1. What is proximate cause?

2. Define the following terms:

a. Quasi-Delict
b. Injury
c. Damage
d. Damages
e. Negligence
f. Last Clear Chance Rule
g. Contributory Negligence
3. What are the elements of the following:
a. Quasi-Delict
b. Abuse of Rights
c. Contra Bonus Mores
4. Is the absence of the pre-existing of contractual relationship between the
parties necessary in order for a case for quasi-delict to prosper?

5. Mr and Mrs R own a burned-out building, the firewall of which collapsed and
destroyed the shop occupied by the family of Mr and Mrs S, which resulted in
injuries to said couple and the death of their daughter. Mr and Mrs S had been
warned by Mr & Mrs R to vacate the shop in view of its proximity to the
weakened wall but the former failed to do so.

Mr & Mrs S filed against Mr and Mrs R an action for recovery of damages the
former suffered as a result of the collapse of the firewall. In defense, Mr and Mrs
R rely on the doctrine of last clear chance alleging that Mr and Mrs S had the last
clear chance to avoid the accident if only they heeded the former’s warning to
vacate the shop, and therefore Mr and Mrs R’s prior negligence should be
disregarded.

If you were the judge, how would you decide the case? State your reasons.

6. As a result of a collision between the taxicab owned by A and another taxicab

owned by B, X, a passenger of the first taxicab, was seriously injured. X later filed
a criminal action against both drivers.

May both taxicab owners raise the defense of due diligence in the selection and
supervision of their drivers to be absolved from liability for damages to X?
Reason.
7. As a result of a collision between the taxicab owned by A and another taxicab
owned by B, X, a passenger of the first taxicab, was seriously injured. X later filed
a criminal action against both drivers.

Is it necessary for X to reserve his right to institute a civil action for damages
against both taxicab owners before he can file a civil action for damages against
them? Why?

8. A van owned by Orlando and driven by Diego, while negotiating a downhill

slope of a city road, suddenly gained speed, obviously beyond the authorized
limit in the area, and bumped a car in front of it, causing severed damage to the
care and serious injuries to its passengers. Orlando was not in the car at the time
of the incident. The car owner and the injured passengers sued Orlando and
Diego for damages caused by Diego’s negligence. In their defense, Diego claims
that the downhill slope caused the van to gain speed and that, as he stepped on
the brakes to check the acceleration, the brakes locked, causing the van to go
even faster and eventually to hit the car in front of it. Orlando and Diego contend
that the sudden malfunction of the van’s brake system is a fortuitous even and
that, therefore, they are exempt from any liability.

Is this contention tenable? Explain.

9. DT and MT were prominent members of the frequent travelers’ club of FX

Airlines. In Hongkong, the couple were assigned seats in Business Class for
which they had bought tickets. On checking in, however, they were told they
were upgraded by computer to First Class for the flight to Manila because the
Business Section was overbooked.

Both refused to transfer despite better seats, food, beverage and other services
in First Class. They said they had guests in Business Class they should
attend to. They felt humiliated, embarrassed and vexed, however, when the
stewardess allegedly threatened to offload them if they did not avail of the
upgrade. Thus they gave in, but during the transfer of luggage DT suffered pain
in his arm and wrist. After arrival in Manila, they demanded an apology from
FX’s management as well as indemnity payment. When none was forthcoming,
they sued the airline for a million pesos in damages.
 Is the airline liable for actual and moral damages? Why or why not? Explain
briefly.

10. Dr. and Mrs. Almeda are prominent citizens of the country and are frequent
travelers abroad. In 1996, they booked round-trip business class tickets for the
Manila-Hong Kong- Manila route of the Pinoy Airlines, where they are holders
of Gold Mabalos Class Frequent Flier cards. On their return flight, Pinoy Airlines
upgraded their tickets to first class without their consent and, inspite of their
protestations to be allowed to remain in the business class so that they could be
with their friends, they were told that the business class was already fully booked,
and that they were given priority in upgrading because they are elite
members/holders of Gold Mabalos Class cards. Since they were embarrassed at
the discussions with the flight attendants, they were forced to take the flight at
the first class section apart from their friends who were in the business class.
Upon their return to Manila, they demanded a written apology from Pinoy
Airlines. When it went unheeded, the couple sued Pinoy Airlines for breach
of contract claiming moral and exemplary damages, as well as attorney’s
fees.

Will the action prosper? Give reasons.

11. a) When would an employer’s liability for damage, caused by an employee in

the performance of his assigned tasks, be primary and when would it be
subsidiary in nature?

b) Would the defense of due diligence in the selection and supervision of the
employee be available to the employer in both instances?

12. Marcial, who does not know how to drive, has always been driven by Ben, his
driver of ten years whom he had chosen carefully and has never figured in a
vehicular mishap. One day, Marcial was riding at the back seat of his Mercedes
Benz being driven along EDSA by Ben. Absorbed in reading a book, Marcial
did not notice that they were approaching the corner of Quezon Avenue, when
the traffic light had just turned yellow. Ben suddenly stepped on the gas to cross
the intersection before the traffic light could turn red. But, too late. Midway in
the intersection, the traffic light changed, and a Jeepney full of passengers
suddenly crossed the car’s path. A collision between the two vehicles was
inevitable. As a result, several jeepney passengers were seriously injured. A suit
 for damages based on culpa aquiliana was filed against Marcial and Ben, seeking
to hold them jointly and severally liable for such injuries.

May Marcial be held liable? Explain.

13. A Gallant driven by John and owned by Art, and a Corolla driven by its owner,
Gina, collided somewhere along Adriatico Street. As a result of the accident,
Gina had a concussion. Subsequently. Gina brought an action for damages
against John and Art. There is no doubt that the collision is due to John’s
negligence. Can Art, who was in the vehicle at the time of the accident, be held
solidarily liable with his driver, John?
14. Does the presence of the owner inside the vehicle causing damage to a third
party affect his liability for his driver’s negligence? Explain.
15. As the result of a collision between a public service passenger bus and a
cargo truck owned by D, X sustained physical injuries and Y died. Both X and Y
were passengers of the bus. Both drivers were at fault, and so X and Z, the only
heir and legitimate child of the deceased Y, sued the owners of both vehicles.
a) May the owner of the bus raise the defense of having exercised the
diligence of a good father of a family?
b) May D raise the same defense?
c) May X claim moral damages from both defendants?
d) May Z claim moral damages from both defendants? Give reasons for all
your answers.
16. Under the law on quasi-delict, aside from the persons who caused injury to
persons, who else are liable under the following circumstances:
a) When a 7-year old boy injures his playmate while playing with his father’s
rifle. Explain.
17. Rosa was leasing an apartment in the city. Because of the Rent Control Law,
her landlord could not increase the rental as much as he wanted to, nor terminate
her lease as long as she was paying her rent. In order to force her to leave the
premises, the landlord stopped making repairs on the apartment, and caused the
water and electricity services to be disconnected. The difficulty of living
without electricity and running water resulted in Rosa’s suffering a nervous
breakdown. She sued the landlord for actual and moral damages. Will the action
prosper? Explain.
18. Tony bought a Ford Expedition from a car dealer in Muntinlupa City. As
payment, Tony issued a check drawn against his current account with Premium
 Bank. Since he has a good reputation, the car dealer allowed him to
immediately drive home the vehicle merely on his assurance that his check is
sufficiently funded. When the car dealer deposited the check, it was dishonored
on the ground of “Account Closed.” After an investigation, it was found that an
employee of the bank misplaced Tony’s account ledger. Thus, the bank
erroneously assumed that his account no longer exists. Later it turned out that
Tony’s account has more than sufficient funds to cover the check. The dealer
however, immediately filed an action for recovery of possession of the
vehicle against Tony for which he was terribly humiliated and embarrassed.
Does Tony have a cause of action against Premium Bank? Explain.

19. Romano was bumped by a minivan owned by the Solomon School of Practical
Arts (SSPA). The minivan was driven by Peter, a student assistant whose
assignment was to clean the school passageways daily one hour before and one
hour after regular classes, in exchange for free tuition. Peter was able to drive the
school vehicle after persuading the regular driver, Paul, to turn over the wheel to
him (Peter). Romano suffered serious physical injuries. The accident happened
at night when only one headlight of the vehicle was functioning and
Peter only had a student driver’s permit.

As a consequence, Peter was convicted in the criminal case. Thereafter, Romano

sued for damages against Peter and SSPA.

a) Will the action for damages against Peter and SSPA prosper?

b) Will your answer be the same if, Paul, the regular driver, was impleaded
as party defendant for allowing Peter to drive the minivan without a regular
driver’s license.

c) Is the exercise of due diligence in the selection and supervision of Peter and
Paul a material issue to be resolved in this case?
20. After working overtime up to midnight, Alberto, an executive of an
insurance company drove a company vehicle to a favorite Videoke bar where
he had some drinks and sang some songs with friends to “unwind”. At 2:00 a.m.,
he drove home, but in doing so, he bumped a tricycle, resulting in the death of
its driver. May the insurance company be held liable for the negligent act of
Alberto? Why?
21. Explain the concept of vicarious liability in quasi-delicts.
22. OJ was employed as professional driver of MM Transit bus owned by Mr. BT.
In the course of his work, OJ hit a pedestrian who was seriously injured and later
died in the hospital as a result of the accident. The victim’s heirs sued the driver
and the owner of the bus for damages.

Is there a presumption in this case that Mr. BT, the owner, had been negligent?
If so, is the presumption absolute or not? Explain.
23. Arturo sold his Pajero to Benjamin for P1 Million. Benjamin took the vehicle but
did not register the sale with the Land Transportation Office. He allowed his son
Carlos, a minor who did not have a driver’s license, to drive the car to buy pan
de sal in a bakery. On the way, Carlos driving in a reckless manner, sideswiped
Dennis, then riding a bicycle. As a result, he suffered serious physical injuries.
Dennis filed a criminal complaint against Carlos for reckless imprudence
resulting in serious physical injuries.

1. Can Dennis file an independent civil action against Carlos and his father
Benjamin for damages based on quasi-delict? Explain.
2. Assuming Dennis’ action is tenable, can Benjamin raise the defense that he is
not liable because the vehicle is not registered in his name? Explain.
24. Silvestre leased a car from Avis-Rent-A-Car Co. at the Mactan International
Airport. No sooner had he driven the car outside the airport when, due to his
negligence, he bumped an FX taxi owned and driven by Victor, causing damage
to the latter in the amount of P100,000.00. Victor filed an action for damages
against both Silvestre and Avis, based on quasi-delict. Avis filed a motion to
dismiss the complaint against it on the ground of failure to state a cause of action.
Resolve the motion.
-end-