUARD"), alleged
employers of defendant Torzuela. An information was also filed by the
Inasmuch as the employer (petitioner herein) was not a party in petitioners charging Torzuela with homicide.
the criminal case, and to grant him his day in court for the purpose of
cross-examining the prosecution witnesses on their testimonies on the Petitioners prayed for actual, compensatory, moral and
driver's alleged negligence and the amount of damages to which the exemplary damages, and attorney's fees. Private respondent
heirs of the victim are entitled, as well as to introduce any evidence or SUPERGUARD filed a Motion to Dismiss on the ground that the
witnesses he may care to present in his defense, the hearing on the complaint does not state a valid cause of action, alleging that
motion to quash the subsidiary writ of execution must be reopened Torzuela's act of shooting Dulay was beyond the scope of his duties,
precisely for the purpose adverted to hereinabove. and that since the alleged act of shooting was committed with
deliberate intent (dolo), the civil liability therefor is governed by
PREMISES CONSIDERED, the assailed decision of the Article 100 of the Revised Penal Code, which states:
appellate court is hereby SET ASIDE, and this case is REMANDED to
the trial court for the hearing adverted to in the next preceding Art. 100. Civil liability of a person guilty of a felony. Every
paragraph. person criminally liable for a felony is also civilly liable.

Maria Benita A. Dulay, in her own behalf and in behalf of the Respondent SUPERGUARD further alleged that a complaint
minor children Krizteen Elizabeth, Beverly Marie and Napoleon for damages based on negligence under Article 2176 of the New Civil
II, all surnamed Dulay vs The Court of Appeals, Former 8 th Code cannot lie, since the civil liability under Article 2176 applies
Division, Hon. Teodoro P. Regino, in his capacity as Presiding only to quasi-offenses under Article 365 of the Revised Penal Code.
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

While respondent SAFEGUARD also filed a motion praying that it be reservation (Yakult Philippines v. Court of Appeals, 190 SCRA 357
excluded as defendant on the ground that defendant Torzuela is not [1990]). This is precisely what the petitioners opted to do in this case.
one of its employees. However, the private respondents opposed the civil action on the
ground that the same is founded on a delict and not on a quasi-delict as
RTC- Respondent Judge Regino ruled in favour of the shooting was not attended by negligence. What is in dispute
SUPERGUARD'S motion to dismiss and SAFEGUARD'S motion for therefore is the nature of the petitioner's cause of action.
exclusion as defendant.
The nature of a cause of action is determined by the facts
CA- Affirmed the lower courts ruling. alleged in the complaint as constituting the cause of action (Republic
Issue: WON quasi-delicts cover acts that are intentional and voluntary v. Estenzo, 158 SCRA 282 [1988]). The purpose of an action or suit
not just acts of negligence under Article 2176 of the New Civil Code. and the law to govern it is to be determined not by the claim of the
party filing the action, made in his argument or brief, but rather by the
Decision: complaint itself, its allegations and prayer for relief. (De Tavera v.
Philippine Tuberculosis Society, 112 SCRA 243 [1982]). An
We find for petitioners.
examination of the complaint in the present case would show that the
It is undisputed that Benigno Torzuela is being prosecuted for plaintiffs, petitioners herein, are invoking their right to recover
homicide for the fatal shooting of Napoleon Dulay. Rule 111 of the damages against the private respondents for their vicarious
Rules on Criminal Procedure provides: responsibility for the injury caused by Benigno Torzuela's act of
shooting and killing Napoleon Dulay, as stated in paragraphs 1 and 2
Sec. 1. Institution of criminal and civil actions. When a criminal of the complaint.
action is instituted, the civil action for the recovery of civil liability is
impliedly instituted with the criminal action, unless the offended party Article 2176 of the New Civil Code provides:
waives the civil action , reserves his right to institute it separately or
institutes the civil action prior to the criminal action. Art. 2176. Whoever by act or omission causes damage to another,
there being fault or negligence, is obliged to pay for the damage done. Such
Such civil action includes recovery of indemnity under the Revised Penal fault or negligence, if there is no pre-existing contractual relation between
Code, and damages under Articles 32, 33, 34, and 2176 of the Civil Code of the parties is called a quasi-delict and is governed by the provisions of this
the Philippines arising from the same act or omission of the accused. Chapter.
(Emphasis supplied)
Contrary to the theory of private respondents, there is no
It is well-settled that the filing of an independent civil action justification for limiting the scope of Article 2176 of the Civil Code to
before the prosecution in the criminal action presents evidence is even acts or omissions resulting from negligence. Well-entrenched is the
far better than a compliance with the requirement of express doctrine that article 2176 covers not only acts committed with
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

negligence, but also acts which are voluntary and intentional. As far 126 SCRA 293 [1983]). Although in the Marcia case (supra), it was
back as the definitive case of Elcano v. Hill (77 SCRA 98 [1977]), this held that no independent civil action may be filed under Article 33
Court already held that: where the crime is the result of criminal negligence, it must be noted
however, that Torzuela, the accused in the case at bar, is charged with
. . . Article 2176, where it refers to "fault or negligence," covers not only acts
homicide, not with reckless imprudence, whereas the defendant in
"not punishable by law" but also acts criminal in character; whether
intentional and voluntary or negligent. ...Briefly stated, We here hold, in
Marcia was charged with reckless imprudence. Therefore, in this case,
reiteration of Garcia, that culpa aquiliana includes voluntary and negligent a civil action based on Article 33 lies.
acts which may be punishable by law. (Emphasis supplied)
Private respondents also contend that their liability is
The same doctrine was echoed in the case of Andamo v. subsidiary under the Revised Penal Code; and that they are not liable
Intermediate Appellate Court (191 SCRA 195 [1990]), wherein the for Torzuela's act which is beyond the scope of his duties as a security
Court held: guard. It having been established that the instant action is not ex-
delicto, petitioners may proceed directly against Torzuela and the
Article 2176, whenever it refers to "fault or negligence," covers not private respondents. Under Article 2180 of the New Civil Code as
only acts criminal in character, whether intentional and voluntary or aforequoted, when an injury is caused by the negligence of the
negligent. Consequently, a civil action lies against the offender in a criminal
employee, there instantly arises a presumption of law that there was
act, whether or not he is prosecuted or found guilty or acquitted, provided
negligence on the part of the master or employer either in the selection
that the offended party is not allowed, (if the tortfeasor is actually also
charged criminally), to recover damages on both scores, and would be of the servant or employee, or in supervision over him after selection
entitled in such eventuality only to the bigger award of the two, assuming the or both (Layugan v. Intermediate Appellate Court, 167 SCRA 363
awards made in the two cases vary. [citing Virata v. Ochoa, 81 SCRA 472] [1988]). The liability of the employer under Article 2180 is direct and
(Emphasis supplied) immediate; it is not conditioned upon prior recourse against the
negligent employee and a prior showing of the insolvency of such
Private respondents further aver that Article 33 of the New employee (Kapalaran Bus Lines v. Coronado, 176 SCRA 792 [1989]).
Civil Code applies only to injuries intentionally committed pursuant to Therefore, it is incumbent upon the private respondents to prove that
the ruling in Marcia v. CA (120 SCRA 193 [1983]), and that the they exercised the diligence of a good father of a family in the
actions for damages allowed thereunder are ex-delicto. However, the selection and supervision of their employee.
term "physical injuries" in Article 33 has already been construed to
include bodily injuries causing death (Capuno v. Pepsi-Cola Bottling Since Article 2176 covers not only acts of negligence but also
Co. of the Philippines, 121 Phil. 638 [1965); Carandang v. Santiago, acts which are intentional and voluntary, it was therefore erroneous on
97 Phil. 94 [1955]). It is not the crime of physical injuries defined in the part of the trial court to dismiss petitioner's complaint simply
the Revised Penal Code. It includes not only physical injuries but also because it failed to make allegations of attendant negligence
consummated, frustrated, and attempted homicide (Madeja v. Caro, attributable to private respondents.
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

Francis Chua vs Hon. Court of Appeals and Lydia C. Hao (2004) State whose law he has violated; and (2) the individual member of the
society whose person, right, honor, chastity or property has been
Facts:
actually or directly injured or damaged by the same punishable act or
Lydia Hao, treasurer of Siena Realty Corporation, filed a omission. An act or omission is felonious because it is punishable by
complaint charging Francis Chua and his wife, Elsa Chua, of four law, it gives rise to civil liability not so much because it is a crime but
counts of falsification of public documents pursuant to Article 172 in because it caused damage to another. Additionally, what gives rise to
relation to Article 171 of the Revised Penal Code. It was alleged that the civil liability is really the obligation and the moral duty of
Chua falsified the Minutes of the Annual Stockholders meeting of the everyone to repair or make whole the damage caused to another by
Board of Directors of the Siena Realty Corporation by making or reason of his own act or omission, whether done intentionally or
causing it to appear in said Minutes of the Annual Stockholders negligently. The indemnity which a person is sentenced to pay forms
Meeting that one LYDIA HAO CHUA was present in said an integral part of the penalty imposed by law for the commission of
proceedings, when in truth and in fact, said person was never present the crime. The civil action involves the civil liability arising from the
during the Annual Stockholders Meeting. During the trial, Atty. offense charged which includes restitution, reparation of the damage
Evelyn Sua-Kho and Atty. Ariel Bruno Rivera appeared as private caused, and indemnification for consequential damages.
prosecutors. Chua moved to exclude complainants counsels as private Under the Rules, where the civil action for recovery of civil
prosecutors in the case on the ground that Hao failed to allege and liability is instituted in the criminal action pursuant to Rule 111, the
prove any civil liability in the case. The court granted Chuas motion. offended party may intervene by counsel in the prosecution of the
Hao moved for reconsideration but it was denied. Hence, Hao filed a offense. Rule 111(a) of the Rules of Criminal Procedure provides that,
petition for certiorari. The RTC gave due course to the petition.
[w]hen a criminal action is instituted, the civil action arising from the
Dissatisfied, Chua filed before the Court of Appeals a petition for offense charged shall be deemed instituted with the criminal action
certiorari but was denied. He filed a petition for review on certiorari unless the offended party waives the civil action, reserves the right to
assailing the decision of the CA. institute it separately, or institutes the civil action prior to the criminal
Issue: Did the Court of Appeals and the lower court err in allowing action.
private prosecutors to actively participate in the trial of Criminal Case? a. Independent Civil Action, Rationale
Despite complainant's failure to allege and prove any civil liability?
Decision: Art. 31. When the civil action is based on an obligation
Generally, the basis of civil liability arising from crime is the not arising from the act or omission complained of as a
fundamental postulate that every man criminally liable is also civilly felony, such civil action may proceed independently of
liable. When a person commits a crime he offends two entities namely the criminal proceedings and regardless of the result of
(1) the society in which he lives in or the political entity called the the latter.
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

Art. 32. Any public officer or employee, or any private (13) The right to take part in a peaceable assembly to
individual, who directly or indirectly obstructs, defeats, petition the government for redress of grievances;
violates or in any manner impedes or impairs any of the
following rights and liberties of another person shall be (14) The right to be free from involuntary servitude in
liable to the latter for damages: any form;

(1) Freedom of religion; (15) The right of the accused against excessive bail;

(16) The right of the accused to be heard by himself


(2) Freedom of speech;
and counsel, to be informed of the nature and cause of
(3) Freedom to write for the press or to maintain a the accusation against him, to have a speedy and public
periodical publication; trial, to meet the witnesses face to face, and to have
compulsory process to secure the attendance of witness
(4) Freedom from arbitrary or illegal detention; in his behalf;
(5) Freedom of suffrage;
(17) Freedom from being compelled to be a witness
(6) The right against deprivation of property without against one's self, or from being forced to confess guilt,
due process of law; or from being induced by a promise of immunity or
reward to make such confession, except when the
(7) The right to a just compensation when private person confessing becomes a State witness;
property is taken for public use;
(18) Freedom from excessive fines, or cruel and
(8) The right to the equal protection of the laws; unusual punishment, unless the same is imposed or
inflicted in accordance with a statute which has not
(9) The right to be secure in one's person, house,
been judicially declared unconstitutional; and
papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and
seizures; (19) Freedom of access to the courts.
(10) The liberty of abode and of changing the same; In any of the cases referred to in this article, whether or
not the defendant's act or omission constitutes a
(11) The privacy of communication and
criminal offense, the aggrieved party has a right to
correspondence;
commence an entirely separate and distinct civil action
(12) The right to become a member of associations or for damages, and for other relief. Such civil action shall
societies for purposes not contrary to law; proceed independently of any criminal prosecution (if
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

the latter be instituted), and mat be proved by a parties, is called a quasi-delict and is governed by the
preponderance of evidence. provisions of this Chapter. (1902a) (NCC)

The indemnity shall include moral damages. Exemplary RULE 111


damages may also be adjudicated.
Prosecution of Civil Action
The responsibility herein set forth is not demandable
from a judge unless his act or omission constitutes a Section 1. Institution of criminal and civil actions.
(a) When a criminal action is instituted, the civil action
violation of the Penal Code or other penal statute.
for the recovery of civil liability arising from the
Art. 33. In cases of defamation, fraud, and physical offense charged shall be deemed instituted with the
injuries a civil action for damages, entirely separate and criminal action unless the offended party waives the
distinct from the criminal action, may be brought by the civil action, reserves the right to institute it separately
injured party. Such civil action shall proceed or institutes the civil action prior to the criminal action.
independently of the criminal prosecution, and shall
require only a preponderance of evidence. The reservation of the right to institute separately the
civil action shall be made before the prosecution starts
Art. 34. When a member of a city or municipal police presenting its evidence and under circumstances
force refuses or fails to render aid or protection to any affording the offended party a reasonable opportunity to
person in case of danger to life or property, such peace make such reservation.
officer shall be primarily liable for damages, and the
city or municipality shall be subsidiarily responsible When the offended party seeks to enforce civil liability
therefor. The civil action herein recognized shall be against the accused by way of moral, nominal,
independent of any criminal proceedings, and a temperate, or exemplary damages without specifying
the amount thereof in the complaint or information, the
preponderance of evidence shall suffice to support such
action. (NCC) filing fees thereof shall constitute a first lien on the
judgment awarding such damages.
QUASI-DELICTS
Art. 2176. Whoever by act or omission causes damage Where the amount of damages, other than actual, is
to another, there being fault or negligence, is obliged to specified in the complaint or information, the
pay for the damage done. Such fault or negligence, if corresponding filing fees shall be paid by the offended
there is no pre-existing contractual relation between the party upon the filing thereof in court.
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

Except as otherwise provided in these Rules, no filing consolidation of the civil and criminal actions. (cir. 57-
fees shall be required for actual damages. 97)

No counterclaim, cross-claim or third-party complaint Section 2. When separate civil action is suspended.
may be filed by the accused in the criminal case, but After the criminal action has been commenced, the
any cause of action which could have been the subject separate civil action arising therefrom cannot be
thereof may be litigated in a separate civil action. (1a) instituted until final judgment has been entered in the
criminal action.
(b) The criminal action for violation of Batas Pambansa
Blg. 22 shall be deemed to include the corresponding If the criminal action is filed after the said civil action
civil action. No reservation to file such civil action has already been instituted, the latter shall be suspended
separately shall be allowed. in whatever stage it may be found before judgment on
the merits. The suspension shall last until final
Upon filing of the aforesaid joint criminal and civil
judgment is rendered in the criminal action.
actions, the offended party shall pay in full the filing Nevertheless, before judgment on the merits is rendered
fees based on the amount of the check involved, which in the civil action, the same may, upon motion of the
shall be considered as the actual damages claimed. offended party, be consolidated with the criminal action
Where the complaint or information also seeks to
in the court trying the criminal action. In case of
recover liquidated, moral, nominal, temperate or
consolidation, the evidence already adduced in the civil
exemplary damages, the offended party shall pay action shall be deemed automatically reproduced in the
additional filing fees based on the amounts alleged criminal action without prejudice to the right of the
therein. If the amounts are not so alleged but any of prosecution to cross-examine the witnesses presented
these damages are subsequently awarded by the court, by the offended party in the criminal case and of the
the filing fees based on the amount awarded shall parties to present additional evidence. The consolidated
constitute a first lien on the judgment. criminal and civil actions shall be tried and decided
Where the civil action has been filed separately and jointly.
trial thereof has not yet commenced, it may be During the pendency of the criminal action, the running
consolidated with the criminal action upon application of the period of prescription of the civil action which
with the court trying the latter case. If the application is
cannot be instituted separately or whose proceeding has
granted, the trial of both actions shall proceed in
been suspended shall be tolled. (n)
accordance with section 2 of this Rule governing
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

The extinction of the penal action does not carry with it The court shall forthwith order said legal representative
extinction of the civil action. However, the civil action or representatives to appear and be substituted within a
based on delict shall be deemed extinguished if there is period of thirty (30) days from notice.
a finding in a final judgment in the criminal action that
the act or omission from which the civil liability may A final judgment entered in favor of the offended party
arise did not exist. (2a) shall be enforced in the manner especially provided in
these rules for prosecuting claims against the estate of
Section 3. When civil action may proceeded the deceased.
independently. In the cases provided for in Articles
32, 33, 34 and 2176 of the Civil Code of the If the accused dies before arraignment, the case shall be
dismissed without prejudice to any civil action the
Philippines, the independent civil action may be
brought by the offended party. It shall proceed offended party may file against the estate of the
independently of the criminal action and shall require deceased. (n)
only a preponderance of evidence. In no case, however, Section 5. Judgment in civil action not a bar. A final
may the offended party recover damages twice for the judgment rendered in a civil action absolving the
same act or omission charged in the criminal action. defendant from civil liability is not a bar to a criminal
(3a) action against the defendant for the same act or
omission subject of the civil action. (4a)
Section 4. Effect of death on civil actions. The death
of the accused after arraignment and during the Section 6. Suspension by reason of prejudicial
pendency of the criminal action shall extinguish the question. A petition for suspension of the criminal
civil liability arising from the delict. However, the action based upon the pendency of a prejudicial
independent civil action instituted under section 3 of question in a civil action may be filed in the office of
this Rule or which thereafter is instituted to enforce the prosecutor or the court conducting the preliminary
liability arising from other sources of obligation may be investigation. When the criminal action has been filed
continued against the estate or legal representative of in court for trial, the petition to suspend shall be filed in
the accused after proper substitution or against said the same criminal action at any time before the
estate, as the case may be. The heirs of the accused may prosecution rests. (6a)
be substituted for the deceased without requiring the
appointment of an executor or administrator and the Section 7. Elements of prejudicial question. The
court may appoint a guardian ad litem for the minor elements of a prejudicial question are: (a) the
heirs. previously instituted civil action involves an issue
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

similar or intimately related to the issue raised in the RTC: Dismissed the complaint on the ground that the cause of action
subsequent criminal action, and (b) the resolution of had already prescribed.
such issue determines whether or not the criminal
action may proceed. (5a) (Rules of Court) CA: Petitioners filed a petition for certiorari which was dismissed for
error in the choice or mode of appeal.
Sps. Antonio C. Santos and Esperanza C. Santos, Nora Barnalo,
Belinda Lumactad, Marienela Dy, Nikka Santos and Leonardo Issue: WON the trial court committed a grave abuse of discretion
Ferrer vs Hon. Normandie B. Pizarro, as Presiding Judge, RTC of when it insisted that the cause of action is based on quasi delict and
QC, Branch 101, Dionision M. Sibayan and Viron Transportation concluded that the action had prescribed
Trial court erred. The independent civil action reserved has not
Company, Inc., represented by Virgilio Q. Rondaris (2005) Decision: prescribed. Even if the quasi delict action has prescribed, the
Here, an independent civil action based on delict was enforcement of the subsidiary civil liability of the employer has not yet
Facts: properly reserved! prescribed.
Our RPC provides that every person criminally liable for a
In April 1994, Viron Transit driver Dionisio Sibayan was felony is also civilly liable. Such civil liability may consist of
charged with reckless imprudence resulting to multiple homicide and restitution, reparation of the damage caused and indemnification of
multiple physical injuries in connection with a collision between a bus consequential damages.
driven by Sibayan and a lite ace van, for which Sibayan was convicted Petitioners expressly made a reservation of their right to file a
on December 1998. separate civil action as a result of the crime committed by Sibayan.
The reason why MCTC did not make any pronouncement as to the
As there was a reservation to file a separate civil action, no
pronouncement of civil liability was made by the Municipal Circuit latter's civil liability.
Trial Court (MCTC). The complaint reveals that the allegations are consistent with
petitioners claim that the action was brought to recover civil liability
In October 20, 2000, Santos filed a complaint for damages
against Sibayan, Viron Transit and Rondaris, president and chairman arising from a crime. Even if there were allegations of negligence on
of Viron Transit with the RTC of Quezon City, pursuant to their the part of Sibayan and Viron Transit, it does not mean that petitioners
reservation to file a separate civil action. They cited the judgment were pursuing a cause of action based on quasi delict, considering that
at the time of the filing of the complaint, the cause of action ex quasi
convicting Sibayan.
delicto had already prescribed.
Viron Transit moved to dismiss the complaint citing
prescription alleging that actions based on quasi delict prescribe in In cases of negligence, the offended party has the choice
4years from the accrual of the cause of action. between an action to enforce liability arising from crime under the
Revised Penal Code and an action for quasi delict under the Civil
Code.
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

An act or omission causing damage to another may give rise to 2 L.G. Foods Corporation and Victorino Gabor, Vice
separate civili liabilities on the part of the offender : President and General Manager vs Hon. Philadelfa B. Pagapong-
Agraviador, in her capacity as Presiding Judge of RTC, Br43,
1. Civil liability ex delicto, under Article 100 of the RPC Bacolod City and Sps Florentino and Theresa Vallejera (2006)
Complaint by offended party (respondents) is based on
2. Independent civil liabilities quasi delict. Thus, despite death of the accused,
Facts:
employer can still be held liable for damages.
a) not arising from an act or omission complained of as a On Feb. 26, 1996, Charles Vallejera, a 7-yr old son of the
felony, ( culpa contractual or obligations arising from
spouses Florentino Vallejera and Theresa Vallejera, died as he was hit
law under Art. 31 of the Civil Code, intentional torts under Art. 32 and by a Ford Fiera van owned by the petitioners and driven at the time by
34, and culpa aquiliana under Art. 2176 their employee, Vincent Norman Ferrer. Eventually, an information
b) where the injured party is granted a right to file an action for Reckless Imprudence Resulting to Homicide was filed against the
independent and distinct from the criminal proceedings. driver before the MTCC Bacolod City. However, as the accused driver
committed suicide, the case was dismissed. Claiming that the
While the cause of action ex quasi delicto had already petitioners should be held civilly liable as they failed to exercise the
prescribed, petitioners can still pursue the remaining avenue opened necessary diligence required of a good father of a family in the
for them by their reservation. The surviving cause of action ex delicto. selection and supervision of their employee, the spouses Vallejera later
on filed a complaint for damages against them. For their part, the
This is so because the prescription of the action ex quasi
petitioners prayed, by way of an Answer w/ Compulsory
delicto does not operate as a bar to an action to enforce the civil
Counterclaim, for the dismissal of the complaint. They argued that
liability arising from crime especially as the latter action had been
they had exercised the required due diligence and maintained that for
expressly reserved.
their liability to attach their driver must first be convicted. Thus, since
We held that the dismissal of the action based on culpa the driver died during the pendency of the criminal action, the sine qua
aquiliana is not a bar to the enforcement of the subsidiary liability of non condition for their subsidiary liability was not fulfilled. Hence,
the employer. they argued that there is lack of cause of action on the part of the
Spouses. They also argued that since the Spouses Vallejera did not
Once there is a conviction for felony, final in character, the make a reservation to institute a separate action for damages when the
employer becomes subsidiarily liable if the commission of the crime criminal case was filed, the damage suit in question is thereby deemed
was in the discharge of the duties of the employees. instituted with the criminal action w/c was already dismissed. The
RTC and the CA both denied petitioners motion to dismiss. Hence,
Article 103 of the RPC is the controlling force to obviate the
possibility of the aggrieved party being deprived of indemnity even this petition for review on certiorari.
after the rendition of a final judgment convicting the employee.
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

Issue: Whether the spouses Vallejeras cause of action in the pleading or complaint and not with the defendant who can not ask for
Civil Case for Damages is founded on Art. 103 of the RPC, as the dismissal of the plaintiffs case of action or lack of it based on the
maintained by the petitioners, or derived from Art. 2180 of the Civil defendants perception that the plaintiff should have opted to file a
Code, as decided by the lower courts. claim under Art. 103, RPC. Under Art. 2180 of the CC, the liability of
Whether the spouses can recover
award of damages from petitioners? the employer is direct/immediate. It is not considered upon prior
Decision: recourse against the negligent employee and a prior showing of
Yes!
PETITION Denied. insolvency of such employee. Furthermore, the circumstance that no
reservation to institute a separate civil action for damages was made
From the allegations of their complaint, it is clear that quasi- when the criminal case was filed is of no moment for the simple
delict was the spouses choice of remedy against the petitioners. An reason that the criminal case was dismissed w/o any pronouncement
act or omission causing damage to another may give rise to 2 separate having been made therein. In reality, it is as if there was no criminal
civil liabilities on the part of the offender: 1) civil liability ex delicto case to speak of in the first place.
and 2) independent civil liabilities, such as those a) not arising from an
act or omission complained of as felony (culpa contractual or b. Prejudicial Question Doctrine Not Applicable
obligations arising from law, intentional torts and culpa aquiliana) or Consing, Jr. vs People of the Philippines (2013)
b) where the injured party is granted a right to file an action
independent and distinct from the criminal action. Either of these two Facts:
possible liabilities may be enforced against the offender. The victims
of negligence or their heirs have a choice between an action to enforce Petitioner negotiated with and obtained for himself and his
mother, Cecilia de la Cruz various loans from Unicapital Inc. The
the civil liability arising from culpa criminal under Art. 100 of the
RPC, and an action for quasi-delict (culpa aquiliana) under Arts 2176- loans were secured by a real estate mortgage constituted on a parcel of
2194 of the Civil Code. If, as in this case, the action chosen is for land in Cavite. In accordance with its option to purchase the
quasi-delict, the plaintiff may hold the employer liable for the mortgaged property, Unicapital agreed to purchase one-half of the
negligent act of its employee, subject to the employers defense of property. The other half of the property was purchased by Plus
Builders, Inc. Before Unicapital and Plus Builders could develop the
exercise of the diligence of a good father of the family. On the other
hand, if the action chosen is for culpa criminal, the plaintiff can hold property, they learned that the title to the property was really in the
the employer subsidiarily liable only upon proof of prior conviction of names of Po Willie Yu and Juanito Tan Teng. And the title held by De
its employee. According to Art. 2177, these are alternative remedies la Cruz appeared to be spurious. Unicapital demanded the return of the
total amount that had been paid to and received by de la Cruz and
the plaintiff may choose from in case the obligation has the possibility
Consing, but the latter ignored the demands.
of arising indirectly from the crime or directly from tort. The choice is
with the plaintiff who makes known his cause of action in his initiatory
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

On July 22, 1999, Consing filed a Civil Case in the Pasig City that there is no prejudicial question that will justify the suspension of
RTC (Pasig civil case) for injunctive relief, thereby seeking to enjoin the criminal case at bar.
Unicapital from proceeding against him for collection on the ground
that he had acted as a mere agent of his mother. On August 6, 1999, Turning back to the Makati criminal case, the State moved for
Unicapital sued Consing in the RTC in Makati City for the recovery of the reconsideration of the adverse decision of the CA, citing the ruling
a sum of money and damages, with an application for a writ of in G.R. No. 148193. On August 18, 2003, the CA amended its
decision, reversing itself. Hence, this appeal by petition for review on
preliminary attachment (Makati civil case).
certiorari.
On January 27, 2000, the Office of the City Prosecutor of
Makati City filed against Consing and De la Cruz an information for Issue: WON the CA err in reversing itself on the issue of the existence
of a prejudicial question that warranted the suspension of the
estafa through falsification of public document in the RTC in Makati
City (Makati criminal case). Consing moved to defer his arraignment proceedings in the Makati criminal case?
in the Makati criminal case on the ground of existence of a prejudicial Decision:
question due to the pendency of the Pasig and Makati civil cases. The
RTC issued an order suspending the proceedings in the Makati Petition DENIED.
criminal case on the ground of the existence of a prejudicial question.
It is well settled that a civil action based on defamation, fraud
The CA uphold the order of the RTC.
and physical injuries may be independently instituted pursuant to
In the meanwhile, on October 13, 1999, Plus Builders Article 33 of the Civil Code, and does not operate as a prejudicial
commenced its own suit for damages against Consing in the RTC in question that will justify the suspension of a criminal case. This was
Manila (Manila civil case). On January 21, 2000, an information for precisely the Courts thrust in G.R. No. 148193, thus: Moreover,
estafa through falsification of public document was filed against neither is there a prejudicial question if the civil and the criminal
Consing and De la Cruz in the RTC in Imus, Cavite (Cavite Criminal action can, according to law, proceed independently of each other.
Case). Consing filed a motion to defer the arraignment on the ground Under Rule 111, Section 3 of the Revised Rules on Criminal
of the existence of a prejudicial question, i.e., the pendency of the Procedure, in the cases provided in Articles 32, 33, 34 and 2176 of the
Pasig and Manila civil cases. RTC denied Consings motion. However, Civil Code, the independent civil action may be brought by the
CA enjoined the RTC from proceeding with the arraignment and trial offended party. It shall proceed independently of the criminal action
until the Pasig and Manila civil cases had been finally decided. and shall require only a preponderance of evidence. In no case,
however, may the offended party recover damages twice for the same
The State assailed the decision of the CA in SC (G.R. No. act or omission charged in the criminal action. In the instant case
148193), praying for the reversal of the decision of the CA. SC granted (Manila civil case), for Damages and Attachment on account of the
the petition, and reversed and set aside the decision of the CA. SC held alleged fraud committed by respondent and his mother in selling the
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

disputed lot to PBI is an independent civil action under Article 33 of fact JII allegedly made known to petitioner, but the latter taking
the Civil Code. As such, it will not operate as a prejudicial question advantage of said information and in bad faith, went directly to FSDC
that will justify the suspension of the criminal case at bar. and dealt with it and sold twenty one (21) units of said tractors,
thereby depriving JII of unrealized profits. SEACOM alleges that the
G. Principles transaction with FSDC was the result of a public bidding. It alleges
1. Abuse of Rights that it did not know FSDCs intent to buy machineries from JII.
Moreover, the dealership agreement is a non-exclusive, therefore, it
Art. 19. Every person must, in the exercise of his rights can still compete in the market against JII.
and in the performance of his duties, act with justice,
give everyone his due, and observe honesty and good The trial court rendered a decision ordering JII to pay
faith. (NCC) SEACOM P18,843.85 representing its outstanding obligation. It also
granted the JIIs counterclaim for unrealized profits and for moral and
1.1 Elements exemplary damages. The Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the
trial court stating that while there exists no agency relationship
Sea Commercial Company, Inc. vs The Honorable Court of
between SEACOM and JII, SEACOM is liable for damages and
Appeals, Jamandre Industries, Inc. and Tirso Jamandre (1999) 2,000 moral and
unrealized profits to JII. exemplary damages
Facts:
Issue: WON there was an abuse of right by SEACOM resulting to bad
SEACOM is a corporation engaged in the business of selling faith when it competed with its own dealer, JII, as regards the sale of
and distributing agricultural machinery, products and equipment. farm machineries to FSDC Yes!
SEACOM and JII entered into a dealership agreement whereby
Decision:
SEACOM appointed JII as its exclusive dealer in the City and
Province of Iloilo. The agreement was subsequently amended to Petition DENIED. Decision of Court of Appeals affirmed.
include Capiz in the territorial coverage and to make the dealership
agreement on a non-exclusive basis. The principle of abuse of rights stated in the above article (Art.
19 of NCC), departs from the classical theory that he who uses a right
JII allegedly incurred a balance of P18,843.85 for unpaid injures no one. The modern tendency is to depart from the classical
deliveries. SEACOM brought action to recover the amount. JII filed an and traditional theory, and to grant indemnity for damages in cases
Answer denying the obligation and interposed a counterclaim for where there is an abuse of rights, even when the act is not illicit.
damages representing unrealized profits. In the counterclaim, JII Article 19 was intended to expand the concept of torts by granting
alleged that as a dealer in Capiz, JII contracted to sell in 1977 twenty- adequate legal remedy for the untold number of moral wrongs which is
four (24) units of Mitsubishi power tillers to a group of farmers, which impossible for human foresight to provide specifically in statutory law.
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

If mere fault or negligence in ones acts can make him liable for Globe Mackay Cable and Radio Corp., and Herbert C. Hendry vs
damages for injury caused thereby, with more reason should abuse or The Honorable Court of Appeals and Restituto M. Tobias (1989)
bad faith make him liable. The absence of good faith is essential to
abuse of right. Good faith is an honest intention to abstain from taking Facts:
any unconscientious advantage of another, even through the forms or Restituto Tobias was employed by Globe Mackay as
technicalities of the law, together with an absence of all information or purchasing agent and administrative assistant to the engineering
belief of fact which would render the transaction unconscientious. In operations manager. In 1972, Globe Mackay discovered fictitious
business relations, it means good faith as understood by men of affairs. purchases and other fraudulent transactions which caused significant
While Article 19 may have been intended as a mere declaration loss to the company. Tobias claimed that he was the one who
discovered the same which prompted him to report the incident to his
of principle,8 the cardinal law on human conduct expressed in said
article has given rise to certain rules, e.g. that where a person exercises immediate superiors including the petitioner Herbert Hendry, the
his rights but does so arbitrarily or unjustly or performs his duties in a general manager of Globe Mackay. Soon after making the report,
manner that is not in keeping with honesty and good faith, he opens Tobias was considered as the primary suspect by Hendry and he was
instructed to take a forced leave, leave his office drawers open and
himself to liability. The elements of an abuse of rights under Article 19
are: (1) there is a legal right or duty; (2) which is exercised in bad leave his office keys. Upon his return, he was called a crook and a
faith; (3) for the sole intent of prejudicing or injuring another. swindler by Hendry.

Two separate investigations by the police were conducted


Clearly, the bad faith of SEACOM was established. By
appointing JII as a dealer of its agricultural equipment, SEACOM which confirmed Tobias non-participation in the incident. Despite the
recognized the role and undertaking of JII to promote and sell said said conclusions made by the police, the petitioners filed six (6)
equipment. Under the dealership agreement, JII was to act as a complaints against Tobias for estafa which were subsequently
middleman to sell SEACOMs products, in its area of operations, i.e. dismissed by the fiscal and affirmed by the Secretary of Justice. Tobias
Iloilo and Capiz provinces. tried to protest the said filing but Hendry ordered him to confess or
else the company would file cases against him until he landed in jail
Even if the dealership agreement was amended to make it on a and that Filipinos are not trustworthy. During the course of the filing
nonexclusive basis,19 SEACOM may not exercise its right unjustly or of criminal charges, Tobias employment was terminated which
in a manner that is not in keeping with honesty or good faith; prompted him to file a case for illegal dismissal with the labor arbiter.
otherwise it opens itself to liability under the abuse of right rule The labor arbiter upheld the validity of the dismissal but upon appeal
embodied in Article 19 of the Civil Code above-quoted. to the NLRC, it was reversed. The petitioners appealed to the
Secretary of Labor which upheld the decision of the labor arbiter. The
1.2. Test when principle may be invoked respondent then raised the matter to the Office of the President but
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

during the pendency of the proceedings, the parties entered into a though by itself legal because recognized or granted by law as such,
compromise agreement. may nevertheless become the source of some illegality. When a right is
At RETELCO exercised in a manner which does not conform with the norms
Tobias then applied for other employment but Hendry wrote a enshrined in Article 19 and results in damage to another, a legal wrong
letter to the prospective employer, without the latters request, that is thereby committed for which the wrongdoer must be held
Tobias employment was terminated due to dishonesty. As a result, responsible. But while Article 19 lays down a rule of conduct for the
Tobias was never hired by the said employer which caused him to file
government of human relations and for the maintenance of social
an action for damages for malicious prosecution and abusive acts of
order, it does not provide a remedy for its violation. Generally, an
the petitioners. The trial court ruled in favor of Tobias which was action for damages under either Article 20 or Article 21 would be
affirmed by the CA. Hence, the present appeal. proper.
Issue: WON the petitioners are liable for damages Yes!
Article 20, which pertains to damage arising from a violation of law,
Decision: provides that:

Denied. Decision of the CA affirmed. Art. 20. Every person who contrary to law, wilfully or
negligently causes damage to another, shall indemnify
One of the more notable innovations of the New Civil Code is the latter for the same.
the codification of some basic principles that are to be observed for
the rightful relationship between human beings and for the stability of However, in the case at bar, petitioners claim that they did not
the social order. Foremost among these principles is that pronounced violate any provision of law since they were merely exercising their
in Article 19 which provides: legal right to dismiss private respondent. This does not, however, leave
private respondent with no relief because Article 21 of the Civil Code
Art. 19. Every person must, in the exercise of his rights provides that:
and in the performance of his duties, act with justice,
give everyone his due, and observe honesty and good Art. 21. Any person who wilfully causes loss or injury
faith. to another in a manner that is contrary to morals, good
customs or public policy shall compensate the latter for
This article, known to contain what is commonly referred to as the damage.
the principle of abuse of rights, sets certain standards which must be
observed not only in the exercise of ones rights but also in the In determining whether or not the principle of abuse of rights
performance of ones duties. The law, therefore, recognizes a may be invoked, there is NO RIGID TEST which can be applied. The
primordial limitation on all rights; that in their exercise, the norms of question of whether or not the principle of abuse of rights has been
human conduct set forth in Article 19 must be observed. A right, violated resulting in damages under Article 20 or Article 21 or other
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

applicable provision of law, depends on the circumstances of each Artemio Cabansag filed Civil Case for damages in October
case. And in the instant case, the Court, after examining the record and 1991. According to respondent, he bought a 50-square meter property
considering certain significant circumstances, finds that petitioners from spouses Eugenio Gomez, Jr. and Felisa Duyan Gomez on July
have indeed abused the right that they invoke, causing damage to 23, 1990. Said property is part of a 400-square meter lot registered in
private respondent and for which the latter must now be indemnified. the name of the Gomez spouses. In October 1991, he received a
demand letter from Atty. Alexander del Prado in behalf
An employer who harbors suspicions that an employee has
of Purisima Nala (Nala), asking for the payment of rentals from 1987
committed dishonesty might be justified in taking the appropriate
to 1991 until he leaves the premises, as said property is owned
action such as ordering an investigation and directing the employee to by Nala, failing which criminal and civil actions will be filed against
go on a leave. Firmness and the resolve to uncover the truth would also him. Another demand letter was sent on May 14, 1991. Because of
be expected from such employer. But the high -handed treatment such demands, respondent suffered damages and was constrained to
accorded Tobias by petitioners was certainly uncalled for. And this
file the case against Nala and Atty. Del Prado.[3]
reprehensible attitude of petitioners was to continue when private
respondent returned to work. The imputation of guilt without basis and Atty. Del Prado claimed that he sent the demand letters in good
the pattern of harassment during the investigations of Tobias faith and that he was merely acting in behalf of his
transgress the standards of human conduct set forth in Article 19 of the client, Nala. Nala alleged that said property is part of an 800-square
Civil Code. The Court has already ruled that the right of the employer meter property owned by her late husband, Eulogio Duyan, which was
to dismiss an employee should not be confused with the manner in subsequently divided into two parts. The 400-square meter property
which the right is exercised and the effects flowing therefrom. If the was conveyed to spouses Gomez in a fictitious deed of sale, with the
dismissal is done abusively, then the employer is liable for damages to agreement that it will be merely held by them in trust for the Duyan's
the employee. Under the circumstances of the instant case, the children. Said property is covered by Transfer Certificate of Title No.
petitioners clearly failed to exercise in a legitimate manner their right 281115 in the name of spouses Gomez. Nala also claimed that
to dismiss Tobias, giving the latter the right to recover damages under respondent is only renting the property which he
Article 19 in relation to Article 21 of the Civil Code. occupies.
Cabansa
1.3 Requisites to be liable for Damages under the RTC RULING: In favor of respondent. P150,000.00 by way of moral
Principle damages; P30,000.00 by way of exemplary damages; P20,000.00 as
and for reasonable attorney's fees and other litigation expenses; and to
Heirs of Purisima Nala vs. Artemio pay the costs.
Cabansa (2008)

Facts:
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

CA RULING: Decision dated December 19, 2002 affirmed the RTC (b) which is exercised in bad faith; and
Decision with modification. P30,000.00 by way of moral damages;
(c) for the sole intent of prejudicing or injuring another.
exemplary damages in the amount of P10,000.00 and P10,000.00,
attorney's fees. It should be stressed that malice or bad faith is at the core of
Article 19 of the Civil Code. Good faith is presumed, and he who
Issue: WON respondent Cabansag is entitled to damages? No!
alleges bad faith has the duty to prove the same. Bad faith, on the other
Decision: hand, does not simply connote bad judgment to simple negligence,
dishonest purpose or some moral obloquy and conscious doing of a
Art. 19. Every person must, in the exercise of his rights and in wrong, or a breach of known duty due to some motives or interest or
the performance of his duties, act with justice, give everyone his due, ill will that partakes of the nature of fraud. Malice connotes ill will or
and observe honesty and good faith. The foregoing provision sets the spite and speaks not in response to duty. It implies an intention to do
standards which may be observed not only in the exercise of ones ulterior and unjustifiable harm.
rights but also in the performance of ones duties. When a right is
exercised in a manner which does not conform with the norms In the present case, there is nothing on record which will prove
enshrined in Article 19 and results in damage to another, a legal wrong that Nala and her counsel, Atty. Del Prado, acted in bad faith or malice
is thereby committed for which the wrongdoer must be held in sending the demand letters to respondent. In the first place, there
responsible. But a right, though by itself legal because recognized or was ground for Nala's actions since she believed that the property was
granted by law as such, may nevertheless become the source of some owned by her husband Eulogio Duyan and that respondent was
illegality. A person should be protected only when he acts in the illegally occupying the same. She had no knowledge that spouses
legitimate exercise of his right; that is, when he acts with prudence and Gomez violated the trust imposed on them by Eulogio and
in good faith, but not when he acts with negligence or abuse. There is surreptitiously sold a portion of the property to respondent. It was
an abuse of right when it is exercised only for the purpose of only after respondent filed the case for damages against Nala that
prejudicing or injuring another. The exercise of a right must be in she learned of such sale. The bare fact that respondent claims
accordance with the purpose for which it was established, and must not ownership over the property does not give rise to the conclusion that
be excessive or unduly harsh; there must be no intention to injure the sending of the demand letters by Nala was done in bad
another. faith. Absent any evidence presented by respondent, bad faith or
malice could not be attributed to petitioner since Nala was only trying
In order to be liable for damages under the abuse of rights to protect their interests over the property.
principle, the following requisites must concur:
Moreover, respondent failed to show that Nala and Atty.
(a) the existence of a legal right or duty; Del Prado's acts were done with the sole intention of prejudicing and
injuring him. It may be true that respondent suffered mental anguish,
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

serious anxiety and sleepless nights when he received the demand Phillips & Sons, Inc. (ROPSI) had still to pay its outstanding
letters; however, there is a material distinction between damages and P4,250,000.00 debt to Miguel Perez Rubio as the result of Rubios sale
injury. Injury is the legal invasion of a legal right while damage is the of his shares of stock of HBI. Thus, Rubio restates his position that the
hurt, loss or harm which results from the injury. Thus, there can ROPSI, including HBI, VVDC and MBTC, had conspired amongst
be damage without injury in those instances in which the loss or harm themselves to put the properties of HBI beyond his reach and thus
was not the result of a violation of a legal duty. In such cases, the make it impossible for him to collect the sum of P4,250,000.00 still
consequences must be borne by the injured person alone; the law unpaid on the purchase price of his shares of stock in HBI. Rubio asks
affords no remedy for damages resulting from an act which does not for a reconsideration of the decision of the court insofar as it makes no
amount to a legal injury or wrong. These situations are often finding against Phillips for moral and exemplary damages as well as
called damnum absque injuria. attorneys fees (Note: Because it appears from the beginning of the
case that the court had already adjudged Phillips to pay the amount of
1.4 Illustrative Cases:
P4,250,000.00, only that there was no pronouncement with regard to
Miguel Perez Rubio vs Court of Appeals, Roberto O. Philipps & damages).
Sons, Inc., Magdalena Ysmael Philipps, Manufacturers Bank and Yes!
Issue: Whether Rubio is entitled to an award for damages
Trust Co., Inc., Hacienda Benito, Inc., et al (1987)
Decision:
Facts:
The court ruled in favor of Rubio.
Miguel Perez Rubio alleges that Robert O. Phillips & Sons,
Inc. (ROPSI), Magdalena Ysmael Phillips, Manufacturers Bank & The scheme provided for in the Memorandum Agreement
Trust Co., Inc. (MBTC), Hacienda Benito, Inc. (collectively, ROPSI et wherein all the properties of Hacienda Benito will be ultimately
al.) conspired among themselves to put the properties of transferred to VVDC without any mention at all and completely
ignoring the petitioner's interest in said Hacienda placed the
Hacienda Benito, Inc. (HBI) represented by Robert O. Phillips,
petitioner's rightful claim to the payment of his shares of stock in clear
president, and Victoria Valley Development Corporation (VVDC) jeopardy.
executed a Memorandum Agreement the thrust of which is that VVDC
will acquire 134.1668 hectares of land including account receivables The fact that the Memorandum Agreement was not fully
belonging to HBI and the 78 hectares mortgaged to Manufacturers implemented is immaterial. The intent to defraud the petitioner and the
Bank & Trust Co., Inc. (MBTC). It was further provided that HBI will damage which led to the filing of this case was present in the
convey all the 78 hectares in favor of MBTC after which VVDC will execution of the Memorandum Agreement. Therefore, an award for
purchase from MBTC the same parcels of land together with the damages in favor of the petitioner is in order against respondents
receivables. This agreement, however, was executed when Robert O. Hacienda Benito, VVDC and MBTC.
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

Article 19 of the New Civil Code provides that: annum from April 30, 1964 until fully paid as provided for in the
parties' agreement dated August 13,1963.
"Every person must, in the exercise of his rights and in the
performance of his duties, act with justice, give everyone his due, and Also, an award for moral damages in favor of the petitioner is
observe honesty and good faith. " in order against respondents Hacienda Benito, VVDC and MBTC. The
planned transfer of all the assets of Hacienda Benito to VVDC which
while Article 20 thereof provides that: the respondents sought to accomplish through the Memorandum
"Every person who, contrary to law, wilfully or negligently Agreement created further aguish and anxiety on the part of the
causes damage to another shall indemnify the latter for the same." petitioner who at that time was still trying to collect the P4,250,000.00
full payment of his shares of stock in Hacienda Benito. Considering
Parenthetically, these respondents did not observe honesty and the circumstances under which the respondents executed the
good faith in dealing with the rightful claim of the petitioner to the still Memorandum Agreement and the social status of the parties herein,
unpaid P4,250,000.00 collectibles from ROPSI. The respondents' acts the amount of P100,000.00 as moral damages in favor of the petitioner
are tortious pursuant to Articles 19 and 20 of the New Civil Code. is awarded.
Hence, these respondents are obliged to pay for the damage done to
the petitioner. Jose Roque, Jr., substituted by his wife Norma Roque, petitioner
vs Jaime T. Torres, substituted by his son James Kenley M. Torres
(See Article 2176, New Civil Code). and the Honorable Court of Appeals

Facts:
In the case at bar, the tortious and fraudulent scheme of the Jose Roque, Jr. (Roque) was the administrator of certain
private respondents made it impossible for the petitioner to collect the parcels of land in Antipolo, Rizal, registered in the name of his son
P4,250,000.00 still unpaid purchase price of his shares of stock in Rafael Roque. Sometime before the incident, Jaime T. Torres
Hacienda Benito. All the respondents are, therefore, solidarily liable (Torres), claiming to be the owner of said property, hired security
for these actual damages suffered by the petitioner. (See Article 2194 guards from Anchor Security and Detective Agency, who allegedly
of the New Civil Code). barred Roque from entering the property and threatened him with
physical harm should he attempt to tend the said land. Roque, then,
Consequently, we rule that Hacienda Benito, VVDC and
filed a case for grave threats against said security guards before the
MBTC together with ROPSI and the Phillips spouses are solidarily
Municipal Trial Court (MTC) of Rizal. Prior to the incident, Torres
liable to the petitioner for the outstanding debt of ROPSI in the amount
instituted an Action for cancellation of Certificate of Titles in the name
of P4,250,000.00 with interest at the rate of eight (8%) per cent per
of Roques son Rafael Roque before the RTC of Antipolo which was
dismissed by the trial court. According to the court a quo, Torres
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

action was premature for failure to exhaust administrative remedies in and Farmers Association, Inc. (ALFAI), of which he was
the Bureau of Lands. Respondent appealed the dismissal before the president. Respondent further asserts that being the President of
Court of Appeals, which later affirmed the decision of the lower court. ALFAI, his instruction to the security guards was to prevent squatters
Respondents appeal to this Court was also dismissed. or intruders from entering the property and to make use of reasonable
force to repel aggression in the event of any untoward incident.
Roque visited the said property and was surprised to see seven
security guards guarding the property upon orders of After trial, the lower court rendered judgment in favor of
respondent. Three security guards approached Roque and exchange of Roque. On appeal, CA reversed the RTC judgment and rendered a
words happened. When Roque refused to leave the premises, Cabos, Decision, stating that Art. 2180 does not apply as there is no question
one of the guards threatened Roque that should he stay that the security guards involved in the shooting incident were
inside, Cabos would shoot him, so Roque immediately left the employed of Anchor Security Detective Agency and not by Torres.
place. However, Cabos still fired at him but missed. Roque ran fast to Doctrine of vicarious liability
his makeshift hut where Cabos followed him and shot again hitting Issue: WON Article 2180 in relation to Article 2176 of the Civil Code
petitioner on the back. After a while, the other security guards, is applicable to the case at bar
namely Sulla, Betasulo, and Romy Mendoza, came, and together Decision:
with Cabos mauled and kicked petitioner all over his body until he lost
consciousness. As a result of the incident, petitioner was hospitalized We agree with the Court of Appeals finding that respondent
and placed under continuous treatment and medication. Due to the cannot be held liable under Article 2180 of the Civil Code for the
multiple gunshot wounds, hematoma, and contusions sustained by damages suffered by petitioner because respondent is not the employer
petitioner, his left eye became 90 to 95% blind and his body was of the security guards who inflicted the injuries upon the person of the
paralyzed from the bustline down. Consequently, petitioner filed a petitioner. As reiterated in the recent case of Mercury Drug
criminal case for frustrated murder before the RTC of Antipolo against Corporation v. Libunao:
the security guards. Eventually, after suffering for more than nine
In Soliman, Jr. v. Tuazon, we held that where the
years, petitioner died.
security agency recruits, hires and assigns the works of
Torres admits the existence of the titles in the name of Rafael its watchmen or security guards to a client, the
Roque but denies the latters ownership over the property. He further employer of such guards or watchmen is such agency,
admits the dismissal of his case for cancellation of Roques titles based and not the client, since the latter has no hand in
on a technical ground. Torres likewise admits to the posting of the selecting the security guards. Thus, the duty to observe
security guards on the property to guard the same from any intruder the diligence of a good father of a family cannot be
but denies that they were his personal security guards, and moreover demanded from the said client:
claimed that they were security guards of the Antipolo Landowners
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

x x x [I]t is settled in our jurisdiction that where the Roques son, the cancellation for title case filed by Torres having been
security agency, as here, recruits, hires and assigns the dismissed. In fact, during trial, the offer for stipulation of Roques
work of its watchmen or security guards, the agency is counsel that at the time of the shooting incident, there is a valid and
the employer of such guards or watchmen. Liability for existing title in the name of Roques son which was never cancelled by
illegal or harmful acts committed by the security guards the court, was accepted by Torres. Therefore, by hiring the security
attaches to the employer agency, and not to the clients guards to prevent entry, possibly even by the registered owner, to the
or customers of such agency. As a general rule, a client subject property, titles to which he fully knew he did not possess,
or customer of a security agency has no hand in Torres blatantly acted in bad faith. Torres unwarranted act of posting
selecting who among the pool of security guards or security guards within the property, which he clearly knew is
watchmen employed by the agency shall be assigned to registered in the name of another, unduly placed petitioner at harm and
it; the duty to observe the diligence of a good father of a deprived him of his right to fully exercise his privileges and duties as
family in the selection of the guards cannot, in the administrator of said property. Respondent, by his grossly faulty acts,
ordinary course of events, be demanded from the client paved the way to the infliction of injuries by the security guards on
whose premises or property are protected by the petitioner.
security guards.
Furthermore, respondents palpable display of bad faith in
x x x [T]he fact that a client company may give claiming a superior right to the property over petitioners son entitles
instructions or directions to the security guards assigned petitioner to damages resulting therefrom. In order that a plaintiff may
to it, does not, by itself, render the client responsible as maintain an action for the injuries which he sustained, he must
an employer of the security guards concerned and liable establish that such injuries resulted from a breach of duty which the
for their wrongful acts or omissions. defendant owed to the plaintiff a concurrence of injury to the
plaintiff and legal responsibility by the person causing it. In other
This conclusion, however, does not necessarily preclude this words, in order that the law will give redress for an act causing
Court from holding respondent liable under the law for damages damage, the act must be not only hurtful, but wrongful.
resulting from the injuries inflicted on petitioner by the unlawful acts
of the security guards. In the case at bar, it is clear that respondent violated the
principle embodied in Article 19 of the Civil Code which mandates
Article 2176 of the Civil Code states that whoever by act or that every person must, in the exercise of his rights and in the
omission causes damage to another, there being fault or negligence, is performance of his duties, act with justice, give everyone his due, and
obliged to pay for the damage done. In the case at bar, Torres cannot observe honesty and good faith. When a right is exercised in a
feign ignorance of the fact that at the time of the shooting incident, the manner which discards these norms resulting in damage to another, a
titles to the disputed property were already registered in the name of
legal wrong is committed for which the actor can be held
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

accountable. As we have stated in a previous case, if mere fault or Lower Court ruled in favor of respondent. CA affirmed with
negligence in ones acts can make him liable for damages for injury modification. Hence, this petition.
caused thereby, with more reason should abuse or bad faith make him
liable.[ Issue: May an educational institution be held liable for damages for
misleading a student into believing that the latter had satisfied all the
University of the East vs Jader (2000) requirements for graduation when such is not the case? Yes!

Facts: Decision:

Romeo Jader was a law student enrolled at UE from 1984- The petition lacks merit.
1988. During the first semester as fourth year law student, he failed to
When a student is enrolled in any educational or learning
take the regular final examination in Practice Court I for which he was
institution, a contract of education is entered into between said
given an incomplete grade. As he enrolled for the second semester he
filed an application for the removal of the incomplete grade given by institution and the student. The professors, teachers or instructors hired
Prof. Carlos Ortega which was approved by Dean Celedonio Tiongson by the school are considered merely as agents and administrators
after payment of the required fee. He took the examination on March 8 tasked to perform the school's commitment under the contract. Since
the contracting parties are the school and the student, the latter is not
and on March 30 Prof Ortega gave him grade of 5.
duty-bound to deal with the former's agents, such as the professors
The Dean and Faculty Members met to deliberate on whom with respect to the status or result of his grades, although nothing
among the fourth year students should be allowed to graduate and the prevents either professors or students from sharing with each other
plaintiffs name appeared in the Tentative List of Candidates for such information. The Court takes judicial notice of the traditional
graduation. Likewise his name appeared in the invitation for practice in educational institutions wherein the professor directly
Investiture & Commencement Ceremonies. Having learned of the furnishes his/her students their grades. It is the contractual obligation
deficiency he dropped his review class and was not able to take the bar of the school to timely inform and furnish sufficient notice and
examination. Consequently, respondent sued petitioner for damages information to each and every student as to whether he or she had
alleging that he suffered shock, mental anguish, serious anxiety, already complied with all the requirements for the conferment of a
besmirched reputation etc. arising from the latters negligence. degree or whether they would be included among those who will
Petitioner denied liability arguing mainly that it never led respondent graduate. Although commencement exercises are but a formal
to believe that he completed the requirements when his name was ceremony, it nonetheless is not an ordinary occasion, since such
included in the tentative list of graduating student. Furthermore, it ceremony is the educational institution's way of announcing to the
argued that the proximate and immediate cause of the alleged damages whole world that the students included in the list of those who will be
arose out of respondents own negligence in not verifying from the conferred a degree during the baccalaureate ceremony have satisfied
professor concerned the result of his removal exam. all the requirements for such degree. Prior or subsequent to the
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

ceremony, the school has the obligation to promptly inform the student Facts:
of any problem involving the latter's grades and performance and also
This case is about the right to recover damages for alleged
most importantly, of the procedures for remedying the same.
abuse of right committed by a superior public officer in preventing a
Petitioner, in belatedly informing respondent of the result of subordinate from doing her assigned task and being officially
the removal examination, particularly at a time when he had already recognized for it.
commenced preparing for the bar exams, cannot be said to have acted
in good faith. Respondent Emma M. Rosqueta (Rosqueta), formerly Deputy
Commissioner of the Revenue Collection and Monitoring Group of the
It is the school that has access to those information and it is Bureau of Customs (the Bureau), tendered her courtesy resignation but
only the school that can compel its professors to act and comply with later on withdrew withdrew the same. Meanwhile Gil Valera was
its rules, regulations and policies with respect to the computation and appointed by President Arroyo. Rosqueta challenged the same by
the prompt submission of grades. Students do not exercise control, filing a petition for prohibition, quo warranto and injunction against
much less influence, over the way an educational institution should run Villanueva, then Commissioner of Customs, the Secretary of Finance
its affairs, particularly in disciplining its professors and teachers and and Valera with the RTC of Manila. The RTC issued a temporary
ensuring their compliance with the school's rules and orders. The restraining order (TRO), enjoining Villanueva and the Finance
negligent act of a professor who fails to observe the rules of the Secretary3 from implementing Valeras appointment which later on
school, for instance by not promptly submitting a student's grade, is was superseded by a writ of preliminary injunction.4
not only imputable to the professor but is an act of the school, being
his employer. Petitioner Villanueva, Valera, and the Secretary of Finance
challenged the injunction order before the Court of Appeals (CA) in
However, while petitioner was guilty of negligence and thus CA-G.R. SP 66070. On September 14, 2001 the CA issued its own
liable to respondent for the latter's actual damages, we hold that TRO, enjoining the implementation of the RTCs injunction order. But
respondent should not have been awarded moral damages. As a senior the TRO lapsed after 60 days and the CA eventually dismissed the
law student, respondent should have been responsible enough to petition before it.
ensure that all his affairs, specifically those pertaining to his academic
achievement, are in order. During the Bureaus celebration of its centennial anniversary
its special Panorama magazine edition featured all the customs deputy
WHEREFORE, the assailed decision of the Court of Appeals is commissioners, except respondent Rosqueta. The commemorative
AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION. billboard also displayed at the Bureaus main gate included Valeras
picture but not Rosquetas. Rosqueta filed a complaint for damages
Titus B. Villanueva vs Emma M. Rosqueta (2010) before the RTC of Quezon City against petitioner Villanueva alleging
that the latter maliciously excluded her from the centennial
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

anniversary memorabilia. Further, she claimed that he prevented her 20 and 21of the Civil Code which grant the latter indemnity for the
from performing her duties as Deputy Commissioner, withheld her injury he suffers because of such abuse of right or duty.
salaries, and refused to act on her leave applications. Thus, she asked
the RTC to award her P1,000,000.00 in moral damages, P500,000.00 Petitioner Villanueva claims that he merely acted on advice of
in exemplary damages, and P300,000.00 in attorneys fees and costs of the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) when he allowed Valera to
suit. assume the office as Deputy Commissioner since respondent Rosqueta
held the position merely in a temporary capacity and since she lacked
RTC- Dismissed6 respondent Rosquetas complaint, stating the Career Executive Service eligibility required for the job.
that petitioner Villanueva committed no wrong and incurred no
omission that entitled her to damages. The RTC found that Villanueva But petitioner Villanueva cannot seek shelter in the alleged
advice that the OSG gave him. Surely, a government official of his
had validly and legally replaced her as Deputy Commissioner seven
months before the Bureaus centennial anniversary. rank must know that a preliminary injunction order issued by a court
of law had to be obeyed, especially since the question of Valeras right
CA- Reversed the RTCs decision, holding instead that to replace respondent Rosqueta had not yet been properly resolved.
petitioner Villanuevas refusal to comply with the preliminary
injunction order issued in the quo warranto case earned for Rosqueta That petitioner Villanueva ignored the injunction shows bad
the right to recover moral damages from him. Citing the abuse of right faith and intent to spite Rosqueta who remained in the eyes of the law
the Deputy Commissioner. His exclusion of her from the centennial
principle, the RTC said that Villanueva acted maliciously when he
anniversary memorabilia was not an honest mistake by any reckoning.
prevented Rosqueta from performing her duties, deprived her of
salaries and leaves, and denied her official recognition as Deputy Indeed, he withheld her salary and prevented her from assuming the
Commissioner by excluding her from the centennial anniversary duties of the position. As the Court said in Amonoy v. Spouses
memorabilia. Gutierrez, a partys refusal to abide by a court order enjoining him
from doing an act, otherwise lawful, constitutes an abuse and an
Issue: WON Villanueva is liable for damages to respondent Rosqueta unlawful exercise of right.1avvphi1
for ignoring the preliminary injunction order. Yes!
That respondent Rosqueta was later appointed Deputy
Decision: Commissioner for another division of the Bureau is immaterial. While
such appointment, when accepted, rendered the quo warranto case
Under the abuse of right principle found in Article 19 of the
moot and academic, it did not have the effect of wiping out the injuries
Civil Code a person must, in the exercise of his legal right or duty, act she suffered on account of petitioner Villanuevas treatment of her.
in good faith. He would be liable if he instead acts in bad faith, with The damage suit is an independent action.
intent to prejudice another. Complementing this principle are Articles
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

The CA correctly awarded moral damages to respondent On September 22, 1988, four employees of the respondent Act
Rosqueta. Such damages may be awarded when the defendants Theater, Inc., namely, Rodolfo Tabian, Armando Aguilar, Arnel
transgression is the immediate cause of the plaintiffs anguish in the Concha and Modesto Ruales, were apprehended by members of the
cases specified in Article 2219 of the Civil Code. Quezon City police force for allegedly tampering a water meter in
violation of P.D. No. 401, as amended by B.P. Blg. 876. The
Here, respondent Rosquetas colleagues and friends testified respondents employees were subsequently criminally charged. On
that she suffered severe anxiety on account of the speculation over her
account of the incident, the respondents water service connection was
employment status.17 She had to endure being referred to as a
cut off. Consequently, the respondent filed a complaint for injunction
"squatter" in her workplace. She had to face inquiries from family and with damages against the petitioner MWSS.
friends about her exclusion from the Bureaus centennial anniversary
memorabilia. She did not have to endure all these affronts and the In the civil case, the respondent alleged in that the petitioner
angst and depression they produced had Villanueva abided in good acted arbitrarily, whimsically and capriciously, in cutting off the
faith by the courts order in her favor. Clearly, she is entitled to moral respondents water service connection without prior notice. Due to
damages. lack of water, the health and sanitation, not only of the respondents
patrons but in the surrounding premises as well, were adversely
The Court, however, finds the award of P500,000.00 excessive. affected.
As it held in Philippine Commercial International Bank v.
Alejandro,18 moral damages are not a bonanza. They are given to ease After due trial, the court acquitted the four employees of Act
the defendants grief and suffering. Moral damages should reasonably Theater, Inc. in the criminal case. In the civil case, the court ordered
approximate the extent of hurt caused and the gravity of the wrong MWSS to pay Act Theater, Inc. actual damage in the amount of
done. Here, that would be P200,000.00. P25,000 and to return the sum of P200,000.00 deposited by the
plaintiff for the restoration of its water services after its disconnection
The Court affirms the grant of exemplary damages by way of on September 23, 1988.
example or correction for the public good but, in line with the same
reasoning, reduces it to P50,000.00. Finally, the Court affirms the The petitioner appealed the civil aspect of the decision to the
award of attorneys fees and litigation expenses but reduces it CA. The appellate court, however, dismissed the appeal. According to
to P50,000.00. the CA, the petitioners act of cutting off the respondents water
service connection without prior notice was arbitrary, injurious and
MWSS vs Act Theatre Inc. prejudicial to the latter justifying the award of damages under Article
Facts: 19 of the Civil Code.

Issue: WON THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEAL[S]


CORRECTLY APPLIED THE PROVISION OF ARTICLE 19 OF
Yes! Mwss should pay
actual damages!
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

THE NEW CIVIL CODE WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE give everyone his due, and observe honesty and good
APPLICABLE PROVISION OF ARTICLE 429 OF THE SAME faith.
CODE
When a right is exercised in a manner which discards these
Decision: norms resulting in damage to another, a legal wrong is committed for
which actor can be held accountable. In this case, the petitioner failed
The petition is devoid of merit. Article 429 of the Civil Code, to act with justice and give the respondent what is due to it when the
relied upon by the petitioner in justifying its act of disconnecting the petitioner unceremoniously cut off the respondents water service
water supply of the respondent without prior notice, reads: connection.
Art. 429. The owner or lawful possessor of a thing has While it is true that MWSS had sent a notice of investigation to
the right to exclude any person from the enjoyment and plaintiff-appellee prior to the disconnection of the latters water
disposal thereof. For this purpose, he may use such services, this was done only a few hours before the actual
force as may be reasonable to repel or prevent an
disconnection. Clearly, the plaintiff-appellee was denied due process
actual or threatened unlawful physical invasion or when it was deprived of the water services. As a consequence thereof,
usurpation of his property. Act had to contract another source to provide water for a number of
A right is a power, privilege, or immunity guaranteed under a days. Plaintiff-appellee was also compelled to deposit with MWSS the
constitution, statute or decisional law, or recognized as a result of long sum of P200,000.00 for the restoration of their water services.
usage, 6 constitutive of a legally enforceable claim of one person 2. Unjust Enrichment (Solutio Indebiti)
against the other.
2.1 Requisites
Concededly, the petitioner, as the owner of the utility providing
water supply to certain consumers including the respondent, had the H . L Carlos ConstructionV. Marina Properties Corp.
right to exclude any person from the enjoyment and disposal thereof.
However, the exercise of rights is not without limitations. Having the Facts:
right should not be confused with the manner by which such right is to Marina Properties Corporation (MPC) is engaged in the
be exercised. Article 19 of the Civil Code sets the norms for the business of real estate development.
exercise of ones rights:
It entered into a contract with H.L Carlos Construction, inc
Art. 19. Every person must, in the exercise of his rights (HLC) to construct Phase III of a condominium complex ( Marina
and in the performance of his duties, act with justice, Bayhomes Condominium Project) consisting of townhouses and villas
Quantum meruit means that in an action for work and labor, payment shall be made in such
amount as the plaintiff reasonably deserves.[31] To deny payment for a building almost completed
and already occupied would be to permit unjust enrichment at the expense of the contractor.
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

for a total consideration of P38, 580, 609 within a period of 365days Decision:
from receipt of " notice to proceed ".
1) MPC argues that to allow the claim for labor cost
The original completion date of the project was May 16, 1989, escalation would be to reward petitioner for incurring delay,
but it was extended to October 31, 1989 with a grace period until thereby breaching a contractual obligation. This contention is
November 30, 1989. untenable. To allow MPC to acquire the partially accomplished
project without paying for labor cost escalation validly incurred
The contract was signed by Jovencio F. Cinco, president of would constitute UNJUST ENRICHMENT at the expense of the
MPC, and Honorio L. Carlos, president of HLC. petitioner.
" On December 15, 1989, HLC instituted this case for sum of There is unjust enrichment under Art. 22 of the Civil Code
money against not only MPC but also against the latter's alleged when (1) a person is unjustly benefited, and (2) such benefit is derived
president, (Respondent) Jesus K. Typoco, Sr. (Typoco) and at the expense of or with damages to another.
(Respondent) Tan Yu (Tan), seeking the payment of various sums with
an aggregate amount of P14 million pesos Since petitioner had rendered services that were accepted by
MPC, then the former should be compensated for them. Labor cost
RTC: Judgment in favor of (Petitioner) H.L Carlos
escalation, has already been earned by petitioner. H.L. Construction
Construction inc. and as against Respondent Marina Properties
Corporation, Tan Yu and Typoco Evidence on record reveals that MPC approved some change
order jobs despite the absence of any supplementary agreement.
CA: Respondents were not liable for escalations in the cost of
labor and construction materials since petitioner failed to show any Under the principle of quantum meruit, a contractor is allowed
basis for the award sought. They were also absolved from paying for to recover the reasonable value of the thing or services rendered
change orders and extra work since there was no supplemental despite the lack of written contract, in order to avoid unjust
agreement covering them as required in the main construction contract. enrichment.

Issues: 2 ) Typoco and Tan are not liable. The records are bereft of
H.L. Construction any evidence that they acted in bad faith with gross or inexcusable
1) WON petitioner is entitled to price escalation for labor, cost of negligence, or that they acted outside the scope of his authority.
change order and extra work Yes! But only to escalation for labor.
3) Yes, petitioner did not fulfill its contractual obligations.
2) Whether Typoco and Tan are solidarily liable with MPC It could not totally pass the blame to MPC for hiring a second
3) WON H.L Construction is liable for actual and liquidated contractor, because the latter was allowed to terminate the services of
damages Yes! the contractor.
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

Either party shall have the right to terminate this contract for 2.2 Manifestation of Unjust Enrichment
reason of violation or non-compliance by the other party of the terms
Vicente S. Almario vs. Philippine Airlines, Inc. (2007)
and condition herein agreed upon.

As of November 1989, petitioner accomplished only Facts:


approximately 80 percent of the project. In other words, it was already Almario, then about 39 years of age and a Boeing 737 (B-737)
in delay at the time. First Officer at PAL, successfully bid for the higher position of Airbus
300 (A-300) First Officer. Since said higher position required
Engr. Miranda testified that it would lose money even if it
finished the project; respondents already suspected that it had no additional training, he underwent, at PALs expense, more than five
intention of finishing the project at all. months of training consisting of ground schooling in Manila and flight
simulation in Melbourne, Australia. After completing the training
Petitioner was in delay and in breach of contract. Clearly, the course, Almario served as A300 First Officer of PAL, but after eight
obligor is liable for damages that are the natural and probable months of service as such, he tendered his resignation, for personal
consequences of its breach of obligation. reasons. Almario pushed through with his resignation.

In order to finish the project, the latter had to contract the PAL filed a Complaint against Almario for reimbursement of
services of a second construction firm for P11, 750,000. Hence, MPC training costs. PAL invoked the existence of an innominate contract of
suffered actual damages in the amount of P4,604,579 for the complaint do ut facias (I give that you may do) with Almario in that by spending
of the project. for his training, he would render service to it until the costs of training
were recovered in at least three (3) years. Almario countered that there is no
Petitioner is also liable for liquidated damages as provided in such agreement in the CBA to which
he is covered.
the Contract. Almario denied the existence of any agreement with PAL that
he would have to render service to it for three years after his training
Liquidated damages are those that the parties agree to be paid failing which he would reimburse the training costs.
in case of a breach. As worded, the amount agreed upon answers for
damages suffered by the owner due to delays in the completion of the Issue: WON Article 22 of the Civil Code can be applied to recover
project. Under Philippine laws, these damages take the nature of training costs. Yes! Almario must pay PAL the sum of P559,739.90 which is
penalties. the training cost (over 850 thousand pesos) less eight
Decision: months of service.
A penal clause is an accessory undertaking to assume greater
liability in case of breach. It is attached to an obligation in order to Article 22 of the Civil Code applies. This provision on unjust
ensure performance. enrichment recognizes the principle that one may not enrich himself at
the expense of another. The enrichment of the defendant must have a
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

correlative prejudice, disadvantage, or injury to the plaintiff. This CHAPTER 1


prejudice may consist, not only of the loss of property or the
QUASI-CONTRACTS
deprivation of its enjoyment, but also of non-payment of compensation
for a prestation or rendered to the defendant without intent to donate
on the part of the plaintiff, or the failure to acquire something which Art. 2142. Certain lawful, voluntary and unilateral acts
the latter would have obtained. give rise to the juridical relation of quasi-contract to the
It bears noting that when Almario took the training course, he end that no one shall be unjustly enriched or benefited
was about 39 years old, 21 years away from the retirement age of 60. at the expense of another. (n)
Hence, with the maturity, expertise, and experience he gained from the Art. 2143. The provisions for quasi-contracts in this
training course, he was expected to serve PAL for at least three years Chapter do not exclude other quasi-contracts which
to offset the prohibitive costs thereof. may come within the purview of the preceding article.
(n)
PAL invested for the training of Almario to enable him to
acquire a higher level of skill, proficiency, or technical competence so
that he could efficiently discharge the position of A-300 First Officer. SECTION 1. - Negotiorum Gestio
Given that, PAL expected to recover the training costs by availing of
Almarios services for at least three years. The expectation of PAL
was not fully realized, however, due to Almarios resignation after Art. 2144. Whoever voluntarily takes charge of the
only eight months of service following the completion of his training agency or management of the business or property of
course. He cannot, therefore, refuse to reimburse the costs of training another, without any power from the latter, is obliged to
without violating the principle of unjust enrichment. continue the same until the termination of the affair and
its incidents, or to require the person concerned to
2.3 Laws and Cases substitute him, if the owner is in a position to do so.
Art. 22. Every person who through an act of This juridical relation does not arise in either of these
performance by another, or any other means, acquires instances:
or comes into possession of something at the expense of (1) When the property or business is not neglected or
the latter without just or legal ground, shall return the abandoned;
same to him. (NCC)
(2) If in fact the manager has been tacitly authorized by
Title XVII. - EXTRA-CONTRACTUAL the owner.
OBLIGATIONS
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

In the first case, the provisions of Articles 1317, 1403, (2) If he has preferred his own interest to that of the
No. 1, and 1404 regarding unauthorized contracts shall owner;
govern.
(3) If he fails to return the property or business after
In the second case, the rules on agency in Title X of this demand by the owner;
Book shall be applicable. (1888a)
(4) If he assumed the management in bad faith. (1891a)
Art. 2145. The officious manager shall perform his
Art. 2148. Except when the management was assumed
duties with all the diligence of a good father of a
family, and pay the damages which through his fault or to save property or business from imminent danger, the
negligence may be suffered by the owner of the officious manager shall be liable for fortuitous events:
property or business under management. (1) If he is manifestly unfit to carry on the management;
The courts may, however, increase or moderate the (2) If by his intervention he prevented a more
indemnity according to the circumstances of each case. competent person from taking up the management. (n)
(1889a)
Art. 2149. The ratification of the management by the
Art. 2146. If the officious manager delegates to another owner of the business produces the effects of an express
person all or some of his duties, he shall be liable for agency, even if the business may not have been
the acts of the delegate, without prejudice to the direct successful. (1892a)
obligation of the latter toward the owner of the
business. Art. 2150. Although the officious management may not
have been expressly ratified, the owner of the property
The responsibility of two or more officious managers or business who enjoys the advantages of the same shall
shall be solidary, unless the management was assumed be liable for obligations incurred in his interest, and
to save the thing or business from imminent danger. shall reimburse the officious manager for the necessary
(1890a) and useful expenses and for the damages which the
Art. 2147. The officious manager shall be liable for any latter may have suffered in the performance of his
fortuitous event: duties.

(1) If he undertakes risky operations which the owner The same obligation shall be incumbent upon him when
was not accustomed to embark upon; the management had for its purpose the prevention of
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

an imminent and manifest loss, although no benefit may


have been derived. (1893)
SECTION 2. - Solutio Indebiti
Art. 2151. Even though the owner did not derive any
benefit and there has been no imminent and manifest Art. 2154. If something is received when there is no
right to demand it, and it was unduly delivered through
danger to the property or business, the owner is liable
as under the first paragraph of the preceding article, mistake, the obligation to return it arises. (1895)
provided: Art. 2155. Payment by reason of a mistake in the
(1) The officious manager has acted in good faith, and construction or application of a doubtful or difficult
question of law may come within the scope of the
(2) The property or business is intact, ready to be preceding article. (n)
returned to the owner. (n)
Art. 2156. If the payer was in doubt whether the debt
Art. 2152. The officious manager is personally liable was due, he may recover if he proves that it was not
for contracts which he has entered into with third due. (n)
persons, even though he acted in the name of the owner,
and there shall be no right of action between the owner Art. 2157. The responsibility of two or more payees,
and third persons. These provisions shall not apply: when there has been payment of what is not due, is
solidary. (n)
(1) If the owner has expressly or tacitly ratified the
management, or Art. 2158. When the property delivered or money paid
belongs to a third person, the payee shall comply with
(2) When the contract refers to things pertaining to the the provisions of article 1984. (n)
owner of the business. (n)
Art. 2159. Whoever in bad faith accepts an undue
Art. 2153. The management is extinguished: payment, shall pay legal interest if a sum of money is
involved, or shall be liable for fruits received or which
(1) When the owner repudiates it or puts an end thereto; should have been received if the thing produces fruits.
(2) When the officious manager withdraws from the He shall furthermore be answerable for any loss or
management, subject to the provisions of Article 2144; impairment of the thing from any cause, and for
(3) By the death, civil interdiction, insanity or damages to the person who delivered the thing, until it
insolvency of the owner or the officious manager. (n) is recovered. (1896a)
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

Art. 2160. He who in good faith accepts an undue former, unless it appears that he gave it out of piety and
payment of a thing certain and determinate shall only without intention of being repaid. (1894a)
be responsible for the impairment or loss of the same or
its accessories and accessions insofar as he has thereby Art. 2165. When funeral expenses are borne by a third
been benefited. If he has alienated it, he shall return the person, without the knowledge of those relatives who
price or assign the action to collect the sum. (1897) were obliged to give support to the deceased, said
relatives shall reimburse the third person, should the
Art. 2161. As regards the reimbursement for latter claim reimbursement. (1894a)
improvements and expenses incurred by him who
unduly received the thing, the provisions of Title V of Art. 2166. When the person obliged to support an
orphan, or an insane or other indigent person unjustly
Book II shall govern. (1898)
refuses to give support to the latter, any third person
Art. 2162. He shall be exempt from the obligation to may furnish support to the needy individual, with right
restore who, believing in good faith that the payment of reimbursement from the person obliged to give
was being made of a legitimate and subsisting claim, support. The provisions of this article apply when the
destroyed the document, or allowed the action to father or mother of a child under eighteen years of age
prescribe, or gave up the pledges, or cancelled the unjustly refuses to support him.
guaranties for his right. He who paid unduly may
Art. 2167. When through an accident or other cause a
proceed only against the true debtor or the guarantors
with regard to whom the action is still effective. (1899) person is injured or becomes seriously ill, and he is
treated or helped while he is not in a condition to give
Art. 2163. It is presumed that there was a mistake in consent to a contract, he shall be liable to pay for the
the payment if something which had never been due or services of the physician or other person aiding him,
had already been paid was delivered; but he from whom unless the service has been rendered out of pure
the return is claimed may prove that the delivery was generosity.
made out of liberality or for any other just cause. (1901)
Art. 2168. When during a fire, flood, storm, or other
calamity, property is saved from destruction by another
SECTION 3. - Other Quasi-Contracts person without the knowledge of the owner, the latter is
bound to pay the former just compensation.
Art. 2164. When, without the knowledge of the person
obliged to give support, it is given by a stranger, the Art. 2169. When the government, upon the failure of
latter shall have a right to claim the same from the any person to comply with health or safety regulations
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

concerning property, undertakes to do the necessary Advanced Foundation Construction Systems Corporation vs. New
work, even over his objection, he shall be liable to pay World Properties and Ventures, Inc. (2006)
Bank
the expenses.
Facts:
Art. 2170. When by accident or other fortuitous event,
New World conducted a bidding for the construction of 69
movables separately pertaining to two or more persons
are commingled or confused, the rules on co-ownership bored piles which would form the foundation of the 36-storey World
shall be applicable. Trade Exchange Building it planned to erect. New World notified
AFCSC of the acceptance of its bid to construct the 69 bored piles.
Art. 2171. The rights and obligations of the finder of
lost personal property shall be governed by Articles 719 After the issuance of the Notice to Proceed, but before the
and 720. signing of the contract, AFCSC, proposed an amendment to the
contract conditions, to wit:
Art. 2172. The right of every possessor in good faith to
reimbursement for necessary and useful expenses is 1.6 Excluded in the contractor scope of work shall be as follows:
governed by Article 546. 1.6.2. Removal of Underground Obstruction
Art. 2173. When a third person, without the knowledge xxx
of the debtor, pays the debt, the rights of the former are
governed by Articles 1236 and 1237. New World did not respond to said proposal but instead
directed AFCSC to proceed with the construction. Both parties signed
Art. 2174. When in a small community a nationality of the contract for the construction of the 69 bored piles. AFCSCs
the inhabitants of age decide upon a measure for proposal, however, was not incorporated in said contract.
protection against lawlessness, fire, flood, storm or
other calamity, any one who objects to the plan and Included in the billing is the cost of the removal of
refuses to contribute to the expenses but is benefited by underground obstructions in the project site as well as the installation
the project as executed shall be liable to pay his share of sonic pipes to be used to conduct load tests on the bored piling
of said expenses. works. AFCSC claimed that these works were not part of the original
contract and should be treated as extra work. New World refused to
Art. 2175. Any person who is constrained to pay the pay its outstanding obligations to AFCSC.
taxes of another shall be entitled to reimbursement from
the latter. Issue: WON the removal of underground obstructions, installation of
sonic pipes, build up of pile test cap, soil investigation, and crane
P8,515,396.63, and the cost of removing the
underground obstructions, sonic pipe installation, build
up of pile test cap, soil investigation and crane rental.
P8,025,836.37 as cost of additional work consisting of the removal of the
underground obstructions!
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

rental constitute additional works which will entitle AFCSC to its constitute unjust enrichment for the bank to the prejudice of AFCSC.
claim of additional pay. Yes! Such unjust enrichment, as previously discussed, is not allowed by
law.
Decision:
Avon Cosmetics, Incorporated and Jose Marie Franco vs Leticia
The removal of the underground obstructions was not covered
H. Luna (2006)
by the scope of work in the contract. It is not disputed though that the
same was a major work entailing additional expenses and extra Facts:
working time. Neither was it denied that such major work was indeed
necessary for the successful completion of the project. Indeed, to deny Luna initially worked for Beautifont as franchise dealer then
AFCSC relief for the expenses it incurred in removing said Supervisor. Later, Beautifont was acquired by Avon Cosmetics, in
obstructions would result in allowing New World to unjustly enrich which Luna continued working.
itself at the expense of AFCSC. Equity necessarily dictates that New Avon and Luna entered into a Supervisors Agreement which
World be held liable for the expenses incurred for the extra work contained that Luna is an independent retailer of the company and is
conducted for its sole benefit. not an employee or an agent and that she shall sell, display or promote
only the products of Avon. Exclusivity clause
Article 22 of the Civil Code which embodies the maxim, Nemo
ex alterius incommode debet lecupletari (no man ought to be made Sometime in 1988, Luna became a Group Franchise Director of
rich out of anothers injury) states: Art. 22. Every person who through Sandre Philippines, a company which sells vitamins and supplements,
an act of performance by another, or any other means, acquires or while concurrently being a Group Supervisor of Avon. She consulted a
comes into possession of something at the expense of the latter without law firm as to the legality of her agreement with Avon and she was
just or legal ground, shall return the same to him. The above-quoted advised that the same was contrary to public policy and
article is part of the chapter of the Civil Code on Human Relations, the unconstitutional as it restraints the trade and livelihood of the party.
provisions of which were formulated as basic principles to be
observed for the rightful relationship between human beings and for Upon learning the connection of Luna to Sandre Phils., Avon
the stability of the social order, x x x designed to indicate certain terminated the exclusive dealership of the former. Hence, Luna filed
norms that spring from the fountain of good conscience, x x x guides complaint for damages against Avon.
human conduct [that] should run as golden threads through society to
RTC ruled in favour of Luna and ordered Avon to pay
the end that law may approach its supreme ideal which is the sway and
damages. The clause was held to be contrary to public policy as it
dominance of justice.
limits the trade and livelihood of the party involved. It should be
Hence, to allow New World to acquire the finished project at a construed only as to not get involved in companies that are direct
price far below its actual construction cost would undoubtedly competitors of Avon.
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

CA affirmed. Bonzon later filed a complaint against Standard Oil and the
defendant Sheriff for the amount of purchase price paid at the
Issue: WON the exclusivity clause was void for being contrary to
execution sale.
public policy.No! It was not by chance that Sandr Philippines, Inc. made respondent
Luna one of its Group Franchise Directors. It doesn't take a genius to
realize that by making her an important part of its distribution arm, Issue: WON Bonzon may still recover the purchase price from the
Decision: Sandr Philippines, Inc., a newly formed direct-selling business, would
judgment creditor.
be saving time, effort and money as it will no longer have to recruit,
NO. train and motivate supervisors and dealers. Respondent Luna, who Decision:
learned the tricks of the trade from petitioner Avon, will do it for them.
The Supreme Court agreed with the petitioner that the clause YES.
was made to protect Avon from other companies, whether competitors
or not, who would exploit the sales and promotions network Under the general principle that one person may not enrich
established by Avon. himself at the expense of another, a judgment creditor would not be
permitted to retain the purchase price of land sold as the property of
Apparently, Sandre Phils. made Luna one of its Franchise the judgment debtor after it has been made to appear that the judgment
Directors to utilize her skills learned from Avon in the sale and
debtor had no title to the land and that the purchaser had failed to
distribution of its products. Hence, this is tantamount to unjust secure title thereto.
enrichment. Also, the goodwill established by Avon will be taken
advantage by Sandre since the dealers may be the same, this will The judgment in favour of Standard Oil gave it the right to
create beliefs in the minds of customers that both products are have the property of the judgment debtor to be sold to satisfy the
manufactured by the same company. judgment; but it could not be given any right over the property of
another person.
Agapito Bonzon vs Standard Oil Company of New York and
Leonardo Osorio (1914) In this case, the property was never owned by the judgment
debtor. By the tortious act of the sheriff, such property was sold to
Facts:
Bonzon of which no title was transferred. The proceeding concerning
Bonzon purchased a real estate at an execution sale and paid the sale have been found to be void hence the eviction of Bonzon from
the sum of P2, 170 to the Sheriff; in return, the sheriff turned over the the property, it is clear that the company have no right to the proceeds
proceeds of the sale to Standard Oil, judgment creditor. of the sale. The purchaser is equitably entitled to the return of the
purchase price.
Bonzon initially possessed the property but was later evicted
after having been discovered that the aforesaid property belonged to
third parties. Neither the judgment debtor nor Bonzon obtained title to CHAPTER II
such property.
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

THE TORTFEASOR Art. 40. Birth determines personality; but the conceived
child shall be considered born for all purposes that are
A. The Tortfeasor
favorable to it, provided it be born later with the
1. Natural Persons conditions specified in the following article. (29a)
(NCC)
Art. 37. Juridical capacity, which is the fitness to be
the subject of legal relations, is inherent in every natural 2. Juridical Persons
person and is lost only through death. Capacity to act,
Art. 44. The following are juridical persons:
which is the power to do acts with legal effect, is
acquired and may be lost. (n) (1) The State and its political subdivisions;

Art. 38. Minority, insanity or imbecility, the state of (2) Other corporations, institutions and entities for
being a deaf-mute, prodigality and civil interdiction are public interest or purpose, created by law; their
mere restrictions on capacity to act, and do not exempt personality begins as soon as they have been constituted
the incapacitated person from certain obligations, as according to law;
when the latter arise from his acts or from property
relations, such as easements. (32a) (3) Corporations, partnerships and associations for
private interest or purpose to which the law grants a
Art. 39. The following circumstances, among others, juridical personality, separate and distinct from that of
modify or limit capacity to act: age, insanity, each shareholder, partner or member. (35a)
imbecility, the state of being a deaf-mute, penalty,
Art. 45. Juridical persons mentioned in Nos. 1 and 2 of
prodigality, family relations, alienage, absence,
the preceding article are governed by the laws creating
insolvency and trusteeship. The consequences of these
circumstances are governed in this Code, other codes, or recognizing them.
the Rules of Court, and in special laws. Capacity to act Private corporations are regulated by laws of general
is not limited on account of religious belief or political application on the subject.
opinion.
Partnerships and associations for private interest or
A married woman, twenty-one years of age or over, is purpose are governed by the provisions of this Code
qualified for all acts of civil life, except in cases concerning partnerships. (36 and 37a)
specified by law. (n)
Art. 46. Juridical persons may acquire and possess
property of all kinds, as well as incur obligations and
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

bring civil or criminal actions, in conformity with the lease of sugar allotment. Her indebtedness was known as a crop loan
laws and regulations of their organization. (38a) and was secured by a mortgage on her standing crop including her
sugar quota allocation. Her sugar cannot be exported without sugar
Philippine National Bank vs CA (1978) quota allotment. A planter harvest less sugar than her quota, so her
Facts: excess quota is utilized by another who pays her for its use. This is the
arrangement entered into between Mrs. Tapnio and Mr. Tuazon . Since
The basic action is the complaint filed by Philamgen the quota was mortgaged to the P.N.B., the contract of lease had to be
(Philippine American General Insurance Co., Inc.) as surety against approved by said Bank.
Rita Gueco Tapnio and Cecilio Gueco, for the recovery of the sum of
P2,379.71 paid by Philamgen to the Philippine National Bank on The bank required the parties to raise the consideration of
behalf of respondents Tapnio and Gueco, pursuant to an indemnity P2.80 per picul or a total of P2,800.00. When the branch manager of
agreement. Petitioner Bank was made third-party defendant by Tapnio the Philippine National Bank at San Fernando recommended the
and Gueco on the theory that their failure to pay the debt was due to approval of the contract of lease at the price of P2.80 per picul, the
the fault or negligence of petitioner. board of directors required that the amount be raised to 3.00 per picul.
The parties were notified of the refusal on the part of the board of
Philamgen executed its Bond, with defendant Rita Gueco directors.
Tapnio in favor of the Philippine National Bank Branch at San
Fernando, Pampanga, to guarantee the payment of defendant Rita The refusal on the part of the bank to approve the lease at the
Gueco Tapnio's account. In turn, to guarantee the payment of whatever rate of P2.80 per picul would have enabled Rita Gueco Tapnio to
amount the bonding company would pay to the Philippine National realize the amount of P2,800.00 which was more than sufficient to pay
Bank, both defendants executed the indemnity agreement. off her indebtedness to the Bank

Defendant Rita Gueco Tapnio was indebted to the bank which Petitioner argued that as an assignee of the sugar quota of
she failed to pay despite demands. The Bank wrote a letter of demand Tapnio, it has the right to fix the rental price per picul of the sugar
to plaintiff. Plaintiff paid the bank for the defendant Rita Gueco's quota subject of the lease between private respondents and Jacobo C.
obligation. Plaintiff made several demands upon defendant Rita Gueco Tuazon.
Tapnio. Tapnio told the Plaintiff that she did not consider herself to be Tuazon informed the Branch Manager of the Bank that the
indebted to the Bank at all because she had an agreement with one
minimum lease rental of P2.80 per picul was acceptable to him and
Tuazon Jacobo-Nazon whereby she had leased to the latter her unused export
that he even offered to use the loan secured by him from petitioner to
sugar quota. Tapnio filed her third-party complaint against the Bank. pay in full the sum of P2,800.00 which was the total consideration of
She agreed to allow Mr. Jacobo C. Tuazon to use said quota for the the lease. This arrangement was not only satisfactory to the Branch
consideration of P2,500.00. This agreement was called a contract of
Manager but it was also approves by Vice-President J. V.
A corporation is civilly liable in the same manner as natural persons for torts, because "generally speaking, the rules governing the liability of a principal or master for a tort
committed by an agent or servant are the same whether the principal or master be a natural person or a corporation, and whether the servant or agent be a natural or artificial
person. All of the authorities agree that a principal or master is liable for every tort which he expressly directs or authorizes, and this is just as true of a corporation as of a
natural person. Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

Buenaventura of the PNB. Under that arrangement, Rita Gueco Tapnio to another in a manner that is contrary to morals, good customs or
could have realized the amount of P2,800.00, which was more than public policy shall compensate the latter for the damage."
enough to pay the balance of her indebtedness to the Bank which was
secured by the bond of Philamgen. B. Persons Made Responsible For Others

1. In General
Issue: WON petitioner is liable for the damage caused. Yes

Decision: a. Quasi-delicts under Art. 2180, how interpreted

The decision of the Court of Appeals is hereby AFFIRMED Felina Rodriguez-Luna vs The Honorable Intermediate Appellate
ordering petitioner, as third-party defendant, to pay respondent Rita Court (1985)
Gueco Tapnio. Facts:
The difference between the amount of P2.80 per picul offered The petitioners are the heirs of Roberto R. Luna who was killed
by Tuazon and the P3.00 per picul demanded by the Board amounted in a vehicular collision.Those involved were the go-kart driven by the
only to a total sum of P200.00. Considering that all the accounts of deceased, a business executive, and a Toyota car driven by Luis dela
Rita Gueco Tapnio with the Bank were secured by chattel mortgage Rosa, a minor of 13 years who had no driver's license.
and surety, there was no reasonable basis for the Board of Directors of
petitioner to have rejected the lease agreement because of a measly Trial court ruled On the amount of the award of P1,650,000.00.
sum of P200.00. It was based on two factors, namely: (a) that the deceased Roberto R.
Luna could have lived for 30 more years; and (b) that his annual net
The law makes it imperative that every person "must in the income was P55,000.00, computed at P75,000.00 annual gross income
exercise of his rights and in the performance of his duties, act with less P20,000.00 annual personal expenses.
justice, give everyone his due, and observe honesty and good faith.
This petitioner failed to do. According to the American Experience Table of Mortality, at
age 33 the life expectancy of Roberto Luna was 33.4 years. Dr.
The bank knew that the agricultural year was about to expire, Vicente Campa testified that based on Roberto Lunas condition, he
that by its disapproval of the lease private respondents would be could reasonably expect to have a life expectancy of 30 years.
unable to utilize the sugar quota in question. In failing to observe the
reasonable degree of care and vigilance which the surrounding Court of First Instance of Manila rendered sentencing the
circumstances reasonably impose, petitioner bank is consequently defendants Luis dela Rosa and Jose dela Rosa to pay, jointly and
liable for the damages caused on private respondents. Under Article 21 severally, to the plaintiffs the sum of P1,650,000.00 as unearned net
of the New Civil Code, "any person who wilfully causes loss or injury earnings of Roberto Luna, compensatory damages plus attorney's fees
in the sum of P50,000.00.
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

The defendants appealed to the defunct Court of Appeals. The from 30 to 10 Years and increased his annual personal expenses from
court affirmed in toto that of the trial court. However, upon a motion P20,000.00 to P30,000.00.
for reconsideration filed by the defendants-appellants, the Court of
Appeals ordered the defendants to pay plaintiffs, jointly and severally, Their petition contains the following prayer: That after notice
the sum of Four Hundred Fifty Thousand Pesos (P450,000.00) as and hearing, judgment be rendered, setting aside or modifying the
unearned net earnings of Roberto R. Luna. RESOLUTION of respondent Court of Appeal only insofar as it
reduced the unearned net earnings to P450,000.00, so as to affirm the
The Court of appeal takes notice that the wrongful death trial court's finding as to the unearned net earnings of the deceased in
occurred as early as January 18, 1970 and that until now the process of the amount of P1,650,000.00
litigation is not yet over. In the interest of justice, the private
The private respondents failed to pay the amounts and when
respondents are hereby ordered to pay to the petitioners within thirty
(30) days from notice the following amounts adjudged against them: required to explain they said that they had no cash money.
P450,000.00 for unearned net earnings of the deceased. Matters still to be resolved shall be the following; whether the
Acting on a motion for reconsideration filed by the dela Rosas, award for unearned net earnings shall be increased to P1,650,000.00;
the Court of Appeals took into account the fact that the deceased and whether the award for attorney's fees shall also be with interest at
Roberto R. Luna had been engaged in car racing and manner of life the legal rate.
should be one of the factors affecting the value of mortality table in Issue: WON the Court of Appeals erred in modifying its original
actions for damages. The court concluded that Luna could not have decision. YES
lived beyond 43 years. The result was that the 30-year life expectancy
of Luna was reduced to 10 years only. Decision:

Court of Appeals ruled in respect of Luna's annual personal Court of Appeals erred in modifying its original decision.
expenses, the escalating price of automobile gas which is a key
Supreme Court sustain the petitioners. Luna was engaged in
expenditure in Roberto R. Luna's social standing, it should increase
go-kart racing which cannot be categorized as a dangerous sport for
that amount to P30,000.00.The Court of Appeals then determined the
go-karts are extremely low slung, low powered vehicles, only slightly
amount of the award thus: P75,000.00 annual gross income less
larger than foot-pedalled four wheeled conveyances. It was error for
P30,000.00 annual personal expenses leaves P45,000.00 multiplied by
the Court of Appeals to reduce the net annual income of the deceased
10 years of life expectancy and the product is P450,000.00.
by increasing his annual personal expenses but without at the same
The petitioners contend that the Court of Appeals erred when time increasing his annual gross income.
by its resolution of June 19, 1981, it reduced Luna's life expectancy
The private respondents invoke Elcano vs. Hill, L-24803, May 26, 1977; 77 SCRA 98, where it was held that Article 2180 of the Civil Code applied to Atty. Marvin Hill
notwithstanding the emancipation by marriage of Reginald Hill, his son but since Reginald had attained age, as a matter of equity, the liability of Atty. Hill had become
merely subsidiary to that of his son. It is now said that Luis dela Rosa, is now married and of legal age and that as a matter of equity the liability of his father should be
subsidiary only. Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

The petitioners now pray that the award of attorney's fees be 101 of the Revised Penal Code Victoria Bangkili could not be held
with interest at the legal rate from the date of the filing of the civilly liable for the criminal act of her minor son, who was already 19
complaint. There is merit in this prayer. The attorney's fees were years of age at the time he committed the offense; and that Article
awarded in the concept of damages in a quasi-delict case and under the 2180 of the New Civil Code was not applicable for it covers only
circumstances interest as part thereof may be adjudicated at the obligations arising from quasi-delicts and not to those arising from
discretion of the court. crimes.

The courts are unwilling to apply equity instead of strict law in Issue: WON the latter, as the mother of Carlos who had him in her
this case because to do so will not serve the ends of justice. Luis dela custody at the time he committed the offense, should be adjudged
Rosa is abroad and beyond the reach of Philippine courts. Moreover, liable with him for the amount which he was sentenced to pay,
he does not have any property either in the Philippines or elsewhere. In considering that he was then a minor of 19 years.
Thus, the father, Jose
fact his earnings are insufficient to support his family. dela Rosa, is held
primarily liable!
Decision:
b. Indirect liability for intentional acts
VICTORIA BANGKILI IS SOLIDARILY LIABLE WITH HER CO-
Linday Paleyan, for her own and behalf of her Minor children vs DEFENDANT.
Carlos Bangkili and Victoria Bangkili (1971)
The particular law that governs this case is Article 2180: "The
Facts: father and, in case of his death or incapacity, the mother, are
responsible for damages caused by the minor children who live in
Plaintiffs are the widow and children of Balos Paleyan, who their company." To hold that this provision does not apply to the
was killed by defendant Carlos Bangkili. He was then accused of the instant case because it only covers obligations which arise from quasi-
crime of Homicide with less serious physical injuries. At the time of delicts and not obligations which arise from criminal offenses, would
the commission of the offense Carlos Bangkili was a minor. Upon his result in the absurdity that while for an act where mere negligence
plea of guilty, he was sentenced accordingly, but the decision made no
intervenes the father or mother may stand subsidiarily liable for the
pronouncement as to the civil indemnity. The plaintiffs filed the an damage caused by his or her son, no liability would attach if the
action for damages against Carlos Bangkili and his mother, Victoria damage is caused with criminal intent.
Bangkili.
Where the allegations in the complaint show that herein
The Court orders the dismissal of the complaint against the appellee was sued directly under the said provision, in that she "failed
defendant Victoria Bangkili and renders judgment in favor of the and neglected to exercise the proper care and vigilance over her ward
plaintiffs and against the defendant Carlos Bangkili. In dismissing the and minor child and as a consequence of such failure and neglect, the
complaint against Victoria Bangkili the court held that under Article said Carlos Bangkili committed the wrongful act herein complained of.
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

The appellee here agrees that Article 2180 is applicable in this case, criminal case to institute a civil action for damages separate and
but submits that its application should be relaxed, considering that her distinct from the criminal suit.
son, although living with her, was already 19 years of age and hence
mature enough to have a mind of his own. This fact is not a legal The Court rendered a judgment in plaintiff's favor ordering the
defense, however, and does not exempt the appellant from her defendants to pay jointly and severally the amount of P13,000.00 as
responsibility as parent and natural guardian. Article 2180 does damages.
not provide for any exemption except proof that the defendant They urged that the civil action was prematurely instituted in
parent "observed all the diligence of a good father of a family to view of Rule 111, section 3, providing in part that "after the criminal
prevent damage." There is no such proof in this case. action has been commenced the civil action cannot be instituted until
final judgment has been rendered in the criminal action." Additionally,
WHEREFORE, the judgment appealed from is reversed with
respect to defendant-appellee Victoria Bangkili, and she is hereby they contended that even assuming their liability, the lower Court
adjudged liable solidarily with her co-defendant for the amounts nevertheless committed an error in holding them jointly and severally
awarded in said judgment, with costs. liable.

c. Nature of Solidarity Issues:

Feliz Lanuzo vs Sy Bon Ping and Salvador Mendoza (1980) 1) WON THE CIVIL ACTION WAS PREMATURELY
INSTITUTED IN VIEW OF RULE 111, SEC.3.
Facts:
2) WON THE LOWER COURT ERRED IN HOLDING SY BONG
A Complaint for damages was instituted by Felix Lanuzo PING JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY LIABLE FOR THE
against Sy Bon Ping, the owner and operator of a truck and his driver, DAMAGES CAUSED BY THE NEGLIGENT ACT OF HIS
Salvador Mendoza. It was alleged that while Mendoza was driving the EMPLOYEE Yes
truck and because of his reckless negligence, he rammed into the
residential house and store of plaintiff. As a result, the house and store Decision:
were completely razed to the ground causing damage to plaintiff in the 1.) The terms of plaintiff's reservation of his right to institute a
total amount of P13,000.00. The defendants moved to dismiss on the separate civil action clearly and unmistakably make out a case for
ground that a criminal case for Damage to Property through Reckless quasi-delict. This is also evident from the recitals in plaintiff's
Imprudence, was pending in the Municipal Court of Nabua, Camarines Complaint averring the employer-employee relationship between the
Sur, between the same parties for the same cause. Plaintiff opposed the appellants, alleging that damages to the house and store were caused
dismissal stressing that he had made an express reservation in the by the fact that Salvador Mendoza had driven the truck "recklessly,
with gross negligence and imprudence, without observance of traffic
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

rules and regulations and without regard to the safety of persons and Prima Malipol, in her own behalf and as guardian ad litem of her
property". minor children, Lydia Malijan, Josefina Malijan, Teodoro Malijan
and Sebastian Malijan vs Lily Lim Tan and Ernesto Labsan
As it is apparent that plaintiff had predicated his present claim (1974)
for damages on quasi-delict, he is not barred from proceeding with this
independent civil suit. The institution of a criminal action cannot have Facts:
the effect of interrupting the civil action based on quasi-delict. And the
separate civil action for quasi-delict may proceed independently and In the evening of February 6, 1965, Pantaleon Malijan, who
regardless of the result of the criminal case, except that a plaintiff was walking on a road in Barrio San Felix, Sto. Tomas, Batangas, was
cannot recover damages twice for the same act or commission of the hit by a gasoline tanker and was thrown to the ground. While he was
sprawling on the ground Malijan was run over by the tanker's right
defendant.
wheel that got detached from its axle. He died due to the accident. The
2.) As to the subject of liability of the appellants herein, For his cause of death is "possible traumatic cerebral hemorrhage due to
own negligence in recklessly driving the truck owned and operated by vehicular accident."
his employer, the driver, Salvador Mendoza, is primarily liable under
Article 2176 of the Civil Code. On the other hand, the liability of his The gasoline tanker was driven at the time of the accident by
employer, Sy Bon Ping, is also primary and direct under Article 2180 herein appellant Ernesto Labsan which was being used in connection
with the gasoline business of the owner, the herein appellant Lily Lim
of the same Code, which explicitly provides:
Tan.
Employers shall be liable for the damages caused by their employees
Representations and demands for payment of damage having
and household helpers acting within the scope of their assigned tasks,
even though the former are not engaged in any business or industry. been ignored by appellants, appellees filed on May 18, 1966 a
complaint in the Court of First Instance of Batangas praying that
For failure of the Sy Bon Ping to rebut the legal presumption of appellants be condemned to pay, jointly and severally, the damages as
his negligence in the selection and supervision of this employee, he is specified in said complaint. The appellees are the mother and the
likewise responsible for the damages caused by the negligent act of his minor brothers and sisters of the deceased Pantaleon Malijan.
employee (driver), and his liability is primary and solidary. But
although the employer is solidarity liable with the employee for Appellants were duly served but they failed to file their answer
within the reglementary period. Upon appellees' motion, the trial court
damages, the employer may demand reimbursement from his
employee for whatever amount the employer will have to pay the declared the appellants in default and appellees were permitted to
offended party to satisfy the latter's claim. present their evidence in the absence of the appellants.
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

CFI- Ernesto Labsan is liable to pay damages to the plaintiffs managers of an establishment or enterprise for damages caused by
and should Ernesto Labsan not be able to pay the damages, they shall their employees is primary and direct, not subsidiary. 9 The employer,
be paid for by defendant Lily Lim Tan, who by law, being the owner however, can demand from his employee reimbursement of the
and operator of the gasoline tanker that featured in the accident, is amount which he paid under his liability. The employer, appellant Lily
subsidiarily liable. Lim Tan, must be held primarily and directly, not subsidiarily, liable
for damages awarded in the decision of the lower court. This is, of
Appellants subsequently filed a verified motion to lift the order
course, without prejudice to the right of appellant Lily Lim Tan to
of default and for a new trial which was denied by the trial court.
demand from her co-appellant Ernesto Labsan reimbursement of the
Issue: WON the liability of Lily Lim Tan in the case, who by law, damages that she would have to pay to appellees.
being the owner and operator of the gasoline tanker is subsidiary.
WHEREFORE, the decision of the Court of First Instance of
Decision: Batangas, dated July 1, 1966, as modified in accordance with the
observations we made in the preceding paragraph, and the order, dated
No. Lily Lim Tans liability is direct and primary. October 10, 1966, denying appellants' motion for the lifting of the
order of default and for new trial, in Civil Case No. 1732, are affirmed.
We must point out a flaw in the decision of the lower court. It
Costs against defendants-appellees.
is stated in the decision appealed from that the driver, Ernesto Labsan,
was primarily liable for the payment of damages adjudged therein, and Gregorio Anuran, Maria Maligaya, Lapaz Laro, et al vs
the appellant Lily Lim Tan, being the owner and operator of the Pepito Buno, Pedro Gahol, Luisa Alcantara, Guillermo Razon,
gasoline tanker that figured in the accident, is subsidiarily liable, that Anselmo Maligaya and Cerefina Aro (1966)
is, liable only in case Ernesto Labsan was not able to pay. This is not
correct. The action in the instant case was brought not to demand civil Facts:
liability arising from a crime. The complaint makes no mention of a Petitioners- Representatives of the dead and the injured
crime having been committed, much less of the driver Ernesto Labsan
having been convicted of a crime. But there is an allegation in the Respondents- Driver and owners of motor truck and
complaint that Ernesto Labsan was the authorized driver of the truck driver and owners of jeepney To alight
that figured in the accident, which truck was operated by appellant passengers
Lily Lim Tan in connection with her gasoline business. The prayer in At noon of January 12, 1958, a passenger jeepney was parked
the complaint, furthermore, sought to hold appellants jointly and on the road to Taal, Batangas. A motor truck speeding along,
solidarily liable for damages. The instant action, therefore, was based, negligently bumped it from behind, with such violence that three of its
as the complaint shows, on quasi delict. Under Article 218 of the Civil passengers died, even as two others (passengers too) suffered injuries
Code, which treats of quasi delicts, the liability of the owners and
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

that required their confinement at the Provincial Hospital for many Upon further and more extended consideration of the matter,
days. we have become convinced that error of law was committed in
releasing the jeepney from liability. It must be remembered that the
So, in February 1958 these suits were instituted by the obligation of the carrier to transport its passengers safely is such that
representatives of the dead and of the injured, to recover consequently the New Civil Code requires "utmost diligence" from the carriers (Art.
damages against the driver and the owners of the truck and also against 1755) who are "presumed to have been at fault or to have acted
the driver and the owners of the jeepney.
negligently, unless they prove that they have observed extraordinary
Court of First Instance- rendered judgment absolving the diligence" (Art. 1756). In this instance, this legal presumption of
driver of the jeepney and its owners but it required the truck driver and negligence is confirmed by the Court of Appeals' finding that the
the owners thereof to make compensation. driver of the jeepney in question was at fault in parking the vehicle
improperly. It must follow that the driver and the owners of the
The plaintiffs appealed to the Court of Appeals insisting that jeepney must answer for injuries to its passengers.
the driver and the owners of the jeepney should also be made liable for
damages. The principle about the "last clear chance" would call for
application in a suit between the owners and drivers of the two
Court of Appeals- it affirmed the exoneration of the jeepney colliding vehicles. It does not arise where a passenger demands
driver and of its owners. It explained that although the driver of the ill- responsibility from the carrier to enforce its contractual obligations.
starred jeepney was not free from fault, for he was guilty of an For it would be inequitable to exempt the negligent driver of the
antecedent negligence in parking his vehicle improperly with a portion jeepney and its owners on the ground that the other driver was likewise
thereof occupying the asphalted road and because it was overloaded, it guilty of negligence.
considered the truck driver guilty of greater negligence which was the
efficient cause of the collision; and applying the doctrine of the "last WHEREFORE, affirming the decision under review, we
clear chance", the said Court ordered the owners of the truck to pay, hereby modify it in the sense prayed for by plaintiffs-petitioners. The
solidarily with its driver, damages. three defendants ( Driver and owners of the jeepney) are required to
pay solidarily with the other defendants-respondents the amounts fixed
The plaintiffs brought the matter to this Supreme Court by the appealed decision. Costs of both appeals against said three
insisting that the driver and the owners of the jeepney should also be defendants. So ordered.
made liable.
* The last clear chance is a doctrine in the law of torts that is
Issue: WON the driver and the owners of the jeepney should employed in contributory negligence jurisdictions. Under this doctrine, a
also be made liable. negligent plaintiff can nonetheless recover if he is able to show that the
defendant had the last opportunity to avoid the accident. Where the plaintiff's
Decision: Yes. previous negligence has placed him or her in a position from which the
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

person is powerless to extricate himself or herselfby the exercise of any Chan and Yoro separately appealed to the CA, which
ordinary care, and the defendant detects the danger while time remains to disallowed the latters appeal for failure to pay the docket and other
avoid it but fails to act, the courts have held that the plaintiff can fees. The CA denied Chans appeal.
recover.There must be proof that the defendant discovered the situation, had
the time to take action that would have saved the plaintiff, but failed to do Issue: Whether Aruego is the real party in interest and may be sued as
what a reasonable person would have done. In the absence of any one of defendant
these elements, the courts deny recovery on the part of the plaintiff.
Chan is liable
Decision:
John Kam Biak Y. Chan, Jr. vs Iglesia ni Cristo, Inc. (2005)
Petition DENIED.
Facts:
The Court finds no compelling reason to disturb this particular
Petitioner John Kam Biak Y. Chan, Jr. (Chan), owner of a conclusion reached by the Court of Appeals. The issue, therefore,
gasoline station bounded on the south by a chapel of the respondent must be ruled in the negative.
Iglesia ni Kristo, Inc. (INC), supposedly needed additional sewage and
septic tanks for his gasoline station. To this end Chan contracted the Article 2176 of the New Civil Code provides:
services of Dioscoro Yoro (Yoro) in which the latter was to dig the
ART. 2176. Whoever by act or omission causes damage to
parcel of land. Their Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) provided
another, there being fault or negligence, is obliged to pay for the
among others, that any damage within or outside Chans property
damage done. Such fault or negligence, if there is no pre-existing
incurred during the digging shall be borne by Yoro. Digging
contractual relation between the parties, is called a quasi-delict and is
commenced, and after some time Chan was informed that the digging
governed by the provisions of this Chapter.
traversed and penetrated a portion of the land belonging to INC. The
foundation of the chapel was affected as a tunnel was dug directly Based on this provision of law, the requisites of quasi-delict are the
under it to the damage and prejudice of the respondent. following:
A complaint was filed by INC with the RTC against Chan and a) there must be an act or omission;
his engineer Oller, who filed an answer and third-party complaint
against Yoro. The RTC ruled that the diggings were not intended for b) such act or omission causes damage to another;
the construction of sewerage and septic tanks but were made to c) such act or commission is caused by fault or negligence; and
construct tunnels to find hidden treasure, and that Chan and Yoro are
solidarily liable to INC and absolving Oller from any liability. d) there is no pre-existing contractual relation between the parties.

All the requisites are attendant in the instant case. The tortious act
was the excavation which caused damage to INC because it was done
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

surreptitiously within its premises and it may have affected the AN ACT LOWERING THE AGE OF MAJORITY
foundation of the chapel. The excavation INCs premises was caused FROM TWENTY-ONE TO EIGHTEEN YEARS,
by fault. Finally, there was no pre-existing contractual relation AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE EXECUTIVE
between Chanand Yoro on the one hand, and INC on the other. ORDER NUMBERED TWO HUNDRED NINE,
AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
For the damage caused to INC, Chan and Yoro are jointly liable as
they are joint tortfeasors. Verily, the responsibility of two or more Be it enacted by the Senate and House of
persons who are liable for a quasi-delict is solidary. Representatives of the Philippines in Congress
assembled::
The heavy reliance of Chan in paragraph 4 of the MOA cited
earlier cannot steer him clear of any liability. Section 1. Article 234 of Executive Order No. 209,
the Family Code of the Philippines, is hereby amended
As a general rule, joint tortfeasors are all the persons who to read as follows:
command, instigate, promote, encourage, advise, countenance,
cooperate in, aid or abet the commission of a tort, or who approve of it "Art. 234. Emancipation takes place by the attainment
after it is done, if done for their benefit. of majority. Unless otherwise provided, majority
commences at the age of eighteen years."
Indubitably, Chan and Yoro cooperated in committing the tort.
They even had provisions in their MOA as to how they would divide Section 2. Articles 235 and 237 of the same Code
the treasure if any is found within or outside Chans property line. are hereby repealed.
Thus, the MOA, instead of exculpating petitioner from liability, is the
very noose that insures that he be so declared as liable. Section 3. Article 236 of the same Code is also
hereby amended to read as follows:
Besides, Chan cannot claim that he did not know that the
excavation traversed INCs property. In fact, he had two (2) of his "Art. 236. Emancipation shall terminate parental
employees actually observe the diggings, his security guard and his authority over the person and property of the child who
engineer Teofilo Oller. shall then be qualified and responsible for all acts of
civil life, save the exceptions established by existing
2. In Particular laws in special cases.

a. Parents "Contracting marriage shall require parental consent


until the age of twenty-one.
Republic Act No. 6809 December 13, 1989
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

"Nothing in this Code shall be construed to derogate parental authority over said minor shall be subsidiarily
from the duty or responsibility of parents and guardians liable.
for children and wards below twenty-one years of age
mentioned in the second and third paragraphs of Article The respective liabilities of those referred to in the
2180 of the Civil Code." preceding paragraph shall not apply if it is proved that
they exercised the proper diligence required under the
Section 4. Upon the effectivity of this Act, existing particular circumstances.
wills, bequests, donations, grants, insurance policies
and similar instruments containing references and All other cases not covered by this and the preceding
provisions favorable to minors will not retroact to their articles shall be governed by the provisions of the Civil
Code on quasi-delicts. (n)
prejudice.

Section 5. This Act shall take effect upon Chapter 3. Effect of Parental Authority Upon the
Persons of the Children
completion of its publication in at least two (2)
newspapers of general circulation. Art. 220. The parents and those exercising parental
authority shall have with the respect to their
Approved: December 13, 1989
unemancipated children on wards the following rights
Art. 218. The school, its administrators and teachers, or and duties:
the individual, entity or institution engaged in child are
shall have special parental authority and responsibility (1) To keep them in their company, to support,
over the minor child while under their supervision, educate and instruct them by right precept and good
instruction or custody. example, and to provide for their upbringing in keeping
with their means;
Authority and responsibility shall apply to all
authorized activities whether inside or outside the (2) To give them love and affection, advice and
premises of the school, entity or institution. (349a) counsel, companionship and understanding;

Art. 219. Those given the authority and responsibility (3) To provide them with moral and spiritual
under the preceding Article shall be principally and guidance, inculcate in them honesty, integrity, self-
solidarily liable for damages caused by the acts or discipline, self-reliance, industry and thrift, stimulate
omissions of the unemancipated minor. The parents, their interest in civic affairs, and inspire in them
judicial guardians or the persons exercising substitute compliance with the duties of citizenship;
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

(4) To furnish them with good and wholesome Agapito Elcano. The CFI acquitted the Hills on the ground that
educational materials, supervise their activities, Marvins act was not criminal, because of "lack of intent to kill,
recreation and association with others, protect them coupled with mistake." The CFI also dismissed the Elcanos complaint
from bad company, and prevent them from acquiring for recovery of damages against the Hills for the same charge. Hence
habits detrimental to their health, studies and morals; the appeal.

(5) To represent them in all matters affecting their Issue: Whether Article 2180 (2nd and last paragraphs) of the Civil
interests; Code may be applied against Atty. Hill, notwithstanding the
undisputed fact that at the time of the occurrence complained of,
(6) To demand from them respect and obedience; Reginald, though a minor, living with and getting subsistence from his
(7) To impose discipline on them as may be required father, was already legally married
under the circumstances; and Decision:
Atty hill, the father is liable.

(8) To perform such other duties as are imposed by Petition DENIED.


law upon parents and guardians. (316a)
Coming now to the second issue about the effect of Reginald's
Art. 221. Parents and other persons exercising parental emancipation by marriage on the possible civil liability of Atty. Hill,
authority shall be civilly liable for the injuries and his father, it is also the Courts considered opinion that the conclusion
damages caused by the acts or omissions of their
of the Hills that Atty. Hill is already free from responsibility cannot be
unemancipated children living in their company and upheld.
under their parental authority subject to the appropriate
defenses provided by law. (2180(2)a and (4)a ) (NCC) While it is true that parental authority is terminated upon
emancipation of the child (Article 327, Civil Code), and under Article
Pedro Elcano and Patricia Elcano, in their capacity as Ascendants 397, emancipation takes place "by the marriage of the minor (child)",
of Agapito Elcano, deceased vs Reginald Hill, minor, and Marvin it is, however, also clear that pursuant to Article 399, emancipation by
Hill, as father and natural guardian of said minor (1977) marriage of the minor is not really full or absolute. Thus
Facts: "(E)mancipation by marriage or by voluntary concession shall
terminate parental authority over the child's person. It shall enable the
Appellee Reginald Hill, a minor, married at the time of the minor to administer his property as though he were of age, but he
occurrence, and his father, the defendant Marvin Hill, with whom he cannot borrow money or alienate or encumber real property without
was living and getting subsistence, was charged by appellants Pedro the consent of his father or mother, or guardian. He can sue and be
and Patricia Elcano for the killing by Reginald of their son named
Pascual, Quinto, Mabalot, Roraldo, Leungson, Quibod, Carillo, Lim, Caoagas, Santos, Liwag, Maronilla, Perola, Crescini, Diosomito, Javier, Magculang

sued in court only with the assistance of his father, mother or Accordingly, in the Courts considered view, Article 2180
guardian." applies to Atty. Hill notwithstanding the emancipation by marriage of
Reginald. However, inasmuch as it is evident that Reginald is now of
Now under Article 2180, "(T)he obligation imposed by article age, as a matter of equity, the liability of Atty. Hill has become
2176 is demandable not only for one's own acts or omissions, but also milling, subsidiary to that of his son.
for those of persons for whom one is responsible. The father and, in
case of his death or incapacity, the mother, are responsible. 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."
In the instant case, it is not controverted that Reginald, although
married, was living with his father and getting subsistence from him at
the time of the occurrence in question. Factually, therefore, Reginald
was still subservient to and dependent on his father, a situation which
is not unusual.

It must be borne in mind that, according to Manresa, the reason


behind the joint and solidary liability of presuncion with their
offending child under Article 2180 is that is the obligation of the
parent to supervise their minor children in order to prevent them from
causing damage to third persons. On the other hand, the clear
implication of Article 399, in providing that a minor emancipated by
marriage may not, nevertheless, sue or be sued without the assistance
of the parents, is that such emancipation does not carry with it freedom
to enter into transactions or do any act that can give rise to judicial
litigation. (See Manresa, Id., Vol. II, pp. 766-767, 776.) And surely,
killing someone else invites judicial action. Otherwise stated, the
marriage of a minor child does not relieve the parents of the duty to
see to it that the child, while still a minor, does not give answerable for
the borrowings of money and alienation or encumbering of real
property which cannot be done by their minor married child without
their consent. (Art. 399; Manresa, supra.)