Torts And Damages Notes Outline 1 (Part 1 Torts) • Laws:ART.

2177,Article 397,article 1093,Article 2180 of the Civil Code

(read below under Special Rules)
• Doctrines:
I. Concept of Torts • acquittal of Reginal Hill in the criminal case has not extinguished
his liability for quasi-delict, hence that acquittal is not a bar to the
instant action against him
Art. 20 • 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
Art. 20. Every person who, contrary to law, wilfully or answerable for the borrowings of money and alienation or
negligently causes damage to another, shall indemnify the encumbering of real property which cannot be done by their minor
latter for the same. married child without their consent
• Porfirio P. Cinco, v. Hon. Mateo Canonoy et al.(1979)
• Cases on Quasi-delict • Summary: Cinco filed a complaint against jeepney driven by Romeo Hilot
• Fausto Barredo v. Severino Garcia(1942) and operated by Valeriana Pepito and Carlos Pepito for a vehicular
• Summary: accident. Pre-trial in the civil case: moved to suspend the civil action
• head-on collision between a taxi of the Malate Taxicab driven by pending the final determination of the criminal suit. City Court: ordered
Pedro Fontanilla and a carretela guided by Pedro Dimapalis. The the suspension of the civil case. CFI by certiorari: dismissed
carretela was overturned and its passenger Faustino Garcia (16 • Laws: Rule 111, Section 3 of the Rules of Court, Art. 31 and Article 2176
years old boy) suffered injuries from which he died two days of the Civil Code
later. Fontanilla 's negligence was the cause of the mishap and • the separate and independent civil action for a quasi-delict is also clearly
was convicted and sentenced to an indeterminate sentence of 1 recognized in:
year and 1 day to 2 years of prision correccional. Fausto Barredo • section 3, Rule 111 of the Rules of Court
as the sole proprietor of the Malate Taxicab and employer of • Art. 31. When the civil action is based on an obligation not arising
Fontanilla was negligent in employing Fontanilla who has from the act or omission complained of as a felony, such civil
several Automobile Law and speeding violations so an action was action may proceed independently of the criminal proceedings and
brought against him. CFI: awarded damages for P2,000 plus legal regardless of the result of the latter.
interest. CA: reduced the damages to P1,000 w/ legal interest. SC: • Article 2176 of the Civil Code is so broad that it includes not only injuries
CA affirmed to persons but also damage to property (in this case vehicular accident)
• Laws: ART. 1089, ART. 1092, ART. 1093, ART. 1094 of the Civil • word "damage" is used in two concepts: the "harm" done and "reparation"
Code, ART. 101, ART. 102, ART. 103, ART. 365 of RPC for the harm done
• Doctrines: • Gashem Shookat Baksh v. Hon. Court of Appeals, et al.(1993)
• quasi-delict or "culpa aquiliana" is a separate legal institution • Summary: Gashem Shookat Baksh , a medical student courted and
under the Civil Code with a substantivity all its own, and proposed to marry 22 years old, single Filipina of good moral
individuality that is entirely apart and independent from delict or character and reputation who accepted his love on the condition that they
crime would get married after the end of the school semester. He visited
• Upon this principle and on the wording and spirit article her parents in Pangasinan for approval for marriage and forced her to live
1903 of the Civil Code, the primary and direct with him when she was still a virgin requiring her to resign from her job
responsibility of employers may be safely anchored. then he started to maltreat and threatened to kill her resulting into injuries.
• Pedro Elcano, et al., v. Reginal Hill et al. (1977) She bore a child but he gave her medicine to abort it. Her father, a
• Summary: Reginald Hill, a minor, married but living with his father, Atty. tricycle driver, already looked for sponsors for the wedding, started
Marvin Hill with whom he was living and getting subsistence preparing for the reception by looking for pigs and chickens, and even
killed Agapito Elcano already invited many relatives and friends to the forthcoming wedding.
CFI, CA, SC: against Gashem.
 • Laws: Art. 21, Art. 23 and Art. 2176 of the Civil Code • Since the civil action is predicated upon Juanito Rosario's alleged
• Doctrines: negligence (that caused the car accident) does not exist, it follows that his
• Quasi-delict (culpa aquiliana) is a civil law concept while torts is acquittal in the criminal action, which is already final, carried with it the
an Anglo-American or common law concept. extinction of civil responsibility arising therefrom
• Torts is much broader than culpa aquiliana because it includes not A. Elements of Torts or Quasi-Delict (ADF-NO)
only negligence, but international criminal acts as well such as 1. Act or Omission
assault and battery, false imprisonment and deceit. 2. Damage or injury is caused to another
• intentional and malicious acts, with certain exceptions, are to be 3. Fault of negligence is present
governed by the Revised Penal Code while negligent acts or 4. There is NO pre-existing contractual relations bet. the parties
omissions are to be covered by Article 2176 of the Civil Code
• Article 21 fills that vacuum and has greatly broadened the scope of B. What must be proved (NDC)
the law on civil wrongs; it has become much more supple and 1. Negligence in quasi-delict (see negligence below)
adaptable than the Anglo-American law on torts (such as in this 2. Damage or injury
case where breach of promise to marry per se is not an actionable 3. Causal connection bet. Negligence and Damage
wrong and there is no crime, as the girl is above nineteen years of • Must be proximate cause of the injury sustained by the plaintiff to enable the plaintiff to
age) recover
Art. 21 • Concept of Proximate Cause - adequate and efficient cause which in the natural
order of events and under particular circumstances surrounding the case, would
Art. 21. Any person who wilfully causes loss or injury to naturally produce the event
another in a manner that is contrary to morals, good customs • If plaintiff's negligence is only contributory:
or public policy shall compensate the latter for the damage. • He is considered partly responsible only, may still recover from the
defendant but must be reduced by the courts in proportion to his
• Maria Benita A. Dulay, et al., v. The Court of Appeals, et al.(1995) own negligence
• Article 2176, where it refers to "fault or negligence," covers not only acts • Cases on Elements of Quasi-Delict
"not punishable by law" but also acts criminal in character; whether • German Garcia et al., v. The Hon. Mariano M. Florido et al. (1973)
intentional and voluntary or negligent. Consequently, a separate civil • petitioners never intervened in the criminal action instituted by the Chief
action against the offender in a criminal act, whether or not he is of Police against respondent Pedro Tumala, much less has the said
criminally prosecuted and found guilty or acquitted, provided that the criminal action been terminated either by conviction or acquittal of said
offended party is not allowed, if he is actually charged also criminally, to accused
recover damages on both scores, and would be entitled in such eventuality • by the institution of the present civil action for damages (for quasi-delict
only to the bigger award of the two, assuming the awards made in the two in the collision), petitioners have in effect abandoned their right to press
cases vary recovery for damages in the criminal case (violation of traffic rules), and
• Extinction of civil liability referred to in Par. (e) of Section 3, Rule 111, have opted instead to recover them in the present civil case
refers exclusively to civil liability founded on Article 100 of the Revised • Natividad V. Andamo, et al., v. Intermediate Appellate Court et al. (1990)
Penal Code, whereas the civil liability for the same act considered as • While the property involved in the cited case belonged to the public
quasi-delict only and not as a crime is not extinguished even by a domain and the property subject of the instant case is privately owned, the
declaration in the criminal case that the criminal act charged has not fact remains that petitioners' complaint sufficiently alleges that petitioners
happened or has not been committed by the accused have sustained and will continue to sustain damage due to the waterpaths
• It is enough that the complaint alleged that Benigno Torzuela shot and contrivances built by respondent corporation
Napoleon Dulay resulting in the latter's death; that the shooting occurred • It must be stressed that the use of one's property is not without limitations.
while Torzuela was on duty; and that either SUPERGUARD and/or Article 431 of the Civil Code provides that "the owner of a thing cannot
SAFEGUARD was Torzuela's employer and responsible for his acts. make use thereof in such a manner as to injure the rights of a third
• Bernabe Castillo et al v. Hon. Court of Appeals, et al (1989) person." SIC UTERE TUO UT ALIENUM NON LAEDAS. Moreover,
 adjoining landowners have mutual and reciprocal duties which require that Negligence
each must use his own land in a reasonable manner so as not to infringe
GR: In action for quasi-delict, plaintiff must prove the
upon the rights and interests of others. Although we recognize the right of
an owner to build structures on his land, such structures must be so negligence of the defendant
constructed and maintained using all reasonable care so that they cannot EX:
be dangerous to adjoining landowners and can withstand the usual and • In cases where negligence is presumed or imputed
expected forces of nature. If the structures cause injury or damage to an by law (only rebuttable/presumption juris tantum
adjoining landowner or a third person, the latter can claim indemnification • Principle of res ipso loquitor (the thing speaks for
for the injury or damage suffered. itself)
• Taylor v. Manila Electric Company and Light Company (1910)
• grounded on the difficulty of proving thru competent
• in order to establish his right to a recovery, must establish by competent
evidence:
evidence, public policy considerations
• Damages to the plaintiff Test of Negligence
• Negligence by act or omission of which defendant personally, or • Did the defendant in doing thealleged negligent act use there
some person for whose acts it must respond, was guilty. asonable care and caution which an ordinarily prudent
• The connection of cause and effect between the negligence and the person would have used in the same situation?
damage.
If not then he is guilty of negligence
• he was sui juris in the sense that his age and his experience qualified him
to understand and appreciate the necessity for the exercise of that degree • Could a prudent man, in the case under consideration,
of caution which would have avoided the injury which resulted from his foresee harm as a result of the course pursued? If so, it was
own deliberate act the duty of the actorto take precautions to guard against
• Negligence is not presumed, but must be proven by him who alleges it. harm
• while we hold that the entry upon the property without express invitation Kinds of Negligence (ACC)
or permission would not have relieved Manila Electric from responsibility
for injuries incurred, without other fault on his part, if such injury were Culpa Contractual (contractual negligence)
attributable to his negligence, the negligence in leaving the caps exposed Arts. 1170
on its premises was not the proximate cause of the injury received Art. 1170. Those who in the performance of their obligations
• cutting open the detonating cap and putting match to its contents are guilty of fraud, negligence, or delay, and those who in any
was the proximate cause of the explosion and of the resultant
manner contravene the tenor thereof, are liable for damages.
injuries inflicted
• Heirs of Pedro Tayag v. Hon. Fernando S. Alcantara, et al. (1980) Art. 1171
• Art. 31. When the civil action is based on an obligation not arising from Art. 1171. Responsibility arising from fraud is demandable in all
the act or commission complained of as a felony. such civil action may obligations. Any waiver of an action for future fraud is void.
proceed independently of the criminal proceedings and regardless of the
Art. 1172
result of the latter.
• All the essential averments for a quasi delictual action are present, namely: Art. 1172. Responsibility arising from negligence in the
(1) an act or omission constituting fault or negligence on the part of performance of every kind of obligation is also demandable, but
private respondent; (2) damage caused by the said act or commission; (3) such liability may be regulated by the courts, according to the
direct causal relation between the damage and the act or commission; and circumstances.
(4) no pre-existing contractual relation between the parties Art. 1173
• NOTE: basis of separate civil action is the elements of quasi-delict and not
the judgment of criminal action
Art. 1173. The fault or negligence of the obligor consists in the Art. 365. Imprudence and negligence. — Any person who, by
omission of that diligence which is required by the nature of the reckless imprudence, shall commit any act which, had it been
obligation and corresponds with the circumstances of the intentional, would constitute a grave felony, shall suffer the
persons, of the time and of the place. When negligence shows penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision
bad faith, the provisions of Articles 1171 and 2201, paragraph correccional in its medium period; if it would have constituted a
2, shall apply. less grave felony, the penalty of arresto mayor in its minimum
and medium periods shall be imposed; if it would have
If the law or contract does not state the diligence which is to be constituted a light felony, the penalty of arresto menor in its
observed in the performance, that which is expected of a maximum period shall be imposed.
good father of a family shall be required.
Art. 1174 Any person who, by simple imprudence or negligence, shall
Art. 1174. Except in cases expressly specified by the law, or commit an act which would otherwise constitute a grave felony,
when it is otherwise declared by stipulation, or when the nature shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor in its medium and
of the obligation requires the assumption of risk, no person maximum periods; if it would have constituted a less serious
shall be responsible for those events which could not be felony, the penalty of arresto mayor in its minimum period shall
foreseen, or which, though foreseen, were inevitable. be imposed.
Culpa Aquiliana (quasi-delict)
When the execution of the act covered by this article shall have
Art. 2176
only resulted in damage to the property of another, the
Art. 2176. Whoever by act or omission causes damage to offender shall be punished by a fine ranging from an amount
another, there being fault or negligence, is obliged to pay for equal to the value of said damages to three times such value,
the damage done. Such fault or negligence, if there is no pre- but which shall in no case be less than twenty-five pesos.
existing contractual relation between the parties, is called a A fine not exceeding two hundred pesos and censure shall be
quasi-delict and is governed by the provisions of this Chapter. imposed upon any person who, by simple imprudence or
Art. 2177 negligence, shall cause some wrong which, if done maliciously,
Art. 2177. Responsibility for fault or negligence under the would have constituted a light [Link] the imposition of these
preceding article is entirely separate and distinct from the civil penalties, the court shall exercise their sound discretion,
liability arising from negligence under the Penal Code. But the without regard to the rules prescribed in Article sixty-four.
plaintiff cannot recover damages twice for the same act or
omission of the defendant The provisions contained in this article shall not be applicable:
Art. 2178
Art. 2178. The provisions of Articles 1172 to 1174 are also 1. When the penalty provided for the offense is equal to or
applicable to a quasi-delict lower than those provided in the first two paragraphs of this
Culpa Criminal (criminal negligence) article, in which case the court shall impose the penalty next
Art. 365 lower in degree than that which should be imposed in the
period which they may deem proper to apply.
2. When, by imprudence or negligence and with violation of the
Automobile Law, to death of a person shall be caused, in which
case the defendant shall be punished by prision correccional in
Comparison Proof Needed
Vinculum Juris Proof beyond
Preponderance of evidence
Culpa Contractual Culpa Criminal reasonable doubt
Culpa Aquiliana
(contractual (criminal Defense available
(quasi-delict)
negligence) negligence) Exercise of Exercise of diligence
Act/omission extraordinary of good father of a
committed by diligence (in family in the
Negligent act/
means of dolo contracts of selection and
Contract omission (culpa,
(deliberate, carriage), Force supervision of
imprudence)
malicious, in bad Majeure employees
faith) In breach of
Only involves private Affect the public contract committed
concern interest through the
In quasi-delict the
Governed by negligence of
presumptive
Civil Code employee, the
responsibility for
provisions on employer CANNOT
the negligence of his
Obligations and Art. 365 of the erase his primary
Art. 2176 of the Civil servants can be
Contracts, Revised Penal and direct liability
Code rebutted by proof of
particularly Arts. Code by invoking exercise
the exercise of due
1170 to 1174 of the of diligence of
care in their
Civil Code a good father of a
selection and
The Civil Code by family in the
The Revised Penal supervision
means of selection and
Code punishes or supervision of the
indemnification
corrects criminal employee
merely repairs the
act Pre-existing contract
damage
Includes all acts in Punished only if There is pre-
No pre-existing contract
which any kind of there is a penal existing contract
fault or negligence law clearly Burden of Proof
intervenes covering them Victim prove the ff.:
However, it should be noted that not all (NDC)
violations of the penal law produce civil Contractual party.
• Negligence Prosecution. Acc
responsibility, such as begging in Prove the ff.:
• Damage used is presumed
contravention of ordinances, violation of • Existence
• Causal innocent until the
the game laws, infraction of the rules of of a contract
connection bet. contrary is proved
traffic when nobody is hurt. • Breach
Negligence and
damage done
 negligence of the plaintiff (wrong side of the road) by an appreciable
Difference in Civil interval.
Quasi-delict Delict • Under these circumstances the law is that the person who has the
Liability
last fair chance to avoid the impending harm and fails to do so is
Liability of
Solidary Subsidiary chargeable with the consequences, without reference to the prior
Employer negligence of the other party.
impliedly instituted • Mr. and Mrs. Amador C. Ong v. Metropolitan Water District (1958)
w/ criminal action, • Since the present action is one for damages founded on culpable
Reservation but under 2000 negligence, the principle to be observed is that the person claiming
impliedly instituted
Requirement Crimpro Rules it is damages has the burden of proving that the damage is caused by the fault
independent and or negligence of the person from whom the damage is claimed, or of one
of his employees
separate
• The last clear chance doctrine can never apply where the party charged is
GR: NOT a bar to required to act instantaneously, and if the injury cannot be avoided by the
Effect of judgment recover application of all means at hand after the peril is or should have been
of acquittal in a EX: when judgment discovered; at least in cases in which any previous negligence of the party
NOT a bar to
criminal case pronounces that charged cannot be said to have contributed to the injury
recover
involving the same the negligence from • Before closing, we wish to quote the following observation of the trial
act/omission which damage arise court, which we find supported by the evidence: "There is (also) a strong
suggestion coming from the expert evidence presented by both parties that
is non-existent
Dominador Ong might have dived where the water was only 5.5 feet deep,
and in so doing he might have hit or bumped his forehead against the
B. Cases on Negligence
bottom of the pool, as a consequence of which he was stunned, and which
• Amado Picart v. Frank Smith (1918)
to his drowning. As a boy scout he must have received instructions in
• Did the defendant in doing thealleged negligent act use thereasonable
swimming. He knew, or have known that it was dangerous for him to dive
care and caution which an ordinarily prudent person would have used in
in that part of the pool."
the same situation? If not then he is guilty of negligence
• Civil Aeronautics Administration v. Court of Appeals (1988)
• The existence of negligence in a given case is not determined by
• Article 1173 of the Civil Code, "(t)he fault or negligence of the obligor
reference to the personal judgment of the actor in the situation
consists in the omission of that diligence which is required by the nature
before him.
of the obligation and corresponds with the circumstances of the person, of
• The question as to what would constitute the conduct of a prudent
the time and of the place."
man in a given situation must of course be always determined in
• Contributory negligence under Article 2179 of the Civil Code
the light of human experience and in view of the facts involved in
contemplates a negligent act or omission on the part of the plaintiff, which
the particular case
although not the proximate cause of his injury, contributed to his own
• Could a prudent man, in the case under consideration, foresee harm as a
damage, the proximate cause of the plaintiffs own injury being the
result of the course actually pursued? If so, it was the duty of the actor to
defendant's lack of due care - none in the case
take precautions to guard against that harm
• Cases on “Pater familias”
• Conduct is said to be negligent when a prudent man in the position
• Preciolita V. Corliss v. The Manila Railroad Co. (1969)
of the tortfeasor would have foreseen that an effect harmful to
• Negligence
another was sufficiently probable to warrant his foregoing conduct
• The failure to observe for the protection of the interests of another
or guarding against its consequences
person that degree of care, precaution and vigilance which the
• It will be noted that the negligent acts of the two parties were not
circumstance justly demand whereby such other person suffers
contemporaneous, since the negligence of the defendant succeeded the
injury.
 • want of the care required by the circumstances. It is a relative or Art. 2180. The obligation imposed by Article 2176 is
comparative, not an absolute term and its application depends upon demandable not only for one's own acts or omissions, but also
the situation of the parties and the degree of care and vigilance
for those of persons for whom one is responsible.
which the circumstances reasonably require.
• Where the danger is great, a high degree of care is
necessary, and the failure to observe it is a want of ordinary The father and, in case of his death or incapacity, the mother,
care under the circumstances. are responsible for the damages caused by the minor children
• it was incumbent upon him to avoid a possible accident — and this who live in their company.
consisted simply in stopping his vehicle before the crossing and allowing
the train to move on. A prudent man under similar circumstances would Guardians are liable for damages caused by the minors or
have acted in this manner incapacitated persons who are under their authority and live in
II. Special Rules
their company.
Special Rules:Laws
Civil Code The owners and managers of an establishment or enterprise
Art. 1173 are likewise responsible for damages caused by their
Art. 1173. The fault or negligence of the obligor consists in the employees in the service of the branches in which the latter are
omission of that diligence which is required by the nature of the employed or on the occasion of their functions.
obligation and corresponds with the circumstances of the
persons, of the time and of the place. When negligence shows Employers shall be liable for the damages caused by their
bad faith, the provisions of Articles 1171 and 2201, paragraph employees and household helpers acting within the scope of
2, shall apply. their assigned tasks, even though the former are not engaged
in any business or industry.
If the law or contract does not state the diligence which is to be
observed in the performance, that which is expected of a good The State is responsible in like manner when it acts through a
father of a family shall be required special agent; but not when the damage has been caused by
Art. 2180 the official to whom the task done properly pertains, in which
case what is provided in Article 2176 shall be applicable.

Lastly, teachers or heads of establishments of arts and trades

shall be liable for damages caused by their pupils and students
or apprentices, so long as they remain in their custody.

The responsibility treated of in this article shall cease when the

persons herein mentioned prove that they observed all the
diligence of a good father of a family to prevent damage.
Art. 2182.
Art. 2182. If the minor or insane person causing damage has Art. 12. Circumstances which exempt from criminal liability. -
no parents or guardian, the minor or insane person shall be The following are exempt from criminal liability:
answerable with his own property in an action against him 1. An imbecile or an insane person, unless the latter has acted
where a guardian ad litem shall be appointed. during a lucid interval.
Art. 2185 When the imbecile or an insane person has committed an act
Art. 2185. Unless there is proof to the contrary, it is presumed which the law defines as a felony (delito), the court shall order
that a person driving a motor vehicle has been negligent if at his confinement in one of the hospitals or asylums established
the time of the mishap, he was violating any traffic regulation. for persons thus afflicted, which he shall not be permitted to
Art. 2187 leave without first obtaining the permission of the same court.
Art. 2187. Manufacturers and processors of foodstuffs, drinks, 2. A person under nine years of age.
toilet articles and similar goods shall be liable for death or 3. A person over nine years of age and under fifteen, unless he
injuries caused by any noxious or harmful substances used, has acted with discernment, in which case, such minor shall be
although no contractual relation exists between them and the proceeded against in accordance with the provisions of article
consumers. 80 of this Code.
When such minor is adjudged to be criminally irresponsible, the
Family Code
court, in conformity with the provisions of this and the
Art. 221 preceding paragraph, shall commit him to the care and custody
Art. 221. Parents and other persons exercising parental of his family who shall be charged with his surveillance and
authority shall be civilly liable for the injuries and damages education; otherwise, he shall be committed to the care of
caused by the acts or omissions of their unemancipated some institution or person mentioned in said article 80.
children living in their company and under their parental 4. Any person who, while performing a lawful act with due care,
authority subject to the appropriate defenses provided by law. causes an injury by mere accident without fault or intention of
Revised Penal Code causing it.
Art. 12 5. Any person who acts under the compulsion of irresistible
force.
6. Any person who acts under the impulse of an uncontrollable
fear of an equal or greater injury.
7. Any person who fails to perform an act required by law,
when prevented by some lawful insuperable cause.
Art. 100
Art. 100. Civil liability of a person guilty of felony. - Every
person criminally liable for a felony is also civilly liable.

Good Father of a Family (pater familias) (Art. 1173 in relation to Art. 2180)
• Standard of conduct used in the Philippines
• a man of ordinary intelligence and prudence or an ordinary reasonable prudent man
deemed to have knowledge of the facts that a man should be expected to know based on
ordinary human experience
 • Case: human affairs, would do, or the doing of something which a
• Julian del Rosario v. Manila Electric Co (1932) (liability as owner) prudent and reasonable man would not do
• presumption of negligence on the part of the Manila Electric • the failure to observe, for the protection of the interest of another
Company from the breakage of this wire has not been overcome, and it is person, that degree of care, precaution and vigilance which the
in our opinion responsible for the accident circumstances justly demand, whereby such other person suffers
• contributory negligence would not be wholly fatal to the right of action in injury
this case, not having been the determining cause of the accident • Accident and negligence are intrinsically contradictory; one cannot exist
1. Children with the other
• GR: The action of the child will not necessarily be judged according to the standard of an • Anent the negligence imputed to Zhieneth, we apply the conclusive
adult presumption that favors children below 9 years old in that they are
• EX: if the minor is mature enough to understand and appreciate the nature and incapable of contributory negligence. In our jurisdiction, a person under
consequence of his actions, he will be considered negligent if he fails to exercise due care nine years of age is conclusively presumed to have acted without
and precaution in the commission of such acts discernment, and is, on that account, exempt from criminal liability. The
• NOTE: same presumption and a like exemption from criminal liability obtains in a
• No arbitrary age case of a person over nine and under fifteen years of age, unless it is
• Absence of negligence does not necessarily mean absence of liability shown that he has acted with discernment.
• Liability without fault: a child under 9 years can still be subsidiarily liable • Initially, Zhieneth held on to Criselda's waist, and only momentarily
with his property (Art. 100, RPC) released the child's hand from her clutch when she signed her credit
• Absence of negligence of the child may not excuse the parents from their card slip. At this precise moment, it was reasonable and usual for her to let
vicarious liability under Art.2180 NCC or Art. 221 FC go of her child.
• Taylor v. Manila Electric Railroad and Light Co.(1910) (liability as owner)(see • Further, at the time Zhieneth was pinned down by the counter, she was just
also Taylor above) a foot away from her mother; and the gift-wrapping counter was just 4
• NOTE: failure of employer to exercise diligence of a good father meters away - time and distance were both significant.
• of a family is also a negligence but it was not the proximate cause 2. Physical Disability
• child who is 9 or below is conclusively presumed to be incapable of negligence. • GR:Mere weakness of a person will not be an excuse in negligence cases.
• On the other hand, if the child is above 9 years but below 15, there is a disputable • EX: If defect amounts to a real disability the standard of conduct is that of a reasonable
presumption of absence of negligence person under that disability
• Jarco Marketing v. CA (1999) 3. Schools, Administrator, Teacher (see Ateneo reviewer)
• accident • Federico Ylarde v. Edgardo Aquino (1988) (liability as teachers or heads of
• pertains to an unforeseen event in which no fault or negligence establishments of arts and trades )
attaches to the defendant • GR: teachers shall be liable for the acts of their students
• a fortuitous circumstance, event or happening • EX: where the school is technical in nature, in which case it is the head
• an event happening without any human agency, or if happening thereof who shall be answerable
wholly or partly through human agency, an event which under the • negligent act of Aquino in leaving his pupils in such a dangerous site has a
circumstances is unusual or unexpected by the person to whom it direct causal connection to the death of the child Ylarde
happens • it was but natural for the children to play around
• occurs when the person concerned is exercising ordinary care, • the child Ylarde would not have died were it not for the unsafe
which is not caused by fault of any person and which could not situation created by Aquino
have been prevented by any means suggested by common 4. Experts and Professionals
prudence • They should exhibit the care and skill of one who is ordinarily skilled in the particular
• negligence field that he is in.
• omission to do something which a reasonable man, guided by
those considerations which ordinarily regulate the conduct of
 • When a person holds himself out as being competent to do things requiring professional • Being closest to the vent of loss, therefore, CBC's negligence must
skill, he will be held liable for negligence if he fails to exhibit the care and skill of one be held to be proximate cause of the loss
ordinarily skilled in the particular work which he attempts to do. • while we do not apply the last clear chance doctrine as controlling
• An expert will not be judged based on what a non-expert can foresee. in this case, still the CBC employees had ample opportunity to
• The rule regarding experts is applicable NOT only to professionals who have undergone avoid the harm which befell both CBC and BPI. They let the
formal education opportunity slip by when the ordinary prudence expected of bank
• Culion Ice, Fish and Electric co v. Phil Motors Corp. (1930) employees would have sufficed to seize it
• In this connection it must be remembered that when a person holds • While it is true that petitioner BPI's negligence may have been the
himself out as being competent to do things requiring professional skill, he proximate cause of the loss, CBC's negligence contributed equally
will be held liable for negligence if he fails to exhibit the care and skill of to the success of the impostor in encashing the proceeds of the
one ordinarily skilled in the particular work which he attempts to do forged checks
• Quest did not use the skill that would have been exhibited • Article 2179 of the Civil Code to the effect that while CBC may
by one ordinarily expert in repairing gasoline engines on recover its losses, such losses are subject to mitigation by the court
boats = negligence. • Both banks were negligent in the selection and supervision of their
• The test of liability is not whether the injury was accidental in a sense, but employees resulting in the encashment of the forged checks by an
whether Quest was free from blame impostor.
• US v. Pineda (1918) • Fernando v. CA (1992)
• bought potassium chlorate, which when analyzed was found to be barium • Summary: losing bidders Bertulano with four other companions namely
chlorate Joselito Garcia, William Liagoso, Alberto Fernando and Jose Fajardo, Jr.
• As a pharmacist, he is made responsible for the quality of all drugs and were found dead inside the septic tank and was filing for damages against
poisons which he sells the City of Davao but since they open the septic tank they were presumes
• it should not be forgotten that the case we consider are civil in nature, the to have caused the proximate cause through their own negligence
question of negligence or ignorance is irrelevant especially in Mr. Bertulano line of service
• Instead of caveat emptor, it should be caveat venditor. • Doctrines:
5. Nature of activity • Distinction must be made between the accident and the injury
• There are activities which by nature impose duties to exercise a higher degree of • Where he contributes to the principal occurrence, as one of
diligence. its determining factors, he can not recover
• Examples: • Where, in conjunction with the occurrence, he contributes
• Banks - by the very nature of their work, are expected to exercise the highest only to his own injury, he may recover the amount that the
degree of diligence in the selection and supervision of their employees. defendant responsible for the event should pay for such
• Common carriers - required to exercise extraordinary diligence in the vigilance injury, less a sum deemed a suitable equivalent for his own
over their passengers and transported goods.(Article 1733 Civil Code) imprudence
• BPI v. CA, 216 SCRA 51 6. Intoxication
• Summary: An impostor faking to be Eligia G. Fernando was able to • GR: Mere intoxication isnot negligence, nor does the mere fact of intoxication establish
preterminate her money placement without surrendering the promissory want of ordinary care. But it may be one of the circumstances to be considered to
note in BPI and opened a new account and encashed the wtihdrawals provenegligence.
through checks payable in cash in CBC without suspicion of the huge • EX: (Art. 2185 of the Civil Code)
amoutn of withdrawals when the account just opened (BPI 60% CBC • it is presumed that a person driving a motor vehicle has been negligent if at the
40%) time of the mishap, he was violating any traffic regulation
• Doctrines: • Wright v. Manila Electric (1914)
• BPI as drawee bank and CBC as representing/collecting bank were • Summary: Wright being intoxicated riding on his horse crossed the
both negligent resulting in the encashment of the forged checks elevated tracks of Manila Electric so he fell and got injured. Though
 intoxicated he was not held negligent because there was no proof that if he • Summary: Li was speeding so he hit Valenzuela while her car was park by
was sober he would not have fallen the sidewalk to get her flat tire fixed and she had her leg amputated. Li
• Doctrines: and Alexander Commercial where Li is an assistant manager and using a
• Mere intoxication is not in itself negligence. It is but a company car are held jointly and solidarily liable
circumstance to be considered with the other evidence tending to • Doctrines:
prove negligence. • If Li was running at only about 55 kph then despite the wet and
• GR: immaterial whether a man is drunk or sober if no want of slippery road, he could have avoided hitting the Valenzuela by the
ordinary care or prudence can be imputed to him, and no greater mere expedient or applying his brakes at the proper time and
degree of care is required than by a sober one. distance
• Dissenting Opinion by Carson: if the case is to be decided on the findings • Contributory negligence is conduct on the part of the injured party,
of fact by the trial judge, these findings sufficiently establish the contributing as a legal cause to the harm he has suffered, which
negligence of Wright falls below the standard to which he is required to conform for his
7. Insanity own protection
• The insanity of a person does not excuse him or his guardian from liability based on • emergency rule
quasi-delict (Criminal excused, civil NOT) • GR: an individual who suddenly finds himself in a situation
• Bases for holding an insane person liable for his tort: of danger and is required to act without much time to
• a. Where one of two innocent persons must suffer a loss, it should be consider the best means that may be adopted to avoid the
borne by the one who occasioned it impending danger, is not guilty of negligence if he fails to
• b. To induce those interested in the estate of the insane person to restrain undertake what subsequently and upon reflection may
and control him appear to be a better solution
• c. The fear that an insanity would lead to false claims of insanity and • EX: the emergency was brought by his own negligence
avoid liability • Not the principle of respondeat superior, which holds the master
• US v. Baggay (1911) liable for acts of the servant (must be in the course of business),
• Summary: During a Buni, Baggay killed Bil-liingan and the five other but that of pater familias, in which the liability ultimately falls
women including his mother and he was exempted from criminal liability upon the employer, for his failure to exercise the diligence of a
due to mental abrasion but subjected to civil liability by indemnifying the good father of the family in the selection and supervision of his
heirs of Bil-liingan employees
• Doctrine: • Ordinarily, evidence demonstrating that the employer has exercised
• Article 18 of the RPC says: diligent supervision of its employee during the performance of the
The exemption from criminal liability declared in Nos. 1, 2, 3, 7, and 10 of article 8 does not latter‘s assigned tasks would be enough to relieve him of the
include exemption from civil liability, which shall be enforced, subject to the following: liability imposed by Article 2180 in relation to Article 2176 of the
(1) In cases 1, 2, and 3, the persons who are civilly liable for acts committed by a lunatic or Civil Code.
imbecile, or a person under 9 years of age, or over this age and under 15, who has not acted with • situation is of a different character, involving a practice
the exercise of judgment, are those who have them under their authority, legal guardianship or utilized by large companies with either their employees of
power, unless they prove that there was no blame or negligence on their part. managerial rank or their representatives.
• UNLESS: the offended party or the heirs of the person murdered III. Degrees of Negligence
expressly renounce such reparation or indemnification Civil Code
• Calculation of risk
• Interests are to be balanced only in the sense that the 1. purposes of the actor,2. Article 2231
the nature of his act and the 3. harm that may result from action or inaction are Art. 2231. In quasi-delicts, exemplary damages may be
elements to be considered (PNH) granted if the defendant acted with gross negligence.
• Valenzuela v. CA (1996)
Gross Negligence
 • want of even slight care and diligence 2) Res Ipsa Loquitur (Latin for "the thing speaks for itself") - see requisites below
• Cases
• Marinduque v. Workmen’s (1956) • It is a rule of evidence peculiar to the law of negligence which recognizes that prima facie
• Summary: Mamador together with other laborers rode the company truck negligence may be established in the absence of direct proof, and furnishes a substitute
driven by another employee Procopio Macunat against the company for specific proof of negligence.
prohibition and while trying to overtake another truck, it hit a coconut tree • NOTE: only applicable in absence of direct proof
where Mamador died and the others were injured. Mamador was still • Cases:
entitled cmpnesation because violation of the prohibtion was not gross • Perla Compania De Seguros, Inc., et al. v. Sps. Gaudencio and Primitiva
(notorious) negligence since the prohibition had nothing to do with Sarangaya (2005)
personal safety of the riders and thus he didn't know it could've caused • Summary: A company car under Pascual exploded in the first door leased
him harm by the Spouses Gaundencio and Primitiva Sarangaya and burned all their
• Doctrines: belongings. Pascual was liable under res ipsa loquitur for failing to
• notorious” negligence = “gross” negligence maintain the car while Perla was lacked the diligence in the supervision
• conscious indifference to consequences and selection of its employee for not giving any guideliness on how the
• pursuing a course of conduct which would naturally and tasks are to be performed, maintaining the car and reporting an inventory
probably result in injury of its properties.
• utter disregard of consequences • Doctrines:
• Benguet Electric Cooperative, Inc. v. Court of Appeals(1999) • Res ipsa loquitur
• Summary: Jose Bernardo held the jeepney bars and was electrocuted to death. • Latin phrase which literally means “the thing or the
BENECO was held liable forgross negligence in violating the Philippine transaction speaks for itself.
Electrical Code for leaving an open wire for 7 years and not meeting the • It relates to the fact of an injury that sets out an inference to
min. vertical clearance of 14 feet the cause thereof or establishes the plaintiff’s prima facie
• Doctrines: case
• Gross negligence • The doctrine rests on inference and not on presumption
• negligence characterized by the want of even slight care, acting or • facts of the occurrence warrant the supposition of
omitting to act in a situation where there is duty to act, not negligence and they furnish circumstantial evidence of
inadvertently but willfully and intentionally, with a conscious negligence when direct evidence is lacking
indifference to consequences in so far as other persons may be • based on the theory that the defendant either knows the
affected cause of the accident or has the best opportunity of
IV. Proof of Negligence ascertaining it and the plaintiff, having no knowledge
thereof, is compelled to allege negligence in general terms
GR: Burden of Proof • plaintiff relies on proof of the happening of the accident
• quantum of proof required is preponderance of evidence alone to establish negligence
Rules of Court • provides a means by which a plaintiff can pin liability on a
defendant who, if innocent, should be able to explain the
Section 1, Rule 131 care he exercised to prevent the incident complained of
Section 1. Burden of proof. — Burden of proof is the duty of a • defendant’s responsibility to show that there was no
party to present evidence on the facts in issue necessary to negligence on his part
establish his claim or defense by the amount of evidence • Requisites of Res Ipsa Loquitur (AE-NOT
required by law. • 1) the accident is of a kind which does not ordinarily occur
unless someone is negligent
EX: • “Ordinary” refers to the usual course of events
 • Flames spewing out of a car engine, when it • permits the plaintiff to present along with proof of the accident, enough of
is switched on, is obviously not a normal the attending circumstances to invoke the doctrine, create an inference or
event. Neither does an explosion usually presumption of negligence and thereby place on the defendant the burden
occur when a car engine is revved. of proving that there was no negligence on his part
• Pascual, as the caretaker of the car, failed to • based on the theory that defendant in charge of the instrumentality which
submit any proof that he had it periodically causes the injury either knows the cause of the accident or has the best
checked - negligence opportunity of ascertaining it while the plaintiff has no such knowledge,
• 2) the cause of the injury was under the exclusive control of and is therefore compelled to allege negligence in general terms and rely
the person in charge and upon the proof of the happening of the accident in order to establish
• 3) the injury suffered must not have been due to any negligence
voluntary action or contribution on the part of the person • can be invoked only when under the circumstances, direct evidence is
injured. absent and not readily available
• When there is caso fortuito: • grounded upon the fact that the chief evidence of the true cause, whether
• (a) the cause of the unforeseen and culpable or innocent, is practically accessible to the defendant but
unexpected occurrence was independent of the human inaccessible to the injured person
will • requisites for the application of res ipsa loquitur:
• human agency must be entirely excluded as the
proximate cause or contributory cause of the injury •
or loss -Not because car not maintained (1) The accident is of a kind which ordinarily does not occur in the
• (b) it was impossible to foresee the event which constituted absence of someone’s negligence; - No two motor vehicles traversing
the caso fortuito or, if it could be foreseen, it was opposite lanes will collide as a matter of course unless someone is
impossible to avoid - NOT under the control of pascual negligent
• (c) the occurrence must be such as to render it impossible
to perform an obligation in a normal manner - Spouses had
no access nor obligation for the maintenance •
• (d) the person tasked to perform the obligation must not (2) It is caused by an instrumentality within the exclusive control of the
have participated in any course of conduct that aggravated defendant or defendants - Driving the Isuzu truck gave Ong exclusive
the accident management and control over it
Marcelo Macalinao, et al., v. Eddie Medecielo Ong (2005)
• Summary: While delivering, the Genetron’s Isuzu Elf truck driven by Ong bumped the •
front portion of a private jeepney. Both vehicles incurred severe damages while the (3) The possibility of contributing conduct which would make the plaintiff
passengers sustained physical injuries as a consequence of the collision. Macalinao responsible is eliminated
was paralyzed and immobilized from the neck down then died. He filed against Ong and •
Sebastian before he died and soon was substituted by his parents. RTC: Ong negligent (4) defendant fails to offer any explanation tending to show that
and Sebastian failed to exercise the diligence of a good father of a family in the selection the injury was caused by his or her want of due care (Based on
and supervision of Ong thus ordering them jointly liable to pay actual, moral, and American Jurisprudence) - defendant fails to offer any
exemplary damages as well as civil indemnity for Macalinao’s death. CA: reversed for explanation tending to show that the injury was caused by his
lack of evidence or her want of due care
• Doctrines: • Macalinao could no longer testify as to the cause of the accident since he
• Res ipsa loquitur is dead. Petitioners, while substituting their son as plaintiff, have no actual
• recognizes that parties may establish prima facie negligence without direct knowledge about the event since they were not present at the crucial
proof, thus, it allows the principle to substitute for specific proof of moment
negligence
 • evidence as to the true cause of the accident is, for all intents and • element 3 "control and management of the thing which caused the injury" to be
purposes, accessible to respondents but not to petitioners wanting
• two truck helpers who survived, both employees of Sebastian, and • Dr. Fuentes performed the surgery and thereafter reported and showed his
Ong, who is not only Sebastian’s previous employee but his co- work to Dr. Ampil who allowed Dr. Fuentes to leave the operating room
respondent in this case as well • Under the "Captain of the Ship" rule, the operating surgeon is the person
Joaquinita P. Capili v. Sps. Dominador and Rosalita Cardana (2006) in complete charge of the surgery room and all personnel connected with
the operation
• Summary: Jasmin Cardaa was walking along the San Roque Elementary School when a • res ipsa loquitur
branch of a caimito trees fell on her, causing her instantaneous death. Her parents • not a rule of substantive law, hence, does not per se create or constitute an
Dominador and Rosalita Cardaa filed a case for damages against the school principal independent or separate ground of liability, being a mere evidentiary rule
Joaquinita Capili knowing that the tree was dead and rotting did not dispose of it RTC: • mere invocation and application of the doctrine does not dispense with the
dismissed for failing to show negligence on the part of Capili CA: reversed. Awarded requirement of proof of negligence
P50,000 as indemnity for the death of Jasmin and P15,010 as reimbursement of her burial V. Causation
expenses, moral damages P50,000 and attorney's fees and litigation P10,000 SC: CA
affirmed but deleting the moral damages bec. of absent of ill-motive 1) Definition of Proximate Cause
• Doctrines:
• • That cause which in natural and continuous sequence, unbrokenby any efficient
• negligent act intervening cause, produces the injury, without which the result wouldnot have occurred
• inadvertent(unintentional) act Cases:
• may be merely carelessly done from a lack of ordinary prudence and may Salud Villanueva Vda. De batacan, et al., v. Mariano Media, G.R. No. L-10126, October 22,
be one which creates a situation involving an unreasonable risk to another 1957
because of the expectable action of the other, a third person, an animal, or Filomeno Urbano v. Intermediate Appellate Court, G.R. No. 72964, January 7, 1988
a force of nature "A prior and remote cause cannot be made the be of an action if such remote cause did nothing
• an ordinary prudent person in the actor's position, in the same or similar more than furnish the condition or give rise to the occasion by which the injury was made
circumstances, would foresee such an appreciable risk of harm to others as possible, if there intervened between such prior or remote cause and the injury a distinct,
to cause him not to do the act or to do it in a more careful manner successive, unrelated, and efficient cause of the injury, even though such injury would not have
• Jasmin, died as a result of the dead and rotting tree within the happened but for such condition or occasion. If no danger existed in the condition except because
school's premises shows that the tree was indeed an obvious danger to anyone of the independent cause, such condition was not the proximate cause. And if an independent
passing by and calls for application of the principle of res ipsa loquitur negligent act or defective condition sets into operation the instances which result in injury
because of the prior defective condition, such subsequent act or condition is the proximate cause.
Professional Services, Inc. v. Natividad and Enrique Agana (2007) Phoenix Construction, Inc. v. Intermediate Appellate Court, G.R. No. L-65295, March 10, 1987
Quezon City Government, et al., v. Fulgencio Dacara, G.R. No. 150304, June 15, 2005
• Summary: Dr. Ampil assisted by Dr. Fuentes performed hysterectomy operation on
Natividad where 2 gauzes were left badly affecting her vaginal vault which formed 2) Distinguished from other kinds
a recto-vaginal fistula forcign her stool to excrete through the vagina. The first gauze
was extracted by hand by Dr. Ampil while the second required another operation. a) Remote
RTC: PSI solidarily liable with Dr. Ampil and Dr. Fuentes for damages for negligence
and malpractice CA: absolved Dr. Fuentes upon the same advise from the PRC Board of • That cause which some independent force merely took advantage of to accomplish
Medicine for failure to show that he placed the guages or concealed the fact from something not the natural effect thereof
Natividad SC: Affirmed CA Cases:
• Laws: Art. 2176 Art. 2180 and Art. 1869 of the Civil Code Filomeno Urbano v. Intermediate Appellate Court, G.R. No. 72964, January 7, 1988
• Doctrines:
b) Concurrent
 • When he saw at a distance that the approaching bus was encroaching on his lane,
• the actor is liable even if the active and substantially simultaneous operation of the effects he did not immediately swerve the jeepney to the dirt shoulder on his right since
of a third person’s innocent,tortious or criminal actis also a substantial factor in bringing he must have assumed that the bus driver will return the bus to its own lane upon
about the harm so long as the actor’s negligent conduct actively and continuously operate seeing the jeepney approaching form the opposite direction
to bring about harm to another. (Africa v. Caltex) • last clear chance doctrine can never apply where the party charged is required to act
• Where several causes producing the injury are concurrent and each is an efficient cause instantaneously, and if the injury cannot be avoided by the application of all means at
without which the injury would not have happened, the injury may be attributed to allow hand after the peril is or should have been discovered
any of the causes and recovery may be had against any or all of the responsible persons Bustamante v. CA (1991)
• Where the concurrent or successive negligent acts or omissions of two or more • the doctrine of last clear chance means that even though a person's own acts may have
persons,although acting independently, are in combination the direct and proximate cause placed him in a position of peril, and an injury results, the injured person is entitled to
of a single injury to a third person, and it is impossible to determine what proportion each recovery
contributed to the injury, either of them is responsible for the whole injury, even though • since the case at bar is not a suit between the owners and drivers of the colliding vehicles
his act alone might not have caused the entire injury; they become joint tort-feasors and but a suit brought by the heirs of the deceased passengers against both owners and drivers
are solidarily liable for the resulting damage under Article 2194 of the Civil Code of the colliding vehicles the court erred in absolving the owner and driver of the cargo
Cases: truck from liability
Prospero Sabido and Aser Lagunda v. Macabuhay Custodio, G.R. No. L-21512, August 31, 1966 Philippine Bank of Commerce v. CA (1997)
• Agripino Custodia a passenger of LTB bus, who was hanging on the left side as truck was • last clear chance/supervening negligence/discovered peril
full of passengers was sideswiped by the track driven by Aser Lagunda • where both parties are negligent, but the negligent act of one is
appreciably later in time than that of the other, or when it is impossible to
3) Last Clear Chance determine whose fault or negligence should be attributed to the incident,
the one who had the last clear opportunity to avoid the impending harm
• The negligence of the plaintiff does not preclude a recovery for the negligence of the and failed to do so is chargeable with the consequences thereof
defendant where it appears that the defendant, by exercising reasonable care and • antecedent negligence of a person does not preclude the recovery of
prudence, might have avoided injurious consequences to the plaintiff notwithstanding the damages for the supervening negligence of, or bar a defense
plaintiff’s negligence against liability sought by another, if the latter, who had the last fair
Cases: chance, could have avoided the impending harm by the exercise of due
Anuran v. Buno (1966) diligence.
• New Civil Code requires "utmost diligence" from the carriers (Art. 1755) who are • Here, assuming that RMC was negligent in entrusting cash to a
"presumed to have been at fault or to have acted negligently, unless they prove that they dishonest employee, yet it cannot be denied that PBC bank, thru its
have observed extraordinary diligence" (Art. 1756) teller, had the last clear opportunity to avert the injury incurred by
• principle about the "last clear chance" would call for application in a suit between the its client, simply by faithfully observing their self-imposed
owners and drivers of the two colliding vehicles. It does not arise where a passenger validation procedure
demands responsibility from the carrier to enforce its contractual obligations. For it • it cannot be denied that, indeed, private respondent was likewise negligent
would be inequitable to exempt the negligent driver of the jeepney and its owners on the in not checking its monthly statements of account. Had it done so, the
ground that the other driver was likewise guilty of negligence company would have been alerted to the series of frauds being committed
Pantranco North Express, Inc. v. Maricar Baesa (1989) against RMC by its secretary. The damage would definitely not have
• Generally, the last clear change doctrine is invoked for the purpose of making a defendant ballooned to such an amount if only RMC, particularly Romeo Lipana,
liable to a plaintiff who was guilty of prior or antecedent negligence, although it may also had exercised even a little vigilance in their financial affairs. This
be raised as a defense to defeat claim for damages omission by RMC amounts to contributory negligence which shall
• For the last clear chance doctrine to apply, it is necessary to show that the person who mitigate the damages that may be awarded to the private respondent
allegedly has the last opportunity to avert the accident was aware of the existence of the • 60-40 ratio. only the balance of 60% needs to be paid by the PBC
peril, or should, with exercise of due care, have been aware of it Canlas v. CA (2000)
 • at a distance of 30 meters from it and driving the Isuzu pick-up at a fast speed as it
• Summary: Osmundo Canlas agreed to sell the lands to Mañosca for P850K, P500K approached the Tamaraw, denied Iran time and opportunity to ponder the situation
payable within 1 week, and the balance serves as his investment in the at all. There was no clear chance to speak of.
business. Mañosca mortgage to Atty. Manuel Magno the parcels of lands for P100K with
the help of impostors who misrepresented themselves as the Spouses Canlas. Mañosca VI. Defenses
was granted a loan by the Asian Savings Bank (ASB) for P500K with the parcels of land
as security and with the help of the same impostors. The loan was left unpaid resulting in 1) Plaintiff’s Negligence as the Proximate Cause (Art. 2179 first clause)
a extrajudicially foreclosure on the lots. RTC: restrained the sheriff from issuing Civil Code
a Certificate of Sheriff’s Sale and annulled the mortgage. CA: reversed holding Canlas
estopped for coming to the bank with Mañosca and letting himself be introduced Art. 2179
as Leonardo Rey SC: reversed CA but since there was negligence by Canlas no attorney's Art. 2179. When the plaintiff's own negligence was the
fees. immediate and proximate cause of his injury, he cannot recover
• Doctrines: damages. But if his negligence was only contributory, the
• immediate and proximate cause of the injury being the
• doctrine of last clear chance (same definition as above)
defendant's lack of due care, the plaintiff may recover
• Antecedent Negligence: Osmundo Canlas was negligent in giving Vicente
Mañosca the opportunity to perpetrate the fraud, by entrusting him the owner's
damages, but the courts shall mitigate the damages to be
copy of the transfer certificates of title of subject parcels of land awarded.
• Supervening Negligence: Failing to perform the simple expedient of faithfully
complying with the requirements for banks to ascertain the identity of the persons Cases:
transacting with them - ASB bears the loss
Engada v. CA (2003) Manila Electric v. Remonquillo, 99 Phil 117
The Le Kim v. Philippine Aerial Taxi Co., G.R. No. 39309, November 24, 1933
Philippine Long Distance Telephone, Co. v. Court of Appeals, GR No. 57079, September 29,
• Summary: The speeding Isuzu puck-up truck driven by Rogelio Engada came from the 1989
opposing direction and swerved to its left encroaching upon the lane of the Tamaraw
driven by Iran and owned by Seyan. In attempt to avoid the pick-up, Seyan shouted at 2) Contributory Negligence (Art. 2179 last clause)
Iran to swerve to the left but the Engada also swerved to its right hitting the Tamaraw at
its right front passenger side causing its head and chassis to separate from its body. • the theory here is that the plaintiff was also negligent together with the defendant; to
Seyan was suffered injuries incurring P130,000 in medical expenses and the loss of the constitute a defense, proximate cause of injury/damage must be the negligence of
Tamaraw of P80,000. MTC, CA, SC: favored Seyan defendant
• Doctrines: Civil Code
• Engada's negligence was the proximate cause of the collision
Art. 2214
• in abandoning his lane, he did not see to it first that the opposite lane was
free of oncoming traffic and was available for a safe passage Art. 2214. In quasi-delicts, the contributory negligence of the
• after seeing the Tamaraw jeepney ahead, he did not slow down plaintiff shall reduce the damages that he may recover.
• emergency rule
• An individual who suddenly finds himself in a situation of danger and is Cases:
required to act without much time to consider the best means that may be Gregorio Genobiagon v. CA, GR No. 40452, October 12, 1989
adopted to avoid the impending danger, is not guilty of negligence if he Phoenix Construction, Inc. v. IAC
fails to undertake what subsequently and upon reflection may appear to be Philippine Bank of Commerce v. CA, 269 SCRA 695
a better solution, unless the emergency was brought by his own negligence
- Iran cannot be faulted 3) GR: Fortuitous Event
 Civil Code 5) Due Diligence
• diligence required by law/contract/depends on circumstances of persons, places, things
Art. 1174 Cases:
Art. 1174. Except in cases expressly specified by the law, or Placido Ramos and Augusto Ramos v. Pepsi-Cola Bottling Co., G.R. No. L-22533, February 9,
when it is otherwise declared by stipulation, or when the nature 1967
of the obligation requires the assumption of risk, no person Metro Manila Transit Corporation v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 104408. June 21, 1993
shall be responsible for those events which could not be
foreseen, or which, though foreseen, were inevitable 6) Prescription
Injury to right of plaintiff/quasi delict
• caso fortuito presents the following essential characteristics:
- 4 years
• (1) The cause of the unforeseen and unexpected occurrence, or of the failure of the debtor
Defamation
to comply with his obligation, must be independent of the human will.
- 1 year *** When no specific provision, must be counted from the day they may be brought
• (2) It must be impossible to foresee the event which constitutes the caso fortuito, or if it
(quasi-delict is incurred)
can be foreseen, it must be impossible to avoid.
Cases:
• (3) The occurrence must be such as to render it impossible for the debtor to fulfill his
Ernesto Kramer v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 83524. October 13, 1989
obligation in a normal manner.
Allied Banking Corporation v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 85868. October 13, 1989
• (4) the obligor (debtor) must be free from any participation in the aggravation of the
injury resulting to the creditor.
7) Double Recovery
Cases:
Responsibility for fault or negligence under quasi-delict is entirely separate and distinct from
civilaction arising from the RPC but plaintiff cannot recover damages 2x for same actor omission
Roberto Juntilla v. Clemente Fontanar (1985)
of the defendan
Teodoro M. Hernandez v. Commission on Audit, GR No. 71871, November 6, 1989
Amparo Servando v. Philippine Steam Navigation, GR No. L-36481-2, October 23, 1982
National Power Corporation v. Court of Appeals, GR Nos. 103442-45, May 21, 1993 Civil Code
Southeastern College, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, GR No. 126389, July 10, 1989 Art. 2177
Art. 2177. Responsibility for fault or negligence under the
4) EX: Assumption of Risk (Volenti non fit injuria) -complete defense
• Intentional exposure to a known danger
preceding article is entirely separate and distinct from the civil
• One who voluntarily assumed the risk of an injury from a known danger cannot recover liability arising from negligence under the Penal Code. But the
in an action for negligence or an injury is incurred plaintiff cannot recover damages twice for the same act or
• Plaintiff’s acceptance of risk (by law/contract/nature of obligation) haserased omission of the defendant.
defendant’s duty so that his negligence is not a legal wrong
• Applies to all known danger Strict Liability
• Elements • When the person is made liable independent of fault or negligence upon submission
of proof of certain facts specified by law.
[Link] plaintiff must know that the risk is present; • NOTE: Strict liability tort can be committed even if reasonable care was exercised and
[Link] must further understand its nature regardless of the state of mind of the actor at that time
[Link] choice to incur it is free and voluntary. A. Possessor of Animals
Civil Code
Cases:
Margarita Afialda v. Basilio Hisole, GR No. L-2075, November 29, 1949 Art. 2183
Ilocos Norte Electric Company v. Court of Appeals, GR No. 53401, November 6, 1989
 Art. 2183. The possessor of an animal or whoever may make Art. 1711. Owners of enterprises and other employers are
use of the same is responsible for the damage which it may obliged to pay compensation for the death of or injuries to their
cause, although it may escape or be lost. This responsibility laborers, workmen, mechanics or other employees, even
shall cease only in case the damage should come from force though the event may have been purely accidental or entirely
majeure or from the fault of the person who has suffered due to a fortuitous cause, if the death or personal injury arose
damage. out of and in the course of the employment. The employer is
also liable for compensation if the employee contracts any
Vestil v. IAC, G.R. No. 74431, November 6, 1989 illness or disease caused by such employment or as the result
of the nature of the employment. If the mishap was due to the
B. Things thrown or falling
employee's own notorious negligence, or voluntary act, or
drunkenness, the employer shall not be liable for
Civil Code compensation. When the employee's lack of due care
Art. 2193 contributed to his death or injury, the compensation shall be
Art. 2193. The head of a family that lives in a building or a part equitably reduced.
thereof, is responsible for damages caused by things thrown or
falling from the same Art. 1712. If the death or injury is due to the negligence of a
fellow worker, the latter and the employer shall be solidarily
C. Death or Injuries in the course of employment liable for compensation. If a fellow worker's intentional
malicious act is the only cause of the death or injury, the
Civil Code employer shall not be answerable, unless it should be shown
Art. 1711-1712 that the latter did not exercise due diligence in the selection or
supervision of the plaintiff's fellow worker.

D. Product Liability
Civil Code
Art. 2187
Art. 2187. Manufacturers and processors of foodstuffs, drinks,
toilet articles and similar goods shall be liable for death or
injuries caused by any noxious or harmful substances used,
although no contractual relation exists between them and the
consumers.
The Consumer Act Of The Philippines (RA No. 7394)
Articles 50-52
Art. 50. Prohibition Against Deceptive Sales Acts or Practices. - Art. 97
A deceptive act or practice by a seller or supplier in connection Art. 97. Liability for the Defective Products. - Any Filipino or
with a consumer transaction violates this Act whether it occurs foreign manufacturer, producer, and any importer, shall be
before, during or after the transaction. An act or practice shall liable for redress, independently of fault, for damages caused to
be deemed deceptive whenever the producer, manufacturer, consumers by defects resulting from design, manufacture,
supplier or seller, through concealment, false representation of construction, assembly and erection, formulas and handling
fraudulent manipulation, induces a consumer to enter into a and making up, presentation or packing of their products, as
sales or lease transaction of any consumer product or service. well as for the insufficient or inadequate information on the use
and hazards thereof.
Without limiting the scope of the above paragraph, the act or
practice of a seller or supplier is deceptive when it represents A product is defective when it does not offer the safety
that: rightfully expected of it, taking relevant circumstances into
consideration, including but not limited to:
(a) a consumer product or service has the sponsorship, (a) presentation of product;
approval, performance, characteristics, ingredients,
accessories, uses, or benefits it does not have; (b) use and hazards reasonably expected of it;

(b) a consumer product or service is of a particular standard, (c) the time it was put into circulation.
quality, grade, style, or model when in fact it is not; A product is not considered defective because another better
quality product has been placed in the market.
(c) a consumer product is new, original or unused, when in
fact, it is in a deteriorated, altered, reconditioned, reclaimed or The manufacturer, builder, producer or importer shall not be
second-hand state; held liable when it evidences:
(a) that it did not place the product on the market;
(d) a consumer product or service is available to the consumer
for a reason that is different from the fact; (b) that although it did place the product on the market such
product has no defect;
(e) a consumer product or service has been supplied in
accordance with the previous representation when in fact it is (c) that the consumer or a third party is solely at fault.
not; Art .99

(f) a consumer product or service can be supplied in a quantity

greater than the supplier intends;

(g) a service, or repair of a consumer product is needed when

in fact it is not;

(h) a specific price advantage of a consumer product exists

when in fact it does not;
Art. 99. Liability for Defective Services. - The service supplier is Art. 106. Prohibition in Contractual Stipulation. - The stipulation
liable for redress, independently of fault, for damages caused to in a contract of a clause preventing, exonerating or reducing
consumers by defects relating to the rendering of the services, the obligation to indemnify for damages effected, as provided
as well as for insufficient or inadequate information on the for in this and in the preceding Articles, is hereby prohibited, if
fruition and hazards thereof. there is more than one person responsible for the cause of the
damage, they shall be jointly liable for the redress established
The service is defective when it does not provide the safety the in the pertinent provisions of this Act. However, if the damage
consumer may rightfully expect of it, taking the relevant is caused by a component or part incorporated in the product or
circumstances into consideration, including but not limited to: service, its manufacturer, builder or importer and the person
(a) the manner in which it is provided; who incorporated the component or part are jointly liable.

(b) the result of hazards which may reasonably be expected of Art. 107. Penalties. - Any person who shall violate any provision
it; of this Chapter or its implementing rules and regulations with
respect to any consumer product which is not food, cosmetic,
(c) the time when it was provided. or hazardous substance shall upon conviction, be subject to a
A service is not considered defective because of the use or fine of not less than Five thousand pesos (P5,000.00) and by
introduction of new techniques. imprisonment of not more than one (1) year or both upon the
The supplier of the services shall not be held liable when it is discretion of the court.
proven: an act to ensure the safety and purity of foods, drugs, and
(a) that there is no defect in the service rendered; cosmetics being made available to the public by creating the
food and drug administration which shall administer and
(b) that the consumer or third party is solely at fault. enforce the laws pertaining thereto (RA No. 3720)
Arts. 106-107 Sec. 11
Section 11. The following acts and the causing thereof are Coca Cola v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 110295, October 18, 1993
hereby prohibited: (a) The manufacture, sale, offering for sale
E. Interference with Contractual Relations
or transfer of any food, drug, device or cosmetic that is
adulterated or misbranded.
(b) The adulteration or misbranding of any food, drug, device, Civil Code
or cosmetic. Art. 1314
(c) The refusal to permit entry or inspection as authorized by Art. 1314. Any third person who induces another to violate his
Section twenty-seven hereof or to allow samples to be contract shall be liable for damages to the other contracting
collected. party
(d) The giving of a guaranty or undertaking referred to in Gilchrist v. Cuddy, G.R. No. 9356, February 18, 1915
Section twelve (b) hereof which guaranty or undertaking is So Ping Bun v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 120554, September 21, 1999
false, except by a person who relied upon a guaranty or
F. Liability of LGUs
undertaking to the same effect signed by, and containing the
name and address of, the person residing in the Philippines
Civil Code
from whom he received in good faith the food, drug, device, or
cosmetic or the giving of a guaranty or undertaking referred to Art. 2189
in Section twelve (b) which guaranty or undertaking is false. Art. 2189. Provinces, cities and municipalities shall be liable for
(e) Forging, counterfeiting, simulating, or falsely representing damages for the death of, or injuries suffered by, any person by
or without proper authority using any mark, stamp, tag label, reason of the defective condition of roads, streets, bridges,
or other identification device authorized or required by public buildings, and other public works under their control or
regulations promulgated under the provisions of this Act. supervision.
(f) The using by any person to his own advantage, or revealing, Guilatco v. City of Dagupan, G.R. No. 61516, March 21, 1989
other than to the Secretary or officers or employees of the
Department or to the courts when relevant in any judicial
Interference with Contractual Relations
proceeding under this Act, any information acquired under
authority of Section nine, or concerning any method or process Civil Code
which as a trade secret is entitled to protection. Article 1314
(g) The alteration, mutilation, destruction, obliteration, or Art. 1314. Any third person who induces another to violate his
removal of the whole or any part of the labeling of, or the doing contract shall be liable for damages to the other contracting
of any other act with respect to, a food, drug, device, or party.
cosmetic, if such act is done while such article is held for sale
(whether or not the first sale) and results in such article being • Gilchrist v. Cuddy (1915)
• Summary: Cuddy was the owner of the film Zigomar. He rented it to C. S.
adulterated or misbranded.
Gilchrist for a week for P125. But, a few days to the date of delivery, Cuddy sent
(h) The use, on the labeling of any drug or in any advertising the money back to Gilchrist and rented it to Espejo and his partner Zaldarriaga for
relating to such drug, of any representation or suggestion that P350 so Gilchrist filed for injunction against these parties. RTC, CA and SC:
an application with respect to such drug is effective under granted bec. there is a contract between Gilchrist and Cuddy
Section twenty-one hereof, or that such drug complies with the • Doctrines:
provisions of such section.
(i) The use, in labeling, advertising or other sales promotion of
• Cuddy was liable in an action for damages for the breach of that contract, small on the other, is of such constant and frequent recurrence that
there can be no doubt. no fair or reasonable redress can be had therefor in a court of law
• mere right to compete could not justify the appellants in intentionally • Gilchrist was facing the immediate prospect of diminished profits by
inducing Cuddy to take away the appellee's contractual rights reason of the fact that the appellants had induced Cuddy to rent to them
• Everyone has a right to enjoy the fruits and advantages of his own the film Gilchrist had counted upon as his feature film
enterprise, industry, skill and credit. He has no right to be free from • It is quite apparent that to estimate with any decree of accuracy the
malicious and wanton interference, disturbance or annoyance. If damages which Gilchrist would likely suffer from such an event
disturbance or loss come as a result of competition, or the exercise of like would be quite difficult if not impossible
rights by others, it is damnum absque injuria(loss without injury), unless • the remedy by injunction cannot be used to restrain a legitimate
some superior right by contract or otherwise is interfered with competition, though such competition would involve the violation of a
• Cuddy contract on the part of the appellants was a desire to make a contract
profit by exhibiting the film in their theater. There was no malice • NOTE:
beyond this desire; but this fact does not relieve them of the legal • In tort under Interference with Contractual Relations, there is no
liability for interfering with that contract and causing its breach. need to know the identity of a person to whom he causes damages
• liability of the appellants arises from unlawful acts and not from unlike in breach of contract
contractual obligations, as they were under no such obligations to • There is damage even malice
induce Cuddy to violate his contract with Gilchrist • But in this case no damage was awarded because of the
• So that if the action of Gilchrist had been one for damages, it impossible to determine the amount
would be governed by chapter 2, title 16, book 4 of the Civil • Separate Opinion:
Code. • MORELAND, J., concurring:
• Article 1902 of that code provides that a person who, by act or • The court seems to be of the opinion that the action is one for a
omission, causes damages to another when there is fault or permanent injunction; whereas, under my view of the case, it is
negligence, shall be obliged to repair the damage do done one for specific performance.
• There is nothing in this article which requires as a condition • The very nature of the case demonstrates that a permanent
precedent to the liability of a tort-feasor that he must know the injunction is out of the question. The only thing that plaintiff
identity of a person to whom he causes damages desired was to be permitted to use the film for the week beginning
• An injunction is a "special remedy" which was there issued by the the 26th of May. With the termination of that week his rights
authority and under the seal of a court of equity, and limited, as in order expired. After that time Cuddy was perfectly free to turn the film
cases where equitable relief is sought, to cases where there is no "plain, over to the defendants Espejo and Zaldarriaga for exhibition at any
adequate, and complete remedy at law," which "will not be granted while time.
the rights between the parties are undetermined, except in extraordinary •
cases where material and irreparable injury will be done," which cannot be • So Ping Bun v. Court of Appeals (1999)
compensated in damages, and where there will be no adequate remedy, • Summary: Tek Hua Trading Co., through So Pek Giok has been leasing the
and which will not, as a rule, be granted, to take property out of the warehouse of Dee C. Chuan & Sons Inc. (DCCSI) from on a month-to-month
possession of one party and put it into that of another whose title has not basis after the initial one year term. Soon, Tek Hua Trading Co. was dissolved
been established by law and Tek Hua Enterprising Corp. was formed by the same owners. When So Pek
• Giok died, So Ping Bun used the place for his own textile business, Trendsetter
• irreparable injury Marketing. He did not respond to the letter containing the new leasing contract
• not meant such injury as is beyond the possibility of repair, or and was asked to vacate but he refused so a suit for injunction was filed. RTC,
beyond possible compensation in damages, nor necessarily great CA,SC: granted with attorney's fees (no damages)
injury or great damage, but that species of injury, whether great or • Doctrines:
small, that ought not to be submitted to on the one hand or inflicted • Damage is the loss, hurt, or harm which results from injury, and damages
on the other; and, because it is so large on the one hand, or so are the recompense or compensation awarded for the damage suffered.
 One becomes liable in an action for damages for a nontrespassory B. Acts contra bonus mores
invasion of another's interest in the private use and enjoyment of asset if
• (a) the other has property rights and privileges with respect to the Civil Code
use or enjoyment interfered with,
• (b) the invasion is substantial, Art. 21
• (c) the defendant's conduct is a legal cause of the invasion, and Art. 21. Any person who wilfully causes loss or injury to
• (d) the invasion is either intentional and unreasonable or another in a manner that is contrary to morals, good customs
unintentional and actionable under general negligence rules or public policy shall compensate the latter for the damage.
• elements of tort interference are:
• (1) existence of a valid contract;
• (2) knowledge on the part of the third person of the existence of Enrique J.L. Ruiz, et al., v. The Secretary of National Defense, et al, G.R. No. L-15526,
contract; and December 28, 1963
• (3) interference of the third person is without legal justification or
excuse 1) Breach of promise, seduction and sexual assault
• NOTE: damage is NOT an essential element of tort interference
• lower courts did not award damages, but this was only because the extent Beatriz P. Wassmer v. Francisco X. Velez, G.R. No. L-20089, December 26, 1964
of damages was not quantifiable Apolonio Tanjanco v. Court of Appeals, et al., G.R. No. L-18630, December 17, 1966
• Lack of malice precludes damages. But it does not relieve petitioner of the Conrado Bunag, Jr. v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 101749, July 10, 1992
legal liability for entering into contracts and causing breach of existing Amelita Constantino, et al., v. Ivan Mendez, et al., G.R. No. 57227, May 14, 1992
ones.
• The injunction saved the respondents from further damage or 2) Malicious prosecution
injury caused by petitioner's interference.
Civil Code
Intentional Torts Art. 2219

A. Abuse of Rights

Civil Code
Art. 19
Art. 19. Every person must, in the exercise of his rights and in
the performance of his duties, act with justice, give everyone
his due, and observe honesty and good faith.

Albenson Enterprises Corp, et al., v. Court of Appeals, et al., G.R. No. 88694, January 11, 1993
Barons Marketing Corp. v. Court of Appeals, et al., G.R. No. 126486, February 9, 1998
University of the East v. Romeo A. Jader, G.R. No. 132344, February 17, 2000
Sergio Amonoy v. Spouses Jose Gutierrez and Angela Fornilda, G.R. No. 140420, February 15,
2001
Art. 2219. Moral damages may be recovered in the following
and analogous cases:
Magtanggol Que v. IAC, G.R. No. 66865. January 13, 1989
Franklin M. Drilon v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 107019. March 20, 1997
(1) A criminal offense resulting in physical injuries; Andres Lao v. Court of Appeals, et al., G.R. No. 47013, February 17, 2000
(2) Quasi-delicts causing physical injuries;
3) Public humiliation

(3) Seduction, abduction, rape, or other lascivious acts;

• Grand Union Supermarket et al., v. Jose J. Espino, Jr., et al., (1979)
• Summary: Jose J. Espino. Jr., a civil engineer and an executive of Procter and
Gamble Philippines, Inc, together with his wife and two daughters went to shop
(4) Adultery or concubinage;
at South Supermarket in Makati. He forgot to pay for the "rat tail" file which was
partially exposed in his breast pocket. He was initially holding it because of its
tiny size and placed it there when he saw the maid of his aunt and talked to her.
(5) Illegal or arbitrary detention or arrest; As he was exiting, he was approached by the guard and was brought to the rear of
the supermarket to fill out the Incident Report and soon to the desk of Ms.
Fandino who remarked: "Ano, nakaw na naman ito". He said he was going to pay
(6) Illegal search; for the file because he needed it but Ms. Fandino replied "That is all they say, the
people whom we cause not paying for the goods say... They all intended to pay for
the things that are found to them." He brought out P5 to pay for the P3.85 file but
instead it was taken as a fine to be rewarded to the guard. People were staring at
(7) Libel, slander or any other form of defamation;
them. He soon paid for the file and got out as fast as they could. He file a case
against Grand Union Supermarket founded on Article 21 in relation to Article
2219 of the New Civil Code. RTC: Dismissed CA: reversed and granted damages
(8) Malicious prosecution; of P75,000 by way of moral damages, P25,000 as exemplary damages, and
P5,000 as attorney's fee SC: affirmed with modification lowering moral damages
to P5,000 and removing the exemplary damages.
(9) Acts mentioned in Article 309; • Laws:
• Everyone must respect the dignity, personality, privacy and peace of mind
of his neighbors and other persons (Article 26, Civil Code)
(10) Acts and actions referred to in Articles 21, 26, 27, 28, 29, • Doctrines:
• Considered intention, personal circumstance
30, 32, 34, and 35.
• the mode and manner in which he was subjected, shouting at him,
imposing upon him a fine, threatening to call the police and in the
presence and hearing of many people at the Supermarket which brought
The parents of the female seduced, abducted, raped, or and caused him humiliation and embarrassment, sufficiently rendered the
abused, referred to in No. 3 of this article, may also recover petitioners liable for damages under Articles 19 and 21 in relation to
moral damages. Article 2219 of the Civil Code
The spouse, descendants, ascendants, and brothers and sisters • It is against morals, good customs and public policy to humiliate,
embarrass and degrade the dignity of a person
may bring the action mentioned in No. 9 of this article, in the
order named.
 • His forgetfulness led to his embarassment and humiliation thereby causing • ART. 23. Any person who wilfully causes loss or injury to another in a
him mental anguish, wounded feelings and serious anxiety. His act of manner that is contrary to morals, good customs or public policy shall
omission contributed to the occurrence of his injury or loss and such compensate the latter for the damage.
contributory negligence is a factor which may reduce the damages that • Doctrines:
private respondent may recover (Art. 2214, New Civil Code). • The hitting on the face is contrary to morals and good customs and
• Grand Union Supermarket acted in good faith in trying to protect and causing mental anguish, moral shock, wounded feelings and social
recover their property, a right which the law accords to them. - eliminate humiliation
the grant of exemplary damages • drunkenness is definitely no excuse and does not relieve him of his
• Rafael Patricio v. Hon. Oscar Leviste, et al., (1989) liability
• Summary: During a benefit dance, the drunk Bacalocos struck on the table a • Exemplary or corrective damages are required by public policy to suppress
bottle of beer and injured and caused blood to his hand. He then approached the wanton acts of the offender
Patricio, a Catholic priest and asked if he has seen his wound. But before, • The amount of exemplary damages need not be proved where it is
Patricio could reply, Bacalocos hit his face with his bloodied hand. Patricio filed shown that plaintiff is entitled to either moral, temperate or
a criminal charge slander by deed against Bacalocos but it was dismissed so he compensatory damages, as the case may be
filed for a civil case for damage in the court a quo. Court a Quo: granted moral • such award cannot be recovered as a matter of right
and exemplary damage and attorney's fees. CA: reversed SC: reinstated court a • In cases where exemplary damages are awarded to the injured party,
quo attorney's fees are also recoverable
• Laws: 4) Unjust dismissal
• ART. 2219. Moral damages may be recovered in the following and
analogous cases
• • Ernesto Medina et al., v. Hon. Floreliana Castro-Bartolome (1982)
• Summary: Cosme de Aboitiz, acting in his capacity as President and Chief
(1) A criminal offense resulting in physical injuries; Executive Officer of the Pepsi Cola Bottling Company of the Philippines, Inc.,
went to the Pepsi-Cola Plant in Muntinlupa and without any provocation, shouted
(2) Quasi-delicts causing physical injuries; and maliciously humiliated Ernesto Medina and Jose G. Ong "GOD DAMN IT.
YOU FUCKED ME UP ... YOU SHUT UP! FUCK YOU! YOU ARE BOTH
(3) Seduction, abduction, rape, or other lascivious acts. SHIT TO ME! YOU ARE FIRED (referring to Ernesto Medina). YOU TOO ARE
FIRED! '(referring to Jose Ong )" A joint criminal complaint for oral defamation
(4) Adultery or concubinage; against Aboitiz. Provincial Fiscal: dismissed the complaint since uttered not to
slander but to express anger and displeasure. Petition for Review with the office
(5) Illegal or arbitrary detention or arrest; of the Secretary of Justice (now Ministry of Justice): reversed CFI: dismissed
motion to dismiss then granted second motion to dismiss due to the amendment
(6) Illegal search; in Art. 217 of the Labor Code since jurisdiction over employee-employer relations
and claims of workers have been removed from the Courts of First Instance. CA:
(7) Libel, slander or any other form of defamation; reinstated CFI
• Doctrines: simple action for damages for tortuous acts is governed by the Civil
(8) Malicious prosecution; Code and not the Labor Code
• Singapore Airlines v. Hon. Ernani Cruz Pano, et al. (1983)
(9) Acts mentioned in article 309; • Summary: Carlos E. Cruz was offered employment Engineer Officer with the
opportunity to undergo a B-707 I conversion training course requiring him
(10) Acts and actions referred to in articles 21, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 32, 34, to enter into a bind with Singapore Airlines Limited for 5 years. Soon, he went on
and 35. a leave despite receiving notice that it his pplication for leave was disapproved.
SIA filed suit for damages against Cruz and his surety, Villanueva, for violation
 of the terms and conditions. RTC: Dismissed for lack of jurisdiction CA: terrorized them in their daily work, ordering them thru his police to appear in his
reversed jurisdiction over the present controversy must be held to belong to the office when he is absent and he is about to order the arrest of the plaintiffs to take
civil Courts their signatures in prepared affidavits exempting the police from any dereliction
• Doctrines: of duty in their case against the perpetrator of the crime. A case was filed against
• claim for damages is grounded on the "wanton failure and refusal" without Sumanguit on the basis of:
just cause of private respondent Cruz to report for duty despite repeated • ART. 21. Any person who wilfully causes loss or injury to another in a
notices served upon him of the disapproval of his application for leave of manner that is contrary to morals, good customs or public policy shall
absence without pay. This, coupled with the further averment that Cruz compensate the latter for the damage
"maliciously and with bad faith" violated the terms and conditions of the • ART. 27. Any person suffering material or moral loss because a public
conversion training course agreement to the damage of petitioner removes servant or employee refuses or neglects, without just cause, to perform his
the present controversy from the coverage of the Labor Code and brings it official duty may file an action for damages and other relief against the
within the purview of Civil Law latter, without prejudice to any disciplinary administrative action that may
• The primary relief sought is for liquidated damages for breach of a be taken.
contractual obligation. The other items demanded are not labor benefits • CFI: dismissed upon appellee's motion in the court below on the ground
demanded by workers generally taken cognizance of in labor disputes, that it does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action
such as payment of wages, overtime compensation or separation pay. The • CA: reversed and remanded to CFI
items claimed are the natural consequences flowing from breach of an • Doctrines:
obligation, intrinsically a civil dispute. • Under the new Rules of Court, an action cannot be dismissed upon the
• ground that the complaint is vague, ambiguous, or indefinite (see Rule 8,
Additionally, there is a secondary issue involved that is outside the pale of section 1), because the defendant, in such case, may ask for more
competence of Labor Arbiters. Is the liability of Villanueva one of particulars (Rule 16) or he may compel the plaintiff to disclose more
suretyship or one of guaranty? Unquestionably, this question is beyond the relevant facts under the different methods of discovery provided by the
field of specialization of Labor Arbiters. Rules.
C. Other Torts • having another recourse (in connection with the crime of illegal discharge
of firearm supposedly committed against one of them) as by filing their
1) Dereliction of Duty complaint directly with the city attorney of Silay or by lodging an
administrative charge against appellee herein, does not preclude this action
for damages under Article 27 of the Civil Code and hence does not justify
Civil Code its dismissal
2) Unfair Competition
Art. 27
Art. 27. Any person suffering material or moral loss because a
public servant or employee refuses or neglects, without just Civil Code
cause, to perform his official duty may file an action for Art. 28
damages and other relief against he latter, without prejudice to
Art. 28. Unfair competition in agricultural, commercial or
any disciplinary administrative action that may be taken.
industrial enterprises or in labor through the use of force,
intimidation, deceit, machination or any other unjust,
• Cornelio Amaro, et al., v. Ambrocio Sumanguit (1962) oppressive or highhanded method shall give rise to a right of
• Summary: Jose Amaro was assaulted and shot at near the city government action by the person who thereby suffers damage.
building of Silay so the next day he, his father Cornelio Amaro and his witnesses
went to the office of the chief of police Ambrosio Sumanguit who harassed and 3) Violation of Human Dignity and Privacy
 P1,000 to P1,500 a month. Moreover, there was violation of Aramil's right to
Civil Code privacy
• Rodrigo Concepcion v. Court of Appeals (2000)
Art. 26 • Summary: Spouses Nestor Nicolas and Allem Nicolas resided in an apartment
Art. 26. Every person shall respect the dignity, personality, leased to them by the owner Florence "Bing" Concepcion who joined Nestor's
privacy and peace of mind of his neighbors and other persons. business venture by contributing capital on condition that after her capital
The following and similar acts, though they may not constitute investment was returned to her, any profit earned would be divided equally among
a criminal offense, shall produce a cause of action for damages, them. Rodrigo Concepcion, brother of the deceased husband of Florence, angrily
accosted Nestor at their apartment in the presence of his wife and children,
prevention and other relief:
neighbors and friends and accused him of conducting an adulterous relationship
with Florence by shouting "Hoy Nestor, kabit ka ni Bing! x x x Binigyan ka pa
(1) Prying into the privacy of another's residence: pala ni Bing Concepcion ng P100,000 para umakyat ng Baguio. Pagkaakyat mo at
(2) Meddling with or disturbing the private life or family ng asawa mo doon ay bababa ka uli para magkasarilinan kayo ni Bing." To
relations of another; clarify matters, Nestor went with Rodrigo. But the same accusation was hurled
(3) Intriguing to cause another to be alienated from his friends; by Rodrigo against Nestor when they confronted Florence at the terrace of her
(4) Vexing or humiliating another on account of his religious residence. Nestor Nicolas felt extreme embarrassment and shame to the extent
beliefs, lowly station in life, place of birth, physical defect, or that he could no longer face his neighbors, Florence stopped
contributing capital so their business declines, not being able to meet demands
other personal condition.
and the spouses had frequent bickerings and quarells as Allem was doubting his
fidelity. He demanded an apology but it was ignored. RTC, CA,
SC: granting P50,000 moral damages, P25,000 exemplary damages, P10,000
• St. Louis Realty Corporation v. Court of Appeals (1984)
attorney's fees, plus costs of suit
• Summary: St. Louis Realty caused to be published with the permission of Arcadio
• Laws: Article 26,Art. 2217 of the Civil Code
S. Arcadio (but without permission of Doctor Aramil) in the issue of the Sunday
• Doctrines:
Times of December 15, 1968 and January 5, 1969 an advertisement with the
• under article 26, the rights of persons are amply protected, and damages
heading "WHERE THE HEART IS". Doctor Aramil wrote to St. Louis Realty
are provided for violations of a person’s dignity, personality, privacy and
about the mistake and stating how it has affected his professional and personal
peace of mind.
integrity as he has invited in several occasions numerous medical colleagues,
• The violations mentioned in the codal provisions are not exclusive
medical students and friends to my house. Because of it he received sly remarks
but are merely examples and do not preclude other similar or
although in light vein as "it looks like your house," "how much are you renting
analogous acts. Damages therefore are allowable for actions
from the Arcadios?" "like your wife portrayed in the papers as belonging to
against a person’s dignity, such as profane, insulting, humiliating,
another husband," etc., have resulted in no little mental anguish on my part. He I
scandalous or abusive language
have referred the matter to the Legal Panel of the Philippine Medical Association
• Under Art. 2217 of the Civil Code, moral damages which include physical
and their final advice is pending upon my submission of supporting ownership
suffering, mental anguish, fright, serious anxiety, besmirched reputation,
papers. Ernesto Magtoto, an officer of St. Louis Realty in charge of advertising
wounded feelings, moral shock, social humiliation, and similar injury,
received the letter. He stopped publication of the advertisement and contacted
although incapable of pecuniary computation, may be recovered if they
Doctor Aramil and offered his apologies but no rectification or apology was
are the proximate result of the defendant’s wrongful act or omission.
published. When Aramil's counsel asked for actual, moral and exemplary
Torts with Independent Civil Action
damage, they said they would publish an apology instead they just publish the
Arcadio's at their real house without any apology or explanation of error. So
A. Violation of Civil and Political Rights
Aramil filed for damages after which St. Louis Realty published in the issue
of the Manila Times a "NOTICE OF RECTIFICATION". RTC,CA,SC: favored
Aramil since he suffered mental anguish and his income was reduced by about
Civil Code Art. 32. Any public officer or employee, or any private
Art. 32 individual, who directly or indirectly obstructs, defeats, violates
or in any manner impedes or impairs any of the following rights
and liberties of another person shall be liable to the latter for
damages:

(1) Freedom of religion;

(2) Freedom of speech;

(3) Freedom to write for the press or to maintain a periodical

publication;

(4) Freedom from arbitrary or illegal detention;

(5) Freedom of suffrage;

(6) The right against deprivation of property without due

process of law;

(7) The right to a just compensation when private property is

taken for public use;

(8) The right to the equal protection of the laws;

(9) The right to be secure in one's person, house, papers, and

effects against unreasonable searches and seizures;

(10) The liberty of abode and of changing the same;

 • Delfin Lim, et al., v. Francisco Ponce De Leon, et al., (1975) Art. 356. Threatening to publish and offer to present such publication for
Rogelio Aberca, et al., v. Major General Fabian Ver, et al., G.R. No. 69866, April 15, 1988 a compensation. — The penalty of arresto mayor or a fine from 200 to
MHP Garments, Inc., et al., v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 86720. September 2, 1994 2,000 pesos, or both, shall be imposed upon any person who threatens
another to publish a libel concerning him or the parents, spouse, child, or
B. Defamation, Fraud and Physical Injuries other members of the family of the latter or upon anyone who shall offer
to prevent the publication of such libel for a compensation or money
Civil Code consideration.
Art. 33 Art. 357
Art. 33. In cases of defamation, fraud, and physical injuries a civil action Art. 357. Prohibited publication of acts referred to in the course of official
for damages, entirely separate and distinct from the criminal action, may proceedings. — The penalty of arresto mayor or a fine of from 20 to
be brought by the injured party. Such civil action shall proceed 2,000 pesos, or both, shall be imposed upon any reporter, editor or
independently of the criminal prosecution, and shall require only a manager or a newspaper, daily or magazine, who shall publish facts
preponderance of evidence. connected with the private life of another and offensive to the honor,
Revised Penal Code virtue and reputation of said person, even though said publication be
Art. 353 made in connection with or under the pretext that it is necessary in the
Art. 353. Definition of libel. — A libel is public and malicious imputation of narration of any judicial or administrative proceedings wherein such facts
a crime, or of a vice or defect, real or imaginary, or any act, omission, have been mentioned.
condition, status, or circumstance tending to cause the dishonor, Art. 358
discredit, or contempt of a natural or juridical person, or to blacken the Art. 358. Slander. — Oral defamation shall be punished by arresto mayor
memory of one who is dead. in its maximum period to prision correccional in its minimum period if it is
Art. 354 of a serious and insulting nature; otherwise the penalty shall be arresto
Art. 354. Requirement for publicity. — Every defamatory imputation is menor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos.
presumed to be malicious, even if it be true, if no good intention and Art. 359
justifiable motive for making it is shown, except in the following cases: Art. 359. Slander by deed. — The penalty of arresto mayor in its
1. A private communication made by any person to another in the maximum period to prision correccional in its minimum period or a fine
performance of any legal, moral or social duty; and ranging from 200 to 1,000 pesos shall be imposed upon any person who
2. A fair and true report, made in good faith, without any comments or shall perform any act not included and punished in this title, which shall
remarks, of any judicial, legislative or other official proceedings which are cast dishonor, discredit or contempt upon another person. If said act is
not of confidential nature, or of any statement, report or speech delivered not of a serious nature, the penalty shall be arresto menor or a fine not
in said proceedings, or of any other act performed by public officers in exceeding 200 pesos.
the exercise of their functions. Maximo Marcia, et al., v. Court of Appeals, et al., G.R. No. L-34529. January 27, 1983
Art. 355 Carmen L. Madeja v. Felix T. Caro, et al., G.R. No. L-51183. December 21, 1983
Catalino Arafiles, v. Philippine Journalists, Inc., et al., G.R. No. 150256, March 25, 2004
Art. 355. Libel means by writings or similar means. — A libel committed
by means of writing, printing, lithography, engraving, radio, phonograph, 1) Defamation
painting, theatrical exhibition, cinematographic exhibition, or any similar
means, shall be punished by prision correccional in its minimum and MVRS Publications, Inc., et al., v. Islamic Da’Wah Council of the Philippines, G.R. No. 135306.
medium periods or a fine ranging from 200 to 6,000 pesos, or both, in January 28, 2003.
addition to the civil action which may be brought by the offended party.
Art. 356 2) Fraud
 Art. 35. When a person, claiming to be injured by a criminal offense,
Almario Salta v. Jesus De Veyra, G.R. No. L-37733, September 30, 1982 charges another with the same, for which no independent civil action is
granted in this Code or any special law, but the justice of the peace finds
3) Physical Injuries no reasonable grounds to believe that a crime has been committed, or
the prosecuting attorney refuses or fails to institute criminal proceedings,
Victoria Capuno, et al., v. Pepsi-Cola Bottling Company, et al., G.R. No. L-19331. April 30,
the complaint may bring a civil action for damages against the alleged
1965
offender. Such civil action may be supported by a preponderance of
Laura Corpus, et al., v. Felardo Paje, et al., G.R. No. L-26737. July 31, 1969
Maria Benita Dulay, et al., v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 108017, April 3, 1995
evidence. Upon the defendant's motion, the court may require the
plaintiff to file a bond to indemnify the defendant in case the complaint
C. Neglect of Duty should be found to be malicious.

If during the pendency of the civil action, an information should be

Civil Code presented by the prosecuting attorney, the civil action shall be
suspended until the termination of the criminal proceedings.
Art. 34
Art. 34. When a member of a city or municipal police force refuses or The Defendants
fails to render aid or protection to any person in case of danger to life or
property, such peace officer shall be primarily liable for damages, and A. Concurrent Negligence or Acts
the city or municipality shall be subsidiarily responsible therefor. The civil
action herein recognized shall be independent of any criminal 1) Joint Tort-feasors
proceedings, and a preponderance of evidence shall suffice to support
such action.
Civil Code
D. Action for damages where no independent civil action is provided Art. 2194
Art. 2194. The responsibility of two or more persons who are liable for
quasi-delict is solidary.
Civil Code Dean Worcester v. Martin Ocampo, et al., G.R. No. 5932, February 27, 1912
Art. 35
2) Motor Vehicle Mishaps

Civil Code
Art. 2184
 Art. 2184. In motor vehicle mishaps, the owner is solidarily liable with his Art. 2180. The obligation imposed by Article 2176 is demandable not only
driver, if the former, who was in the vehicle, could have, by the use of the for one's own acts or omissions, but also for those of persons for whom
due diligence, prevented the misfortune. It is disputably presumed that a one is responsible.
driver was negligent, if he had been found guilty or reckless driving or
violating traffic regulations at least twice within the next preceding two The father and, in case of his death or incapacity, the mother, are
months. responsible for the damages caused by the minor children who live in
their company.
If the owner was not in the motor vehicle, the provisions of Article 2180
are applicable. Guardians are liable for damages caused by the minors or incapacitated
J.H. Chapman v. James Underwood, G.R. No. 9010. March 28, 1914 persons who are under their authority and live in their company.
Marcial T. Caedo, et al., v. Yu Khe Thai, et al., G.R. No. L-20392. December 18, 1968
The owners and managers of an establishment or enterprise are likewise
B. Vicarious Liability responsible for damages caused by their employees in the service of the
branches in which the latter are employed or on the occasion of their
functions.
Civil Code
Art. 2180 Employers shall be liable for the damages caused by their employees
and household helpers acting within the scope of their assigned tasks,
even though the former are not engaged in any business or industry.

The State is responsible in like manner when it acts through a special

agent; but not when the damage has been caused by the official to
whom the task done properly pertains, in which case what is provided in
Article 2176 shall be applicable.

Lastly, teachers or heads of establishments of arts and trades shall be

liable for damages caused by their pupils and students or apprentices,
so long as they remain in their custody.

The responsibility treated of in this article shall cease when the persons
herein mentioned prove that they observed all the diligence of a good
father of a family to prevent damage.
Art. 2181
Art. 2181. Whoever pays for the damage caused by his dependents or
employees may recover from the latter what he has paid or delivered in
satisfaction of the claim.
Art. 2182
Art. 2182. If the minor or insane person causing damage has no parents Art. 219. Those given the authority and responsibility under the
or guardian, the minor or insane person shall be answerable with his preceding Article shall be principally and solidarily liable for damages
own property in an action against him where a guardian ad litem shall be caused by the acts or omissions of the unemancipated minor. The
appointed. parents, judicial guardians or the persons exercising substitute parental
Art. 2183 authority over said minor shall be subsidiarily liable.
Art. 2183. The possessor of an animal or whoever may make use of the
same is responsible for the damage which it may cause, although it may The respective liabilities of those referred to in the preceding paragraph
escape or be lost. This responsibility shall cease only in case the shall not apply if it is proved that they exercised the proper diligence
damage should come from force majeure or from the fault of the person required under the particular circumstances.
who has suffered damage.
Art. 2184 All other cases not covered by this and the preceding articles shall be
governed by the provisions of the Civil Code on quasi-delicts.
Art. 2184. In motor vehicle mishaps, the owner is solidarily liable with his
driver, if the former, who was in the vehicle, could have, by the use of the Art. 221
due diligence, prevented the misfortune. It is disputably presumed that a Art. 221. Parents and other persons exercising parental authority shall
driver was negligent, if he had been found guilty or reckless driving or be civilly liable for the injuries and damages caused by the acts or
violating traffic regulations at least twice within the next preceding two omissions of their unemancipated children living in their company and
months. under their parental authority subject to the appropriate defenses
provided by law.
If the owner was not in the motor vehicle, the provisions of Article 2180 Art. 236
are applicable. Art. 236. Emancipation for any cause shall terminate parental authority
Presidential Decree No. 603 over the person and property of the child who shall then be qualified and
Article 58 responsible for all acts of civil life.
Article 58. Torts. - Parents and guardians are responsible for the damage Revised Penal Code
caused by the child under their parental authority in accordance with the Article 101
Civil Code.
Family Code
Art. 218
Art. 218. The school, its administrators and teachers, or the individual,
entity or institution engaged in child are shall have special parental
authority and responsibility over the minor child while under their
supervision, instruction or custody.

Authority and responsibility shall apply to all authorized activities whether

inside or outside the premises of the school, entity or institution.
Art. 219
Article 101. Rules regarding civil liability in certain cases. - The Article 102. Subsidiary civil liability of innkeepers, tavernkeepers and
exemption from criminal liability established in subdivisions 1, 2, 3, 5 and proprietors of establishments. - In default of the persons criminally liable,
6 of article 12 and in subdivision 4 of article 11 of this Code does not innkeepers, tavernkeepers, and any other persons or corporations shall
include exemption from civil liability, which shall be enforced subject to be civilly liable for crimes committed in their establishments, in all cases
the following rules: where a violation of municipal ordinances or some general or special
First. In cases of subdivisions 1, 2, and 3 of article 12, the civil liability for police regulation shall have been committed by them or their employees.
acts committed by an imbecile or insane person, and by a person under Innkeepers are also subsidiarily liable for the restitution of goods taken
nine years of age, or by one over nine but under fifteen years of age, by robbery or theft within their houses from guests lodging therein, or for
who has acted without discernment, shall devolve upon those having the payment of the value thereof, provided that such guests shall have
such person under their legal authority or control, unless it appears that notified in advance the innkeeper himself, or the person representing
there was no fault or negligence on their part. him, of the deposit of such goods within the inn; and shall furthermore
Should there be no person having such insane, imbecile or minor under have followed the directions which such innkeeper or his representative
his authority, legal guardianship, or control or if such person be insolvent, may have given them with respect to the care of and vigilance over such
said insane, imbecile, or minor shall respond with their own property, goods. No liability shall attach in case of robbery with violence against or
excepting property exempt from execution, in accordance with the civil intimidation of persons unless committed by the innkeeper's employees.
law. Article 103
Second. In cases falling within subdivision 4 of article 11, the persons for Article 103. Subsidiary civil liability of other persons. - The subsidiary
whose benefit the harm has been prevented shall be civilly liable in liability established in the next preceding article shall also apply to
proportion to the benefit which they may have received. employers, teachers, persons, and corporations engaged in any kind of
The courts shall determine, in sound discretion, the proportionate industry for felonies committed by their servants, pupils, workmen,
amount for which each one shall be liable. apprentices, or employees in the discharge of their duties.
When the respective shares cannot be equitably determined, even R.A. 9344
approximately, or when the liability also attaches to the Government, or
to the majority of the inhabitants of the town, and, in all events, whenever SEC. 6
the damage has been caused with the consent of the authorities or their SEC. 6. Minimum Age of Criminal Responsibility. - A child fifteen (15)
agents, indemnification shall be made in the manner prescribed by years of age or under at the time of the commission of the offense shall
special laws or regulations. be exempt from criminal liability. However, the child shall be subjected to
Third. In cases falling within subdivisions 5 and 6 of article 12, the an intervention program pursuant to Section 20 of this Act.
persons using violence or causing the fears shall be primarily liable and
secondarily, or, if there be no such persons, those doing the act shall be A child above fifteen (15) years but below eighteen (18) years of age
liable, saving always to the latter that part of their property exempt from shall likewise be exempt from criminal liability and be subjected to an
execution. intervention program, unless he/she has acted with discernment, in
Article 102 which case, such child shall be subjected to the appropriate proceedings
in accordance with this Act.

The exemption from criminal liability herein established does not include
exemption from civil liability, which shall be enforced in accordance with
existing laws.

1) Parents
 XI. DAMAGES
Cresencio Libi v. Intermediate Appellate Court, G.R. No. 70890. September 18, 1992
Macario Tamargo et al., v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 85044. June 3, 1992. A. Definition and Concept

2) Guardians Civil Code

Art. 2195
Family Code
Art. 2195. The provisions of this Title shall be
Art. 216
Art. 216. In default of parents or a judicially appointed guardian, the
respectively applicable to all obligations mentioned in
following person shall exercise substitute parental authority over the Article 1157.
child in the order indicated: Art. 1157
(1) The surviving grandparent, as provided in Art. 214; Art. 1157. Obligations arise from:
(2) The oldest brother or sister, over twenty-one years of age, unless
unfit or disqualified; and

(3) The child's actual custodian, over twenty-one years of age, unless (1) Law;
unfit or disqualified.

Whenever the appointment or a judicial guardian over the property of the (2) Contracts;
child becomes necessary, the same order of preference shall be
observed.
Art. 218
Art. 218. The school, its administrators and teachers, or the individual, (3) Quasi-contracts;
entity or institution engaged in child are shall have special parental
authority and responsibility over the minor child while under their
supervision, instruction or custody. (4) Acts or omissions punished by law; and
Authority and responsibility shall apply to all authorized activities whether
inside or outside the premises of the school, entity or institution.
(5) Quasi-delicts
3) Teachers and Heads of Institutions Art. 2197
Maximo Soliman, Jr., et al., v. Ramon Tuazon, G.R. No. 66207. May 18, 1992
St. Mary’s Academy v. William Carpitanos, et al., G.R. No. 143363. February 6, 2002

4) Owners and Managers

Philippine Rabbit Bus Line, et al., v. Philippine-American Forwarders, Inc., et al., G.R. No.
L-25142. March 25, 1975.
Art. 2197. Damages may be: CA affirmed RTC: Lazatin and Central Surety and Insurance Co. solidarily
liable to pay P3,000 for attorney's fees, P500 for moral damages, 6% interest and
costs. SC: Affirmed with modification: elimination of moral damages
◦ Laws: Art. 2208, Article 2219 of the civil code (old laws)
(1) Actual or compensatory; ◦ Doctrines:
▪ kind of damages recoverable:
▪ (1) actual or compensatory and
▪ (2) moral Article 2219 provides that moral damages may be
(2) Moral; recovered in the following and analogous cases . . .
▪ (3) malicious prosecution
▪ NOTE: malicious intent is essential ingredient
▪ In the absence of stipulation, attorney's fees and expenses of litigation,
(3) Nominal; other than judicial costs, cannot be covered, except:xxx
▪ (4) In case of a clearly unfounded civil action or proceeding against the
plaintiff.
(11) In any other case where the court deems it just and equitable that
(4) Temperate or moderate; attorney's fees and expenses of litigation should be recovered.
B. Kinds of Damages

(5) Liquidated; or 1. Actual or Compensatory

(6) Exemplary or corrective. Civil Code

• Heirs of Borlado vs. Vda. De Bulan G.R. 114118 (2001)
Art. 2216
◦ Summary: Spouses Bienvenido Bulan and Salvacion Borbon had a continuous,
peaceful, uninterrupted, adverse and exclusive possession of the lot from February Art. 2216. No proof of pecuniary loss is necessary in
1948 until November 4, 1972 when the heirs of Borlado forcibly entered and order that moral, nominal, temperate, liquidated or
physically took possession. RTC: favored the spouses awarding as damage 100 exemplary damages, may be adjudicated. The
cavans of palay until the heirs vacate the premises plus P5K attorney's fees and
cost of suit CA: affirmed SC: deleted the 100 cavans of palay for lack of basis as assessment of such damages, except liquidated ones, is
it is not of legal tender currency in the Philippines left to the discretion of the court, according to the
◦ Doctrines: circumstances of each case.
▪ Damages should be legal tender currency in the Philippines
Art. 2219
▪
• Lazatin vs. Twano 2 SCRA 842 (1961)
◦ Summary: Angel C. Twaño and Gregorio T. Castro for the recovery of P35,000
plus interest against F. L. Lazatin, et al. for their purchase from the U.S.
government of 225 auto-trucks. Lazatin's property was levied and publicly
auctioned of which Twaño and Castro purchased. Lazatin deposited during the
redemption period. At the same time, filed for writ of attachment alleging
that Twaño and Castro intended to dispose the property to defraud its creditors.
Art. 2219. Moral damages may be recovered in the Art. 2220. Willful injury to property may be a legal
following and analogous cases: ground for awarding moral damages if the court should
find that, under the circumstances, such damages are
(1) A criminal offense resulting in physical injuries; justly due. The same rule applies to breaches of
contract where the defendant acted fraudulently or in
(2) Quasi-delicts causing physical injuries; bad faith.
Art. 205
(3) Seduction, abduction, rape, or other lascivious acts; Art. 205. Indemnities that must be paid by either
spouse on account of a crime or of a quasi-delict shall
(4) Adultery or concubinage; be paid from the common assets, without any obligation
to make reimbursement.
(5) Illegal or arbitrary detention or arrest; • Algarra v. Sandejas (1914)
◦ Summary: Algarra was injured from a car collision due to the negligence of
Sandejas and is claiming for damages. RTC: denied based on the doctrine
(6) Illegal search; under Marcelo vs. Velasco and Viana which does not pertain to personal injuries
SC: reversed and awarded him damages: P10 for medical expenses; P100 for the
(7) Libel, slander or any other form of defamation; 2 months of his enforced absence from his business; and P250 for the damage
done to his business in the way of loss of profits = P360
◦ Laws: article 1902,1106,1107 of the Civil Code (old laws)
(8) Malicious prosecution; ◦ Doctrines:
▪ "actual damages"
(9) Acts mentioned in Article 309; ▪ purpose of the law in awarding actual damages is to repair the
wrong that has been done, to compensate for the injury inflicted,
and not to impose a penalty
(10) Acts and actions referred to in Articles 21, 26, 27, ▪ not dependent on nor graded by the intent with which the
28, 29, 30, 32, 34, and 35. wrongful act is done.
▪ shall be construed to include all damages that the plaintiff may he
has suffered in respect to his property, business, trade, profession,
The parents of the female seduced, abducted, raped, or or occupation, and no other damages whatever."
abused, referred to in No. 3 of this article, may also ▪ proceed from a sense of natural justice
recover moral damages. ▪ indemnity comprises, not only the value of loss suffered, but also
The spouse, descendants, ascendants, and brothers and that of the prospective profit that was not realized, and the
obligation of the debtor in good faith is limited to such losses and
sisters may bring the action mentioned in No. 9 of this damages as were foreseen or might have been foreseen at the time
article, in the order named. the obligation was incurred and which are a necessary consequence
Art. 2220 of his failure of fulfillment
▪ The measure of damages is an ultimate fact, to be determined from the
evidence submitted to the court
a. Kinds
 and attorney's fees, for lack of factual and legal basis only mere est. based on self-
• PNOC v. CA (1998) claim of Integrated
◦ Summary: M/V Maria Efigenia XV, owned by Maria Efigenia Fishing ◦ Doctrines:
Corporation on its way to Navotas, Metro Manila collided with the vessel ▪ indemnification for damages comprehends not only the loss suffered, that
Petroparcel owned by the Luzon Stevedoring Corporation (LSC) though the fault is to say actual damages (damnum emergens), but also profits which the
of Petroparcel captain, Edgardo Doruelo so Efigenia sued against LSC and its obligee failed to obtain, referred to as compensatory damages (lucrum
captain. Soon, LSC is substituted by PNOC, the new owner of Petroparcel. RTC: cessans).
awarded actual damages of P6,438,048 CA: affirmed SC: affirmed with ▪ However, to justify a grant of actual or compensatory damages, it
modification deleted the actual damaged for lack of basis and instead awarded is necessary to prove with a reasonable degree of certainty,
P2M nominal damage premised upon competent proof and on the best evidence
◦ Doctrines: obtainable by the injured party, the actual amount of loss
▪ two kinds of actual or compensatory damages: ▪ Moral damages may be awarded when in a breach of contract the
▪ loss of what a person already possesses (daño emergente) defendant acted in bad faith, or was guilty of gross negligence amounting
▪ failure to receive as a benefit that which would have pertained to to bad faith, or in wanton disregard of his contractual obligation.
him ▪ eletion of the award of moral damages is proper, since private
▪ nominal damages respondent could not be held liable for breach of contract.
▪ In the absence of competent proof on the actual damage suffered, it ▪ Since the award of moral damages is eliminated, so must the award for
is adjudicated in order that a right of the plaintiff, which has been attorney's fees be also deleted.
violated or invaded, may be vindicated and recognized, and not for
the purpose of indemnifying any loss suffered b. Extent
▪ awarded in every obligation arising from law, contracts, quasi-
contracts, acts or omissions punished by law, and quasi-delicts, or
in every case where property right has been invaded
▪ damages in name only and not in fact Civil Code
▪ shall be equal or at least commensurate to the injury sustained by
private respondent considering the concept and purpose of such Art. 2201
damages Art. 2201. In contracts and quasi-contracts, the
• Integrated Packing v. CA (2000) damages for which the obligor who acted in good faith is
◦ Summary: Integrated Packaging Corp agreed to deliver to Fil-anchor paper co.,
inc. 3,450 reams of printing paper. Materials were to be paid within 30-90 days.
liable shall be those that are the natural and probable
Then Integrated entered into a contract with Philippine Appliance Corporation consequences of the breach of the obligation, and which
(Philacor) to print three volumes of "Philacor Cultural Books". Integrated the parties have foreseen or could have reasonably
paid P97,200.00 which was applied to its back accounts covered by delivery foreseen at the time the obligation was constituted.
invoices dated September 29-30, 1980 and October 1-2, 1980. Integrated entered
into an additional printing contract with Philacor but it failed to comply
so Philacor demanded compensation for the delay and damage it suffered on In case of fraud, bad faith, malice or wanton attitude,
account of Integrated's failure. Fil-anchor filed a collection suit the obligor shall be responsible for all damages which
of P766,101.70 against Integrated representing unpaid purchase price of printing
may be reasonably attributed to the non-performance of
paper bought on credit. RTC: held that Integrated is entitled to compensatory and
moral damages. CA: reversed and set aside ordered to pay Fil- the obligation.
anchor P763,101.70 for unpaid printing paper and deleted the award of Art. 2202
P790,324.30 as compensatory damages as well as the award of moral damages
 Art. 2202. In crimes and quasi-delicts, the defendant mayor as minimum to 17 years and 4 months of reclusion temporal as maximum,
to indemnify the heirs of Malaspina P50,000.00,P8,300.00 as actual damages plus
shall be liable for all damages which are the natural and costs. CA: Affirmed SC: changed to reclusion perpetua and deleted actual
probable consequences of the act or omission damages
complained of. It is not necessary that such damages ◦ Doctrines: the Court can only give credence to those supported by receipts and
have been foreseen or could have reasonably been which appear to have been genuinely expended in connection with the death of
the victim
foreseen by the defendant. d. Damage to property

c. Certainty

• PNOC v. CA (1998), supra (see above)

• DBP v. CA (1998) ◦ Doctrines:
◦ Summary: Lydia P. Cuba is a grantee of a Fishpond Lease Agreement from the ▪ in the case of profit-earning chattels, what has to be assessed is the value
Government who executed 2 Deeds of Assignment of her Leasehold Rights as of the chattel to its owner as a going concern at the time and place of the
security. Upon failure to pay, without foreclosure proceedings it was loss, and this means, at least in the case of ships, that regard must be had
appropriated and DBP executed in turn a Deed of Conditional Sale of the to existing and pending engagements
Leasehold Rights in her favor which she offered to repurchase but failed so it was ▪ If the market value of the ship reflects the fact that it is in any case
appropriated. Cuba filed against the DBP since no foreclosure proceedings was virtually certain of profitable employment, then nothing can be added to
done thus, contrary to Article 2088 of the Civil Code. RTC: favored Cuba that it that value in respect of charters actually lost, for to do so would be pro
was a pactum commissorium returning her leasehold rights tanto to compensate the plaintiff twice over.
and entitling P1,067,500 actual damages, P100,000 moral and P50,000 exemplary ▪ if the ship is valued without reference to its actual future engagements and
damages and P100,000 attorney’s fees. CA: reversed - leasehold rights to Caperal only in the light of its profit-earning potentiality, then it may be necessary
as valid but same damages SC: CA reversed except the P50,000 as moral damages to add to the value thus assessed the anticipated profit on a charter or other
for lack of basis engagement which it was unable to fulfill.
◦ Doctrines: ▪ damages cannot be presumed and courts, in making an award must point
▪ The award of actual damages should, therefore, be struck down for lack of out specific facts that could afford a basis for measuring whatever
sufficient basis compensatory or actual damages are borne
▪ Other than the testimony of CUBA and her caretaker, there was no e. Personal Injury and Death
proof as to the existence of those items before DBP took over the
fishpond in question neithr was the prevention expressed in her
letter 7 months after DBP took the leasehold rights
▪ Exemplary or corrective damages in the amount of P25,000 should
likewise be awarded by way of example or correction for the public Civil Code
good. There being an award of exemplary damages, attorney’s fees are Art. 2206
also recoverable
• Fuentes [Link] (1996)
◦ Summary: Alejandro Fuentes, Jr. was witnessed by Alberto Toling and Honorio
Osok who knew him for quite some time to have stabbed Malaspina in the
abdomen with a hunting knofe. But, Alejandro Fuentes, Jr. and his
uncle Felicisimo contends that it was Zoilo Fuentes, Jr. a.k.a "Jonie" who did it
and fleed but it was dismissed because only hearsay RTC: guilty of murder
qualified by treachery-indeterminate prison term of 10 years and 1 day of prision
Art. 2206. The amount of damages for death caused by against Dr. Hosaka and Dra. Perfecta Gutierrez. RTC: favor the
Ramos' warding P8,000 as actual monthly expenses totalling to P632,000 as of
a crime or quasi-delict shall be at least three thousand A p r i l 1 5 , 1 9 9 2 , P 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 a t t y. f e e s , P 8 0 0 , 0 0 0 m o r a l
pesos, even though there may have been mitigating damages,P200,000 exemplary damages and cost of suit. CA: reversed and asked
circumstances. In addition: then to pay unpaid bills. SC: affirmed with modification 1,352,000 actual
(1) The defendant shall be liable for the loss of the damages computed as of the date of promulgation plus a monthly payment of
P8,000.00 up to the time that petitioner Erlinda Ramos expires or miraculously
earning capacity of the deceased, and the indemnity survives; 2) P2,000,000 moral damages, 3) P1,500,000 temperate damages; 4)
shall be paid to the heirs of the latter; such indemnity P100,000 exemplary damages and P100,000 attorney's fees; and, 5) the costs of
shall in every case be assessed and awarded by the the suit.
court, unless the deceased on account of permanent ◦ Doctrines:
▪ The application of res ipsa loquitur in medical negligence cases presents a
physical disability not caused by the defendant, had no question of law since it is a judicial function to determine whether a
earning capacity at the time of his death; certain set of circumstances does, as a matter of law, permit a given
inference.
(2) If the deceased was obliged to give support ▪ doctrine of res ipsa loquitur is availed by the plaintiff, the need for
expert medical testimony is dispensed with because the injury
according to the provisions of Article 291, the recipient itself provides the proof of negligence - applicable in this case
who is not an heir called to the decedent's inheritance ▪ doctrine of res ipsa loquitur can have no application in a suit
by the law of testate or intestate succession, may against a physician or surgeon which involves the merits of a
diagnosis or of a scientific treatment
demand support from the person causing the death, for
▪ Generally, to qualify as an expert witness, one must have acquired special
a period not exceeding five years, the exact duration to knowledge of the subject matter about which he or she is to testify, either
be fixed by the court; by the study of recognized authorities on the subject or by practical
experience.
▪ Hermina - With her clinical background as a nurse, the Court is
(3) The spouse, legitimate and illegitimate descendants satisfied
and ascendants of the deceased may demand moral ▪ Dr. Jamora - not an anesthesiologist - not credible
damages for mental anguish by reason of the death of ▪ Temperate damages can and should be awarded on top of actual or
compensatory damages in instances where the injury is chronic and
the deceased.
continuing. The reason is that these damages cover two distinct phases
▪ family's moral injury and suffering charged with moral responsibility
▪ Finally, by way of example, exemplary damages are awarded. Considering
• Ramos v. CA (1999)
the length and nature of the instant suit attorney's fees likewise proper.
◦ Summary: Erlinda Ramos, 47-year old robust woman underwent on an operation
• Gatchalian v. Delim (1991)
to the stone at her gall bladder removed after being tested that she was fit
◦ Summary: Gatchalian was injured in her leg, arm and forehead due to a Thames
for "cholecystectomy" operation performed by Dr. Orlino Hozaka. Dr. Hosaka
mini-bus accident where there was a snapping sound and the bus turtled. Delim
charged a fee of P16,000.00, which was to include the anesthesiologist's fee and
visited the injured passengers and paid for their hospital bills and even gave
which was to be paid after the operation. He assured Rogelio E. Ramos, husband
Gatchalian transportation expenses. She was also made to sign a joint affidavit
that he will get a good anesthesiologist who was Dra. Perfecta Gutierrez. Dra.
where it stated that they are not interested to file a case against Thames owner and
Perfecta Gutierrez failed to intubate Erlinda and due to insufficiency of blood in
driver. Later, she filed against Delim because she had a conspicuous white scar
the brain caused her to be comatosed incurring one month hospitalization
measuring 1 by 1/2 inches on the forehead, generating mental suffering and an
expenses and monthly expenses totalling to P93,542.25. The Ramos' filed
inferiority complex on her part CFI: dismissed because of the Joint Affidavit CA:
 affirmed SC: REVERSED and SET ASIDE 1) P15,000 actual or compensatory Civil Code
damages to cover the cost of plastic surgery for the removal of the scar on
petitioner's forehead; 2) P30,000 moral damages; and 3) P1,000 attorney's fees, Art. 2208
the aggregate amount to bear interest at the legal rate of 6% per annum counting
from the promulgation of this decision until full payment thereof
◦ Doctrines:
▪ A waiver, to be valid and effective, must in the first place be couched in
clear and unequivocal terms which leave no doubt as to the intention of a
person to give up a right or benefit which legally pertains to him.
▪ while reading the same, she experienced dizziness but that, seeing
the other passengers who had also suffered injuries sign the
document, she too signed without bothering to read the Joint
Affidavit in its entirety. Considering these circumstances there
appears substantial doubt whether petitioner understood fully the
import of the Joint Affidavit
▪ To uphold a supposed waiver of any right to claim damages by an
injured passenger, under circumstances like those exhibited in this
case, would be to dilute and weaken the standard of extraordinary
diligence exacted by the law from common carriers and hence to
render that standard unenforceable.
▪ Court of Appeals, however, found that at the time of the accident,
she was no longer employed in a public school since, being a
casual employee and not a Civil Service eligible, she had been laid
off. Her employment as a substitute teacher was occasional and
episodic, contingent upon the availability of vacancies for
substitute teachers.
▪ person is entitled to the physical integrity of his or her body; if that
integrity is violated or diminished, actual injury is suffered for
which actual or compensatory damages are due and assessable.
Petitioner Gatchalian is entitled to be placed as nearly as possible
in the condition that she was before the mishap. A scar, especially
one on the face of the woman, resulting from the infliction of
injury upon her, is a violation of bodily integrity, giving raise to a
legitimate claim for restoration to her conditio ante. If the scar is
relatively small and does not grievously disfigure the victim, the
cost of surgery may be expected to be correspondingly modest.
▪ moral damages may be awarded where gross negligence on the
part of the common carrier - driver did not check after the snapping
sound

f. Attorney's Fees
Art. 2208. In the absence of stipulation, attorney's fees • Quirante v. IAC (1989)
◦ Summary: Dr. Casasola, thru his counsel, Atty. John Quirante, sued both Guerrero
and expenses of litigation, other than judicial costs, for failing to perform and Philamgen as bondsman of Guerrero. RTC: in favor
cannot be recovered, except: of Dr. Indalecio Casasola by rescinding the contract ordering Guerrero
and Philamgen to pay actual damages of P129,430, moral
(1) When exemplary damages are awarded; damages of P50,000, exemplary damages of P40,000 and attorney's fees
of P30,000 ordering Guerrero alone to pay liquidated damages of P300/day from
December 15, 1978 to July 16, 1979 and ordering Philamgen to pay Dr. Casasola
(2) When the defendant's act or omission has compelled the amount of the surety bond equivalent to P120,000. Quirante filed a motion in
the plaintiff to litigate with third persons or to incur the trial court for the confirmation of his attorney's fees. RTC: granted the motion
for confirmation SC: affirmed RTC decision that it is premature
expenses to protect his interest;
◦ Doctrines:
▪ attorney's fees may be asserted either in:
(3) In criminal cases of malicious prosecution against ▪ the very action in which the services in question have been
the plaintiff; rendered -as in this case
▪ the Court may pass upon said claim, even if its amount
were less than the minimum prescribed by law for the
(4) In case of a clearly unfounded civil action or jurisdiction of said court, upon the theory that the right to
proceeding against the plaintiff; recover attorney's fees is but an incident of the case in
which the services of counsel have been rendered
▪ rests on the assumption that the court trying the case is to a
(5) Where the defendant acted in gross and evident bad certain degree already familiar with the nature and extent of
faith in refusing to satisfy the plaintiff's plainly valid, the lawyer's services
just and demandable claim; ▪ The rule against multiplicity of suits will in effect be served
▪ a separate action
▪ 2 Kinds of Attorney's fees
(6) In actions for legal support; ▪ 1. item of damages provided for under Article 2208 of the Civil
Code wherein the award is made in favor of the litigant, not of his
(7) In actions for the recovery of wages of household counsel, and the litigant, not his counsel, is the judgment creditor
who may enforce the judgment for attorney's fees by execution
helpers, laborers and skilled workers;
▪ 2. claims are based on the contract for professional services, with
the attorney as the creditors and the clients as the debtors
(8) In actions for indemnity under workmen's ▪ It is further observed that the supposed contract alleged by petitioners as
compensation and employer's liability laws; the basis for their fees provides that the recovery of the amounts claimed
is subject to certain contingencies
▪ We are of the considered view that the orderly administration of justice
(9) In a separate civil action to recover civil liability dictates that such issue be likewise determined by the court a quo
arising from a crime; inasmuch as it also necessarily involves the same contingencies in
determining the propriety and assessing the extent of recovery of
attorney's fees by both petitioners herein. The court below will be in a
(10) When at least double judicial costs are awarded; better position, after the entire case shall have been adjudicated
▪ We, therefore, take exception to and reject that portion of the decision of
(11) In any other case where the court deems it just the respondent court which holds that the alleged confirmation to
and equitable that attorney's fees and expenses of
 attorney's fees should not adversely affect the non-signatories thereto, SC: MODIFIED. The rate of interest shall be 6%/annum (since piece of work),
since it is also premised on the eventual grant of damages to the Casasola computed from the time of the filing of the Complaint in the trial court until the
family, hence the same objection of prematurity obtains and such a finality of the judgment. If the adjudged principal and the interest (or any part
holding may be pre-emptive of factual and evidentiary matters that may be thereof) remain unpaid thereafter, the interest rate shall be 12% per annum
presented for consideration by the trial court. computed from the time the judgment becomes final and executory until it is fully
g. Interest satisfied.
◦ Laws:
Civil Code ▪ Article 1589 on the Civil Code
▪ owe interest for the period between the delivery of the thing and
Art. 2209 the payment of the price . . . should he be in default from the time
Art. 2209. If the obligation consists in the payment of a of judicial or extrajudicial demand for the payment of the price.
sum of money, and the debtor incurs in delay, the ▪ Article 2209 of the Civil Code (see above)
▪ Usury Law
indemnity for damages, there being no stipulation to the
▪ rate of interest for the loan or forbearance of any money, goods or
contrary, shall be the payment of the interest agreed credits and the rate allowed in judgments, in the absence of express
upon, and in the absence of stipulation, the legal contract as to such rate of interest, shall be 12% per annum
interest, which is six per cent per annum ◦ Doctrines:
▪ award of interest in the concept of actual and compensatory damages, the
Art. 2210 rate of interest, as well as the accrual thereof
Art. 2210. Interest may, in the discretion of the court, ▪ When the obligation is breached, and it consists in the payment of
be allowed upon damages awarded for breach of a sum of money, i.e., a loan or forbearance of money, the interest
due should be that which may have been stipulated in writing
contract.
▪ interest due shall itself earn legal interest from the time it is
Art. 2211 judicially demanded
Art. 2211. In crimes and quasi-delicts, interest as a part ▪ In the absence of stipulation, the rate of interest shall be
of the damages may, in a proper case, be adjudicated in 12% per annum to be computed from default, i.e., from
judicial or extrajudicial demand under and subject to the
the discretion of the court. provisions of Article 1169 of the Civil Code
Art. 2212 ▪ When an obligation, not constituting a loan or forbearance of
Art. 2212. Interest due shall earn legal interest from the money, is breached, an interest on the amount of damages awarded
may be imposed at the discretion of the court at the rate of 6% per
time it is judicially demanded, although the obligation annum.
may be silent upon this point. ▪ No interest, however, shall be adjudged on unliquidated
Art. 2213 claims or damages except when or until the demand can be
established with reasonable certainty
Art. 2213. Interest cannot be recovered upon
▪ where the demand is established with reasonable certainty,
unliquidated claims or damages, except when the the interest shall begin to run from the time the claim is
demand can be established with reasonably certainty. made judicially or extrajudicially (Art. 1169, Civil Code)
• Crismina Garments v. CA (1999) but when such certainty cannot be so reasonably
◦ Summary: Crismina Garments, Inc. contracted the services of D'Wilmar established at the time the demand is made, the interest
Garments, for the sewing of 20,762 pieces of assorted girls denims for P76,410 of shall begin to run only from the date the judgment of the
which he did not pay. RTC: favored D'Wilmar P76,140 at 12% per annum, court is made (at which time the quantification of damages
P5,000 attorney's fees and cost of suit CA: affirmed deleting attoryney's fees. may be deemed to have been reasonably ascertained).
 ▪ Art. 2215. In contracts, quasi-contracts, and quasi-
The actual base for the computation of legal interest shall,
in any case, be . . . the amount finally adjudged.
delicts, the court may equitably mitigate the damages
▪ When the judgment of the court awarding a sum of money under circumstances other than the case referred to in
becomes final and executory, the rate of legal interest, whether the the preceding article, as in the following instances:
case falls under paragraph 1 or paragraph 2, above, shall be 12%
per annum from such finality until its satisfaction, this interim
period being deemed to be by then an equivalent to forbearance of
credit (1) That the plaintiff himself has contravened the terms
of the contract;
h. Mitigation of Liability

Civil Code (2) That the plaintiff has derived some benefit as a
Art. 2203 result of the contract;
Art. 2203. The party suffering loss or injury must
exercise the diligence of a good father of a family to
(3) In cases where exemplary damages are to be
minimize the damages resulting from the act or
awarded, that the defendant acted upon the advice of
omission in question.
counsel;
Art. 2204
Art. 2204. In crimes, the damages to be adjudicated
may be respectively increased or lessened according to
(4) That the loss would have resulted in any event;
the aggravating or mitigating circumstances.
Art. 2214
Art. 2214. In quasi-delicts, the contributory negligence
(5) That since the filing of the action, the defendant has
of the plaintiff shall reduce the damages that he may
done his best to lessen the plaintiff's loss or injury.
recover. • Cerrano v. Tan (1918)
Art. 2215 ◦ Summary: Tan Chuco,owner of casco, rented it to Vivencio Cerrano for P70/
month payable at the end of each month. No duration was stipulated. Tan notified
Cerrano that it was necessary to repair it at Malabon. Cerrano was interested to
rent it after the repair but Tan told him that it was already for P80/month. A week
before the end of the repair, Tan sold it to Siy Cong Bieng & Co. J. After
the casco had been in possession of Santos for some three months, the replevin
suit held that casco was the property of Siy Cong Bieng & Co. at the time of the
suit was commenced, and that the "illegal detention" of the casco by Santos had
caused damages of P457.98 to Siy Cong Bieng & Co. Cerrano paid the judgment
in favor of Siy Cong Bieng & Co. and the attorney's fees of Santos which shows
that Santos was only a nominal defendant in the replevin suit,which was entirely
 controlled by Cerrano. CFI: casco was rented 10 months at the rate of ▪ TORRES, J., dissenting: should be affirmed
P60, P457.98 for damages and P500 for attorney's fees. RTC: reversed P50
damage (damage by Cerrano only excluding damage cause by Santos since NOT 5) Employers
the proximate cause as Cerrano's own impreudence is the proximate cause) and
his costs in the CFI Castilex Industrial Corporation v. Vicente Vasquez, et al., G.R. No. 132266, December 21, 1999
◦ Laws: Light Rail Transit Authority v. Marjorie Navidad, G.R. No. 145804. February 6, 2003
▪ article 1581 of the Civil Code provides that when no definite agreement
has been made regarding its duration, the lease of a house is deemed to 6) State
have been made from day to day, from month to month, or from year to
year, according to whether a daily, monthly, or yearly rent is to be paid. City of Manila v. Genero Teotico, et al., G.R. No. L-23052. January 29, 1968.
▪ Article 1106 of the Civil Code establishes the rule that prospective profits Spouses Jose and Virginia Fontanilla v. Inocencio Maliaman, et al., G.R. Nos. 55963 & 61045.
may be recovered as damages February 27, 1991.
▪ Article 1107 of the same Code provides that the damages recoverable for
the breach of obligations not originating in fraud (dolo) are those which 2. Moral
were or might have been foreseen at the time the contract was entered
into. a. Concept
◦ reasonable presumption that one who agrees to pay a monthly rent intends that his
tenancy is to endure for a like period, subject to indefinite tacit renewals at the Civil Code
end of each month as long as the arrangement is agreeable to both parties
◦ it is unquestionable that defendant must be deemed to have foreseen at the time he Art. 2177
made contract that in the event of his failure perform it, the plaintiff would be Art. 2177. Responsibility for fault or negligence under the
damaged by the loss of the profit he might reasonably have expected to derive preceding article is entirely separate and distinct from the civil
from its use liability arising from negligence under the Penal Code. But the
◦ GR: plaintiff may recover compensation for any gain which he can make it appear plaintiff cannot recover damages twice for the same act or
with reasonable certainty the defendant's wrongful act prevented him from
omission of the defendant.
acquiring
• Kierulf v. CA (1997)
▪ plaintiff would have earned a net profit of P50 from the use of the casco in
the month during which he was entitled to its possession • Summary: P antranco bus driven by Jose Malanum lost control and swerved to the
left flying over the center island occupying the east-bound lane of EDSA. The
▪ damages resulting from avoidable consequences of the breach of a
front of the bus hit the front of the Isuzu pickup driven by Legaspi smashed to
contract or other legal duty are not recoverable
pieces and inflicting physical injury to Legaspi and his passenger Lucila Kierulf.
▪ It is the duty of one injured by the unlawful act of another to take
Both were treated at the Quezon City General Hospital. The bus also hit and
such measures as prudent men usually take under such
injured a pedestrian who was then crossing EDSA. Despite the impact, the bus
circumstances to reduce the damages as much as possible.
continued to move forward and its front portion rammed against a Caltex gasoline
▪ burden of proof rests upon the defendant to show that the
station, damaging its building and gasoline dispensing equipment.
plaintiff might have reduced the damages - none in this
RTC: proximate cause was the negligence of Jose Malanum. Pantranco North
case
Express to pay Lucila Kierulf, Victor Kierulf for the damages of the Isuzu pick-up
▪ The contract of lease or hiring does not create a right in rem in favor of the
and Porfirio Legaspi. CA: Affirmed with modification by adding P25,000
lessee, except in the case of a recorded lease of real estate
attorney's fees and to pay costs. SC: AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION. The
▪ Santos' attempt to retain possession of it against the lawful owners
award of moral damages to Lucila and Legaspi is INCREASED to P400,000.00
by whom he had been placed in charge of it, was unlawful
and P50,000 respectively; exemplary damages to Lucila is INCREASED to
▪ if Cerrano is unable to recover from Santos the money paid
P200,000. Legaspi is awarded exemplary damages of P50,000.
by him will not justify us in imposing the burden of
repaying this money to him • Doctrines:
• Moral damage • aimed at restoration, as much as possible, of the
• for social and financial standing spiritual status quo ante; thus, it must be proportionate to
• includes: the suffering inflicted
• rude and rough reception • should not be so palpably and scandalously
• menacing attitude excessive as to indicate that it was the result of
• supercilious manner passion, prejudice or corruption on the part of the
• abusive language and highly scornful reference trial judge
• awarded only if he or she was subjected to contemptuous • Neither should it be so little or so paltry that it rubs
conduct despite the offender's knowledge of his or her salt to the injury already inflicted on plaintiffs
social and financial standing b. Proof and Proximate Cause
• for physical sufferings, mental anguish, fright, serious anxiety and • Miranda-Ribaya and Carbonell v. Bautista (1980)
wounded feelings.. sleepless nights and shock • Summary: Mrs. Ribaya was made to believe that Mr. Bautista was a millionaire
• Exemplary damages logger. Mr. Bautista issued several checks for jewelries which was dishonored
• designed to permit the courts to mould behavior that has socially due to closed account. Mrs. Ribaya soon found out that it was pawned to
deleterious consequences, and its imposition is required by public different pawnshops. She pleaded with Mr. Bautista and was able to retrieve the
policy to suppress the wanton acts of an offender pawn tickets one by one and in the process of taking them back she incurred debts
• discretion of the court and her pawn shop had to close down. RTC: favored Mrs. Ribaya
• (1) They may be imposed by way of example or correction only in for P125,460.79 plus 25% attorney's fees but did not grant moral and exemplary
addition, among others, to compensatory damages, and cannot be damages CA: affirmed RTC. SC: further awarded moral and exemplary damages
recovered as a matter of right, their determination depending upon 25% of P125,460.79
the amount of compensatory damages that may be awarded to the • Doctrines:
claimant • In awarding moral damages, there should be pleading and proof of moral
• (2) the claimant must first establish his right to moral, temporate, suffering, mental anguish, fright
liquidated or compensatory damages • does not need to be the precise legal terms or "sacramental
• (3) the wrongful act must be accompanied by bad faith, and the phrases" of "mental anguish, fright, serious anxiety, wounded
award would be allowed only if the guilty party acted in a wanton, feelings or moral shock" and the like
fraudulent, reckless, oppressive or malevolent manner • exemplary damages given even in breach of civil contract
• though incapable of pecuniary estimation, are in the category of an • Del Rosario v. CA (1997)
award designed to compensate the claimant for actual injury and • Summary: The Spouses Del Rosario through their contractor Engineer Puno
are not meant to enrich complainant at the expense of defendant purchased roofing from Metal Forming Corp. who advertised their metal shingles
• there must be pleading and proof of moral suffering, mental to be able to withstand strong wind. But, the roofings installed where not
anguish, fright and the like. according to those specified and was blown by Typhoon Ruping 2 months later.
• While no proof of pecuniary loss is necessary in order that RTC: favored Spouses Del Rosario Actual damage P1,008,003, Moral
moral damages may be awarded, the amount of indemnity Damages P500,000, Exemplary Damages P300,000 and Attorney's fees and
being left to the discretion of the court it is nevertheless expenses of litigation P150,000 CA: reversed holding there is no privity bet. the
essential that the claimant should satisfactorily show the Spouses Del Rosario and MFC SC: REINSTATED AND AFFIRMED, with the
existence of the factual basis of damages and its causal modification that the award of actual damages and attorney's fees is deleted, and
connection to defendant's acts. the moral and exemplary damages awarded are reduced from P500,000 to
• Purpose: P100,000, and from P300,000 to P50,000, respectively.
• awarded to enable the injured party to obtain Means, • Laws: Article 2229 , Article 2208 of the Civil Code
Diversions or Amusements (MAD) that will serve to • Doctrines:
alleviate the moral suffering he/she has undergone, by • Actual or compensatory damages cannot be presumed, but must be duly
reason of the defendant's culpable action proved and proved with reasonable degree of certainty.
 • relied only on the report of the Esteban Adjusters and Valuers, Inc. • Doctrines:
which contains no statement whatever of the amount of the • clearly unfounded suit, which is expressly mentioned in Art. 2208 (par. 4),
damage as justifying an award of attorney's fees, but is not included in the
• law explicitly authorizes the award of moral damages in breaches of enumeration of Art. 2219 in respect to moral damages
contract where the defendant acted fraudulently or in bad faith • People v. Bagayong (1998)
• The power of the court to award attorney's fees under Article 2208 of the • Summary: Boy asked Arlene , 11-years old, to hold his penis and when it was
Civil Code demands factual, legal, and equitable justification; its basis already hard and stiff placed it inside the mouth of Arlene and a white substance
cannot be left to speculation or conjecture. Where granted. the court must came out. This was in the presence of Catherine who was 6 years old who was
explicitly state in the body of the decision, and not only in the dispositive the one who told Leticia. Leticia filed complained with the NBI. Arlene testified
portion thereof, the legal reason for the award of attorney's fees that Boy had been doing the same since she was 9 years old. They were times
• Raagas v. Traya (1968) when Boy would insert his penis and when the white substance came out, he
• Summary: Octavio Traya recklessly driving a truck owned by Canciller ran over would pull it out. RTC: guilty of the crime of Acts of Lasciviousness committed
the 3-year old son of the spouses Melquiades Raagas and Adela Laudiano Raagas on October 15, 1994 and he is hereby sentenced to suffer an indeterminate penalty
causing his instantaneous death. Spouses Raagas prayed for actual damages of of 6 months of arresto mayor as minimum to 4 years and 2 months of prision
P10,000, moral, nominal and corrective damages, P1,000 as attorney's fees, correccional as maximum, and of the crime of Rape he committed in 1993 for
P1,000 for expenses of litigation, plus costs. RTC: Traya and Bienvenido which he is sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua.
Canciller jointly and severally liable P10,000 for the death of their child Regino SC: AFFIRMED, with the MODIFICATION that Bugayong is ordered to pay
Laudiano Raagas, P2,000 for moral damages, P1,000 actual damages, P1,000 for Complainant Arlene Cauan P50,000 as indemnity and the additional amount of
attorney's fees, and the costs. Traya and Canciller appealed to CA, which P50,000 as moral damages, or a total of P100,000
certified the case to the SC because the issues raised are purely of law. SC: hereby • Doctrines:
remanded to the court of origin for trial on the merits • moral damages may additionally be awarded to the victim in the criminal
• Doctrines: proceeding, in such amount as the Court deems just, without the need for
• pleading or proof of the basis thereof as has heretofore been the practice
• even if the allegations regarding the amount of damages in the complaint c. Cases where allowed
are not specifically denied in the answer, such damages are not deemed
admitted
• an allegation is not necessary in order that moral damages may be
awarded, but it is, nevertheless, essential that the claimant satisfactorily Civil Code
prove the existence of the factual basis of the damage and its causal
relation to defendant's acts Art. 2219
• Enervida v. dela Torre (1974)
• Summary: Roque Enervida filed a complaint against spouses Lauro de la Torre
and Rosa de la Torre praying that the deed of sale executed by his deceased father,
Ciriaco Enervida, over a parcel of land covered by a Homestead Patent be
declared null and void for having been executed within the prohibited period of
five years, in violation of the provision, of Section 118 of Commonwealth Act
141, otherwise known as the Public Land Law. He further prayed that he be
allowed to repurchase said parcel of land for being the legitimate son and sole heir
of his deceased father RTC: dismissed CA: sale had been made in 1948 - 7 yrs
after therefore beyond the 5-year phobitive period is valid SC: Dismissal order is
hereby affirmed with the modification that only attorney's fees in the amount of
P1,500 are hereby awarded to the respondents
• Laws Applicable: Article 2208 of the Civil Code
Art. 2219. Moral damages may be recovered in the following • Francisco v. GSIS(1963)
and analogous cases: • Summary: Francisco proposed to redeem her foreclosed property to which GSIS
agreed. Subsequenty, GSIS was asking for attorney's fees of P35,644.14,
publication expenses, filing fee of P301.00, and surcharge of P23.64 for the
(1) A criminal offense resulting in physical injuries; foreclosure done. RTC: Atty. Francisco's offer was unqualifiedly accepted, and
was binding SC: affirmed.
(2) Quasi-delicts causing physical injuries; • Doctrines:
• breach of contract, not being malicious or fraudulent, does not warrant the
(3) Seduction, abduction, rape, or other lascivious acts; award of moral damages under Article 2220 of the Civil Code
• Expert Travel v. CA (1999)
(4) Adultery or concubinage; • Summary: Expert travel & Tours, Inc. issued to Ricardo Lo 4 round-trip plane
tickets for Hongkong with hotel accommodations and transfers for P39,677.20
and filed for recovery. CA affirmed RTC: Lo remitted the Monte de Piedad
(5) Illegal or arbitrary detention or arrest; Check for P42,175.20 to Expert's chairperson Ms. Ma. Rocio de Vega who in turn
issued City Trust Check of P50,000. SC: petition is GRANTED and the award of
(6) Illegal search; moral damages to respondent Ricardo Lo under the assailed decision is
DELETED.
(7) Libel, slander or any other form of defamation; • Laws: Article 2219, Article 1764, Article 2206
• Doctrines:
(8) Malicious prosecution; • An award of moral damages would require certain conditions to be met; to
wit:
• (1) there must be an injury, whether physical, mental or
(9) Acts mentioned in Article 309; psychological, clearly sustained by the claimant
• (2) there must be a culpable act or omission factually established
(10) Acts and actions referred to in Articles 21, 26, 27, 28, 29, • (3) the wrongful act or omission of the defendant is the proximate
30, 32, 34, and 35. cause of the injury sustained by the claimant
• (4) the award of damages is predicated on any of the cases stated in
The parents of the female seduced, abducted, raped, or Article 2219
• in culpa contractual or breach of contract:
abused, referred to in No. 3 of this article, may also recover
• moral damages may be recovered when the defendant acted in bad
moral damages. faith or was guilty of gross negligence (amounting to bad faith) or
The spouse, descendants, ascendants, and brothers and sisters in wanton disregard of his contractual obligation and,
may bring the action mentioned in No. 9 of this article, in the exceptionally, when the act of breach of contract itself is
order named. constitutive of tort resulting in physical injuries
Art. 2220 • By special rule in Article 1764, in relation to Article 2206, of the Civil
Code
Art. 2220. Willful injury to property may be a legal ground for
• moral damages may also be awarded in case the death of a
awarding moral damages if the court should find that, under passenger results from a breach of carriage
the circumstances, such damages are justly due. The same rule • In culpa aquiliana, or quasi-delict and contracts when breached by tort
applies to breaches of contract where the defendant acted • (a) when an act or omission causes physical injuries, or
fraudulently or in bad faith. • (b) where the defendant is guilty of intentional tort
• In culpa criminal
 • moral damages could be lawfully due when the accused is found • Summary: J Marketing filed a replevin suit against Sia for the recovery of its lost
guilty of physical injuries, lascivious acts, adultery or concubinage, motorcycle but it was not proven. RTC: dismissed but awarded damages and
illegal or arbitrary detention, illegal arrest, illegal search, or attorney’s fees to Sia CA: affirmed SC: AFFIRMED WITH THE
defamation MODIFICATION that the award of damages, attorney’s fees and cost to private
• Malicious prosecution can also give rise to a claim for moral damages respondent is deleted
• The term "analogous cases," referred to in Article 2219, following the • Doctrines:
ejusdem generis rule, must be held similar to those expressly enumerated • it cannot be said that the institution of the replevin suit was tainted with
by the law gross and evident bad faith or was done maliciously to harass, embarrass,
• Excludes clearly unfounded civil suit annoy or ridicule private respondent.
i. Unfounded Suits • No damages can be charged on those who may exercise such precious
• Mijares v. CA (1997) right in good faith, even if done erroneously.
• Summary: Metro Drug filed a recovery against Mijares when it was suppose to be • There being no bad faith reflected in petitioner’s persistence in pursuing
against Solomon. RTC: dismissed Metro Drug, Inc. to pay P30,000 for moral its case, other than an erroneous conviction of the righteousness of its
damages, P10,000 as attorney's fees and cost of suit since not delivered to Mijares cause, attorney’s fees cannot be recovered as cost.
CA: reversed. SC: RTC reinstated only as to the dismissal • Cometa v. CA (1999)
• Doctrines: • Summary: After HBI was acquitted from the charge of falsification of
• failed to show motivated by bad faith when it instituted the action for documents, it filed a complaint for malicious prosecution against petitioners
collection Cometa and SITI alleging that it was filed with the sole intent of harassing and
• Malicious prosecution, both in criminal and civil cases, pressuring Guevara, in his capacity as chairman of GIDC, to give in to their illicit
• requires the presence of two elements, to wit: and malicious desire to appropriate the remaining unsold properties of
• a) malice; and GIDC. Cometa and SITI answered that the action seeks to impose a penalty on the
• b) absence of probable cause. right to litigate and for that reason is unconstitutional and against settled public
• Moreover, there must be proof that the prosecution was prompted policy. RTC and CA: denied since without malice SC: affirmed
by a sinister design to vex and humiliate a person, and that it was • Doctrines:
initiated deliberately knowing that the charge was false and • It is hardly necessary to say that to allow the present action to proceed is
baseless not to impose a penalty on the right to litigate. For trial is still to be
• For the same reasons, the award for attorney's fees and expenses of conducted and liability is not automatic.
litigation must likewise be deleted • Just as it is bad to encourage the indiscriminate filing of actions for
• De la Peña v. CA (1994) damages by accused persons after they have been acquitted, whether
• Summary: De la Peña filed an action for reconveyance with damages with the correctly or incorrectly, a blanket clearance of all who may be minded to
RTC alleging that Ricardo Tan amended to Herotido Tan used fraud and charge others with offenses, fancied or otherwise, without any chance of
misrepresentation but it was baseless. RTC: rejected. counterclaim was granted the aggrieved parties in the appropriate cases of false accusation to obtain
and Dela Peña was ordered to pay P6,000 attorney's fees and expenses of relief, is in Our Opinion short of being good law
litigation, P15,000 for moral damages and the costs of the proceedings. CA: ii. Labor Cases
affirmed SC: FFIRMED, with the sole modification that the award for attorney's
fees, expenses of litigation, and moral damages is DELETED
• Doctrines: • Triple Eight v. NLRC (1998)
• award for attorney's fees and moral damages is unfounded in the absence • Summary: Osdana filed a case against its Triple Eight for sending her to Saudi
of a deliberate intent to cause prejudice to the other party. The right to Arabia to do tedious work at long hours different from the contract she signed that
litigate is so precious that a Penalty should not be charged on those who she was to work as a waitress. She suffered and was operated for Carpal Tunnel
may exercise it erroneously Syndrome because of the hard labor and was terminated after her operation on the
• J Marketing v. Sia (1998) ground of illness. She was also made to work without compensation and to not
work for no reason at all. labor arbiter: favored Osdana holding Triple Eight
 liable for US$2,499.00 as salaries for the unexpired portion of the contract, and brother Benito Arcona y Moban confederating together and mutually helping one
US$1,076.00 as unpaid salary and salary differential, or its equivalent in another, with intent to kill and with evident premeditation and treachery assault,
Philippine Peso and P50,000 moral damages, P20,000 exemplary damages strike and beat with a bamboo pole Edgardo Talanquines who managed to escape
and 10% of the monetary award as attorney's fee. NLRC: affirmed. SC: and seek medical assistance thereby preventing his death. They
AFFIRMED with the MODIFICATION that the award to Osdana should be also stabbed Napoleon Ong with a bladed weapon causing his immediate
US$1,260 as salaries for the unexpired portion of the employment contract, and death. RTC: Carlos Arcona y Moban guilty of the crime of Homicide under Art.
US$1,076, representing unpaid salaries for 7 months and underpaid salary for 1 249 of the Revised Penal Code, with the mitigating circumstance of voluntary
month, plus interest. P30,000 moral damages, P10,000 exemplary damages and surrender to authorities and no aggravating circumstances. He is hereby
10% attorney's fees. sentenced to suffer the indeterminate penalty of 6 YEARS and 1 DAY of
• Doctrines: PRISION MAYOR as MINIMUM to 14 YEARS and 1 DAY OF RECLUSION
• moral damages are recoverable where the dismissal of the employee was TEMPORAL as MAXIMUM, and to indemnify the heirs of Napoleon Ong
attended by bad faith or fraud or constituted an act oppressive to labor, or P30,000 for his death, P10,000 actual damages and P10,000 moral damages.
was done in a manner contrary to morals, good customs, or public policy. Benito Arcona is acquitted. Benito Arcona is found GUILTY beyond reasonable
Likewise, exemplary damages may be awarded if the dismissal was doubt of the crime of Slight Physical injuries 20 DAYS of ARRESTO MENOR
effected in a wanton, oppressive or malevolent manner. Since the and to indemnify Edgardo Talanquines 10,000 as actual damages. CA: Affirms
employer is deemed to have acted in bad faith, the award for attorney's increases indemnity to P50,000 SC: AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION
fees is likewise upheld. increased moral damages to P50,000. actual damages is deleted
iii. Taking of Life • Doctrines:
• As borne out by human nature and experience, a violent death invariably
and necessarily brings about emotional pain and anguish on the part of the
• People v. Pirame (2000) victim’s family. It is inherently human to suffer sorrow, torment, pain and
• Summary: Cipriano Supero saw Pedro Torrenueva being held by Florencio anger when a loved one becomes the victim of a violent or brutal killing.
Perame was struck with an iron pipe by Epifanio Cleopas and Teodorico Cleopas Such violent death or brutal killing not only steals from the family of the
with a piece of wood hitting him in the forehead so he fell on the ground dead. deceased his precious life, deprives them forever of his love, affection and
He was then buried in the well near the house of Demetrio Cleopas, father of the support, but often leaves them with the gnawing feeling that an injustice
accused. RTC: Teodorico Cleopas and Florencio Pirame guilty of the crime of has been done to them. For this reason, moral damages must be awarded
murder punished under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code and sentenced each even in the absence of any allegation and proof of the heirs’ emotional
one of them to suffer an imprisonment of RECLUSION PERPETUA, with the suffering
accessories of the law and to pay the cost. Ordering them to indemnify surviving • NOTE: In Carlos Arcona case, no need to allege in case of death while in People v.
spouse P50,000 each and 23,214 for burial and incidental expenses and P50,000 Pirame have to allege.
each for moral and exemplary damages and in all instances without subsidiary d. Factors in determining amount
imprisonment in case of insolvency. Deducting time for preventive imprisonment. • PNB v. CA (1997)
SC: AFFIRMED, but the award of P50,000.00 as moral and exemplary damages • Summary: PNB foreclosed the property assigned by Industrial Enterprises, Inc.
is hereby DELETED (IEI) to Marinduque Mining and Industrial Corporation (MMIC) despite being
• Doctrines: notified by IEI.
• No moral damages were widow did not testify on any mental anguish or • RTC: granted. PNB is equally guilty of bad faith because it was advised
emotional distress, which she suffered as a result of her husband's death beforehand that the heavy equipment and movable property which are part of the
• absence of any generic aggravating circumstance attending the crime Giporlos Coal Project were still unpaid. MMIC and PNB jointly and solidarily
likewise precludes the award of exemplary damages liable to pay moral damages P300,000,exemplary damages P200,000 and
• Carlos Arcona y Moban v. CA (2002) P200,000 attorney's fees. CA: reversed. IEI's claim against PNB for actual,
• Summary: Napoleon Ong and Edgardo Talanquines were walking along the consequential and moral damages including attorney's fees, litigation expenses
national highway at Barangay Labog, Brooke’s Point, Palawan, on their way and costs of suit, has neither legal nor factual bases. SC: REVERSED and SET
home after coming from a birthday party. When Carlos Arcona y Moban and his ASIDE insofar as it renders petitioner solidarily liable with Marinduque Mining
 and Industrial Corporation for damages and AFFIRMED insofar as it nullifies AFFIRMED, subject to the MODIFICATION regarding the computation of the
the foreclosure sale of August 31, 1984. 6% legal rate of interest on the monetary awards.
• Doctrines: • Doctrines:
• In view of the noninvolvement of petitioner in the alleged conspiracy to • Under the peculiar circumstances of this case, we are convinced that the
strip private respondent of the its rights over the Giporlos Project, awards for actual, moral and exemplary damages granted in the judgment
petitioner cannot be made solidarily liable with the MMIC for damages of respondent court, for the reasons meticulously analyzed and thoroughly
• Fule v. CA (1998) explained in its decision, are just and equitable.
• Summary: Fule and Dr. Cruz with the assistance of Atty. Belarmino engaged in a • Valenzuela v. CA (1997) (see previous)
barter wherein 10 hectare of land in Tanay, Rizal of Fule will be exchanged for • Doctrines:
the emerald-cut diamond earrings of Dr. Cruz. 2 hours after the exchange, Fule • As the amount of moral damages are subject to this Court’s discretion, we
alleged that it was fake taking back the compensation of Remelia Dichoso and are of the opinion that the amount of P1,000,000.00 granted by the trial
Oliva Mendoza as his agents who looked for the buyer of his lot. RTC: Fule court is in greater accord with the extent and nature of the injury -.
reported it 2 hours later is considered unreasonable delay and finding him with physical and psychological - suffered by Valenzuela as a result of Li’s
wanton bad faith so award of attorney's fees was warranted. Dra. Cruz runs her grossly negligent driving of his Mitsubishi Lancer in the early morning
own hospital and defendant Belarmino is a well respected legal practitioner so hours of the accident.
their reputations were besmirched. SC and CA: affirmed • the damage done to her would not only be permanent and lasting, it
• Doctrines: would also be permanently changing and adjusting to the
• Moral and exemplary damages may be awarded without proof of physiologic changes which her body would normally undergo
pecuniary loss. In awarding such damages, the court shall take into through the years. The replacements, changes, and adjustments
account the circumstances obtaining in the case said assess damages will require corresponding adjustive physical and occupational
according to its discretion. To warrant the award of damages, it must be therapy. All of these adjustments, it has been documented, are
shown that the person to whom these are awarded has sustained injury. He painful.
must likewise establish sufficient data upon which the court can properly • Sumaplong v. CA (1997)
base its estimate of the amount of damages. Statements of facts should • Summary: Arsolo Ramos and his wife Leonarda were on their way home from
establish such data rather than mere conclusions or opinions of witnesses. their ricefield when Aurelio Sumalpong asked Leonarda if she knew who stoned
• While, as a rule, moral damages cannot be recovered from a person who his house. Leonarda told him to determine first who did it. But, Aurelio angered
has filed a complaint against another in good faith because it is not sound slapped Leonarda causing her to fall to the ground and while on her hands and
policy to place a penalty on the right to litigate, the same, however, cannot knees shot her on the back of her head with a .38 caliber revolver killing her.
apply in the case at bar Arsolo rushed towards Aurelio who shot him twice but missed. While grappling,
• he filed the action for the nullification of the contract of sale with Aurelio bit Arsolo's forearm and left ear causing a mutilation. RTC: convicting the
unclean hands, all deserve full faith and credit to support the Aurelio of the crime of attempted homicide and sentenced him to suffer the
conclusion that petitioner was motivated more by ill will than a penalty of imprisonment from 6 months and 1 day of arresto mayor as
sincere attempt to protect his rights in commencing suit against minimum to 2 years, 4 months and 1 day of prision correccional as maximum.
respondents The petitioner was likewise ordered to indemnify the complainant in the amount
• Philippine Airlines v. CA (1997) of: (a) P16,800 for the loss of his crops due to his failure to attend to his farmwork
• Summary: Pantejo's flight was delayed due to typhoon Osang but PAL refused to because of the injuries inflicted upon him by the petitioner; (b) P2,000 for
shoulder his hotel expenses. Soon he found out that some of his co-passengers hospitalization expenses and (c) P5,000 by way of moral damages CA: increased
were reimbursed for their hotel expenses so he filed a case for damages because moral damages to P10,000 and adding nominal damages P10,000. SC: Affirmed
of the discrimnation. RTC: Ordered PAL to pay P300 actual damages, P150,000 CA
moral damages, P100,000 exemplary damages, P15,000 attorney’s fees, and 6% • Doctrines:
interest from the time of the filing of the complaint until paid, plus costs of • Nominal damages are adjudicated in order that a right of the plaintiff,
suit CA: affirmed but deleted attorney’s fees and litigation expenses. SC: which has been violated or invaded by the defendant, may be vindicated or
 recognized, and not for the purpose of indemnifying the plaintiff for any balance was P1,051,051.19. RTC: favored Chua ordering Producers to pay
loss suffered by him. P2,000,000 moral damages, with legal rate of interest; P90,000/month and
• whenever there has been a violation of an ascertained legal right, although P18,000/month unrealized profits from his cement and gasoline station business,
no actual damages resulted or none are shown, the award of nominal to commence from October 16, 1984, with legal rate of interest until fully paid;
damages is proper P250,000 exemplary damages. Offset the P960,000 with his agricultural loan of
• in the absence of competent proof of the amount of actual damages, the P1,300,000 with 14% interest, to commence from January 4, 1984, covered by a
complainant is entitled only to nominal damages. real estate mortgage, both of which shall have a cut-off time frame on the date of
• Anent the increase in the amount of moral damages suffice it to state that this decision. Loan of P175,000 and the clean loan of P400,000 without interest
the nature of the injuries and the degree of physical suffering endured by shall be off-settled by the moral, actual and compensatory damages. 15% of
the complainant warrants the same. The tragic incident caused a mutilation moral, actual and compensatory damages as attorney's fees. Cost of suit. CA:
of complainant's left ear and a permanent scar on his right forearm. These modified moral damages to P500,000. P100,000.00 attorney's fees SC: affirmed
injuries have left indelible marks on the complainant's body and will serve with MODIFICATION. P300,000 moral damages. P150,000 exemplary
as a constant reminder of this traumatic experience. damages. P100,000 attorney's fees and litigation expenses.
• Lopez v. Pan American (1966) • Doctrines:
• Summary: Due to an illegal strike out, Pan Am forced its employees to take 2 • There are two kinds of actual or compensatory damages:
days leave without pay. court a quo: affected them financially and economically, • loss of what a person already possesses
it ordered Pan America to pay them their two days salaries. CA: affirmed. • failure to receive as a benefit that which would have pertained to
SC: AFFIRMED in so far as it declares petitioner Pan American World Airways, him
Inc. not guilty of unfair labor practice, but IS REVERSED in so far as it orders • damages consisting of unrealized profits, frequently
said petitioner to pay the members of the respondent labor union, Pan American referred as "ganacias frustradas" or "lucrum cessans," are
Employees Association, their wages or salaries for February 22 and 23, 1961 not to be granted on the basis of mere speculation,
when they were made by the petitioner to go on furlough. The petitioner is conjecture, or surmise, but rather by reference to some
absolved from paying the said back wages. No pronouncement as to costs. It is so reasonably definite standard such as market value,
ordered. established experienced, or direct inference from known
• Doctrines: circumstances
• The dismiss employee is not entirely without remedy if his charge of • When the existence of a loss is established, absolute certainty as to
unfair labor practice fails and his complaint dismissed, because the breach its amount is not required. The benefit to be derived from a
by the employer of the obligation to him may be redressed like an ordinary contract which one of the parties has absolutely failed to perform is
contract or obligation of necessity to some extent, a matter of speculation, but the injured
• Inasmuch as petitioner acted in good faith, it should not be ordered to pay party is not to be denied for that reason alone. He must produce the
back wages to its laid off employees. best evidence of which his case is susceptible and if that evidence
• not paid their wages for only two days, We do not believe that the same warrants the inference that he has been damaged by the loss of
would place them in such a financial and economic distress as to warrant profits which he might with reasonable certainty have anticipated
the award of their back wages but for the defendant's wrongful act, he is entitled to recover.
• Producer's Bank v. CA (2001) e. Who may recover
• Summary: Salvador Chua was offered by Mr. Jimmy Rojas, manager of Producers • Strebel v. Figueros (1954)
Bank of the Philippines to transfer his account from Pacific Banking Corporation • Summary: Strebel filed a complaint among others that Figeuros used his official
to Producers Bank. Chua did and was able to obtain a loan for P2,000,000 which and political position to remove his wife's son-in-law from his position. RTC:
was secured by a real estate mortgage and payable within a period of 3 years or Dismissed SC: Affirmed. Strebel is not even related to Dr. Hernandez whose wife
from 1982 to 1985. January 20, 1984: Chua deposited with Producers Bank is a daughter of Mrs. Strebel by a previous marriage
P960,000 which was entered into their savings account passbook but failed to • Doctrines:
credit it because Sixto Castillo, absconded with the money. Producers Bank • GR: Right of recovery for mental suffering resulting from bodily injuries
dishonored the checks drawn by Chua in favor of various creditors. Although his is restricted to the person who has suffered the bodily hurt, and there can
 be no recovery for distress caused by sympathy for another's suffering, or • Summary: PHIBRO had a delay in its delivery due to strikes so in the next
for fright due to a wrong against a third person. bidding, it was not accepted by NAPOCOR. RTC: favored PHIBRO. Ordering
• So the anguish of mind arising as to the safety of others who may NAPCOR to reinstate PHIBRO as accredited bidder, to pay $864,000 actual
be in personal peril from the same cause cannot be taken into damages, $100,000 moral damages, $50,000 exemplary damages, $73,231.91
consideration reimbursement for expenses, cost of litigation and attorney's fees, cost of suit and
• a husband or wife cannot recover for mental suffering caused by dismissed counterclaim of NAPOCOR. CA: affirmed in toto. "Strikes" are
his or her sympathy for the other's suffering undoubtedly included in the force majeure clause of the Bidding Terms and
• ABS-CBN v. CA (1999) Specifications SC: Modified actual, moral and exemplary damages,
• Summary: VIVA offered its film rights to ABS-CBN but the deal did not reimbursement for expenses, cost of litigation and attorney's fees, and costs of
push through so it sold it to RBS for P60M. RTC: Issued TRO against RBS in suit, is DELETED
showing 14 films as filed by ABS-CBN. RBS also set up a cross-claim against • Doctrines:
VIVA. RTC: ordered ABS-CBN to pay RBS P107,727 premium paid by RBS to •
the surety which issued their bond to lift the injunction, P191,843.00 for the • Moral damages are granted in recompense for physical suffering, mental
amount of print advertisement for "Maging Sino Ka Man" in various newspapers, anguish, fright, serious anxiety, besmirched reputation, wounded feelings,
P1M attorney's fees, P5M moral damages, P5M exemplary damages and costs. moral shock, social humiliation, and similar injury. A corporation, being
Cross-claim to VIVA was dismissed. ABS-CBN appealed. VIVA and Del an artificial person and having existence only in legal contemplation, has
Rosario also appealed seeking moral and exemplary damages and additional no feelings, no emotions, no senses; therefore, it cannot experience
attorney's fees. CA: reduced the awards of moral damages to P2M, exemplary physical suffering and mental anguish. Mental suffering can be
damages to P2M and attorney's fees to P500,000. Denied VIVA and Del experienced only by one having a nervous system and it flows from real
Rosario's appeal because it was RBS and not VIVA which was actually ills, sorrows, and griefs of life
prejudiced when the complaint was filed by ABS-CBN. SC: REVERSED except • a winning party may be awarded attorney's fees only in case plaintiff's
as to unappealed award of attorney's fees in favor of VIVA Productions, Inc. action or defendant's stand is so untenable as to amount to gross and
• Doctrines: evident bad faith
• Can only filed for damage if actually prejudiced 3. Nominal
• the claim of RBS for actual damages did not arise from contract,
quasi-contract, delict, or quasi-delict. It arose from the fact of filing of the Civil Code
complaint despite ABS-CBN's alleged knowledge of lack of cause of
action. Needless to state the award of actual damages cannot be Art. 2221
comprehended under the above law on actual damages. RBS could only Art. 2221. Nominal damages are adjudicated in order that a right of the
probably take refuge under Articles 19, 20, and 21 of the Civil Code. plaintiff, which has been violated or invaded by the defendant, may be
• The award of moral damages cannot be granted in favor of a vindicated or recognized, and not for the purpose of indemnifying the
corporation because, being an artificial person and having existence only plaintiff for any loss suffered by him.
in legal contemplation, it has no feelings, no emotions, no senses, It Art. 2222
cannot, therefore, experience physical suffering and mental anguish, Art. 2222. The court may award nominal damages in every obligation
which call be experienced only by one having a nervous system.
arising from any source enumerated in Article 1157, or in every case
A corporation may recover moral damages if it "has a good reputation
where any property right has been invaded.
that is debased, resulting in social humiliation" is an obiter dictum. On
this score alone the award for damages must be set aside, since RBS is a Art. 2223
corporation. Art. 2223. The adjudication of nominal damages shall preclude further
• There is no adequate proof that ABS-CBN was inspired by malice contest upon the right involved and all accessory questions, as between
or bad faith. If damages result from a person's exercise of a right, it is the parties to the suit, or their respective heirs and assigns.
damnum absque injuria. Ventanilla v. Centeno 1 SCRA 215
• National Power v. Philipp Brothers (2001) Robes-Francisco v. CFI 86 SCRA 59
People v. Gopio 346 SCRA 408 Art. 2229
Armovit v. CA 184 SCRA 476
Art. 2229. Exemplary or corrective damages are imposed, by way of
example or correction for the public good, in addition to the moral,
4. Temperate
temperate, liquidated or compensatory damages.
Art. 2230
Civil Code Art. 2230. In criminal offenses, exemplary damages as a part of the civil
liability may be imposed when the crime was committed with one or more
Art. 2224 aggravating circumstances. Such damages are separate and distinct
Art. 2224. Temperate or moderate damages, which are more than from fines and shall be paid to the offended party.
nominal but less than compensatory damages, may be recovered when Art. 2231
the court finds that some pecuniary loss has been suffered but its
Art. 2231. In quasi-delicts, exemplary damages may be granted if the
amount can not, from the nature of the case, be provided with certainty.
defendant acted with gross negligence.
Art. 2225
Art. 2232
Art. 2225. Temperate damages must be reasonable under the
Art. 2232. In contracts and quasi-contracts, the court may award
circumstances.
exemplary damages if the defendant acted in a wanton, fraudulent,
Pleno v. CA G.R. No. 56505 (1988)
People v. Singh 360 SCRA 404
reckless, oppressive, or malevolent manner.
People v. Plazo 350 SCRA 433 Art. 2233
Art. 2233. Exemplary damages cannot be recovered as a matter of right;
5. Liquidated the court will decide whether or not they should be adjudicated.
Art. 2234
Civil Code Art. 2234. While the amount of the exemplary damages need not be
Art. 2226 proved, the plaintiff must show that he is entitled to moral, temperate or
Art. 2226. Liquidated damages are those agreed upon by the parties to a compensatory damages before the court may consider the question of
contract, to be paid in case of breach thereof. whether or not exemplary damages should be awarded. In case
Art. 2227 liquidated damages have been agreed upon, although no proof of loss is
necessary in order that such liquidated damages may be recovered,
Art. 2227. Liquidated damages, whether intended as an indemnity or a
nevertheless, before the court may consider the question of granting
penalty, shall be equitably reduced if they are iniquitous or
exemplary in addition to the liquidated damages, the plaintiff must show
unconscionable.
that he would be entitled to moral, temperate or compensatory damages
Art. 2228 were it not for the stipulation for liquidated damages.
Art. 2228. When the breach of the contract committed by the defendant Art. 2235
is not the one contemplated by the parties in agreeing upon the
Art. 2235. A stipulation whereby exemplary damages are renounced in
liquidated damages, the law shall determine the measure of damages,
advance shall be null and void.
and not the stipulation.
PNB v. CA 256 SCRA 44
Del Rosario v. CA 267 SCRA 158
6. Exemplary or Corrective

Civil Code