Scribd
Upload
27 views1 page

Zosimo D. Tanalega For Appellants. Gibbs, Gibbs, Chuidian and Quasha For Appellee

The document discusses the distinctions between civil liability arising from crimes and responsibility for cuasi-delitos or extra-contractual culpa. It emphasizes that the same negligent act can lead to different legal remedies under the Revised Penal Code and the Civil Code, and that plaintiffs have the right to choose their course of action. The ruling clarifies that the two cases involve different causes of action and that dismissing one due to the pendency of another would unjustly deprive plaintiffs of their legal remedies.

Uploaded by

roberto valenzuela
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
27 views1 page

Zosimo D. Tanalega For Appellants. Gibbs, Gibbs, Chuidian and Quasha For Appellee

The document discusses the distinctions between civil liability arising from crimes and responsibility for cuasi-delitos or extra-contractual culpa. It emphasizes that the same negligent act can lead to different legal remedies under the Revised Penal Code and the Civil Code, and that plaintiffs have the right to choose their course of action. The ruling clarifies that the two cases involve different causes of action and that dismissing one due to the pendency of another would unjustly deprive plaintiffs of their legal remedies.

Uploaded by

roberto valenzuela
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

G.R. No.

L-4920             June 29, 1953


FRANCISCO DIANA and SOLEDAD DIANA, plaintiffs-appellants,
vs.
BATANGAS TRANSPORTATION CO., defendant-appellee.
Zosimo D. Tanalega for appellants.
Gibbs, Gibbs, Chuidian and Quasha for appellee.
BAUTISTA ANGELO, J.:
There is a distinction between civil liability arising from a crime and responsibility for cuasi-delictos or extra-
contractual culpa. The same negligent act that causes damage may result in civil liability arising from a crime
under article 100 of the Revised Penal Code, or in an action for cuasi-delito or extra-contractual culpa under
articles 1902-1910 of the Civil Code (Barredo vs. Garcia and Al- mario, 73 Phil., 607). Other distinctions
between crimes and culpa aquiliana are as follows:1. That crimes affect the public interest, while cuasi-
delitos are only of private concern.
2. That, consequently, the Penal Code punishes or corrects the criminal act, while the Civil Code, by
means of indemnification, merely repairs the damage.
3. That delicts are not as broad as quasi-delicts, because the former are punished only if there is a
penal law clearly covering them, while the latter, cuasi-delitos, include all acts in which 'any kind of
fault or negligence intervenes. (P. 611, supra.).
Considering the distinguishing characteristics of the two cases, which involve two different remedies, it can
hardly be said that there is identity of reliefs in both actions as to make the present case fall under the
operation of Rule 8, section 1(d) of the Rules of Court. In other words, it is a mistake to say that the present
action should be dismissed because of the pendency of another action between the same parties involving the
same cause. Evidently, both cases involve different causes of action. In fact, when the Court of Appeals
dismissed the action based on culpa aquiliana (civil case No. 8023), this distinction was stressed. It was there
said that the negligent act committed by defendant's employee is not a quasi crime, for such negligence is
punishable by law. What plaintiffs should have done was to institute an action under article 103 of the
Revised Penal Code (CA-G.R. No. 3632-R). And this is what plaintiffs have done. To deprive them now of this
remedy, after the conviction of defendant's employee, would be to deprive them altogether of the indemnity
to which they are entitled by law and by a court decision, which injustice it is our duty to prevent.
2
There is a distinction between civil liability arising from a crime and responsibility for cuasi-delitos or extra-
contractual culpa. The same negligent act that causes damages may result in civil liability arising from a crime
under article 100 of the Revised Penal Code, or in an action for cuasi-delito or extra-contractual culpa under
articles 1902-1910 of the Civil Code. Plaintiffs were free to select which remedy to pursue. The decision
outlines some of the distinctions between crimes under the Penal Code and culpa aquiliana or cuasi-delito
under the Civil Code.

You might also like