/aamn2015

LECTURE NOTES IN TORTS AND DAMAGES

Under Dean Ed Vincent Albano
Kinds of Torts
1) Intentional Tort an act intended to cause damage to another
2) Negligent Tort
3) Strict Liability Tort
Article 19, NCC (Rule on Abuse of Right); Article 1314, NCC
E.g. In a contract to sell executed by B in favor of A, where A pays an amount
to B for five years, and on the last day of instalment, B sells the lot to C, then
A can file an action against B for damages.
Article 1314, NCC the inducer is liable for damages; interfering with the
contractual relationship of other parties (liability is based on tort)
Case: Hospicio de San Jose
Article 21, NCC (acts contra bonus mores) added to the Civil Code in order
to arrest a void in the law
E.g. Breach of promise to marry basically not an actionable wrong; but can
be a reason for an action for damages based on the peculiar circumstances of
the case such as when the plaintiff has incurred big expenses in preparation for
the wedding
Possible void in the law: where there can be no criminal liability but the act
was contrary to morals, good customs or public policy and thereby caused
damage to another
Article 2183, NCC defense against liability is CONTRIBUTORY
NEGLIGENCE
Relate to Article 2187; 2193, NCC
Case: Dayrit vs. CA; Co vs. CA; Air France vs. Carrascoso (there is tort even
if there is a contractual relation; similar with Art. 1314 in inducing another to
violate his contract)
Principle of Res Ipsa Loquitor
Art. 2176, NCC covers not only negligent acts but also intentional or
voluntary acts
Prohibition against recovery of damages TWICE
Elements: (1) There must be an act or omission that causes DAMAGE relate
to damnun absque injuria; relate to Art. 430, NCC and the owners fencing
of his/her property; (2) No pre-existing contractual relationship - case: PSBA
vs. CA; (3) The act or omission is the cause of the damage done
DAMNUM ABSQUE INJURIA violation of a legal right; applicable in
criminal cases involving Art.11, RPC (Justifying Circumstances)
RES IPSA LOQUITOR The thing speaks for itself; a rule of evidence
rather than of civil law; case: Africa vs. Caltex; Batiquin vs. CA

/aamn2015
DOCTRINE OF LAST CLEAR CHANCE - case: Picart vs. Smith; relate to
Art.2185, NCC; applies to negligence of banks
Read the following cases: Pilapil vs. CA (force majeure); De Guzman vs. CA
Fortuitous event must be the proximate and only cause; fortuitous event in a
non-concurrence of the Senate to a treaty
Prohibition against recovery of damages twice (can recover the higher of the
two damages/ awards but never both)
Article 2183, NCC; animal causes damage to another)
STRICT LIABILITY TORT - defense: contributory negligence (not a
complete defense, merely reduces liability of defendant)
Case: Bataclan vs. Medina
Article 2180, NCC no longer controlling; no longer an alternative liability;
under the Family Code, parents are now jointly liable for torts caused by their
minor children in their custody
See RA 6809 amending the Family Code parents are liable for torts
committed by their children 18-21 years old but still living under their
company/ custody; liability under the Deep Pocket Rule
Case: Delgado vs. CA; Tamargo vs. CA
PRIOR RULE: A teacher is liable for damages if the school is a school of arts
and trades; NOW ABANDONED; case: Palisco vs. Brillantes; Amadora vs.
CA
CURRENT RULE: regardless of the nature of school, the school is liable for
school-administered activities in case of tortuous acts, e.g. during field trips
State is liable if it acts through a SPECIAL AGENT, because the State gives
its consent to be sued; case: Palafox vs. Ilocos Norte; Municipality of San
Fernando La Union vs. PNB
Employer-Employee Relationship; defense of the employer: diligence of a
good father of a family in the selection and supervision of the employer; case:
Mercury Drug vs. Huang
Case: Castilex Industrial Corp. vs. Vasquez; Filamer Christian Institute
Registered Owner Rule; recourse of registered owner against the buyer is to
file a third-party complaint
Case: R. Transport Co.; Domingo vs. Villanueva

RA 6809 amending Article 236, FC; RA 4136

Article 2189, NCC LGU exercising control and supervision
State gives consent to be sued either by general law or special law
Manhole cases; case: Guilatco vs. City of Dagupan
Strict Liability Tort possession of animal; the animal must cause damage;
case: Afialda vs. Hisole present possessor of animal is liable even if the
animal gores the owner to death; POSSIBLE DEFENSE: Contributory
negligence of plaintiff; serves only to mitigate the liability of owner
Case: Dayrit vs. CA; Koh vs. CA
Concept of Consequential Damages (possible loss of income/closure);
manufacturer is liable for defect in goods, not the wholesaler or retailer

/aamn2015
Art. 2190 in relation to Art. 1723, NCC liability of contractor for building
defects; case: Hospicio de San Jose vs. Findlay Miller Timber Co.; defense of
diligence of a good father of a family (otherwise, may be considered a joint
tortfeasor)
Defense of parents, teachers, employers, State: PATER FAMILIAS
Case: Filamer Christian Institute; note that the school was held liable even in
the absence of employer-employee relationship
Assumption of Risk, e.g. Boxing Match, baseball game; athlete
Prescriptive Period of four (4) years for filing an action for tort/quasi delict
Volenti Non Fit Injuria self-inflicted injury
Defenses: (1) Diligence of a good father of family; (2) Fortuitous events
(negligent cases) only if it is the proximate and only cause; different if it
concurs with actors negligence; actor is still liable
HUMAN RELATIONS read in reference to discussions under Persons and
Family Relations
Art. 19 the catch-all provision of the law; e.g. an action for damages
basedo on Art. 19 for one who fails to honor a perfected option contract when
he sells the property before the end of the period for exercising the option
Case: Padilla vs. CA; Velayo vs. Shell Co (Phil) GR No. L-7817 Oct. 31, 1956
Art. 21 purpose is to arrest a void in the law; case: Batara vs. Marcos (7 Phil
156/ No. 2929, Dec. 7, 1906)
Breach of promise to marry is not an actionable wrong in itself but if there is
an act independent of the breach which causes damage, an action for damages
under Art. 21 of the NCC shall prosper.
Rule 111 (Rules of Court) if acquittal is beyond reasonable doubt, accused
can still be held civilly liable; if acquittal is based on the fact that there is no
basis of the charge, accused cannot be held civilly liable
Case: Mendoza vs. Arieta; Chin vs. Nicdao
Article 22, NCC solution indebiti; unjust unrichment
Case: GSIS vs. CA

Finders-Keepers Law (Art. 719 -720, NCC)

Read Articles 23, 26, NCC
Case: Kim vs. People (cash advance in the nature of a loan)
Art. 32, NCC constitutional rights enumerated; violations cannot be criminal
acts, but can be subject to independent civil action
Art. 32, 33, 34, 2175 NCC no need for reservation of civil action; only needs
preponderance of evidence
On searches and seizures - case: Villavicencio vs. Lukban
Art. 33, NCC defamation, fraud, physical injuries
Note: BP 22 does not allow reservation for civil action or independent civil
action
Art. 315 RPC allows independent civil action
Damages in defamation (libel/slander); physical injuries (used in its generic
sense to include death; case: People vs. Teehankee)

/aamn2015

Physical injuries include death (Civil Code)

In order to get exemplary damages (in murder/homicide), at least one
aggravating circumstance must be proved.
No reservation, no independent civil action in violations of BP 22;
independent civil action is available under Art. 315, RPC
Prejudicial question; case: Mercado vs. Tan (civil case of declaration of nullity
of marriage is a prejudicial question to a criminal case for bigamy); the civil
case must be file ahead of the criminal action
Principle of Res Judicata - a criminal case may be dismissed based on res
judicata (previous decision in a civil case) e.g. forgery case and probate of
will; case: Cruz vs. Sandiganbayan
SUBSIDIARY LIABILITY OF EMPLOYER (in criminal prosecution against
employer) if employee has insufficient funds to satisfy judgment; insolvent
In a rent-a-car company, lessee is not employee
Civil liabilities of the accused involve (1) reparation and (2) restoration

Damages under the Civil Code MENTAL: Moral, Exemplary, Nominal,

Temperate, Actual and Compensatory
Actual/Compensatory Damages need to be proven; proof needed; i.e.
receipts (documentary evidence); testimonial evidence is not sufficient cannot
be based on speculation
Temperate Damages awarded when a right was violated but there is no
means to determine actual damages; case: Victory Liner vs. Palparan; People
vs. Teehankee
Damages in case of death General rule: Php 50,000; in cases of murder and
crimes where the penalty is reclusion perpetua- Php 75,000; in cases of
homicide: Php 50,000
LOSS OF EARNING CAPACITY: 2/3 x 80 (age of person at the time of
death) = Life Expectancy; multiply life expectancy with the salary/wages of
deceased
case: People vs. Julian; presumption 50% presumed savings; 50% presumed
expenses
case: Mercury Drug vs. Huang; PLTB vs. Carriaga
Moral damages awarded in case of quasi-delict resulting in physical injuries
(includes death), according to discretion of court; see Art. 2219, NCC
Award of damages to corporations

Actual or compensatory damages must be proved

If compensatory damages cannot be proved, temperate damages may still be
recovered
Exception to the rule that actual/compensatory damages must be proved by
Documentary evidence: if the decedent was not employed or self-employed
and earning amount below minimum wage, compensatory damages may be
proven by TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE

/aamn2015
More than one (1) aggravating circumstance is required to recover exemplary
damages
Art. 32 e.g. violation of freedom of religion moral damages may be awarded,
e.g. INC members/employees discarded because of closed-shop agreement
Art. 34 moral damages may be recovered from a police officer who refuses
to extend aid in cases of danger to life and property
Consider the economic and social standing of parties when awarding moral
damages
GENERAL RULE: A juridical person cannot be awarded moral damages; they
have no nervous system to experience wounded feelings; Exception: In cases
where the corporations name and reputation are besmirched
REMEMBER: In case of quasi-delict, in order to recover exemplary damages,
gross negligence must be proven; in criminal cases, prove the presence of
more than one (1) aggravating circumstance; in obligations and contracts, in
case of excessive penalties, the court may reduce the amount but may not
declare the liquidated amount of damages void.
With regard to the topic of nuisance, refer to the discussions under Property.
** nothing follows**
God bless for the Finals!