Torts & Damages

Notes in Torts and Damages by Pauline Mae P.
Araneta (2013)
TORT
DEFINITION OF TORT
Tort is derived from the Latin word tortum, which means to twist. It includes that conduct which is not straight or lawful. It is equivalent to the English term wrong. Salmond - It is a civil wrong for which the remedy is a common law action for unliquidated damages and which is not exclusively the breach of a trust or other merely equitable obligation. We may define tort as a civil wrong which is redressible by an action for unliquidated damages and which is other than a mere branch of contract or breach of trust.
CONCEPT
The term Tort is of Anglo-American law a common law which is broader in scope than the Spanish-Philippine concept which is limited to negligence while the former includes international or criminal acts. Torts in Philippine law is the blending of common-law and civil law system. Quasi-Delict refers to acts or omissions which cause damage to another, there being fault or negligence on the part of the defendant, who is obliged by law to pay for the damages done. Elements of Quasi-Delict: 1. 2. 3. Damages suffered by the plaintiff Fault or negligence of the defendant Casual connection between the fault or negligence of the defendants act and the damages incurred by the plaintiff ( Andamo v. IAC, 191 SCRA 426, 96)
Article 2176 of the Civil Code applies when theres no pre-existing contractual relation between the parties. However, the Supreme Court held that even if there is a contractual relation, there will still be quasi-delict since the act that break the contract may be also be tort, in cases of Air France v. Carrascaso, 18 SCRA 155; Singson v. BPI, 23 SCRA 1117, 63; and Fabre Jr. v. CA, 259 SCRA 426. Art. 2176. Whoever by act or omission causes damage to another, there being fault or negligence, is obliged to pay for the damage done. Such fault or negligence, if there is no pre-existing contractual relation between the parties is called a quasi-delict and is governed by the provisions of this Chapter (Title XVII: EXTRA-CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS). Elcano v. Hill: An act, whether punishable or not punishable by law, whether criminal or not criminal in character, whether intentional or voluntary or negligent, which result in the damage to another.
Quasi-Delict v. Torts
Quasi-delict, known as culpa-aquiliana is a civil law concept while Torts is Anglo-American or common law concept. Torts is broader than culpa-aquiliana because it includes not only negligence, but intentional criminal acts as well. However, Art. 21 with Art. 19 and 20 greatly broadened the scope of the law on civil wrongs; it has become more supple and adaptable than the Anglo-American law on torts.
Art. 19. Every person must, in the exercise of his rights and in the performance of his duties, act with justice, give everyone his due, and observe honesty and good faith. Art. 20. Every person who, contrary to law, wilfully or negligently causes damages to another, shall indemnify the latter for the same. Art. 21. Any person who wilfully causes loss or injury to another in manner that is contrary to morals, good customs or public policy shall compensate the latter for damage.
Types of Quasi-Delicts
(1) Intentional Torts: When the law tries to serve its highest purpose; to regulate the relations among men; to promote mutual respect, dignity and justice. Art. 19 was intended to expand the concept of torts by granting adequate legal remedy for the untold number of moral wrong which is impossible for human foresight to provide specifically in statutory law.
Notes in Torts and Damages by Pauline Mae P. Araneta (2013)
Elements of Abuse of Right 1. 2. 3. There is a legal right or duty; Exercised in bad faith; For the sole intent of prejudicing or injuring another
Art. 19 together with the succeeding articles on human relations was intended to embody certain basic principles that are to be observed for the rightful relationship between human beings and for the stability of their social orders. (Sea Commercial supra) Strict Liability Torts: The rule on strict liability is said to be applicable in situations in which social policy requires the defendant make good the harm which results to others from abnormal risks which are inherent in activities that are not considered blameworthy because they are reasonably incident to desirable industrial activities. Provisions: 1) 2) 3) The possessor of an animal or whoever may make use of the same is responsible for the damage which it may cause, although it may escape or be lost. (Art. 2183) Manufacturers and processors of foodstuffs, etc. (Art 2187) RA 7394 or the Consumer Acts of the Philippines. The product is defective when it does not offer the safety rightfully expected of it, taking relevant circumstances into consideration, including but not limited to: (a) presentation of product (b) use and hazard reasonably expected of it (c) the time it was put into circulation Head of the family that lives in a building is responsible for the damages causes by things thrown or falling from the same (Art. 2193)
4)
(2) Human Dignity Art. 26. Every person shall respect the dignity, personality, privacy and peace of mind of his neighbors and other persons. The following and similar acts, though they may not constitute a criminal offense, shall produce a cause of action for damages, prevention and other relief: 1. Prying into the privacy of anothers residence; 2. Meddling with or disturbing the private life or family relations of another; 3. Intriguing to cause another to be alienated from his friends; 4. Vexing or humiliating another on account of his religious beliefs, lowly station in life, place of birth, physical defect, or other personal condition. Read: Jacutin v. People. GR No. 140604, March 6, 2002. (3) Nuisance Art. 682. Every building or piece of land is subject to the easement which prohibits the proprietor or possessor from committing nuisance through noise, jarring, offensive odor, smoke, heat, dust, water, glare and other causes. Art. 683. Subject to zoning, health, police and other laws and regulations, factories and shops may be maintained provided the least possible annoyance is caused to the neighborhood . Scope: Public and private Nature: per se and per accidense Nuisance is the limitation of the use of property. Bengzon v. Province of Pangasinan: The pumping station should have foreseen the consequences of the construction of such station. The duty shifted to pumping station that they should have thought that the construction may give damage to Bengzons. Attractive Nuisance - In the law of torts, the attractive nuisance doctrine states that a landowner may be held liable for injuries to children trespassing on the land if the injury is caused by a hazardous object or condition on the land that is likely to attract children
who are unable to appreciate the risk posed by the object or condition. The doctrine has been applied to hold landowners liable for injuries caused by abandoned cars, piles of lumber or sand, trampolines, and swimming pools. However, it can be applied to virtually anything on the property of the landowner. It is Attractive nuisance is an implied license to enter and a breach of duty. Requisites: 1. It must involve children; 2. It must have dangerous instrumentality; 3. There is a failure to take reasonable precaution
Quasi-Delict: Person Responsible

Art. 2176: One who directly responsible for the damages is responsible, others are: 1. Father or mother with respect to the damages of their minor child. 2. Guardians with authority to minor child or incapacitated who lives with them. 3. Owners and managers of the establishment with respect to employees. 4. Employers 5. The State 6. Teachers or heads of establishment of arts and trades with respect to students Schloendoerff doctrine regards a physician, even if employed by a hospital, as an independent contractor, because of his skill the exercises and the lack of control exerted over his work. Under this doctrine, the hospital is exempt from the application of the respondeat superior principle for fault or negligence committed by physician in the discharge of their profession. HOWEVER, Ramos v. CA weakens this doctrine hospitals are no longer exempt from universal rule of respondeat superior. Doctrine of Corporate Negligence, hospitals have now the duty to make reasonable effort to monitor and oversee the treatment prescribed and administered by physicians practicing in its premises. Doctrine of ostensible agency - imposes liability upon hospital because of the hospitals actions as principal or as employer in somehow misleading the public into believing that the relationship or the authority exists.
Traditional Quasi-Delict: Elements

Art. 2176: 1. act or omission 2. damage or injury is caused to another 3. fault or negligence is present 4. no pre-existing contractual obligation 5. causal connection between damage done and act or omission
DISTINCTIONS
1. Fault signifies voluntary act or omission causing damages to the right of another giving rise to an obligation of the actor to repair such damage. 2 KINDS: a. b. Substantive and independent fault in that there is no pre-existing relation. This is the one referred to Art. 2176 NCC and source of an obligation. It is also known as culpa extra contractual or culpa aquiliana covered by Art. 2176 NCC. Fault as an incident in the performance of an obligation existing is known as contractual fault or culpa contractual governed by Art. 1170-73 of NCC.
2. 3.
Negligence consists in the omission to do certain acts which result to the damage to another. Intent to cause damage to another thru an act or omission: a) b) Culpa absence such intent, the actors liability is civil governed by the Civil Code Dolo presence of such intent and the act or omission becomes crime and the actors civil liability is governed by the provisions of the Revised Penal Code
Importance of the distinction: Importance of knowing these distinctions lies in filing the proper cause of action against the tortfessor. The same act or omission which is faulty or negligent causing damage produces civil liability arising from a crime under the Revised Penal Code or create an action for quasi-delict or culpa contractual under the Civil Code.
Distinction between Tort and Crime

Tort 1) Less serious wrongs are considered as private wrongs and have been labelled as civil wrong. 2) The suit is filed by the injured person himself. 3) Compromise is always possible. 4) The wrongdoers pay compensation to the injured party. Crime 1) More serious wrongs have been considered to be public wrongs and are known as crimes. 2) The case is brought by the state. 3) Except in certain cases, compromise is not possible. 4) The wrongdoer is punished.
Distinction between Tort and Breach of Contract (Culpa Contractual)

Breach of contract 1) It results from breach of a duty undertaken by the parties themselves. 2) In contract, each party owes duty to the other. 3) Damage of contract is liquidated. 4) It provides limited remedy Tort 1) It occurs from the breach of such duties which are not undertaken by the parties but which are imposed by law. 2) Duties imposed by law of torts are not towards any specific individual but towards the world at large. 3) Damage of tort is unliquidated. 4) It provides unlimited remedy.
Distinction between Tort and Breach of Trust

Tort 1) Damage of tort is unliquidated. 2) Law of tort was part of common law. 3) Tort is partly related to the law of property. Breach of Trust 1) Damage of breach of trust is liquidated. 2) Law of trust was part of Court of Chancery. 3) Trust is a branch of law of property.
Latin terms and maxims

(1) Causa causans - An immediate and effective cause. (2) Causa sine quanon - A necessary cause; the cause without which the thing cannot be or the event would not have occurred. Some preceding link but for which the causa causans, that is, the immediate cause could not have become operative. a. East India Commercial Co. v. Collector of Customs, AIR 1962 b. Municipal Board v. State Transport Authority, AIR, 1965 c. Prem Bus Service v. R.T.A, AIR 1968 d. Chockalingam v. C.I.T, AIR, 1963 e. Inayatullah v. Custodian, Evacuee Property, AIR, 1958 (3) Volenti non fit injuria - There is no injury to one who consents. Hall v. Brooklands Auto Racing Club - The plaintiff was a spectator at a motor car race being held at Brooklands on a track owned by the defendant company. During the race, there was a collision between two cars, one of which was thrown among the spectators, thereby injuring the plaintiff. It was held that the plaintiff impliedly took the risk of such injury, the danger being inherent in the sport which any spectator could foresee, the defendant was not liable. Padmavati v. Dugganaika - While the driver was taking the jeep for filling petrol in the tank, two strangers took lift in the jeep. Suddenly one of the bolts fixing the right front wheel to the axle gave way toppling the jeep. The two strangers were thrown out and sustained injuries, and one of them died as a consequence of the same. It was held that neither the driver nor his master could be made liable, first, because it was a case of sheer accident and, secondly, the strangers had voluntarily got into the jeep and as such, the principle of volenti non fit injuria was applicable to this case.
Wooldrige v. Sumner - The plaintiff, who was a photographer, was taking photographs at a horse show while he was standing at the boundary of the arena. One of the horses, belonging to the defendant, rounded the bend too fast. As the horse galloped furiously, the plaintiff was frightened and he fell into the horses course and there he was seriously injured by the galloping horse. The horse in question won the competition. It was held that since the defendants had taken due care, they were not liable. The duty of the defendants was the duty of care rather than duty of skill. (4) Ex turpi causa non oritur actio - No action arises from a wrongful consideration. Hardy v. Motor Insurers Bureau - This was a case where a security officer was dragged along when he tried to stop a car. Lord Denning MR said: no person can claim reparation or indemnity for the consequences of a criminal offence where his own wicked and deliberate intent is an essential ingredient in it It is based on the broad rule of public policy that no person can claim indemnity or reparation for his own wilful and culpable crime. He is under a disability precluding him from imposing a claim. Revill v. Newberry - An elderly allotment holder was sleeping in his shed with a shotgun, to deter burglars. On hearing the plaintiff trying to break in, he shot his gun through a hole in the shed, injuring the plaintiff. At first instance, the defendant successfully raised the defence of ex turpi to avoid the claim. (5) Damnum sine injuria - Damage without wrongful act; damage or injury inflicted without any act of injustice; loss or harm for which there is no legal remedy. It is also termed damnum absque injuria. There are cases in which the law will suffer a man knowingly and wilfully to inflict harm upon another, and will not hold him accountable for it. Gloucester Grammar School Case - The defendant, a schoolmaster, set up a rival school to that of the plaintiffs. Because of the competition, the plaintiffs had to reduce their fees from 40 pence to 12 pence per scholar per quarter. It was held that the plaintiffs had no remedy for the loss thus suffered by them. Mogul Steamship Co. v. McGregor Gow and Co. - A number of steamship companies combined together and drove the plaintiff company out of the tea-carrying trade by offering reduced freight. The House of Lords held that the plaintiff had no cause of action as the defendant had by lawful means acted to protect and extend their profits. Ushaben v. Bhagyalaxmi Chitra Mandir - The plaintiffs sued for a permanent injunction against the defendants to restrain them from exhibiting the film named Jai Santoshi Maa. It was contended that the film hurt the religious feelings of the pla intiff in so far as Goddesses Saraswati, Laxmi and Parvati were depicted as jealous and were ridiculed. It was observed that hurt to religious feelings had not been recognized as a legal wrong. Moreover, no person has a legal right to enforce his religious views on another or to restrain another from doing a lawful act, merely because it did not fit in with the tenets of his particular religion. Since there was no violation of a legal right, request of injunction was rejected. Action v. Blundell - The defendants by digging a coal pit intercepted the water which affected the plaintiffs well, less than 20 years old, at a distance of about one mile. It was held that they were not liable. It was observed: The person who owns the surface, may dig therein and apply all that is there found to his own purposes, at his free will and pleasure, and that if in the exercise of such rights, he intercepts or drains off the water collected from underground springs in the neighbors well, this inconvenience to his neighbor falls within description damnum abseque injuria which cannot become the ground of action. (6) Injuria sine damno - This maxim means injury without damage. Wherever there is an invasion of a legal right, the person in whom the right is vested is entitled to bring an action and may be awarded damages although he has suffered no actual damage. Thus, the act of trespassing upon anothers land is actionable even though it has done the plaintiff not the slightest harm. Bhim Singh v. State of J & K - The petitioner, an MLA, of J & K Assembly, was wrongfully detained by the police while he was going to attend the Assembly session. He was not produced before the Magistrate within the requisite period. As a consequence of this, the member wad deprived of his constitutional right to attend the Assembly session. There was also violation of fundamental right guaranteed under the Constitution. By the time the petition was decided by the Supreme Court, Bhim Singh had been released, but by way of consequential relief, exemplary damages amounting to 50,000 were awarded to him.
Terminologies
(1) Malice - A condition of mind which prompts a person to do a wrongful act wilfully, that is, on purpose, to the injury of another, or to do intentionally a wrongful act toward another without justification or excuse. In its legal sense it means a wrongful act done intentionally without just cause or excuse. Malice is a wish to injure a party, rather than to vindicate the law.
2 TYPES OF MALICE a. b. Malice in fact Means an actual malicious intention on the part of the person who has done the wrongful act. It is also called express or actual malice. Malice in law It is not necessarily personal hate or ill will, but it is that state of mind which is reckless of law and of the legal rights of the citizen.
(2) Motive - Motive is that which incites or stimulates a person to do an act. It is the moving power which impels to action for a definite result. Motive is mainspring of human action. It is cause or reason. It is something which prompts a man to form an intention. (3) Intention - A settled direction of the mind towards the doing of a certain act; that upon which the mind is set or which it wishes to express or achieve; the willingness to bring about something planned or foreseen. (4) Injury - In legal parlance, injury means any wrong or damage done to another, either in his person, rights, reputation or property. Meaning under Penal Code, 1860 (section 44) the word injury denotes any harm whatever illegally caused to any person, in body, mind, reputation or property. (5) Hurt - Whoever causes bodily pain, disease or infirmity to any person is said to cause hurt. (6) Malfeasance - it is a wrongful act which the actor has no legal right to do, or any wrongful conduct which affects, interrupts, or interferes with performance of official duty, or an act for which there is no authority or warrant of law or which a person ought not to do at all, or has contracted not, to do. The word malfeasance would apply to a case where an act prohibited by law is done by a person. ( Khairul Bahsar v. Thana Lal AIR 1957) (7) Misfeasance - Unlawful use of power; wrongful performance of a normally legal act; injurious exercise of lawful authority; official misconduct; breach of law. The word misfeasance would apply to a case where a lawful act is done in an improper manner. (8) Nonfeasance - Non-performance of some act which ought to be performed, omission to perform a required duty at all, or total neglect of duty. Nonfeasance would apply to a case where a person omits to do some act prescribed by law. Distinction between Misfeasance, nonfeasance and malfeasance Misfeasance is the improper doing of an act which a person may wilfully do. Nonfeasance means the omission of an act which a person ought to do. Malfeasance is the doing of an act which a person ought not to do at all.
Title XVIII
DAMAGES
Introductory Comment: The fundamental principle of the law on damages is that one injured be a breach of contract or by wrongful or negligent act or omission shall have a fair and just compensation, commensurate with the loss sustained as a consequence of the defendants ac t. GENERAL RULE: Actual pecuniary compensation, whether the action is based on a contract or in tort. EXCEPTION: Where the circumstances warrant the allowance of other kinds of damages. Chapter 1
GENERAL PROVISIONS Art. 2195. The provisions of this Title shall be respectively applicable to all obligations mentioned in Art. 1157.
NOTES: Art. 1157. Obligations arise from: (1) Law; (2) Contracts; (3) Quasi-contracts; (4) Acts or omissions punished by law; and (5) Quasi-delicts.
Art. 2196. The rules under this title are without prejudice to special provisions on damages formulated elsewhere in the Civil 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 the Civil Code.
NOTES: Special Provisions and Laws In case of conflict between the civil Code and the Special Laws, it is the Civil Code that prevails insofar as damages are concerned EXCEPT in the case of compensation for workmen and other employees.
Art. 2197. Damages may be: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
NOTES: Damages - defined as the pecuniary compensation, recompense, or satisfaction for an injury sustained, or as otherwise expressed, the pecuniary consequences which the law imposes for the breach of some duty or the violation of some right Damages v. Injury Injury is the wrongful act which causes loss or harm to another; while damages denotes the sum of money recoverable as amends for the wrongful act. The one is the legal wrong to be redressed; the other is the scale or measure of recovery. Damage without Injury There can be damage without injury (damnum absque injuria or physical hurt or injury without legal wrong), i.e. when a government exercised a contractual right to cancel an agency, although by such cancellation, the agent would suffer damages or when one who complies with a government-promulgated rule cannot be held liable for damages that may be caused by other person.
Actual or compensatory; Moral; Nominal; Temperate or moderate; Liquidated; or Exemplary or corrective.
Art. 2198. The principles of the general law on damages are hereby adopted insofar as they are not inconsistent with the Civil Code.
Chapter 2
ACTUAL OR COMPENSATORY DAMAGES Art. 2199. Except as provided by law or by stipulation, one is entitled to an adequate compensation only for such pecuniary loss suffered by him as he has duly proved. Such compensation is referred to as ACTUAL OR COMPENSATORY DAMAGES.
NOTES: Actual or Compensatory Damages - are those awarded in satisfaction of, or in recompense for, loss or injury sustained. They are those recoverable because of pecuniary loss (in trade business, trade, property, profession, job or occupation). They simply make good or replace the loss caused by the wrong. They are construed to include all damages that the plaintiff may show he has suffered in respect to his property, business, trade, profession, or occupation; and no other damages whatsoever. (Algarra v. Sandejas, 27 Phil. 284) American Law: Actual damages include pecuniary recompense for pain and suffering, injured feelings, and the like. Philippine Law: Actual damages do not extend to such incidents, which are included in the term moral damages. Proof Required Damages, to be recoverable, must not only be capable of proof, but must be actually proved with a reasonable degree of certainty. It cannot be presumed. The trial court or appellate court is not authorized to adopt its own knowledge as a basis for the assessment of damages; such assessment must be based on the evidence submitted. Courts cannot give judgment for a greater amount of damages than that actually proved. On appeal, however, when the evidence adduced is not so clear and satisfactory as to enable the court to determine the amount of damages suffered, the appellate court may remand the case to the court for new trial in order that the amount of damages may be ascertained. When the existence of a loss is established, however, absolute certainty as to its amount is not required. Thus, the lack of positive proof of the exact amount on the different items of damages suffered by a claimant will not defeat recovery, as long as the amount of damages awarded by the court is, when the existence of a loss is established, reasonable, fair and just. Speculative Damages - are too remote to be included in an accurate estimate of damages. Loss presumed - There are cases where the amount of damages need not be proved by positive evidence. Thus, where the relation of husband and wife; or of parent and child exists, provided the child is shown as a minor, the law presumes a pecuniary loss from the mere fact of death and it is not necessary to submit proof as to such loss. (Manzanares v. Moreta, 38 Phil. 821) When Actual Damages need NOT be proved: 1) 2) 3) 4) In case liquidated damages had been previously agreed upon. (Art. 2216) In case of damages other than actual. (Art. 2216) In case loss is presumed as when a child (minor) or a spouse dies. (Manzanares v. Moreta, 38 Phil. 821) In case of forfeiture of bonds in favor of the government for the purpose of promoting public interest or policy (like a bond for the temporary stay of an alien). (Far Eastern Surety & Ins. Co. V. Court of Appeals, L-12019, Oct. 16, 1958)
Art. 2200. Indemnification for damages shall comprehend not only the value of the loss suffered, but also that of the profits which the obligee failed to obtain.
NOTES: KINDS OF COMPENSATORY DAMAGES 1. 2. dao emergente - the loss of what a person already has or the value of the loss suffered lucro cesante - the failure to receive a benefit which would have pertained to him or profits (expected income) which were not obtained or realized
These damages may be given for pecuniary loss in business, trade, property, profession, job or occupation, and for injury to business standard and goodwill.
Examples of Dao Emergente (a) (b) (c) (d) destruction of things fines or penalties that had to be paid medical and hospitalization expenses rents and agricultural products not received in an agricultural lease
Examples of Lucro Cesante (a) profits that could have been earned had there been no interruption in the plaintiffs business as evidenced by the reduced receipts of the enterprise (b) profits because of a proposed future re-sale of the property being purchased if the existence of a contract there was known to the delinquent seller (c) interest on rentals that were not paid If there be an award for compensatory damages, there can be no grant of nominal damages. The reason is that the purpose of nominal damages is to vindicate or recognize a right that has been violated, in order to preclude further cost thereon, and not for the purpose of indemnifying the plaintiff for any loss suffered by him. (Medina, et al. V. Cresencia, et al., L-8194, July 11, 1956)
Art. 2201. In contracts and quasi contracts, the damages for which the obligor who acted in good faith is liable shall be those that are the natural and probable consequences of the breach of the obligation, and which the parties have foreseen or could have reasonably foreseen at the time of the obligations was constituted. In case of fraud, bad faith, malice, or wanton attitude, the obligor shall be responsible for all damages which may be reasonably attributed to the non0performance of the obligation.
NOTES: Debtors in Good Faith and in Bad Faith A larger measure of damages is provided for debtors who act fraudulently or in bad faith. In case of fraud, it is not required that the damages be a necessary consequence of the non-performance, it being enough that they clearly arise from such non-performance. In case of debtors in good faith, the damage must have been foreseen or may have been foreseen at the time the obligation was created; this requirement is not imposed in case of damages against the debtor in bad faith, as to whom it is sufficient that a clear relation of cause and effect exist between the non-performance and the damage claimed. The fundamental difference between the first and second paragraphs is this: in the first, there was mere carelessness; in the second, there was a deliberate or wanton wrongdoing. Liability of Debtor in Contracts and Quasi-Contracts (a) if in GOOD FAITH It is essential that the damages be: 1) the NATURAL and PROBABLE consequences of the breach of the obligation; 2) those which the parties FORESAW or COULD HAVE REASONABLE FORESEEN at the time the obligation was constituted (b) if in BAD FAITH It is enough that the damages may be REASONABLE ATTRIBUTED to the non-performance of an obligation (relation of cause and effect). Measure of Damages in Contracts 2 classes of damages recoverable in case of a breach of contract: (1) the ordinary, natural and in a sense, necessary damages (2) the special damages ORDINARY DAMAGE (generally inherent in a breach of typical contract) is found in all breaches of contract where there are no special circumstances to distinguish the case especially from other contracts, e.g. the consideration paid for an unperformed promise. In all such cases, the damages recoverable are such as naturally and generally would result from the breach of contract, according to the usual course of things. Ordinary damage is assumed as a matter of law to be within the contemplation of the parties.
10
Examples: a. Value of the use of the land if same is withheld, computed for the duration of the withholding. b. Difference in the value of goods at the time of stipulated delivery and the time of actual delivery (common carriers) c. Cost of completing or repairing a defective building (in the case of building contracts) d. The income which an injured bus passenger could have earned (had he finished his medical course and passed the corresponding board examinations) must be deemed within the category of natural and probable consequences which parties should have foreseen at the moment said passenger boarded the bus. (Carriaga, et. al., v. Laguna, Tayabas Bus Co., et al., L-111037, Dec. 29, 1960) e. Salary for the entire period agreed upon in an employment contract in case the employer breaks it without just cause MINUS income actually earned or could have been earned during the unexpired period. The breach is generally indivisible, and therefore action may be brought AT ONCE for both present and future salaries, without waiting for the stipulated end of the contract. Failure to sue for all damages by suing only for the damages already accrued will BAR future suits on the same point. (Hicks v. Manila Hotel, 78 Phil. 325) The employer has the duty to prove the earnings made or which could have been earned during the unexpired period. (Ibid.) SPECIAL DAMAGE is such as flows less directly from the breach than ordinary damage. It is only found in case where some external condition, apart from the actual terms of the contract, exists or intervenes, as it were, to give a turn to affairs and to increase damage in a way that the promissor, without actual notice of that external condition, could not reasonable be expected to foresee. Before such damage can be recovered, the plaintiff must show that the particular condition which made the damage possible and likely consequence of the breach was known to the defendant at the time the contract was made. SPECIAL DAMAGES are those which exist because of special circumstances and for which a debtor in GOOD FAITH can be held liable only if he had been previously informed of such circumstances. Example: If a carrier fails to deliver a movie film intended for showing at a fiesta, it cannot be held liable for the extraordinary profits realizable at a fiesta showing if it had not been told that the film had to be delivered in time for said fiesta. (Mendoza v. PAL, 90 Phil. 836) If the debtor is in BAD faith, special damages can be assessed against him even if he had NO knowledge of the special circumstances. It is enough that the damage be reasonably attributed to the non-performance of obligation. Future Damages In an action for breach of a contract which normally should have run for a definite term, the plaintiff may recover, not only the damages already suffered at the time the action is brought, but also all damages he would suffer in the future by reason of such breach. In fact, where there is a complete and total breach of a continuous contract for a term of years, the plaintiff is bound to prove in a single action not only such damage as has been suffered, but also such prospective damage by reason of the breach as he may be legally entitled to, because the judgment he recovers in such action will be a conclusive adjudication as to the total damages on account of the breach, and a second action for damages subsequently brought will be barred. (Blossom & Co. v. Manila Gas Corporation, 55 Phil. 226) Employment contracts Where a contract of employment is for a specified duration or period, and it is wrongfully terminated by one party before the lapse of the period agreed upon, the cause of action in favor of the injured party accrues at once upon the wrongful termination of the contract, and the action may be brought immediately thereafter and at any time before it is barred. The amount of damages corresponding to the unexpired period may be reduced by showing: that the person so discharged failed to seek other employment of the same kind in the same vicinity and that if he had sought such employment, he might have obtained it with the following evidence showing: a. that it is a like employment; b. that it is in the same locality; c. that it is substantially under the same conditions; and d. the wages he could have earned; or that he actually obtained other employment, for which he received a certain compensation.
1.
2.
Where the employer, after his wrongful discharge of an employee, offered to take back the latter under substantially the same terms as those of the original contract, the employee can recover only his salary from the date of wrongful discharge until the offer to take him back was made, in the absence of a showing that the employer so mistreated the employee that no self-respecting man would ever work for him. In the latter case, the employee may recover the full amount of his wages for the full term from date of wrongful discharge. (Lemoine v. Alkan, 22 Phil. 162) When employee leaves the Philippines after wrongful termination he thereby abandons his right to recover the salary he might have received if the contract had not been violated and he is entitled to recover only such salary as would be due him up to the time he left the country.
11
Waiver of right to recover salary the employee may also waive his right to recover the salary he would have earned under the contract, and demand only his salary for services rendered. Sale of Land The damages ordinarily and normally recoverable against a vendor for failure to deliver land which he has contracted to deliver is the value of the use and occupation of the land for the time wrongfully withheld. Where the purchaser has not paid the purchase money, a deduction may be made in respect to the damages on the money which constitutes the purchase price. More extensive damages may be recovered where, at the time of the creation of the contractual obligation, the vendor is aware of the use to which the purchaser desires to put the property which is the subject of the contract, and the contract is made with the eyes of the vendor open to the possibility of damages which may result to the other party from his own failure to give possession, i.e. if the plaintiff contracted to sell to a third party, at a profit of P20,000 the land which the defendant had agreed to sell to him, he may recover such amount as damages from the defendant upon breach of contract by said defendant. Sale of Merchandise If the thing sold is merchandise, the measure of damages to which a vendee is entitled, when the vendor fails to deliver the goods purchased, is the difference between the price stipulated by the parties, and the price which the thing sold commands in the market at the time the delivery thereof should have been made by the vendor. CASE: Lopez v. Tan Tioco, 8 Phil. 693 Where there was a contract between plaintiff and defendant that the latter would sell the formers sugar at the time directed by the plaintiff, and the defendant failed to do so but sold at a later date, it was held that the measure of damages is the difference between the market price on the day the sugar should have been sold and the price at which it was actually sold. Sale of Other Personalty When the object sold is not merchandise, but an article for a known purpose, the damages recoverable from a manufacturer or dealer for the breach of warranty of the article he contracts to furnish or place in operation for a known purpose, are not confined to the difference in value of the articles as warranted and as it proves to be, but include such consequential damages as are the direct, immediate and probable result of the breach. (Rodriguez v. Findlay, 14 Phil. 587) Lease Contracts When the lessor fails to place the lessee in possession of the leased premises at the time agreed upon, the damages recoverable would be the value of the use and occupation of such premises during the period it is withheld from the lessee. But where the lessee has expended various sums of money in preparing to open a business as a merchant in the leased premises, he is entitled to recover the sums ACTUALLY and NECESSARILY expended in such preparation which may fairly be said to be within the purview of the parties when they entered into the lease, if the lessor fails to deliver according to the contract. (Lim v. Roxas, 26 Phil. 609) Good faith When there is no stipulation in a lease with respect to the goods and merchandise a lessee has placed in a rented building, should it get wet as a result of leaks developed by a torrential rainfall, and the lessor does not appear to have known of any defect or leak in the roof of said building, which was inspected and approved by the city authorities when the lessee moved into it, or which was inspected monthly by a carpenter who found that it was in good condition and the roof had no holes, the lessor CANNOT be held liable for such damages; he can be chargeable only when he knew about such defects and failed to reveal them to the lessee or to make the necessary repairs. Against Carriers The most usual element of damages for a carriers negligent delay in delivering the goods to the consignee is the difference between the market value of the goods at the time they should have been delivered and their market value at the time they were actually delivered, to which may be added reasonable expenses caused by the delay; but if there has been a conversion of the goods by the carrier, and the consignee has not thereafter accepted them, he is entitled to recover the value of the goods at the time they should have been delivered. (Uy Chaco v. Admiral Line, 46 Phil. 418) Building Contracts The measure of damages for breach of a building contract is the amount expended by the owner in completing it and correcting defects. Where it is the owner who is guilty of breach of a building contract, making the cost of completion greater to the builder thereafter than it would have been under normal fulfilment of the contract, said owner is liable for damages caused in addition to the contract price. But the payment will not deprive the owner of his right to desist from the work or have it completed by some other contractor. In either case, if the amounts paid by the owner by instalments are more than sufficient to reimburse the contractor for loss of profits, an action will lie to recover the excess. (Adams & Smith v. Sociedad Naton, 39 Phil. 838) Replevin Suits In suits for Replevin of property, having a usable value, the successful party recovering the property is entitled to recover as damages for its detention, the value of such use during the time that the property was unlawfully detained. *Replevin - A personal action ex delicto brought to recover possession of goods unlawfully taken, (generally, but not only, applicable to the taking of goods distrained for rent,) the validity of which taking it is the mode of contesting, if the party from whom the goods were taken wishes to have them back in specie, whereas, if he prefer to have damages instead, the validity may be contested by action of trespass or unlawful distress. The word means a redelivery to the owner of the pledge or thing taken in distress.
12
If the property is not returned the party entitled to possession, may, in addition, recover the full value of the property. From the total amount to be recovered should be deducted the expenses incident to the keeping or maintenance of the property during the period of detention.
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.
NOTES: Damages from Quasi-Delict Damages resulting from a tort are measured in the same manner as those due from contractual debtor in bad faith, since he must answer for such damages whether he had foreseen them or not, just as he must indemnify not only for damnum emergens but also for lucrum cessans. Even if there is no specific allegation of damages in the complaint or information, civil liability may still be claimed in the criminal case. If the accused in a criminal case is acquitted on reasonable doubt, a civil action for damages may still be instituted. What Victim Must Prove in a Tort or Quasi-Delict Suit (a) a causal connection between the tort and the injury; (b) the amount and extent of the injury Unfair Competition If unfair competition deprives the victims of certain profits, the person liable must respond if the two things stated above are proved. Liability may, however, be reduced if loss was suffered by the plaintiff not only because of the unfair competition but also because of his fault, e.g., inferior quality or service. (Castro, et al. v. Ice and Cold Storage Industries, et al., L-10147, Dec. 27, 1958) Concealment of an Existing Marriage from a girl whom a man intends to seduce can make a man liable for damages. If on account of his concealment, the woman lives with him and bears a child, and relinquishes her employment to attend to a litigation filed to obtain support for her child he must be held liable for all the consequent damages. This concealment of marriage in fact is NOT mere negligence, but actual fraud (dolo) practiced upon the girl. Said liability is equivalent to that of a contractual (though considered extra-contractual in nature) debtor in bad faith. (Silva, et al. v. Peralta, et al., L-13114, Aug. 29, 1961) While it is true that no moral damages are generally allowable as a consequence of sexual relations outside of wedlock, but in the instant case it appears that after the girl had filed the action for support the man avoided the service of summons and then exercised improper pressure upon her to make her withdraw the suit. When she refused, the man and his lawful wife even filed an action against her, thus calling to her employers attention the fact that she was an unwed mother. These are deliberate maneuvers causing her anguish and physical suffering in which she got sick as a result. As this injury was inflicted after the NCC became operative, it constitutes a justification for the award of moral damages. (Ibid.)
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.
NOTES: Duty to Minimize Damages Damages resulting from avoidable consequences of the breach of a contract or other legal duty are not recoverable. It is the duty of the one injured by the unlawful act of another to take such measures as prudent men usually take under such circumstances to reduce the damages as much as possible. Acts to Minimize Damage The injured party, in minimizing the damages suffered by him, is required to take only such steps as an ordinary prudent person would reasonably adopt for his own interest. But whatever reasonable measures he may adopt to minimize the damage shall be at the cost of the person liable to pay indemnity, being an indirect consequence of the act of the latter, and an integral part of the injury caused. Burden of Proof The defendant (the person sued) has the burden of proving that the victim could have mitigated the damage. Plastic Surgery which could have been Performed in the Philippines A victim cannot recover the cost of plastic surgery in the United States if it is proved that the operation could have been completely performed in the Philippines by local practitioners. (Araneta, et al. v. Arreglado, et al., 104 Phil. 526)
13
Art. 2204. In crimes, the damages to be adjudicated may be respectively increased or lessened according to the aggravating or mitigating circumstances.
NOTE: No exemplary damages if there are no aggravating circumstances.
RPC, Title 1, Book 1, Chapter 3 Art. 13. Mitigating circumstances. The following are mitigating circumstances; 1. Those mentioned in the preceding chapter, when all the requisites necessary to justify or to exempt from criminal liability in the respective cases are not attendant. 2. That the offender is under eighteen year of age or over seventy years. In the case of the minor, he shall be proceeded against in accordance with the provisions of Art. 80 (Suspension of sentence of minor delinquents). 3. That the offender had no intention to commit so grave a wrong as that committed. 4. That sufficient provocation or threat on the part of the offended party immediately preceded the act. 5. That the act was committed in the immediate vindication of a grave offense to the one committing the felony (delito), his spouse, ascendants, or relatives by affinity within the same degrees. 6. That of having acted upon an impulse so powerful as naturally to have produced passion or obfuscation. 7. That the offender had voluntarily surrendered himself to a person in authority or his agents, or that he had voluntarily confessed his guilt before the court prior to the presentation of the evidence for the prosecution; 8. That the offender is deaf and dumb, blind or otherwise suffering some physical defect which thus restricts his means of action, defense, or communications with his fellow beings. 9. Such illness of the offender as would diminish the exercise of the will-power of the offender without however depriving him of the consciousness of his acts. 10. And, finally, any other circumstances of a similar nature and analogous to those above mentioned. RPC, Title 1, Book 1, Chapter 4 Art. 14. Aggravating circumstances. The following are aggravating circumstances: 1. That advantage be taken by the offender of his public position. 2. That the crime be committed in contempt or with insult to the public authorities. 3. That the act be committed with insult or in disregard of the respect due the offended party on account of his rank, age, or sex, or that is be committed in the dwelling of the offended party, if the latter has not given provocation. 4. That the act be committed with abuse of confidence or obvious ungratefulness. 5. That the crime be committed in the palace of the Chief Executive or in his presence, or where public authorities are engaged in the discharge of their duties, or in a place dedicated to religious worship. 6. That the crime be committed in the night time, or in an uninhabited place, or by a band, whenever such circumstances may facilitate the commission of the offense. Whenever more than three armed malefactors shall have acted together in the commission of an offense, it shall be deemed to have been committed by a band. 7. That the crime be committed on the occasion of a conflagration, shipwreck, earthquake, epidemic or other calamity or misfortune. 8. That the crime be committed with the aid of armed men or persons who insure or afford impunity. 9. That the accused is a recidivist. A recidivist is one who, at the time of his trial for one crime, shall have been previously convicted by final judgment of another crime embraced in the same title of this Code. 10. That the offender has been previously punished by an offense to which the law attaches an equal or greater penalty or for two or more crimes to which it attaches a lighter penalty. 11. That the crime be committed in consideration of a price, reward, or promise. 12. That the crime be committed by means of inundation, fire, poison, explosion, stranding of a vessel or international damage thereto, derailment of a locomotive, or by the use of any other artifice involving great waste and ruin. 13. That the act be committed with evidence premeditation. 14. That the craft, fraud or disguise be employed. 15. That advantage be taken of superior strength, or means be employed to weaken the defense. 16. That the act be committed with treachery (alevosia). There is treachery when the offender commits any of the crimes against the person, employing means, methods, or forms in the execution thereof which tend directly and specially to insure its execution, without risk to himself arising from the defense which the offended party might make. 17. That means be employed or circumstances brought about which add ignominy to the natural effects of the act. 18. That the crime be committed after an unlawful entry. There is an unlawful entry when an entrance is effected by a way not intended for the purpose. 19. That as a means to the commission of a crime, a wall, roof, floor, door, or window be broken. 20. That the crime be committed with the aid of persons under fifteen years of age or by means of motor vehicles, motorized watercraft, airships, or other similar means. (As amended by RA 5438) 21. That the wrong done in the commission of the crime be deliberately augmented by causing other wrong not necessary for its commissions.
Art. 2205. Damages may be recovered: (1) For loss or impairment of earning capacity in cases of temporary or permanent personal injury; (2) For injury to the plaintiffs business standing or commercial credit.
NOTES: Lameness is a permanent personal injury. (Marcelo v. Veloso, 11 Phil. 287)
14
Art. 2206. The amount of damages for death caused by a crime or quasi-delict shall be at least P3,000.00, even though there may have been mitigating circumstances. In addition: (1) The defendant shall be liable for the loss of the earning capacity of the deceased, and the indemnity shall be paid to the heirs of the latter; such indemnity shall every case be assessed and awarded by the court, unless the deceased on account of permanent physical disability not caused by the defendant, had no earning capacity at the time of his death; (2) If the deceased was obliged to give support according to the provisions of Art. 291, the recipient who is not an heir called to the decedents inheritance by the law of testate or intestate successio n, may demand support from the person causing the death, for a period not exceeding five (5) years, the exact duration to be fixed by the court.
(3) The spouse, legitimate and illegitimate descendants and ascendants of the deceased may demand moral damages
for mental anguish by reason of the death of the deceased.
NOTES:
Art. 291. The following are obliged to support each other to the whole extent set forth in the preceding article: (1) The spouses; (2) Legitimate ascendants and descendants; (3) Parents and acknowledged natural children and the legitimate or illegitimate descendants of the latter; (4) Parents and natural children by legal fiction and the legitimate and illegitimate descendants of the latter; (5) Parents and illegitimate children who are not natural. Brothers and sisters owe their legitimate and natural brothers and sisters, although they are only of the half-blood, the necessaries for life, when by a physical or mental defect, or any other cause not imputable to the recipients, the latter cannot secure their subsistence. This assistance includes, in a proper case, expenses necessary for elementary education and for professional or vocational training.
Damages for Wrongful Death Before the passage of Com. Act No. 284 in 1983 the practice of our courts was to allow P1,000 to the heirs of the deceased in case of death caused by crime. By virtue of Com. Act No. 284 a minimum of P2,000 was fixed, but the courts usually awarded only the minimum, without taking the trouble to inquire into the earning capacity of the victim, and regardless of aggravating circumstances. Under Art. 2206 the minimum to be given is P3,000, but this does not mean that the court should stop after awarding that amount because the life of a captain of industry, scientist, inventor, a great writer or statesman, is materially more valuable to the family and community than that of an ordinary man. Exemplary damages may be justified by aggravating circumstances. The earning capacity of the deceased, his obligation o support dependents, and the moral damages suffered by his kin, must also be considered. Because of the declining value of the currency, there have been increases in the award of damages for death. The latest amount granted by our court is P50,000 (McKee, et al. v. IAC, et al. G.R. No. 68102, July 16, 1992). The determination of the indemnity to be awarded to the heirs of deceased person has no fixed basis. Much is left to the discretion of the court considering the moral and material damages involved. Reason for Awarding Damages There 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 a precise mathematical calculation, but the amount recoverable depends on the particular facts and circumstances of each case. Factors considered: (a) the life expectancy of the deceased or of the beneficiary, whichever is shorter (b) pecuniary loss to the plaintiff or beneficiary (c) loss of support (d) loss of service (e) mental suffering of beneficiaries (f) medical and funeral expenses
15
Where death occurs as a result of the commission of a crime, the following items for damages may thus be recovered: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) an indemnity for the death of the victim; and indemnity for loss of earning capacity of the deceased; moral damages; exemplary damages; attorneys fees and expenses of litigation; and interest in proper cases
Earning Capacity In determining the liability of the defendant for the loss of the earning capacity of the deceased, our Supreme Court has considered the salary which the deceased would have been entitled to had he lived, his life expectancy and his state of health at the time of his death as factors in fixing the amount thereof. (Alcantara v. Surro, et al., O.G. 2769) In determining earning capacity, the net, not the gross income should be considered; living and other expenses must be deducted, and the deceased might not be at work all the time. Life Expectancy The introduction of mortality tables is not absolutely essential to prove the life expectancy of a deceased or his beneficiary, and if introduced, they are NOT CONCLUSIVE. The value of these tables when applied to a particular case must depend largely upon other circumstances, such as the state of health, habits, and the manner of life, and the social condition of the person injured. The Court uses the American Experience/Expectancy Table of Morality or the Actuarial Combine Experience Table of Mortality, which consistently pegs the life span of the average Filipino at 80 years (in other cases, 50 to 60 years), from which it extrapolates the estimated income to be earned by the deceased had he not been killed. (People v. Villanueva, 302 SCRA 380 [1999]) Support In order that the defendant may be obliged to pay support to the persons named in Art. 291, it is necessary that at the time of the death of the deceased, the latter was in a position to support them and they needed the support. Art. 45 of the Swiss Code of Obligations stated such as payment to other persons who have been deprived of support. The measure of the support is what the dependents received or would have received from the deceased. Moral Damages Moral damages for the death of a person, caused by the negligence of another, whether the same constitutes culpa aquiliana or culpa contractual, may be recovered, although death occurred prior to the effectivity of the NCC. The right to recover said damages finds its juridical basis within the framework of the said Code, and it is not necessary to resort to the transitory provisions of Art. 2253, in order to enforce such right (Belisario, et al. v. Mindanao Bus Co., C.A. 52 O.G. 6946) . The NCC, however, does NOT grant the sisters and brothers of the deceased a right to recover moral damages (Heirs of Gervacio D. Gonzales v. Alegorbes, et al., 53 O.G. 8070), which are given only to the spouse and legitimate and illegitimate descendants and ascendants. Where the victim does not die, but merely suffers physical injuries, moral damages may be recovered only in the following instances: 1) 2) 3) if caused by a crime. (Art. 2219, No. 1) if caused by a quasi-delict. (Art. 2219, No. 2) if caused by a breach of contract BUT ONLY if the defendant acted fraudulently or in bad faith (Art. 2220) or in case of wanton and deliberately injurious conduct on the part of the carrier. (LTB v. Cornista, L-22193, May 29, 1k964)
Art. 2207. If the plaintiffs property has been insured, and he has received indemnity from the insurance company for the injury or loss arising out of the wrong or breach of contract complained of, the insurance company shall be subrogated to the rights of the insured against the wrong-doer or the person who has violated the contract. if the amount paid by the insurance company does not fully cover the injury or loss, the aggrieved party shall be entitled to recover the deficiency from the person causing the loss or injury.
NOTES: Applicability This article applies only to loss of insured property and is not applicable to damages resulting from loss of human life or injury to natural persons. Effect if Property is Insured According to American Jurisprudence, the fact that the plaintiff has been indemnified by an insurance company cannot lessen the damages to be paid by the defendant. Such rule gives more damages than those actually suffered by the plaintiff, and the defendant, if also sued by the insurance company for reimbursement, would have to pay in many cases twice the damages he has caused. (Report of the Code Commission, p. 73) The principle enunciated in this article can apply even to cases that accrued prior to the effectivity of this article and the NCC otherwise, the general principle against unjust enrichment would be violated. Hence, the amount of insurance recovered shall be deducted from the total liability of the defendant. (Africa v. Caltex, L-12986, March 21, 1966)
16
Art. 2208. In the absence of stipulation, attorneys fees and expenses of litigation, other than judicial costs, cannot be recovered, except: (1) When exemplary damages are awarded; (2) When the defendants act or omission has compelled the plaintiff to litigate with third persons or to incur 1 expenses to protect his interest; 2 (3) In criminal cases of malicious prosecution against the plaintiff; (4) In case of a clearly unfounded civil action or proceeding against the plaintiff; (5) Where the defendant acted in gross and evident bad faith in refusing to satisfy the plaintiffs plainly valid, just and 3 demandable claim; (6) In actions for illegal support; (7) In actions for the recovery of wages of household helpers, labourers and skilled workers; (8) In actions for indemnity under workmens compensation and employers liability laws; (9) In a separate civil action to recover civil liability arising from a crime; (10) When at least double judicial costs are awarded; (11) In any other case where the court deems it just and equitable that attorneys fees and expenses of litigation should be recovered. In all cases, the attorneys fees and expenses of litigation must be reasonable.
NOTES: Concept of Attorneys Fees as Damages The attorneys fees referred to in this article do not refer to the duty of a client to pay his own attorney. Such payment generally involves only the client and his attorney. The fees stated in the article apply rather to instances when a client may recover from the other party the fees which the former may pay the formers attorney. (Tan Ti v. Alvear, 26 Phil. 566) Generally Not Part of Damages Generally, attorneys fees, as understood in this article are not a proper element of damage, for it is NOT sound public policy to place a penalty on the right to litigate. (Ibid.) Thus, if a party loses in court, this does not necessarily mean that the court will compel him to award attorneys fees (as damages) to the winning party. (Ramos v. Ramos, 61 SCRA 284) However, under the NCC, it may truly be said that in certain cases, attorneys fees are an element of recoverable damages, whether in writing or not stipulated at all. (Santiago v. Dimayuga, L-17883, Dec. 30, 1961) Stipulation of Attorneys Fees A stipulation for the payment of attorneys fees based on a certain percentage of the amount of the principal obligation is neither illegal nor immoral and the same is enforceable as the law between the parties. Attorneys fe es agreed upon the parties are in the nature of liquidated damages. Attorneys Fees Discretionary The amount of attorneys fees recoverable as actual damages is subject to judicial discretion. But it must have some factual, legal and equitable bases, and cannot be left to speculation and conjecture.
Art. 2209. If the obligation consists in the payment of a sum of money, and the debtor incurs in delay, the indemnity for damages, there being no stipulation to the contrary, shall be the payment of the interest agreed upon, and in the absence of stipulation, the legal interest, which is six per cent (6%) per annum (now 12% per annum).
NOTES: Monetary Obligations This applies to a monetary obligation where the debtor is in default. Rules (a) Give the indemnity (other than interest) agreed upon. (Attorneys fees may be stipulated.) (b) If none was specified, give the interest agreed upon. (c) If none, give the legal interest (now this is 12% per annum).
Where the institution of the action was caused not by the failure of a defendant to meet its responsibility but because the plaintiff demanded an exorbitant amount of moral damages to which the defendant did not yield, plaintiff is not entitled to attorneys fees. (Cachero v. Manila Yellow Taxicab Co., 54 O.G. 6599) 2 The reference to malicious prosecution implies that the person to be held liable should have acted deliberately and with knowledge that his accusation was false and groundless. (Buenaventura v. Sto. Domingo, 54 O.G. 8439) 3 Attorneys fees cannot be awarded in an action to collect a debt, where the defendant did not deny his indebtedness, but mere ly pleaded for adjustment of payment under the Ballantyne Schedule. (Intestate of Luther Young v. Bucoy, 54 O.G. 7560)
17
Damages Limited to Interest In contracts for the payment of a sum of money, the measure of damages for delay is limited to the interest stipulated, or in default of agreement, to the interest provided by law. The interest is due from the mere fact of delay in payment, even if no damage is proved by the creditor. On the other hand, the creditor cannot demand a higher amount than the interest, even if he proved injury of a greater extent. When Interest Begins to Run This interest is allowed from the date of demand, either judicial or extrajudicial. When the amount is unliquidated and is determined only by a judgment of the court, the interest should be paid only from the date of the decision. Limitation on Interest Where the parties have stipulated the rate of the interest, such rate shall be collected without prejudice to the 4 provisions of the Usury Law (no longer in effect). An agreement for the payment of interest higher than the rates provided in such law is void. Attorneys Fees The lender without violating the Usury Law may provide in a note for an attorneys fees to cover the cost of collection. The purpose of a stipulation in a note for reasonable attorneys fees is not to give the lender a larger compensation for the loan than what the law allows, but to safeguard him against future loss or damage by being compelled to retain counsel to institute judicial proceedings to collect his credit. (Andreas v. Green, 48 Phil. 463) Stipulation of Penalty Art. 1226 (Obligations with a Penal Clause) of the NCC permits an agreement upon a penalty apart from the interest. Should there be an agreement to this effect, the penalty does not include the interest, and as such, the two are different and distinct things which may be demanded separately. The penalty is not to be added to the interest for the determination of whether the interest exceeds the rate fixed by law, since the rate was fixed only for the interest.
5
Art. 2210. Interest may, in the discretion of the court, be allowed upon damages awarded for breach of contract.
NOTES: Interest on Damages for Breach of Contract Actual damages given by a court in a breach of contract case shall earn legal interest, not from the date of the filing of the complaint but from the date the judgment of the trial court is rendered. (Juana Soberano & Jose B. Soberano v. The Manila Railroad Co., L-19407, Nov. 23, 19660)
Art. 2211. In crimes and quasi-delicts, interest as a part of the damages may, in a proper case, be adjudicated in the discretion of the court. Art. 2212. Interest due shall earn legal interest from the time it is judicially demanded, although the obligation may be silent upon this point. (Also called accrued interest)
NOTES: Interest on Interest Due (Accrued Interest) Accrued interest earns legal interest, not from default (which may be from judicial or extrajudicial demand) but from JUDICIAL DEMAND. An agreement to charge interest on interest is valid if in adding the combined interest, the limits under the Usury Law are exceeded. (Valdezco v. Francisco, 52 Phil. 350; Government v. Conde, 61 Phil. 14)
Art. 2213. Interest cannot be recovered upon unliquidated claims or damages, except when the demand can be established with reasonable certainty. Art. 2214. In quasi-delicts, the contributory negligence of the plaintiff shall reduce the damages that he may recover.
The maximum rate of interest provided for by the Usury Law (Act No. 2655, as amended; for the loan or forbearance of any money, goods or credits) are the following: 12% per annum where the loan is secured in whole or in part by a mortgage upon registered real estate, or by any document conveying such real estate or an interest therein; 14% per annum, where the loan is not so secured; and in case of pawnshops or pawnbrokers, 2-1/2 per month where the loan is less than P100; 2% per month where the loan is P100 or more but not exceeding P500; and 14% per annum when the loan exceeds P500. In the absence of an express agreement as to the rate of interest, the legal rate of 6% (now 12%) shall be imposed. 5 In obligations with a penal clause, the penalty shall substitute the indemnity for damages and the payment of interests in case of noncompliance, if there is no stipulation to the contrary. Nevertheless, damages shall be paid if the obligor refuses to pay the penalty or is guilty of fraud in the fulfillment of the obligation. The penalty may be enforced only when it is demandable in accordance with the provisions of this Code.
18
Art. 2215. In contracts, quasi-contracts, and quasi-delicts, the court may equitably mitigate the damages under circumstances other than the case referred to in the preceding article, as in the following instances: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
NOTES: Mitigation of Damages in Contracts, Quasi-Contracts and Quasi-Delicts The enumeration is not exclusive for the law uses the phrase as in the following instances. Chapter 3
That the plaintiff himself has contravened the terms of the contract; That the plaintiff has derived some benefit as a result of the contract; In cases where exemplary damages are to be awarded, that the defendant acted upon the advice of counsel; That the loss would have resulted in any event. That since the filing of the action, the defendant has done his best to lessen the plaintiffs loss or injury.
OTHER KINDS OF DAMAGES Art. 2216. No proof of pecuniary loss is necessary in order that moral, nominal, temperate, liquidated or exemplary damages may be adjudicated. The assessment of such damages, except liquidated ones, is left to the discretion of the court, according to the circumstances of each case.
NOTES: Reduction of Award Courts are given the discretion to determine the amount of moral damages and the Court of Appeals can only modify or change the amount awarded when they are palpably and scandalously excessive. Awards of moral and exemplary damages which are too excessive, compared to the actual loss of the aggrieved party, would be reduced to a more reasonable amount. Prudenciado v. Alliance Transport, 148 SCRA 440; Osmea v. CA, 120 SCRA 395) Necessity of Proving Factual Basis While no proof of pecuniary loss is necessary in order that moral damages may be awarded, the amount of indemnity being left to the discretion of the Court, it is nevertheless, essential that the claimant satisfactorily prove the existence of the factual basis of the damages (Art. 2217) and its causal relation to the defendants acts. This is because moral damages though incapable of pecuniary estimation, are in the category of an award designed to compensate the claimant for actual injury suffered, and not to impose a penalty on the wrongdoer. The mere fact that a party was sued for instance without any legal foundation, does not entitle him to an award of moral damages, for it would make a moral damage a penalty, which they are not, rather than a compensation for actual injury suffered, which they are intended to be. Moral damages, in other words, are not corrective or exemplary damages. (Malonzo v. Galang, et al., L-13851, July 27, 1960) Section 1
MORAL DAMAGES Art. 2217. Moral damages include physical suffering, mental anguish, fright, serious anxiety, besmirched reputation, wounded feelings, moral shock, social humiliation, and similar injury. Though incapable of pecuniary computation, moral damages may be reco vered if they are the proximate result of the defendants wrongful act or omission.
NOTES: Requisites for the Recovery of Moral Damages a) There must be physical suffering, mental anguish, fright, etc. Physical suffering includes pain incident to a surgical operation or medical treatment, as well as possible FUTURE pain. Mental anguish is a high degree of mental suffering and not a mere disappointment or regret or from annoyance or vexation. However, inconvenience amounting to physical discomforts is a subject of compensation. b) The suffering, etc. must be the proximate result of the wrongful act or omission.
19
When Moral Damages are Recoverable Judicial discretion in awarding moral damages may be invoked and exercised only when the complainant has in fact experienced mental anguish, serious anxiety, physical suffering, and so forth and had furthermore shown that these where the proximate result of the offenders wrongful act or omission. Position of Earning Capacity The position or earning capacity of the person injured cannot be considered of significance in the determination of moral damages, for the reason that the human value and the dignity of man are of paramount consideration. In later cases however, the SC has held that among the factors courts take into account in assessing moral damages are the professional, social, political and financial standing of the offended parties, on one hand, and the business and financial position of the offender, on the other hand. (Lopez v. Pan American, 16 SCRA 431) Personal to Injured As a general rule, the right of recovery for mental suffering resulting from bodily injuries is restricted to the person who has suffered the bodily hurt, and there can be no recovery for distress caused by sympathy for another s suffering or for fright due to a 6 wrong against a third person. Exceptions to the rule may be found in the last two paragraphs of Art. 2219. Act Must be Wrongful The grant of moral damages is not subject to the whims and caprices of judges or courts. In order that a person may be made liable to the payment of moral damages, the law requires that his act be wrongful. The adverse result of an act does not per se make the act wrongful and subject the actor to the payment of moral damages. No injury can accrue by the exercise of a right. (Barretto v. Arevalo, et al., 52 O.G. 5818) Litigations Moral damages cannot be recovered from a person who has filed a complaint against another in good faith or without malice or bad faith. Thus, where the filing of a case was due to an honest mistake in the appreciation of the applicable law and jurisprudence, or the honest belief that a contract was without consideration, there can be no award of moral damages. Neither can such damages be recovered where the filing of the complaint was found reasonable to a certain extent. Breach of Contract Moral damages are recoverable for breach of contract where the breach was wanton, reckless, malicious or in bad faith, oppressive or abusive. Purpose of Moral Damages Moral damages, though incapable of pecuniary estimation, are in the category of an award designed to compensate the claimant for actual injury suffered and not to impose a penalty on the wrongdoer. They are emphatically not intended to enrich a complainant at the expense of a defendant; they are awarded only to enable the injured party to obtain means, diversion or amusement that will serve to alleviate the moral suffering he has undergone, by reason of the defendants culpable action.
Art. 2218. In the adjudication of moral damages, the sentimental value of property, real or personal, may be considered.
NOTES: Moral Damages for Loss of Property Under ordinary circumstances there can be no recovery for mental anguish suffered in connection with an injury to property, because mental suffering is not a natural consequence of injury to property. Where, however, the act is inspired by fraud, malice, or like motives, mental suffering is a proper element of damages. (Arnaldo v. Famous Dry Cleaners, [CA] 53 O.G. 282) Sentimental Value Sentimental value may be considered both in civil liabilities arising from crimes (Art. 106, RPC; Reparation) and in civil cases, where there are fraudulent or deceitful motives. (Ibid.)
Art. 2219. Moral damages may be recovered in the following and analogous cases: (1) A criminal offense resulting in physical injuries; (2) Quasi-delicts causing physical injuries; (3) Seduction, abduction, rape or other lascivious acts; (4) Adultery or concubinage; (5) Illegal or arbitrary detention or arrest; (6) Illegal search; (7) Libel, slander or any other form of defamation; (8) Malicious prosecution; 7 (9) Acts mentioned in Art. 309; 8 (10) Acts and actions referred to in Arts. 21, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 32, 34, and 35.
6
The parents of the female seduced, abducted, raped, or abused, referred to in No. 3 of this article, may also recover moral damages. The spouse, descendants, ascendants, and brothers and sisters may bring the action mentioned in No. 9 of this article, in the order named. Art. 309. Any person who shows disrespect to the dead, or wrongfully interferes with a funeral shall be liable to the family of the deceased for damages, material and moral. 8 Art. 21. Any person who wilfully causes loss or injury to another in manner that is contrary to morals, good customs or public policy shall compensate the latter for the damage.
7
20
The parents of the female seduced, abducted, raped or abused, referred to in No. 3 of this article, may also recover moral damages. The spouse, descendants, ascendants, and brothers and sisters may bring the action mentioned in No. 9 of this article, in the order named.
NOTES: Meaning of Analogous Cases Analogous means bearing analogy or resemblance, correspond (to some others) or resembling in certain aspects, as in form, proportion, relations, etc. The law does not intend that moral damages should be awarded in all cases where the aggrieved party has suffered mental anguish, fright, moral anxiety, besmirched reputation, wounded feelings, moral shock, social humiliation, and similar injury, arising out of an act or omission of another, otherwise, there would not have been any reason for the inclusion in the law of specific acts in the present article. (P.P.I. v. Plaza, [CA] 52 O.G. 6609) Offenses Against Chastity The conviction of the accused in cases of rape, abduction, seduction, or other acts of lasciviousness, suffices as a basis to adjudge him, in the same action, liable for moral damages, without independent proof thereof, to the victim and her parents.
Art. 26. Every person shall respect the dignity, personality, privacy and peace of mind of his neighbors and other persons. The followin g and similar acts, though they may not constitute a criminal offense, shall produce a cause of action for damages, prevention and other relief: (1) Prying into the privacy of another's residence; (2) Meddling with or disturbing the private life or family relations of another; (3) Intriguing to cause another to be alienated from his friends; (4) Vexing or humiliating another on account of his religious beliefs, lowly station in life, place of birth, physical defect, or other personal condition. Art. 27. Any person suffering material or moral loss because a public servant or employee refuses or neglects, without just cause, to perform his official duty may file an action for damages and other relief against the latter, without prejudice to any disciplinary administrative action that may be taken. Art. 28. Unfair competition in agricultural, commercial or industrial enterprises or in labor through the use of force, intimidation, deceit, machination or any other unjust, oppressive or highhanded method shall give rise to a right of action by the person who thereby suffers damage. Art. 29. When the accused in a criminal prosecution is acquitted on the ground that his guilt has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt, a civil action for damages for the same act or omission may be instituted. Such action requires only a preponderance of evidence. Upon motion of the defendant, the court may require the plaintiff to file a bond to answer for damages in case the complaint should be found to be malicious. If in a criminal case the judgment of acquittal is based upon reasonable doubt, the court shall so declare. In the absence of any declaration to that effect, it may be inferred from the text of the decision whether or not the acquittal is due to that ground. Art. 30. When a separate civil action is brought to demand civil liability arising from a criminal offense, and no criminal proceedings are instituted during the pendency of the civil case, a preponderance of evidence shall likewise be sufficient to prove the act complained of. Art. 32. Any public officer or employee, or any private individual, who directly or indirectly obstructs, defeats, violates or in any manner impedes or impairs any of the following rights and liberties of another person shall be liable to the latter for damages: (1) Freedom of religion; (2) Freedom of speech; (3) Freedom to write for the press or to maintain a periodical publication; (4) Freedom from arbitrary or illegal detention; (5) Freedom of suffrage; (6) The right against deprivation of property without due process of law; (7) The right to a just compensation when private property is taken for public use; (8) The right to the equal protection of the laws; (9) The right to be secure in one's person, house, papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures; (10) The liberty of abode and of changing the same; (11) The privacy of communication and correspondence; (12) The right to become a member of associations or societies for purposes not contrary to law; (13) The right to take part in a peaceable assembly to petition the Government for redress of grievances; (14) The right to be a free from involuntary servitude in any form; (15) The right of the accused against excessive bail; (16) The right of the accused to be heard by himself and counsel, to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him, to have a speedy and public trial, to meet the witnesses face to face, and to have compulsory process to secure the attendance of witness in his behalf; (17) Freedom from being compelled to be a witness against one's self, or from being forced to confess guilt, or from being induced by a promise of immunity or reward to make such confession, except when the person confessing becomes a State witness; (18) Freedom from excessive fines, or cruel and unusual punishment, unless the same is imposed or inflicted in accordance with a statute which has not been judicially declared unconstitutional; and (19) Freedom of access to the courts. In any of the cases referred to in this article, whether or not the defendant's act or omission constitutes a criminal offense, the aggrieved party has a right to commence an entirely separate and distinct civil action for damages, and for other relief. Such civil action shall proceed independently of any criminal prosecution (if the latter be instituted), and may be proved by a preponderance of evidence. The indemnity shall include moral damages. Exemplary damages may also be adjudicated. The responsibility herein set forth is not demandable from a judge unless his act or omission constitutes a violation of the Penal Code or other penal statute. Art. 34. When a member of a city or municipal police force refuses or fails to render aid or protection to any person in case of danger to life or property, such peace officer shall be primarily liable for damages, and the city or municipality shall be subsidiarily responsible therefor. The civil action herein recognized shall be independent of any criminal proceedings, and a preponderance of evidence shall suffice to support such action. Art. 35. When a person, claiming to be injured by a criminal offense, charges another with the same, for which no independent civil action is granted in this Code or any special law, but the justice of the peace finds no reasonable grounds to believe that a crime has been committed, or the prosecuting attorney refuses or fails to institute criminal proceedings, the complaint may bring a civil action for damages against the alleged offender. Such civil action may be supported by a preponderance of evidence. Upon the defendant's motion, the court may require the plaintiff to file a bond to indemnify the defendant in case the complaint should be found to be malicious. If during the pendency of the civil action, an information should be presented by the prosecuting attorney, the civil action shall be suspended until the termination of the criminal proceedings.
21
Damages Under Par. (10) Where defendant wilfully caused loss or injury to plaintiffs in a manner contrary to morals, good customs and public policy, they are liable for damages under Arts. 19 and 20 in relation to Art. 2219 of the NCC. To formally set a wedding and go through all the necessary preparations and publicity, only to walk out of it when the matrimony is about to be solemnized is palpably and unjustifiably contrary to good customs for which the erring promissor is held answerable for damages according with Art. 21 of the NCC, moral damages may be awarded under this article. (Wassmer v. Velez, 12 SCRA 648) In Libel or Defamation A defendant who utters defamatory words against the plaintiff, as a proximate result of which, plaintiff suffered mental anguish, wounded feelings and moral shock, is liable to such plaintiff for moral damages. But he should not be made liable for moral damages arising from alleged libellous remarks in the pleadings, which are pertinent and relevant to the case because the same are covered by the mantle of privileged communication. (De la Rosa, et al. v. Maristela, [CA] 50 O.G. 254) In Physical Injuries Where the complaint against a taxicab company is predicated on an alleged breach of contract of carriage without including the driver as a party defendant, moral damages cannot be recovered from the taxicab company, for the latter has not committed any criminal offense resulting in physical injuries, the one who committed the offense being the driver of the taxicab. (Cachero v. Manila Yellow Taxicab, 54 O.G. 6599) Common Carriers Moral damages are not recoverable in actions for damages predicated on breach of contract of transportation, except: a) where the mishap results in the death of a passenger, and b) where it is proved guilty of fraud, bad faith, even if death does not result.
Art. 2220. Willful injury to property may be a legal ground for awarding moral damages if the court should find that, under the circumstances, such damages are justly due. The same rule applies to breaches of contract where the defendant acted fraudulently or in bad faith.
NOTES: Article Applied The appellants are entitled to moral damages pursuant to Art. 2220 of the NCC where the appellees, not content with reducing the water available in appellants fields by the construction of a dam, deliberately blocked totally their water sup ply by increasing the elevation of the dam without appellants consent and without government authorization. (Del Valle v. Fernandez, 34 SCRA 352) Willful Injury to Property and Breaches of Contracts If the breach of a contract is neither malicious nor fraudulent, no award of moral damages may be given. (Francisco v. GSIS, L-18155, March 30, 1963) Section 2
NOMINAL DAMAGES Art. 2221. Nominal damages are adjudicated in order that a right of the plaintiff, which has been violated or invaded by the defendant, may be vindicated or recognized, and not for the purpose of indemnifying the plaintiff for any loss suffered by him.
NOTES: Concept of Nominal Damages These are the damages recoverable where a legal right is technically violated and must be vindicated against an invasion that has produced no actual present loss of any kind, or where there has been a breach of contract and not substantial injury or actual damages whatever have been or can be shown. They are not for indemnification of loss but a vindication of a right violated. The Reason for the Grant of Nominal Damages There are instances when the vindication or recognition of the plaintiffs right is of the utmost importance to him as in the case of trespass upon real property. The awarding of nominal damages does not therefore run counter to the maxim de minimio non curat lex (the law does not cure or bother with trifles). (Report of the Code Commission, p. 74)
Art. 2222. The court may award nominal damages in every obligation arising from any source enumerated in Art. 9 1157, or in every case where any property right has been invaded.
Art. 1157. Obligations arise from: (1) Law; (2) Contracts; (3) Quasi-contracts; (4) Acts or omissions punished by law; and (5) Quasi-delicts.
22
NOTES: When Nominal Damages May be Awarded The assessment of nominal damages is left to the discretion of the court, according to the circumstance of the case. An award of nominal damages precludes the recovery of actual, moral, temperate, or moderate damages. (Ventanilla v. Gregorio Centeno, L-14333, Jan. 28, 1961)
Art. 2223. The adjudication of nominal damages shall preclude further contest upon the right involved and all accessory questions, as between the parties to the suit, or their respective heirs and assigns.
Section 3
TEMPERATE OR MODERATE DAMAGES Art. 224. Temperate or moderate damages, which are more than nominal but less than compensatory damages, may be recovered when the court finds that some pecuniary loss has been suffered but its amount can not, from the nature of the case, be proved with certainty.
NOTES: Moderate Damages Allowed There are cases where from the nature of the case, definite proof of pecuniary loss cannot be offered, although the court is convinced that there has been such loss. For instance, injury to ones financial or commercial credit or to the goodwill 10 of a business firm is often hard to show with certainty in terms of money. The judge should be empowered to calculate moderate damages in such cases, rather than that the plaintiff should suffer, without redress, from the defendant s wrongful acts. However, although the assessment of such damages is left to the sound discretion of the court, nevertheless, the same may only be recovered when the court finds that some pecuniary loss has been suffered but its amounts cannot be determined with certainty in terms of money. (Victorino, et al. v. Nora [CA] 52 O.G. 911)
Art. 2225. Temperate damages must be reasonable under the circumstances.

NOTES: Reasonable Temperate Damages What is reasonable is a question of fact, depending on the relevant circumstances. Section 4
LIQUIDATED DAMAGES Art. 2226. Liquidated damages are those agreed upon by the parties to a contract, to be paid in case of breach thereof.
NOTES: Liquidated Damages and Penalty Liquidated damages are identical to penalty, so far as legal results are concerned. In either case, the injured party need not prove the damages suffered by him. Attorneys fees provided in contracts as recoverable against the other party as damages are in the nature of liquidated damages, and the stipulation may be aptly called a penal clause. (National Power Corp. v. National Merchandising Corp. 117 SCRA 789)
Art. 2227. Liquidated damages, whether intended as an indemnity or a penalty, shall be equitably reduced if they are iniquitous or unconscionable.
NOTES: Equitable Reduction of Liquidated Damages The reason is that in both, the stipulation is contra bonos mores (against good morals). It is a mere technicality to refuse to lessen the damages to their just amount simply because the stipulation is not meant to be a penalty. An immoral stipulation is nonetheless immoral because it is called an indemnity. (Report of the Code Commission, p. 75)
10
Goodwill is the advantage or benefit which is acquired by an establishment beyond the mere value of the capital stock, funds or property employed therein, in consequence of the general and public patronage and encouragement which it receives from constant or habitual customers on account of its local position, or common celebrity, or reputation for skill, or affluence, or punctuality, or from other accidental circumstances or necessities, or even from ancient partialities or prejudices. To find the reasonable value of goodwill, the average net profits for a period of years is multiplied by a number of years, such number being suitable and proper, having reference to the nature and character of the particular business under consideration.
23
Art. 2228. When the breach of the contract committed by the defendant is not the one contemplated by the parties in agreeing upon the liquidated damages, the law shall determine the measure of damages, and not the stipulation.
Section 5
EXEMPLARY OR CORRECTIVE DAMAGES Art. 2229. Exemplary or corrective damages are imposed, by way of example or correction for the public good, in addition to the moral, temperate, liquidated or compensatory damages.
NOTES: Reason for Exemplary Damages The rationale behind exemplary or corrective damages is to provide an example or correction for the public good. They are designed to reshape behavior that is socially deleterious in its consequence. Conditions for Award Jurisprudence sets certain conditions when exemplary damages may be awarded, to wit: 1) they may be imposed by way of example or correction only in addition, among others, to compensatory damages, and cannot be recovered as a matter of right, their determination depending upon the amount of compensatory damages that may be awarded to the claimant; 2) the claimant must first establish his right to moral, temperate, liquidated or compensatory damages; and 3) the wrongful act must be accompanied by bad faith, and the award would be allowed only if the guilty party aced in a wanton, fraudulent, reckless, oppressive or malevolent manner. Exemplary Damages and Jurisdiction Under the present laws, jurisdiction of municipal courts and justice of peace in money claims is limited to P2,000. Where a complaint is filed with said courts asking for exemplary damages in an unspecified amount, said courts can grant only so much thereof, as not to exceed its jurisdiction, in addition to other items of damages. (Singson, et al. v. Aragon, et al. 49 O.G. 515)
Art. 2230. In criminal offenses, exemplary damages as a part of the civil liability may be imposed when the crime was committed with one or more aggravating circumstances. Such damages are separate and distinct from fines and shall be paid to the offended party. Art. 2231. In quasi-delicts, exemplary damages may be granted if the defendant acted with gross negligence. Art. 2232. In contracts and quasi-contracts, the court may award exemplary damages if the defendant acted in a wanton, fraudulent, reckless, oppressive or malevolent manner. Art. 2233. Exemplary damages cannot be recovered as a matter of right; the court will decide whether or not they should be adjudicated.
NOTES: Not a Matter of Right Exemplary damages cannot be recovered as a matter of right; their determination depends upon the discretion of the court. One can only ask that it be determined by the court, if in its discretion the same is warranted by the evidence. (Ibid.) Courts will grant it if the defendant has acted in wanton disregard of his obligation.
Art. 2234. While the amount of the exemplary damages need not be proved, the plaintiff must show that he is entitled to moral, temperate or compensatory damages before the court may consider the question of whether or not exemplary damages should be awarded. In case liquidated damages have been agreed upon, although no proof of loss is necessary in order that such liquidated damages may be recovered, nevertheless, before the court may consider the question of granting exemplary in addition to the liquidated damages, the plaintiff must show that he would be entitled to moral, temperate or compensatory damages were it not for the stipulation for liquidated damages.
NOTES: Allegation and Proof 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. It need not also be alleged, 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. (Ibid.)
Art. 2235. A stipulation whereby exemplary damages are renounced in advance shall be null and void.

Torts &amp; Damages

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Torts &amp; Damages

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Notes in Torts and Damages by Pauline Mae P.

Notes in Torts and Damages by Pauline Mae P. Araneta (2013)

Notes in Torts and Damages by Pauline Mae P. Araneta (2013)

Quasi-Delict: Person Responsible

Traditional Quasi-Delict: Elements

Notes in Torts and Damages by Pauline Mae P. Araneta (2013)

Distinction between Tort and Crime

Distinction between Tort and Breach of Contract (Culpa Contractual)

Distinction between Tort and Breach of Trust

Latin terms and maxims

Notes in Torts and Damages by Pauline Mae P. Araneta (2013)

Notes in Torts and Damages by Pauline Mae P. Araneta (2013)

Notes in Torts and Damages by Pauline Mae P. Araneta (2013)

Actual or compensatory; Moral; Nominal; Temperate or moderate; Liquidated; or Exemplary or corrective.

Notes in Torts and Damages by Pauline Mae P. Araneta (2013)

Notes in Torts and Damages by Pauline Mae P. Araneta (2013)

Notes in Torts and Damages by Pauline Mae P. Araneta (2013)

Notes in Torts and Damages by Pauline Mae P. Araneta (2013)

Notes in Torts and Damages by Pauline Mae P. Araneta (2013)

Notes in Torts and Damages by Pauline Mae P. Araneta (2013)

Notes in Torts and Damages by Pauline Mae P. Araneta (2013)

Notes in Torts and Damages by Pauline Mae P. Araneta (2013)

Notes in Torts and Damages by Pauline Mae P. Araneta (2013)

Notes in Torts and Damages by Pauline Mae P. Araneta (2013)

Notes in Torts and Damages by Pauline Mae P. Araneta (2013)

Notes in Torts and Damages by Pauline Mae P. Araneta (2013)

Notes in Torts and Damages by Pauline Mae P. Araneta (2013)

Notes in Torts and Damages by Pauline Mae P. Araneta (2013)

Notes in Torts and Damages by Pauline Mae P. Araneta (2013)

Art. 2225. Temperate damages must be reasonable under the circumstances.

Notes in Torts and Damages by Pauline Mae P. Araneta (2013)

You might also like

Torts & Damages

Torts & Damages