Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Art. 2202. In crimes and quasi-delicts, the defendant shall be liable for all
damages which are the natural and probable consequences of the act or
omission complained of. It is not necessary that such damages have been
foreseen or could have reasonably been foreseen by the defendant.
Art. 2195. The provisions of this Title shall be respectively applicable to all
obligations mentioned in Article 1157.
Art. 2203. The party suffering loss or injury must exercise the diligence of a
good father of a family to minimize the damages resulting from the act or
omission in question.
Art. 2196. The rules under this Title are without prejudice to special
provisions on damages formulated elsewhere in this Code. Compensation for
workmen and other employees in case of death, injury or illness is regulated
by special laws. Rules governing damages laid down in other laws shall be
observed insofar as they are not in conflict with this Code.
TORTS TESORO
(5) That since the filing of the action, the defendant has done his best to
lessen the plaintiff's loss or injury.
Code, they suffered sleepless night, mental anguish, serious anxiety, and wounded
feelings. An award of moral damages in their favor is thus justified.
However, the award of P100,000 to the heirs of Dalmacio Salunoy, denominated in the
decision of the trial court as "moral damages and unearned income" cannot be upheld.
The heirs were already included among those awarded moral damages. Marilyn Salunoy
was ordered to be paid P10,000, Jack Salunoy, P10,000, and their mother Nenita
Salunoy, P20,000, as moral damages. The amount of P100,000 was presumably
awarded primarily for loss of earning capacity but even then the amount must be
modified.
Facts: This case involves a collision between a Mercedes Bent panel truck of petitioner
Sanitary Steam Laundry and a Cimarron which caused the death of three persons and
the injuries of several others (Cimarron passengers are the respondents). All the victims
were riding in the Cimarron. One of those who died was the driver.
The passengers of the Cimarron were mostly employees of the Project Management
Consultants, Inc. (PMCI). The other passengers were family members and friends
whom they invited to an outing. The Cimarron was owned by Salvador Salenga, father
of one of the employees of PMCI. Driving the vehicle was Rolando Hernandez. It
appears that on its way back to Manila, the Cimarron was hit on its front portion by
Sanitary's panel truck, which was traveling in the opposite direction.
The trucks driver, Herman Hernandez, claimed that a jeepney in front of him suddenly
stopped. He said he stepped on the brakes to avoid hitting the jeepney and that this
caused his vehicle to swerve to the left and encroach on a portion of the opposite lane.
As a result, his panel truck collided with the Cimarron on the north-bound lane.
The driver of the Cimarron, Rolando Hernandez, and two of his passengers, namely,
Jason Bernabe and Dalmacio Salunoy, died. Several of the other passengers of the
Cimarron were injured and taken to various hospitals.
They filed an action against Sanitary for damages. The RTC sided with the victims and
granted moral damages to 14 of them, in amounts ranging from 2k to 20k. The heirs of
Salunoy were also awarded 100k for moral damages and unearned income. (The
respondents also received actual damages, attorneys fees and a 50k civil indemnity for
the heirs of Bernabe )
On appeal, the CA affirmed the decision.
Issue: Whether or not the moral damages were justly awarded.
Held: To those injured Yes!
To the heirs of Salunoy No!
Doctrine: As to the moral damages awarded, we find them to be reasonable and
necessary in view of the circumstances of this case. Moral damages are awarded to
allow the victims to obtain means, diversion, or amusement to alleviate the moral
suffering they had undergone due to the defendant's culpable action. In this case,
private respondents doubtless suffered some ordeal because some of them lost their
loved ones, while others lost their future. Within the meaning of Art. 2217 of the Civil
The SC awarded Salunoys heirs P50k as death indemnity and P124, 300 as
compensatory damages based on the formula we studied in class.
80. CAPILI v. CARDENA
FACTS:
On Feb 1993, Jasmin Cardena, a 12 year old school girl, was walking along the fence of
San Roque Elementary School when a branch of a caimito tree located within the school
premises fell on her. It caused her death. Hence, her parents filed a case for damages
against Capili, the principal of the school.
The spouses allege that as early as Dec 1992, a certain Lerios reported on the possible
danger of the tree to passersby but it was not acted upon by the principal whose office
even stood near the office. The spouses averred principals gross negligence and lack of
foresight as the cause of their daughters death. Capili denied knowledge of the trees
rotting condition.
The TC dismissed the complaint for failure to establish Capilis negligence. The CA
reversed the decision and found Capilli liable for Jasmins death. The CA ordered Capili
to pay to the spouses the following amounts:
TORTS TESORO
As the school principal, petitioner was tasked to see to the maintenance of the school
grounds and safety of the children within the school and its premises. That she was
unaware of the rotten state of the tree calls for an explanation on her part as to why
she failed to be vigilant.
Moral damages are awarded if the following elements exist in the case:(1) an injury
clearly sustained by the claimant; (2) a culpable act or omission factually established;
(3) a wrongful act or omission by the defendant as the proximate cause of the injury
sustained by the claimant; and (4) the award of damages predicated on any of the
cases stated in Article 2219 of the Civil Code. However, the person claiming moral
damages must prove the existence of bad faith by clear and convincing evidence for the
law always presumes good faith. It is not enough that one merely suffered sleepless
nights, mental anguish, and serious anxiety as the result of the actuations of the other
party. Invariably, such action must be shown to have been willfully done in bad faith or
with ill motive. Under the circumstances, we have to concede that petitioner was not
motivated by bad faith or ill motive vis--vis respondents' daughter's death. The award of
moral damages is therefore not proper.
285. MCC INDUSTRIAL vs. SSANGYONG CORPORATION
FACTS:
MCC Industrial Sales is engaged in the business of importing and wholesaling stainless
steel produce. Ssyangyong was one of its suppliers, whose head office was in S. Korea
and has a HQ in Makati.
The 2 corporations conducted business through telephone calls and facsimile
or telecopy transmissions. Ssangyong would send pro forma invoices containeing the
details of the order to MCC and the latter conforms to it through its representative by
affixing the latters signature on the faxed copy and sending it again by fax.
On April 13, 2000, Ssangyong Mla Office sent a letter through fax addressed to
MCCs manager (who is also Sanyo Seiki Corps president) to confirm Sanyo Seikis
order of 220 metric tons of hot rolled stainless steel. Mr. Chan assented and affixed his
signature in the letter.
On April 17, 2000, Ssangyong forwarded to MCC a pro forma invoice that
contained the terms and conditions of the transaction. MCC agains sent back by fax the
invoice to Ssangyong with Chans conformity signature. Stated in the invoice was that
payment for the ordered steel products would be made through an irrevocable letter of
credit in favor of Ssangyong. The goods would be delivered after the L/C had been
opened.
Pursuant to MCCs order, Ssangyong placed the said order with its steel
manufacturer, Pohang Iron Corp in S. Korea and paid in full.
MCC could only open a partial L/C so the 220 metric tons of steel order was
split in 2. (2 orders of 110 tons each) On June 20, 2000, Ssangyong informed Sanyo
Seiki and Chan through fax that it was ready to ship 193 tons of steel to the Phil. It
requested for the opening of the L/C.
Despite several letters of requests to open the L/C, MCC failed to so. Even
though it was granted an extension of time, it still failed to set up the L/C. So on Aug
15, 2000, Ssangyong wrote Sanyo Seike that if the L/C's were not opened, Ssangyong
would be compelled to cancel the contract and hold MCC liable for damages for breach,
inclusive of warehouse expenses, related interests and charges.
On Aug 17, MCC was able to open an L/C with PCIBank for payment of half of
the stainless steel order. As to the other half, MCC requested through fax letter, for a
price adjustment. Ssangyong rejected this request.
Exasperated, Ssangyong through counsel wrote a letter to MCC, on September
11, 2000, canceling the sales contract and demanding payment of US$97,317.37
representing losses, warehousing expenses, interests and charges.
Ssangyong then filed, on November 16, 2001, a civil action for damages due to breach
of contract against defendants MCC, Sanyo Seiki and Gregory Chan. Ssangyong alleged
that defendants breached their contract when they refused to open the L/C for the
remaining 100 tons of steel.
RTC ruled in favor of Ssangyong and ordered MCC too pay actual damages
amounting to $93,493.87 representing the outstanding principal claim plus interest at
the rate of 6% per annum from March 30, 2001, and attys fees.
CA affirmed but absolved Chan of liability.
ISSUE: W/N the award of actual damages and attorney's fees in favor of
Ssangyong is proper and justified.
HELD/RATIO: No.
It is axiomatic that actual or compensatory damages cannot be presumed, but must be
proven with a reasonable degree of certainty.
Actual or compensatory damages are those awarded in order to compensate a party for
an injury or loss he suffered. They arise out of a sense of natural justice and are aimed
at repairing the wrong done. Except as provided by law or by stipulation, a party is
entitled to an adequate compensation only for such pecuniary loss as he has duly
proven.
In the instant case, the trial court awarded to respondent Ssangyong US$93,493.87 as
actual damages. On appeal, the same was affirmed by the appellate court. Noticeably,
however, the trial and the appellate courts, in making the said award, relied on the
statements of account and details of losses presented by Ssangyong which are at best,
self-serving. There were no official receipts to substantiate them.
Ssangyong contended that it resold the items at a loss but it did not show actual proof
of the assertion.
Nonetheless, the Court finds that petitioner knowingly breached its contractual
obligation and obstinately refused to pay despite repeated demands from respondent.
Petitioner even asked for several extensions of time for it to make good its obligation.
But in spite of respondent's continuous accommodation, petitioner completely reneged
on its contractual duty. For such inattention and insensitivity, MCC must be held liable
for nominal damages. "Nominal damages are 'recoverable where a legal right is
technically violated and must be vindicated against an invasion that has produced no
TORTS TESORO
actual present loss of any kind or where there has been a breach of contract and no
substantial injury or actual damages whatsoever have been or can be shown.'"
Accordingly, the Court awards nominal damages of P200,000.00 to respondent
Ssangyong.
213. SILVERIO MARCHAN vs. ARSENIO MENDOZA
FACTS:
One evening, a passenger bus of the Philippine Rabbit Bus Lines which was then driven
by Silverio Marchan fell into a ditch while travelling on its way to Manila. As a result of
which, Arsenio Mendoza, his wife and child, were thrown out to the ground resulting in
their multiple injuries.
Arsenio Mendoza damaged his vertebrae causing the paralysis of his lower
extremities. The physician who attended and treated him opined that he may never
walk again.
Consequently, Silverio Marchan was convicted in the RTC for serious, less
serious and slight physical injuries through reckless imprudence.
Arsenio Mendoza, his wife and child sought to recover damages against
Arsenio Marchan and Philippine Rabbit Bus Lines, predicated not only on a breach of
contract of carriage for failure to safely convey them to their destination, but also on
account of a criminal negligence resulting to Mendozas multiple physical damages.
The Court of Appeals affirmed the amount of P40,000.00 awarded by the RTC as
compensatory damages modifying the appealed lower court decision by holding
petitioners to pay the amount of P30,000.00 as exemplary damages and sustaining the
award of attorney's fees in the amount of P5,000.00.
The errors assigned would dispute the holding of the Court of Appeals in
imposing liability in the respective amounts of P40,000.00 for compensatory damages
and P30,000.00 for exemplary damages.
ISSUE: W/N the amounts are proper.
HELD/RATIO: YES. The amount of P40,000.00 as compensatory damages is quite
reasonable and fair, considering that Arsenio Mendoza had suffered paralysis on the
lower extremities, which will incapacitate him to engage in his customary occupation
throughout the remaining years of his life, especially so if we take into account that
plaintiff Arsenio Mendoza was only 26 years old when he met an accident on January
22, 1954; and taking the average span of life of a Filipino, he may be expected to live
for 30 years more; and bearing in mind the earning capacity of Arsenio Mendoza who
before the happening of this accident derived an income of almost P100.00 a month
from the business of his father-in-law as Assistant Supervisor of the small [fairs] and his
income of P100.00 a month which he derived as a professional boxer.
Considering that respondent Arsenio Mendoza was only in his middle twenties when he
lost the use of his limbs, being condemned for the remainder of his life to be a
paralytic, in effect leading a maimed, well-nigh useless existence, the fixing of such
liability in the amount of P40,000.00 as compensatory damages was well within the
discretion of the Court of Appeals.
As to the finding of liability for exemplary damages, exemplary damages may be
imposed by way of example or correction only in addition, among others, to
compensatory damages, but that they cannot be recovered as a matter of right, their
determination depending upon the discretion of the court. It further appears that the
amount of exemplary damages need not be proved, because its determination depends
upon the amount of compensatory damages that may be awarded to the claimant. If
the amount of exemplary damages need not be proved, it need not also be alleged, and
the reason is obvious because it is merely incidental or dependent upon what the court
may award as compensatory damages. Unless and until this premise is determined and
established, what may be claimed as exemplary damages would amount to a mere
surmise or speculation. It follows as a necessary consequence that the amount of
exemplary damages need not be pleaded in the complaint because the same cannot be
predetermined. One can merely ask that it be determined by the court if in the use of
its discretion the same is warranted by the evidence, and this is just what appellee has
done.
No such reproach can be hurled at the decision and resolution now under review. No
such indictment would be justified. As noted earlier, both the second and the third
assignments of error are devoid of merit.
Nor is there any occasion to consider further the fourth assigned error, petitioner being
dissatisfied with the award of P5,000.00 as attorney's fees to respondents. On its face,
such an assignment of an alleged error is conspicuously futile.
The judgment, however, must be modified in accordance with the ruling of this Court in
Soberano v. Manila Railroad Co. Respondents are entitled to interest for the amount of
compensatory damages from the date of the decision of the lower court and legal
interest on the exemplary damages from the date of the decision of the Court of
Appeals.
WHEREFORE, as thus modified, the decision is affirmed, petitioners being liable for the
sum of P40,000.00 in the concept of compensatory damages with interest at the legal
rate from and after January 26, 1960, and the sum of P30,000.00 as exemplary
damages with interest at the legal rate from and after December 14, 1964, as well as
for the sum of P5,000.00 as attorney's fees, likewise earning a legal rate of interest
from and after January 26, 1960.
214. PEOPLE V. TAAN
FACTS: Accused-appellant Eduardo Taan was found guilty of murder aggravated by the
use of an unlicensed firearm and sentenced to death by the RTC. In view of penalty
imposed, Taans case was elevated to SC for automatic review. Case was transferred to
the CA. Taan argues that the trial court, among others (other issues not related to
TORTS TESORO
torts), erred in: sentencing him to indemnify the heirs of Ladaga P75,000 as moral
damages and another P50,000 as exemplary damages. CA affirmed the trial court.
Issue: W/N Taan should pay the damages as imposed by the trial court.
Held & Ratio: Regarding damages, when death occurs due to a crime, the following
may be recovered: (1) civil indemnity ex delicto for the death of the victim; (2) actual
or compensatory damages; (3) moral damages; (4) exemplary damages; (5) attorneys
fees and expenses of litigation; and (6) interest in proper cases. SC affirmed the
monetary awards granted by the CA but modified the awards of civil indemnity ex
delicto to P75,000 and moral damages to P50,000 for the heirs of Ladaga, based on
recent case of People v. Elberto Tubungbanua.
Tuttoh's mother, Jaihan Abu, testified that Tuttoh was her only son. At the time of
Tuttoh's death, he and his wife had five (5) children, and the wife was pregnant with
child. The wife had given birth after the demise of Tuttoh. Jaiham Abu further testified
that she incurred expenses in connection with the death of her son in the total amount
of P54,075.00. She said that in connection with Tuttoh's funeral, they spent 10 sacks of
rice in the total amount of P8,500.00. They also slaughtered a cow, and bought
cigarettes and fish.
However, no receipts were shown to support the claim of expenses incurred for the
wake and the burial of the victim.
The Zamboanga RTC found Eling guilty of murder aggravated with the use of an
unlicensed firearm. Eling was sentenced to death and ordered to pay to pay the heirs of
the victim P50,000.00 as indemnity for his death; P54,075.00 as actual damages;
P50,000.00 as moral damages; P30,000.00 as exemplary damages; and to pay the
costs.
Because of the death penalty imposed, the case was brought to the SC, but there, it
was then brought to the CA pursuant to jurisprudence.
The SC affirmed the conviction but because of Republic Act No. 9346, which prohibited
the imposition of the death penalty, it downgraded the penalty from death to reclusion
perpetua and awarded temperate damages in lieu of actual damages. It deleted the
award of actual damages for the reason that no receipts were shown to support the
claim of expenses incurred for the wake and the burial of the victim.
The awards then were:
P50,000.00 as civil indemnity; P50,000.00 as moral damages; P30,000.00 as exemplary
damages; and P25,000.00 as temperate damages in lieu of actual damages.
Issue: Whether or not the temperate damages should have been granted in lieu of
actual damages.
Held: Yes! (The SC affirmed Elings conviction)
Doctrine: We are in accord with the grant by the Court of Appeals of civil indemnity;
however, in accordance with prevailing jurisprudence, we increase the same to
P75,000.00. The amount of P75,000.00 as civil indemnity is awarded only if the crime is
qualified by circumstances which warrant the imposition of the death penalty. Though
the penalty imposed on appellant was reduced to reclusion perpetua pursuant to
Republic Act No. 9346, civil indemnity to be awarded remains at P75,000.00. We also
agree with the award of moral damages in the amount of P50,000.00. We award the
same as the circumstances surrounding the untimely and violent death, in accordance
with human nature and experience, could have brought nothing but emotional pain and
anguish to the victim's family.
We retain the award of exemplary damages but reduced the amount to P25,000.00
following current jurisprudence. Exemplary damages in the amount of P25,000.00 must
TORTS TESORO
be awarded, given the presence of treachery which qualified the killing to murder.
Article 2230 of the Civil Code allows the award of exemplary damages as part of the
civil liability when the crime was committed with one or more aggravating
circumstances. The term aggravating circumstance as used therein should be construed
in its generic sense since it did not specify otherwise.
Notwithstanding the absence of receipts to prove actual damages, we affirm the
grant of the Court of Appeals of temperate damages in the amount of
P25,000.00, in lieu of actual damages. The award of P25,000.00 in temperate
damages in homicide or murder cases is proper when no evidence of burial
and funeral expenses is presented in the trial court. Under Article 2224 of the
Civil Code, temperate damages may be recovered as it cannot be denied that the heirs
of the victim suffered pecuniary loss although the exact amount was not proved.
computation) at the time of his demise by applying the formula (2/3 x [80-301 = life
expectancy).
Petitioner: damages were computed on a four (4) year as held in the Alcantara case.
(2) the rate at which the losses sustained by said respondents should be
fixed.
Held
(1)The Alcantara case cited is not controlling in the one at bar. In the Alcantara case,
none of the parties had questioned the propriety of the four-year basis adopted by the
trial court in making its award of damages. Both parties appealed, but only as regards
the amount thereof. On the contrary, it declared:
"(t)here can be no exact or uniform rule for measuring the value of a human life and
the measure of damages cannot be arrived at by precise mathematical calculation, but
the amount recoverable depends on the particular facts and circumstances of each
case. The life expectancy of the deceased or of the beneficiary, whichever is shorter, is
an important factor.' Other factors that are usually considered are: (1) pecuniary loss
to plaintiff or beneficiary; (2) loss of support; (3) loss of service; (4) loss of society; (5)
mental suffering of beneficiaries; and (6) medical and funeral expenses."
Thus, life expectancy is, not only relevant, but, also, an important element in fixing the
amount recoverable by private respondents herein. The Court of Appeals has not erred
in basing the computation of petitioner's liability upon the life expectancy of Policronio
Quintos, Jr.
(2) In fixing the amount of that support, We must reckon with the "necessary expenses
of his own living", which should be deducted from his earnings. Thus, it has been
consistently held that earning capacity, as an element of damages to one's estate for
his death by wrongful act is necessarily his net earning capacity or his capacity to
acquire money, "less the necessary expense for his own living. Stated otherwise, the
amount recoverable is not loss of the entire earning, but rather the loss of that portion
of the earnings which the beneficiary would have received. In other words, only net
earnings, not gross earning, are to be considered that is, the total of the earnings less
expenses necessary in the creation of such earnings or income and less living and other
incidental expenses.
All things considered, We are of the opinion that it is fair and reasonable to fix the
deductible living and other expenses of the deceased at the sum of P1,184.00 a year, or
about P100.00 a month, and that, consequently, the loss sustained by his sisters may
be roughly estimated at P1,000.00 a year or P33,333.33 for the 33-1/3 years of his life
expectancy. To this sum of P33,333.33, the following should be added: (a) P12,000.00,
pursuant to Arts. 104 and 107 of the Revised Penal Code, in relation to Article 2206 of
our Civil Code, as construed and applied by this Court; (b) P1,727.95, actually spent by
private respondents for medical and burial expenses; and (c) attorney's fee, which was
fixed by the trial court, at P500.00, but which, in view of the appeal taken by petitioner
herein, first to the Court of Appeals and later to this Supreme Court, should be
increased to P2,500.00. In other words, the amount adjudged in the decision appealed
from should be reduced to the aggregate sum of P49,561.28, with interest thereon, at
TORTS TESORO
the legal rate, from December 29, 1961, date of the promulgation of the decision of the
trial court.
218. DAVILA VS. PAL
Facts: The case arose from the tragic crash of a passenger plane of PAL which took the
lives of all its crew and passengers. The plane took off from the Manduriao Airport,
Iloilo, on its way to Manila, with 33 people on board, including the plane's complement.
It did not reach its destination, but crashed at Mt. Baco, Mindoro, one hour and fifteen
minutes after take-off. The plaintiffs, parents of Pedro T. Davila, Jr., who was one of
the passengers, had no definite news of what had happened to their son, getting what
information they could only from conflicting newspaper reports, until they received a
letter of condolence from PALs president, informing them that their son had died in the
crash.
Issue: WON PAL is liable for violation of its contract of carriage and if so, for how much.
-YES!
Ratio: It was undisputed that the pilot did not follow the route prescribed for his flight,
at least between Romblon and Manila. Since up to that point over Romblon, the
weather was clear, the most reasonable conclusion is that his failure to do so was
intentional, and that he probably wanted to fly on a straight line to Manila. It was a
violation of air-craft traffic rules to which, under the circumstances, the accident may be
directly attributable. In any case, absent a satisfactory explanation on the part of the
defendant as to how and why the accident occurred, the presumption is that it was at
fault, under Article 1756 of the Civil Code.
The next question relates to the amount of damages that should be awarded to the
plaintiffs, parents of the deceased. The trial court fixed the indemnity for his death in
the amount of P6,000.00. Pursuant to current jurisprudence on the point it should be
increased to P12,000.00.
The deceased was employed as manager of a radio station, from which he was earning
P8,400.00 a year, consisting of a monthly salary of P600.00 and allowance of P100.00.
As a lawyer and junior partner of his father in the law office, he had an annual income
of P3,600.00. From farming he was getting an average of P3,000.00. All in all therefore
the deceased had gross earnings of P15,000.00 a year.
According to Article 2206, paragraph (1), of the Civil Code, "the defendant shall be
liable for the loss of the earning capacity of the deceased and indemnity shall be paid to
the heirs of the latter." This Article, while referring to "damages for death caused by
crime or quasi-delict," is expressly made applicable by Article 1764 "to the death of a
passenger caused by the breach of contract by a common carrier."
The deceased, Pedro Davila, Jr., was single and 30 years of age when he died. At that
age one's normal life expectancy is 33-1/3 years, according to the formula (2/3 x [80-
30]) adopted in the case of Villa Rey Transit, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals on the basis of
the American Expectancy Table of Mortality or the Actuarial of Combined Experience
Table of Mortality. However, although the deceased was in relatively good health, his
medical history shows that he had complained of and been treated for such ailments as
backaches, chest pains and occasional feelings of tiredness. It is reasonable to make an
allowance for these circumstances and consider, for purposes of this case, a reduction
of his life expectancy to 25 years.
Considering the fact that the deceased was getting his income from three (3) different
sources, namely from managing a radio station, from law practice and from farming,
the expenses incidental to the generation of such income were necessarily more than if
he had only one source. Together with his living expenses, a deduction of
P600.00 a month, or P7,200.00 a year, seems reasonable, leaving a net
yearly income of P7,800.00. This amount, multiplied by 25 years, or
P195,000.00 is the amount which should be awarded to the plaintiffs in this
particular respect.
Parents were also entitled to actual damages, moral damages, and attorneys fees but
the award of exemplary damages was eliminated.
219. PEOPLE VS BAGUIO
Facts: Alfredo Paulino as barangay tanod had unpleasant dealings with Rodolfo
Baguio, aka Bebot. So when a group of people passed by Alfredo and his wife Lidovina,
the wife recognized Baguio. Lidovina went inside the house to get money when she
suddenly heard her husband scream, aray ko po!. She rushed out and found her
husband sprawled and being stabbed by Baguio and his companions. The assailants
then fled. Alfredo later died on the operating room.
Baguio was arraigned and tried before the RTC for murder with treachery and
abuse of superior strength. Baguio put up the defense of alibi but the RTC rejected this
and declared that the crime of murder was established beyond reasonable doubt. RTC
sentenced Baguio to reclusior perpetua OR life imprisonment and to indemnify the heirs
of Alfredo Paulino in the amount of P12K. Baguio appealed to the SC.
Issue:
Held:
Reclusion perpetua!
Ratio: (Note: the ratio actually focused on the admissibility of dying declarations, alibis,
evidences...etc., essentially, whether the crime of murder was proven beyond
reasonable doubt. Ill skip this since this isnt our topic)
The SC finds that Baguio committed the crime of murder beyond reasonable
doubt. The RTC sentenced Baguio to reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment as if the
two were one and the same. Crime of murder is defined by the RPC. The RPC does not
prescribe the penalty of life imprisonment --- life imprisonment is imposed for serious
offenses NOT penalized by the RPC but by special laws. Reclusion perpetua carries with
TORTS TESORO
it accessory penalties while life imprisonment does not. Moreover, life imprisonment
does not appear to have any definite extent or duration. The proper penalty then is
reclusion perpetua since murder is defined and punishable under the RPC.
Indemnity payable to the heirs is increased from P12K to P50K conformably
with the current doctrine (no mention is made as to what doctrine this is).
Mrs. Gammad (respondents wife) was on board a Victory Liner bus from Manila bound
for Tugegarao. The bus, running at a high speed fell on a ravine somewhere in Nueva
Vizcaya, resulting to Mrs. Gammads (and others) deaths. Her heirs, led by Mr.
Gammad the husband filed a complaint for damages based on culpa contractual. Victory
claimed the incident was purely accidental and that it did not fail to exercise
extraordinary diligence.
Trial court ruled for Gammad, ordering Victory to pay the ff:
Actual damages 122K
Death Indemnity 50K
Exemplary and Moral Damages 400K
Compensatory Damages1.5M
Attys fees10%
Costs of the suit
On appeal by Victory, the CA modified the award:
Actual D
88K
Compensatory D
1.135M
Moral and Exemplary D
400K
Attys fees
10%
Victory argues that the grant of damages is without basis.
Issue: 1. w/n there was breach of contract of carriage
2. w/n amount of damages is proper
Ruling:
1. Yes, there was breach of contract
For breach of contract of carriage, the common carrier is presumed negligent and upon
him lies the burden of proving otherwise. In this case, because of negligence of
Victorys counsel, this burden of rebutting the presumption was not satisfied (note:
lawyer was repeatedly absent, no presentation of evidence, no cross examination of
respondents evidence. Negligence of counsel binds the client).
2.
Under the CC, a common carrier that breached its contract of carriage which
results in death of a passenger is liable to pay: (1) indemnity for death; (2)
indemnity for loss of earning capacity; (3) moral damages.
Under current jurisprudence, heirs of deceased are entitled to indemnity at a fixed
amount of 50K.
TORTS TESORO
Temperate damages must be awarded. Under the CC, temperate damages may be
recovered when the court finds that pecuniary loss had been suffered but its
amount cannot be proved with certainty. 500K should be awarded to respondents.
In a number of cases, the SC awarded temperate damages in lieu of damages for loss
of earning capacity which was not substantiated with the required documentary proof.
Moral and exemplary damages, having different bases, should not be lumped together.
Moral damages may be recovered when the defendant acted in bad faith or
with gross negligence in cases of culpa contractual. By special rule, moral
damages may also be awarded in cases where breach of contract of carriage
results in the death of passenger. Moral damages: 100K. Exemplary damages
may be recovered in contractual obligations if the defendant acted in
wanton, fraudulent, reckless, oppressive or malevolent manner. For failure to
exercise extraordinary diligence, 100K exemplary damages must be awarded.
Actual damages should be reduced for failure to substantiate expenses incurred. Actual
oil leak, clutch disc, release bearing hub and trunion bolt, propeller
shaftLEMON! LEMON! LEMON!
2)
3)
TORTS TESORO
Were it not for the filing of this case and the improvident issuance of the writ
of PI, Javellana would have received P912K from Shell. But since she had been given an
advance rental of P120K, the accrued rental due her is P792K. Mobil is now directed to
pay this amount of P792K to Javellana with interest thereon at the legal rate from
finality of judgment until the same is fully paid, plus the amount of P7K per month,
from July 31, 1983 until the possession of the property in question is returned to
Javellana. Mobil is also ordered to pay P20K representing attys fees and expenses of
litigation.
Decision:No.
Guballa and his wife still owed Bautista the amount of P30,000.00. It is not
far-fetched that Bautista was disappointed and disturbed, and laid part of the blame
upon Maxino who negotiated the sale and transfer of the property to Guballa and his
wife and even suspected that there was a conspiracy to defraud her.
Facts:
Facts:
The deceased Jose Bernardo, a meat shop vendor, was 33 years old at the time of his
death and was survived by his spouse and 3 minor children.
When he was about to board a jeepney loaded with slaughtered pigs in order to select
the meat he would sell for that day, upon grasping the handlebars he was electrocuted
because the antenna of the jeepney was entangled with an open electric wire. He died
as a result of the incident.
His wife filed a complaint for damages against Benguet Electric Cooperative.
In 1956, Maxino and his wife sold their hacienda and fishponds, as well as the
agricultural tools and equipment used therein to Bautista for the amount of P70,000.00,
with the condition that the Bautista shall assume the payment of an obligation, secured
by mortgages on the property, in favor of the Rehabilitation Finance Corporation (RFC),
now Development Bank of the Philippines.
Bautista sold the same property to the San Jose Development Company,
represented by its president, Francisco G. Guballa, for the amount of P80,000.00,
P20,000.00 of which shall be paid upon the execution of the contract, and the balance
to be paid in three (3) equal installments of P20,000.00 each, per year, for three (3)
years.
However, Maxino and his wife also sold the same property to Guballa. As of
1961, Guballa had an outstanding obligation of P30,000.00 to Bautista which he failed
Thus, the filing of the complaint by Bautista against Maxino was not baseless.
It cannot be said to have been motivated by, malice or spite to warrant the payment of
the damages claimed by the Maxino spouses.
10
TORTS TESORO
rate at which the losses sustained by the widow and her children should be fixed (net
income).
The SC ruled that although the widow failed to present documentary evidence
regarding the income of the deceased, the unrebutted testimony of Joses sister
supplied such deficiency considering that Joses meat stall used to belong to his sister
and that she only gave it to him. She testified that Jose earned around P150-P200/day.
SC fixed Joses daily gross income to P150/day or P54k annually.
Net income = gross income necessary living expenses
P27,000 = P54,000 P27,000
*Necessary living expenses is fixed at 50% of gross income
So, the net earning capacity of Jose is:
Net Earning Capacity = Life expectancy x net income
P675,000 = 25 x P27,000
4.
11
TORTS TESORO
In the case at bar, it was established that Ray, at the time of the mishap: (1) was
driving the motorcycle at a high speed; (2) was tailgating the Tamaraw jeepney; (3)
has imbibed one or two bottles of beer; and (4) was not wearing a protective helmet.
These circumstances, although not constituting the proximate cause of his demise and
injury to Sergio, contributed to the same result. The contribution of these
circumstances are all considered and determined in terms of percentages of
the total cause. Hence, pursuant to Rakes v. AG & P, the heirs of Ray Castillon shall
recover damages only up to 50% of the award. In other words, 50% of the
damage shall be borne by the private respondents; the remaining 50% shall be paid by
the petitioner.
Earning Capacity
In considering the earning capacity of the victim as an element of damages, the
following factors are considered in determining the compensable amount of lost
earnings: (1) the number of years for which the victim would otherwise have lived; and
(2) the rate of loss sustained by the heirs of the deceased. Jurisprudence provides that
the first factor, i.e., life expectancy, is computed by applying the formula (2/3 x [80 age at death]) adopted in the American Expectancy Table of Mortality or the Actuarial
Combined Experience Table of Mortality. As to the second factor, it is computed by
multiplying the life expectancy by the net earnings of the deceased, i.e., the total
earnings less expenses necessary in the creation of such earnings or income and less
living and other incidental expenses. The net earning is ordinarily computed at
fifty percent (50%) of the gross earnings. Thus, the formula used by this Court in
computing loss of earning capacity is: Net Earning Capacity = [2/3 x (80 age at
time of death) x (gross annual income reasonable and necessary living
expenses)].
It was established that Ray was 35 at the time of his death and was earning a gross
annual income of P31,876.00 as a driver at the Mindanao State University. In arriving at
the net earnings, the trial court deducted from the gross annual income the annual
living expenses in the amount of P9,672.00, broken down as follows: P20.00 a day for
travel or P520.00 per month; P60.00 a month for cigarettes; P26.00 for drinks; and
other personal expenses like clothing, toiletries, etc. estimated at P200.00 per month.
The amount of P9,672.00, however, appears unrealistic, and constitutes only 30.34% of
the gross earnings. It even includes expenses for cigarettes which by no means can be
classified as a necessary expense. Using the cited formula with the net earnings
computed at 50% of the gross earnings, a detailed computation is as follows:
NET EARNING
CAPACITY (X)
x GROSS ANNUAL
INCOME (GAI)
- LIVING
EXPENSES (50% of
GAI)
= [2/3 (80-35)]
x [P31,876.00
-50% x
P31,876.00]
= [2/3 (45)]
x [P31,876.00
- P15,938.00]
= 30
x 15,938.00
= P478,140.00
We sustain the awards of P33,215.00 as funeral and burial expenses being supported
with receipts; P50,000.00 as death indemnity; and P50,000.00 as moral damages.
However, the award of P20,000.00 as attorneys fees must be deleted for lack of basis.
The indemnity for death caused by a quasi-delict used to be pegged at P3,000.00,
based on Article 2206 of the Civil Code. However, the amount has been gradually
increased through the years. At present, prevailing jurisprudence fixes the amount at
P50,000.00.
FACTS:
Plaintiffs Maria de Evangelista and Sergio Evangelista, who are mother and
son, (the EVANGELISTAS, for short) are the owners of a residential lot valued at
P410.00. The EVANGELISTAS then borrowed from FLOREZA the amount of P100.00.
Thereafter, with the consent of the EVANGELISTAS, FLOREZA occupied the said
residential lot and built a house of light materials without any agreement as to payment
for the use of said residential lot owing to the fact that the EVANGELISTAS has a
standing loan in favor of FLOREZA.
The EVANGELISTAS again borrowed different amounts on several occasions
totaling to P740.00, including the first loan.
The last three loans were evidenced by private documents stating that the lot
stands as security therefor and that the amounts covered thereunder are payable within
six years, without mention of interest.
FLOREZA then demolished the house of light materials and constructed one of
strong materials.
The EVANGELISTAS, for and in consideration of P1,000.00 representing the
total outstanding loan of P740.00 plus P260.00 in cash, sold their residential lot to
FLOREZA, with a right to repurchase within a period of 6 years from date.
Seven months before the expiry of the repurchase period, the EVANGELISTAS
paid in full the repurchase price of P1,000.00.
The EVANGELISTAS made a formal written demand to vacate, within five days.
FLOREZA refused to vacate unless he was first reimbursed the value of his house.
ISSUE: W/N FLOREZA MUST PAY RENT BECAUSE OF HIS REFUSAL TO VACATE
W/N FLOREZA IS A BUILDER IN GOOD FAITH AND THEREFORE
REIMBURSEMENT UNDER ARTICLE 448 OF THE CIVIL CODE.
HAS A RIGHT OF
HELD: YES, FLOREZA MUST PAY RENT. NO, HE DOESNT HAVE THE RIGHT TO REIMBURSEMENT.
RATIO:
As regards the issue of rentals, it is clear that from the date that the
redemption price had been paid by the EVANGELISTAS on January 2, 1955, petitioner's
right to the use of the residential lot without charge had ceased. Having retained the
property although a redemption had been made, he should be held liable for damages
12
TORTS TESORO
in the form of rentals for the continued use of the subject residential lot at the rate of
P10.00 monthly from January 3, 1955 until the house was removed and the property
vacated by petitioner or his heirs.
As regards the issue of reimbursement, Article 448 applies only when the
builder, planter, or sower believes he had the right so to build, plant or sow because he
thinks he owns the land or believes himself to have a claim of title. Here, petitioner
makes no pretensions of ownership whatsoever.
Petitioner contends that as vendee a retro he is entitled to the rights granted
under Article 1616 of the Civil Code. This is incorrect. It should be noted that
petitioner did not construct his house as a vendee a retro. The house had already been
constructed even before the pacto de retro sale.
Petitioner incurred no useful
expense, therefore, after that sale. The house was already there at the tolerance of the
EVANGELISTAS in consideration of the several loans extended to them. Since petitioner
cannot be classified as a builder in good faith within the purview of Article 448 of the
Civil Code, nor as a vendee a retro, who made useful improvements during the lifetime
of the pacto de retro, petitioner has no right to reimbursement of the value of the
house which he had erected on the residential lot of the EVANGELISTAS, much less to
retention of the premises until he is reimbursed.
The rights of petitioner are more akin to those of a usufructuary who, under
Article 579 of the Code, may make on the property useful improvements but with no
right to be indemnified therefor. He may, however, remove such improvements should
it be possible to do so without damage to the property.
Side Note: During the pendency of this appeal, Maria D. de Evangelista died and was
ordered substituted by her son, petitioner Sergio. Also, FLOREZA had since died and
that his heirs had voluntarily vacated the residential lot in question. Thus, only the
issue of the payment of rent was disposed of by the SC.
ISSUE: W/N the awarding of compensatory damages by the RTC was proper.
NO. Respondent judge found no basis for actual or compensatory damages and
exemplary damages. Compensatory damages are those recoverable because of
pecuniary loss in business, trade, property, profession, job or occupation, and the
same must be provided, otherwise, if the proof is flimsy and non-substantial, no
damages will be given. Well settled is the rule that even if the complaint filed by one
against the other is clearly unfounded, this does not necessarily mean, in the absence
of specific facts proving damages, that said defendant really suffered actual damage
over and above, attorneys fees and costs. The Court cannot rely on its speculations as
to the fact and the amount of damages. It must depend on actual proof of the damages
alleged to have been suffered.
231. RODRIGUEZ LUNA V. IAC
Facts: The petitioners are the heirs of Roberto R. Luna who was killed in a vehicular
collision at a go-kart practice. Those involved were the go-kart driven by the deceased,
a business executive, and a Toyota car driven by Luis dela Rosa, a minor of 13 years
who had no driver's license.
In the suit for damages filed by the petitioners agains Luis dela Rosa and his father, the
latter were sentenced pay jointly and severally
P1,650,000.00 as unearned net earnings of Roberto Luna, P12,000.00 as compensatory
damages, P50,000.00 for the loss of his companionship, with legal interest from the
date of this decision.
The award of P1,650,000.00 was based on two factors: (a) that the deceased Roberto
R. Luna could have lived for 30 more years; and (b) that his annual net income was
P55,000.00, computed at P75,000.00 annual gross income less P20,000.00 annual
personal expenses.
Upon MR of the defendants, the decision was modified as to the unearned net earnings,
which was reduced to P450,000.00 with legal interest thereon from the date of the
filing of the complaint.
In reducing the amount, Court of Appeals took into account the fact that the deceased
had been engaged in car racing as a sport, a dangerous and risky activity. The result
was that the 30-year life expectancy of Luna was reduced to 10 years only.
Considering the escalating price of automobile gas which is a key expenditure in
Roberto R. Luna's social standing, the personal expenses was increased to P30,000.00.
Thus P75,000.00 annual gross income less P30,000.00 annual personal expenses leaves
P45,000.00 multiplied by 10 years of life expectancy and the product is P450,000.00.
Issue: Was CA correct in reducing the unearned net earnings of Roberto Luna from
P1,650,000 to P450,000
Held: NO
Ratio: That Luna had engaged in car racing is not based on any evidence on record, he
was engaged in go-kart racing. This cannot be categorized as a dangerous sport for go-
13
TORTS TESORO
karts are extremely low slung, low powered vehicles, only slightly larger than footpedalled four wheeled conveyances.
It was error for the Court of Appeals to reduce the net annual income of the deceased
by increasing his annual personal expenses but without at the same time increasing his
annual gross income. It stands to reason that if his annual personal expenses should
increase because of the "escalating price of gas which is a key expenditure in Roberto
R. Luna's social standing" [a statement which lacks complete basis], it would not be
unreasonable to suppose that his income would also increase considering the manifold
sources thereof.
232. HERBOSA V. CA:
Facts: Petitioner spouses contracted the services of PVE for the betamax coverage of
their then wedding celebration. .On the day of the wedding, the PVE crew arrived at the
residence of the bride. They recorded the pre-departure activities of the bride before
leaving for the church and the Manila Hotel where the wedding reception followed. 2
days after the wedding however, studio manager of PVE, informed the petitioners that
the videotape coverage of their wedding celebration was damaged due to mechanical
defect in their equipment.
Petitioners alleged that said failure on the part of PVE to perform its obligation
caused deep disappointment, anxiety and an irreparable break in the continuity of an
established family tradition of recording by film or slide historical and momentous family
events especially wedding celebrations and for which they were entitled to be paid
actual, moral and exemplary damages including attorneys fees.
RTC rendered a decision ordering defendant to pay the plaintiffs actual, moral and
exemplary damages in the amount of P100,000.00, P10,000.00 for attorneys fees and
to pay the costs of these proceedings.
Issues: Whether or not the petitioners are entitled to award of damages arising from
breach of contract of service.
14