Sei sulla pagina 1di 1

MALLARI v CA (b) The driver of a vehicle shall not overtake or pass another vehicle proceeding in

324 SCRA 147 / JAN 31, 2000 / BELLOSILLO, J. / GOOD CONDITION IN CARRIAGE BY LAND the same direction when approaching the crest of a grade, nor upon a curve in the
NATURE Petition for Review highway, where the driver's view along the highway is obstructed within a distance
PETITIONERS Alfredo Mallari, Sr., and Alfredo Mallari, Jr. of five hundred feet ahead except on a highway having two or more lanes for
RESPONDENTS Court of Appeals, and Bulletin Publishing Corporation movement of traffic in one direction where the driver of a vehicle may overtake or
pass another vehicle: Provided That on a highway, within a business or residential
SUMMARY. One morning, the passenger jeepney driven by Mallari Jr collided with the district, having two or more lanes for movement of traffic in one direction, the
delivery van of Bulletin Publishing. Due to the accident, several passengers were injured, one driver of a vehicle may overtake or pass another vehicle on the right.
of whom was Reyes who died due to the gravity of his injuries. The widow of Reyes filed a
complaint for damages. It is settled that a driver abandoning his proper lane for overtaking another vehicle in an
DOCTRINE. Art. 1732 of the Civil Code defines common carriers as persons, corporations, ordinary situation has the duty to see to it that the road is clear and not to proceed if he
firms, or associations engaged in the business of carrying or transporting passengers or cannot do so in safety. When a vehicle is approaching or rounding a curve, there is special
goods or both, by land, water, or air, for compensation, offering their services to the public. necessity for keeping to the right side of the road and the driver does not have the right to
drive on the left hand side relying upon having time to turn to the right if a car approaching
FACTS. from the opposite direction comes into view.
 On October 14, 1987 at around 5 am, the passenger jeepney driven by Mallari Jr and
owned by Mallari Sr collided with the delivery van of Bulletin Publishing along the In this case, Mallari Jr already saw that the delivery van was coming from the opposite
National Highway in Bataan. direction and failing to consider its speed, mindlessly occupied the left lane and overtook the
 According to Mallari Jr, he went to the left lane because he had to overtake a Fiera that vehicles in front of it at a curve in the highway. Clearly, the proximate cause of the collision
had stopped on the right lane and that before passing the Fiera, he saw the van of which resulted in the death of Reyes was the sole negligence of Mallri Jr who recklessly
Bulletin Publishing. The collission occurred just after Mallari Jr overtook the Fiera while operated and drove the jeepney in a lane where overtaking was not allowed by the traffic
traversing a curve on the highway. rules.
 The impact caused the jeepney to turn around and fall on its left side resulting in
injuries to its passengers one of whom was Israel Reyes who eventually died. Under Art 2185 of the Civil Code, unless there is proof to the contrary, it is presumed that a
 The widow of Reyes filed a complaint for damages (compensatory damages, medical person driving a vehicle has been negligent if at the time of the mishap, he was violating a
expenses, burial expenses, exemplary damages, and attorney’s fees) against the traffic regulation.
Mallaris and against Bulletin, its driver Felix Angeles, and the NV Netherlands Insurance
Company. As the owner of the passenger jeepney engaged as a common carrier, Mallari Sr is also
 The complaint alleged that the collision was due to the negligence of both drivers. bound to be liable for the negligence and recklessness of Mallari Jr. By the contract of
 TC: The proximate cause of the collision was Angeles’ negligence considering that the carriage, the carrier jeepney owned by Mallari Sr assumed the express obligation to
left portion of the delivery truck hit and bumped the left rear portion of the passenger transport the passengers to their destination safely and to observe extraordinary diligence
jeepney. Bulletin Publishing and Angeles are jointly and severally liable. with due regard for all the circumstances, and any injury or death that might be suffered by
 CA: The accident was actually caused by the sole negligence of Mallari Jr who admitted its passengers is right away attributable to the fault or negligence of the carrier.
that he had seen the delivery van before overtaking the Fiera. The Mallaris are liable
and Bulletin Publishing and Angeles are absolved from liability. Monetray award ordered to be paid: 1M for loss of earning capacity, 50k as civil indemnity
for death, and 10k for attorney’s fees.
ISSUES & RATIO.
1. WON the Mallari Jr was negligent –YES DECISION.
Petition denied. The decision of the CA is affirmed.
Mallari Jr’s act of overtaking was in clear violation of the The Land Transportation and Traffic
Code which provides:
Sec. 41. Restrictions on overtaking and passing. — (a) The driver of a vehicle shall
not drive to the left side of the center line of a highway in overtaking or passing
another vehicle proceeding in the same direction, unless such left side is clearly
visible and is free of oncoming traffic for a sufficient distance ahead to permit such
overtaking or passing to be made in safety.

Potrebbero piacerti anche