ObliConDigest - Valenzuela Vs.

CA 253 SCRA 303 (1996)

Facts:
At around 2:00 in the morning of June 24, 1990, plaintiff Ma. Lourdes Valenzuela was driving a blue
Mitsubishi lancer from her restaurant at Marcos highway to her home. While travelling along Aurora
Blvd., she noticed something wrong with her tires; she stopped at a lighted place where there were
people, to verify whether she had a flat tire and to solicit help if needed. Having been told by the people
present that her rear right tire was flat and that she cannot reach her home in that car’s condition, she
parked along the sidewalk, about 1½ feet away, put on her emergency lights, alighted from the car, and
went to the rear to open the trunk.

She was standing at the left side of the rear of her car pointing to the tools to a man who will help her fix
the tire when she was suddenly bumped by a 1987 Mitsubishi Lancer driven by defendant Richard Li and
registered in the name of defendant Alexander Commercial, Inc. Because of the impact plaintiff was
thrown against the windshield of the car of the defendant, which was destroyed, and then fell to the
ground. She was pulled out from under defendant’s car. Plaintiff’s left leg was severed up to the middle
of her thigh, with only some skin and sucle connected to the rest of the body. She was brought to the
UERM Medical Memorial Center where she was found to have a “traumatic amputation, leg, left up to
distal thigh (above knee).” She was confined in the hospital for twenty (20) days and was eventually
fitted with an artificial leg.

Issue:
Whether or not Alexander Commercial, Inc. Li’s employer is liable.

Ruling:
Yes. Alexander Commercial, Inc. has not demonstrated, to the Court’s satisfaction, that it exercised the
care and diligence of a good father of the family in entrusting its company car to Li. No allegations were
made as to whether or not the company took the steps necessary to determine or ascertain the driving
proficiency and history of Li, to whom it gave full and unlimited use of a company car. Not having been
able to overcome the burden of demonstrating that it should be absolved of liability for entrusting its
company car to Li, said company, based on the principle of bonus pater familias, ought to be jointly and
severally liable with the former for the injuries sustained by Ma. Lourdes Valenzuela during the accident.

Li was an Assistant Manager of Alexander Commercial, Inc. He admitted that his functions as Assistant
Manager did not require him to scrupulously keep normal office hours as he was required quite often to
perform work outside the office, visiting prospective buyers and contacting and meeting with company
clients. These meetings, clearly, were not strictly confined to routine hours because, as a managerial
employee tasked with the job of representing his company with its clients, meetings with clients were
both social as well as work-related functions. The service car assigned to Li by Alexander Commercial,
Inc. therefore enabled both Li – as well as the corporation – to put up the front of a highly successful
entity, increasing the latter’s goodwill before its clientele. It also facilitated meeting between Li and its
clients by providing the former with a convenient mode of travel.