FACTS:

Romeo Jader graduated at UE College of law from 1984-88. During his last year, 1stsemester, he
failed to take the regular final examination in Practical Court 1where he was given an
incomplete grade remarks. He filed an application for removal of the incomplete grade given
by Prof. Carlos Ortega on February 1, 1988 which was approved by Dean Celedonio Tiongson
after the payment of required fees. He took the exam on March 28 and on May 30, the
professor gave him a grade of 5.

The commencement exercise of UE College of law was held April 16, 1988, 3PM. In the
invitation, his name appeared. In preparation for the bar exam, he took a leave of absence from
work from April 20- Sept 30, 1988. He had his pre-bar class review in FEU. Upon learning of
such deficiency, he dropped his review classes and was not able to take the bar exam.

Jader sued UE for damages resulting to moral shock, mental anguish, serious anxiety,
besmirched reputation, wounded feelings, sleepless nights due to UE’s negligence.

ISSUE: Whether UE should be held liable for misleading a student into believing JADER
satisfied all the requirements for graduation when such is not the case. Can he claim moral
damages?

HELD:

SC held that petitioner was guilty of negligence and this liable to respondent for the latter’s
actual damages. Educational institutions are duty-bound to inform the students of their
academic status and not wait for the latter to inquire from the former. However, respondent
should not have been awarded moral damages though JADER suffered shock, trauma, and pain
when he was informed that he could not graduate and will not be allowed to take the bar
examinations as what CA held because it’s also respondent’s duty to verify for himself whether
he has completed all necessary requirements to be eligible for the bar examinations. As a
senior law student, he should have been responsible in ensuring that all his affairs specifically
those in relation with his academic achievement are in order. Before taking the bar
examinations, it doesn’t only entail a mental preparation on the subjects but there are other
prerequisites such as documentation and submission of requirements which prospective
examinee must meet.

WHEREFORE, the assailed decision of the Court of Appeals is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION.
Petitioner is ORDERED to PAY respondent the sum of Thirty-five Thousand Four Hundred
Seventy Pesos (P35,470.00), with legal interest of 6% per annum computed from the date of
filing of the complaint until fully paid; the amount of Five Thousand Pesos (P5,000.00) as
attorney's fees; and the costs of the suit. The award of moral damages is DELETED.