Professional Documents
Culture Documents
EN BANC
PICART,
plaintiff-appellant,
vs.
FRANK
STREET, J p:
SYLLABUS
NEGLIGENCE; CRITERION FOR DETERMINING
EXISTENCE
OF
NEGLIGENCE.
The
test
for
ID.;
SUCCESSIVE
CONTRIBUTORY
NEGLIGENT
ACTS.
NEGLIGENCE;
Where
had
gotten
approached
both
1.
from
half
the
way
across,
opposite
the
defendant
direction
in
an
heard
the
warning
signals.
However,
being
Page 2 of 96
guided it toward his left, that being the proper side of
side. The pony had not as yet exhibited fright, and the
the other side and pass sufficiently far away from the
this by the fact that the horse had not yet exhibited
turned its body across the bridge with its head toward
the railing. In so doing, it was struck on the hock of
the left hind leg by the flange of the car and the limb
was broken. The horse fell and its rider was thrown off
with some violence. From the evidence adduced in the
case we believe that when the accident occurred the
free
space
where
the
pony
stood
between
the
the
horse
died.
The
plaintiff
received
of
negligence
in
given
case
is
not
Page 3 of 96
foresee harm as a result of the course actually
terms,
the
its consequences.
the
proper
criterion
for
determining
Page 4 of 96
the peace charging the defendant with the infliction of
magistrate
and
the
proceedings
were
dismissed.
dismissing
Atl., 330.)
the
criminal
proceeding
upon
the
rendered
that
the
plaintiff
recover
of
the
2.
[G.R. No. 39587. March 24, 1934.]
THE
of
the
plaintiff,
the
loss
or
damage
MANILA
RAILROAD
COMPANY,
defendant-
appellant.
Harvey & O'Brien for plaintiffs-appellants.
Jose C. Abreu for defendant-appellant.
SYLLABUS
1.
NEGLIGENCE;
RAILROAD
COMPANY;
Separate Opinions
3.
excessive.
Page 5 of 96
4.
defendant
the
Manila
Railroad
Company,
DECISION
VILLA-REAL, J p:
This case involves two appeals, one by the defendant
the Manila Railroad Company, and the other by the
plaintiffs Aleko E. Lilius et al., from the judgment
well-known
"Wherefore,
judgment
is
rendered
ordering
the
and
reputed
journalist,
author
and
translated
secretary.
plaintiff, his wife Sonja Maria Lilius, and his 4-year old
his
articles
and
books
into
English,
Where
the
road
was
clear
and
Page 6 of 96
Dayap. Before reaching the crossing in question, there
of the pelvic bone, the tibia and fibula of the right leg,
below the knee, and received a large lacerated wound
forehead.
the
the station with a red flag in one hand and a green one
on
She
underwent
two
surgical
the
flagman
and
switchman,
for
not
having
Page 7 of 96
warn
passers-by
of
the
approaching
train;
the
from
not,
through
his
own
negligence,
of
his
neighbor's
personal
whistle
of
the
locomotive
immediately
victim
the
safety
and
Page 8 of 96
is in the language of the court, which saw her at the
declaring it to be reasonable.
face
legs
husband must live with and protect his wife. The wife
unfavorably
must obey and live with her husband and follow him
and
that
the
and
to
fractures
great
of
both
extent
her
affect
her
matrimonial future.
With respect to the plaintiffs' appeal, the first question
Page 9 of 96
is
the
head.
When
was
performed
all
physical
incapacity
always
husband's
prejudice
inasmuch
the
said
the
wife's
tasks
redounded
as
it
mission
and
to
her
the
deprived
him
of
her
until
this
judgment
becomes
final,
in
becomes
final
will
be
added
to
the
3.
FIRST DIVISION
[G.R. No. L-40570. January 30, 1976.]
from so doing.
Page 10 of 96
Antonino de los Reyes for the private respondent.
SYNOPSIS
Defendant as owner and manager of the Alcala Electric
Plant was ordered to pay damages by the lower court
which found the death by electrocution of a 3 year old
boy as due to defendant's fault or negligence. Petitioner
claims that he could not be held liable under the
concept of quasi-delict or tort as owner and manager
because the proximate cause of the boy's death by
electrocution could not be due to any negligence on his
part, but rather to a fortuitous event the storm that
caused the banana plants to fall and cut the electric
line pointing out the absence of negligence on the
part of his employee who tried to have the line repaired
and the presence of negligence of the parents of the
child in allowing him to leave his house during that
time. The Supreme Court found that a series of
negligence on the part of the defendant's employee
resulted in the death of the victim by electrocution, to
wit: the defendant did not cut down the banana plants
which are taller than the electric posts to eliminate
that source of danger to the electric line; that after the
storm they did not cut off the flow of electricity from
the lines pending inspection of the wires to see if they
had been cut; and lastly, in not taking precautions to
prevent anybody from approaching the live wires.
Decision affirmed.
SYLLABUS
1.
plaintiff
the
sum
of
Five
Thousand
Pesos
and
Five
Hundred
(P500.00)
Pesos
as
2.
Page 11 of 96
and near the transmission line of the Alcala Electric
a result, the live electric wire was cut, one end of which
was left hanging on the electric post and the other fell
series
of defendant's
(cut wire was very near the house where victim was
agree
of negligence
on
the
part
with
petitioner's
theory
that
the
parents'
Page 12 of 96
negligence constituted the proximate cause of the
application
liabilities
left untouched.
of
laws
emanating
governing
quasi-delicts
therefrom.
The
and
inevitable
4.
EN BANC
[G.R. No. L-21291. March 28, 1969.]
PRECIOLITA V. CORLISS, plaintiff-appellant, vs.
THE MANILA RAILROAD CO., defendant-appellee.
their functions."
appellee.
SYLLABUS
1.
Manila
Railroad
Company
Page 13 of 96
appealed from should be affirmed, the finding of the
record.
2.
DECISION
ID.;
ID.;
ID.;
PRESUMPTION
OF
ID.;
ID.;
FACTORS
TO
CONSIDER
must
be
dependent
on
its
facts.
The
CIRCUMSTANCES.
Each
and
every
case
on
peculiar
circumstances
that
of
damages
filed
by
plaintiff-appellant,
locomotive
of
defendant-appellee
Manila
with
4.
FERNANDO, J p:
present
reaching
the
sum
of
P282,065.40.
An
Page 14 of 96
basis for a reversal of the decision appealed from. We
affirm.
1.
judgment
accorded
principle
has
in
its
acceptance,
to
say
that
favor
the
subject
the
of
presumption
course
appellate
to
function
of
the
is
deserves
serious
consideration
by
this
Page 15 of 96
In a 1964 opinion, we adhered to such an approach.
appealed from.
2.
presumption
were
indulged
in
and
the
matter
satisfactorily
shown,
therefore,
that
not
be
held
liable.
The
crucial
could
question,
person
two
under
responsible
indispensable
therefor.
factors
in
These
the
are
the
obligations
confidently
assign
to
it
decisive
weight
and
Page 16 of 96
significance. Considered separately, neither of the two
faculties
of
seeing
and
hearing.
He
should
from
what
had
been
correctly
which
would
require
an
automobile
driver
Page 17 of 96
approaching a railroad crossing with an obstructed
do." 22
normally
such
precautions
will
require
looking,
Justice
Cardozo
announced
would
merely
Thus
defendant-appellee
acted.
It
is
FIRST DIVISION
[G.R. No. 32611. November 3, 1930.]
CULION ICE, FISH & ELECTRIC CO., INC., plaintiffappellee, vs. PHILIPPINE MOTORS CORPORATION,
defendant-appellant.
Gibbs & McDonough for appellant.
Benj. S. Ohnick for appellee.
SYLLABUS
1.
5.
of
the
plaintiff's
witnesses,
on
the
undertaken.
2.
Page 18 of 96
grade. After a new carburetor had been introduced and
a new fuel tank installed, the boat was taken out for a
the
were
with the result that the boat was destroyed. Held, upon
the facts stated in the opinion, that the loss of the boat
cylinder
of
the
engine,
and
flames
STREET, J p:
judgment,
costs.
From
this
judgment
the
defendant appealed.
The plaintiff and defendant are domestic corporations;
and at the time of the incident with which we are here
concerned; H.D. Cranston was the representative of
the plaintiff in the City of Manila. At the same time the
plaintiff was the registered owner of the motor
schooner Gwendoline, which was used in the fishing
trade in the Philippine Islands. In January, 1925,
Cranston decided, if practicable, to have the engine on
Gwendoline changed from a gasoline consumer to a
crude oil burner, expecting thereby to effect economy
in the cost of running the boat. He therefore made
known his desire to McLeod & Co., a firm dealing in
tractors, and was told by McKellar, of said company,
that he might make inquiries of the Philippine Motors
Corporation, which had its office on Ongpin Street, in
the City of Manila. Cranston accordingly repaired to
the office of the Philippine Motors Corporation and had
a conference with C.E. Quest, its manager, who agreed
to do the job, with the understanding that payment
should be made upon completion of the work.
Page 19 of 96
the carburetor was flooding, and that the gasoline, or
the carburetor; and the result was that, when the back
the matter and said that, when the engine had gotten
was
covered
without
any
untoward
apparently
which
at
the
too
mixture
great
tank
an
was
prepared
elevation
from
was
the
Page 20 of 96
We therefore see no escape from the conclusion that
invoked.
inasmuch
Gwendoline
as
during
Quest
the
had
control
experimental
of
the
run,
the
boat
on
this
trial
run.
His
employment
property
in
the
chatted
bailed.
As
C.
J.,
Malcolm,
Villamor,
Ostrand,
CANGCO,
plaintiff-appellant,
vs.
MANILA
MASTER
AND
SERVANT;
CONTRACT;
2.
3.
CONTRACTS;
CARRIERS;
NEGLIGENCE:;
PASSENGERS;
CULPA
NEGLIGENCE;
moving train.
DECISION
Page 21 of 96
FISHER, J p:
At the time of the occurrence which gave rise to this
station
exit through the door, took his position upon the steps
for
shipment
to
the
market.
They
were
to rise from the level of the ground. When the train had
curation.
Page 22 of 96
of the fact that the sacks of melons were so placed as
in
plaintiff appealed.
existing . . .."
the
legal
viewpoint
performance
of
an
obligation
already
essentially,
the
from
that
imposed
damages
upon
occasioned
employers
by
the
with
respect
negligence
of
to
their
master
would
be liable
in every
case
and
Page 23 of 96
master has not been guilty of any negligence whatever
liable for the acts of the latter, whether done within the
servant
or
employee
there
instantly
arises
tantum
and
not
juris
et
de
jure,
and
into
should
consideration
the
qualifications
they
Page 24 of 96
Every legal obligation must of necessity be extra-
contractual
or
contractual.
Extra-contractual
defined
to
cases
in
which
moral
of
discharging
the
liability
arising
from
Page 25 of 96
causes its destruction, he is unquestionably liable.
securities
to
banking
corporation
as
the
performance
of
contract
has
"These are not cases of injury caused, without any preexisting obligation, by fault or negligence, such as
those to which article 1902 of the Civil Code relates,
but of damages caused by the defendant's failure to
out
the
undertakings
imposed
chauffeur
while
driving
defendant's
carry
by
the
contracts . . .."
A brief review of the earlier decision of this court
involving the liability of employers for damage done by
the negligent acts of their servants will show that in no
case has the court ever decided that the negligence of
Page 26 of 96
the facts disclosed that the injury complained of by
constituted
or
inattention
on
the
part
of
the
the
source
of
an
extra-contractual
railroad
company's
defense
involves
the
by
plaintiff
was
his
own
contributory
Page 27 of 96
negligence and plaintiff's negligence merely contributed
may say that the test is this; Was there anything in the
Defendant
contends,
and
cites
many
his
failure
so
to
desist
was
contributory
negligence.
(Thompson,
Commentaries
avoid
on
Page 28 of 96
to the passenger a stable and even surface on which to
ordered.
person.
In
determining
the
question
of
from
continuing
that
employment.
concur.
Separate Opinions
MALCOLM, J., dissenting:
With one sentence in the majority decision, we are of
full accord, namely, "It may be admitted that had
plaintiff waited until the train had come to a full stop
before alighting, the particular injury suffered by him
could not have occurred." With the general rule relative
to a passenger's contributory negligence, we are
likewise in full accord, namely, "An attempt to alight
from a moving train is negligence per se." Adding these
two points together, we have the logical result the
Manila Railroad Co. should be absolved from the
complaint, and judgment affirmed.
Johnson, J., concurs.
7.
SECOND DIVISION
[G.R. No. 77679. September 30, 1987.]
disabled
to
the
standard
mortality
tables,
is
Page 29 of 96
said cargo truck in a very diligent (and) careful
and that the said accident was an act of God for which
third
party
defendant
insurance
company.
Travellers
Insurance
severally
and
Surety
of his driver.
the
petitioner's
contention
that
the
Page 30 of 96
An action for damages based on quasi-delict (Art. 2176
connection
cargo
accident,
failed
truck
involved
in
the
vehicular
to
of
cause
adduce
any
and
effect
evidence
to
8.
[G.R. No. L-44748. August 29, 1986.]
between
overcome
such
the
Page 31 of 96
RADIO COMMUNICATIONS OF THE PHILS., INC.
private
joke
between
the
sending
and
receiving
DECISION
PARAS, J p:
LORETO DIONELA
FER.
LORETO DIONELA CABANGAN WIRE ARRIVAL
OF CHECK-PER.
115 PM.
SA IYO WALANG PAKINABANG DUMATING KA
DIYAN WALA KANG PADALA DITO KAHIT
BULBULMO" (p. 19, Annex "A")
Plaintiff-respondent Loreto Dionela alleges that the
defamatory words on the telegram sent to him not only
wounded his feelings but also caused him undue
embarrassment and affected adversely his business as
well because other people have come to know of said
defamatory words. Defendant-corporation as a defense,
Page 32 of 96
"ART. 20. Every person who, contrary to law, wilfully
or
negligently
causes
damage
to
another,
shall
should
answer
directly
and
stated:
II
or
precautionary
steps
to
avoid
the
liability
of
petitioner-company-employer
is
permission.
Page 33 of 96
breach of contract thru the negligence of its own
employees. 1
Petitioner is a domestic corporation engaged in the
THIRD DIVISION
[G.R. Nos. 79050-51. November 14, 1989.]
MARICAR
ERWIN,
BASCOS
OLIVE,
BAESA,
EDMUNDO
thru
and
her
personal
SHARON
ICO,
respondents.
Efren N. Ambrosio & Associates for petitioner PNEI.
Emiliano S. Micu for respondents.
SYLLABUS
1.
2.
3.
ACTING
INSTANTANEOUSLY
OR
BY
AVAILABLE
9.
Page 34 of 96
5.
that the employer has been negligent and the latter has
6.
passengers
testimonies.
7.
Petition,
The
jeepney
was
CORTES, J p:
this
injuries.
DECISION
In
suffered
under
Pantranco
North
Express
Inc.
the
"No
Fault"
insurance
coverage
of
PANTRANCO.
Maricar Baesa through her guardian Francisca O.
Bascos and Fe O. Ico for herself and for her minor
children, filed separate actions for damages arising
from quasi-delict against PANTRANCO, respectively
docketed as Civil Case No. 561-R and 589-R of the
respondents. Cdpr
against
PANTRANCO
awarding
the
total
Page 35 of 96
plus 10% thereof as attorney's fees and costs to Fe Ico
A)
B)
P252,000.00;
C)
E)
F)
I.
P630,000.00;
E)
Baesa P375,000.00;
F)
P3,727.00;
H)
I)
II.
following damages:
driver.
Petitioner
claims
that
under
the
Page 36 of 96
recovery for the negligence of defendant where it
and
prudence,
consequences
might
to
have
claimant
avoided
injurious
notwithstanding
his
negligence.
for
all
the
consequences
of
the
accident
50].
the
jeepney
towards
the
spacious
dirt
passengers.
that the bus was not returning to its own lane, it was
of merit.
prevent
an
accident.
The
speed
at
which
the
Page 37 of 96
road in time to avoid the collision. Thus, even
assuming that the jeepney driver perceived the danger
a few seconds before the actual collision, he had no
opportunity to avoid it. This Court has held that the
last clear chance doctrine "can never apply where the
party charged is required to act instantaneously, and if
the injury cannot be avoided by the application of all
means at hand after the peril is or should have been
discovered" [Ong v. Metropolitan Water District, supra].
prcd
II
On the issue of its liability as an employer, petitioner
claims that it had observed the diligence of a good
father of a family to prevent damage, conformably to
the last paragraph of Article 2180 of the Civil Code.
Petitioner adduced evidence to show that in hiring its
drivers, the latter are required to have professional
driver's license and police clearance. The drivers must
also
pass
written
examinations,
interviews
and
six-month
petitioner's
highway.
training
Training
period.
Rodrigo
Coordinator,
San
Pedro,
testified
on
both
vehicles
were
coming
from
opposite
this
was
the accident.
presented
that
Ramirez
actually
and
really
Page 38 of 96
logbook signed by the trainees when they attended the
seminars. If such records are not available, the
testimony of the classmates that Ramirez was their
classmate
in
said
seminar
(should
have
been
III
On the question of damages, petitioner claims that the
Court of Appeals erred in fixing the damages for the
loss of earning capacity of the deceased victims.
Petitioner assails respondent court's findings because
no documentary evidence in support thereof, such as
contends
Ambrosio
process
strict
value
observed
and
and
its
was
that
the
subjected
usual
fact
to
that
the
recruitment
same
procedure
safety
standards
were
observed.
The
mere
on
efficiency
and
safety
were
followed.
to
sustain
in
law
the
Court
of
Appeals'
victims,
the
absence
thereof
does
not
capacity
of
the
three
deceased
victims.
nature
of
his
occupation,
his
educational
the
uncorroborated
Coordinator,
is
testimony
insufficient
of
to
its
Training
overcome
the
Page 39 of 96
degree holder and the proprietor of the Cauayan Press,
printer of the Cauayan Valley Newspaper and the Valley
Times at Cauayan, Isabela. Marilyn Baesa graduated
as a nurse in 1976 and at the time of her death, was
the company nurse, personnel manager, treasurer and
cashier
of
the
Respondent
Ilagan
court
duly
Press
at
Ilagan,
Isabela.
these
factors,
considered
SO ORDERED.
Fernan, C.J., Gutierrez, Jr., Feliciano and Bidin, JJ.,
concur.
Footnotes
*
10.
Baesa.
Respondent
court
awarded
to
Pesos
(P30,000.00)
as
"compensatory
Pesos
(P15,000.00)
for
the
death
of
SECOND DIVISION
[G.R. No. 57079. September 29, 1989.]
PHILIPPINE LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE CO., INC.
petitioner, vs. COURT OF APPEALS and SPOUSES
ANTONIO
ESTEBAN
and
GLORIA
ESTEBAN,
respondents.
SYLLABUS
1.
RECONSIDERATION;
each brother.
REMEDIAL
LAW;
ACTIONS
SECOND
MOTION
MOTION
FOR
FOR
Page 40 of 96
CASE AT BAR. In the present case, after their
their
private
first
leave
of
motion
court
to
for
file
reconsideration,
second
motion
for
DAY
PERIOD,
DEPRIVES
THE
COURT
OF
TO
BE
EXTENDED.
An
6.
the
same
should
not
be
exercised
EXTRA-CONTRACTUAL
DELICT;
OMISSION
OBLIGATIONS;
TO
PERFORM
QUASIA
DUTY
PERIOD
settled.
Page 41 of 96
cause thereof. It is both a societal norm and necessity
for
his
own
Antonio
protection.
Esteban
had
Furthermore,
the
last
clear
respondent
chance
or
responsible
for
the
consequences
of
his
imprudence.
10.
EXISTENCE
OF
negligence
by
OF
must
FAULT
be
OR
NEGLIGENCE
affirmatively
established
DECISION
which reads:
REGALADO, J p:
defendant
Philippine
Long
Distance
Telephone
and
P5,000.00
exemplary
damages;
to
(B)
accident,
defendant." 6
respondent
Gloria
Esteban
allegedly
Page 42 of 96
From this decision both PLDT and private respondents
motion
for
reconsideration
of
private
respondent
11,
1981,
respondent
Court
of
Appeals
Court
of
Appeals
denied
said
motion
for
1.
denying
private
respondents'
second
motion
for
additional
2.
ground
Respondent
that
court
said
erred
the
reversing
for
(b)
in
motion
second
(c)
Page 43 of 96
(d)
(g)
7,
1980,
second
motion
for
(h)
(i)
resolution
denying
their
of
first
motion for
to
file
their
second
motion
for
appeal
having
been
taken
seasonably,
the
Page 44 of 96
1979, became final and executory on March 9, 1980.
same
should
not
be
exercised
whimsically,
that
the
accident
which
befell
private
the
ACCIDENT
MOUND
several
feet
as
jeep was running quite fast on the inside lane and for
Page 45 of 96
in time, he would not have seen any warning sign
LibLex
to his injuries and those of his wife but goes to the very
respondents.
By
exercising
reasonable
care
and
presence
of
warning
signs
could
not
have
the
negligence
he
imputes
to
of
the
presence
and
location
of
the
explained.
As aptly observed by respondent court in its aforecited
extended resolution of January 24, 1980
"(a)
statement
is
made
only
to
stress
the
of
negligence
must
be
affirmatively
Page 46 of 96
relies on negligence for his cause of action has the
LLpr
on
September
25,
1979,
is
hereby
SO ORDERED.
concur.
FIRST DIVISION
COURT
and
LEONARDO
DIONISIO,
respondents.
FELICIANO, J p:
In the early morning of 15 November 1975 at about
1:30 a.m. private respondent Leonardo Dionisio was
on his way home he lived in 1214-B Zamora Street,
Makati
DECISION
Bangkal,
from
cocktails-and-dinner
latter:
"(1)
Page 47 of 96
(2)
untouched.
the
untold
sorrows
and
frustration
in
life
Carbonel
which the dump truck had been parked but rather the
(5)
and
Phoenix
that
the
true
legal
and
1.
solely
attributable
to
the
accident
"was
in
question;" and
3.
Page 48 of 96
which must bear upon the liability, or extent of liability,
that Dionisio's car was "moving fast" and did not have
for
the
emergency
treatment
immediately
after
his
curfew
pass.
He
also
offered
made
as
spontaneous
reaction
to
the
Page 49 of 96
evoke spontaneous, rather than reflective, reactions
people differently.
The
conclusion
circumstances
we
draw
outlined
from
the
factual
is
that
private
above
than
he
should
have
been.
Worse,
he
thus did not see the dump truck that was parked
consequence
of
the
truck
driver's
negligence.
The petitioners, however, urge that the truck driver's
negligence was merely a "passive and static condition"
and that private respondent Dionisio's negligence was
an "efficient intervening cause," and that consequently
Dionisio's negligence must be regarded as the legal and
proximate cause of the accident rather than the earlier
negligence of Carbonel. We note that the petitioners'
arguments are drawn from a reading of some of the
older cases in various jurisdictions in the United States
but we are unable to persuade ourselves that these
arguments have any validity for our jurisdiction. We
note, firstly, that even in the United States, the
distinctions between "cause" and "condition" which the
petitioners would have us adopt have already been
"almost entirely discredited." Professors Prosser and
Keeton make this quite clear: LibLex
Page 50 of 96
"Cause and condition. Many courts have sought to
producing
to
the
distinguish
result,
between
it
is
active
quite
forces
impossible
passive
and
Keeton: prLL
of
considerable
time
during
which
the
has
reason
particular
circumstances,
to
anticipate
the
under
defendant
may
the
be
Page 51 of 96
intervening causes which fall fairly in this category will
protect
the
plaintiff
against
`that
of
anticipated.'
human
Thus,
defendant
life,
and
defendant
therefore
who
to
be
blocks
the
that
man
must
respond
for
the
foreseeable
Page 52 of 96
consequences of his own negligent act or omission. Our
petitioners. cdphil
SO ORDERED.
Yap, Narvasa, Cruz, Gancayco and Sarmiento, JJ .,
concur.
12.
THIRD DIVISION
[G.R. No. L-47379. May 16, 1988.]
NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION, petitioner, vs.
HONORABLE
COURT
OF
APPEALS
and
of Phoenix.
account
the
comparative
negligence
of
private
COURT
OF
APPEALS
and
NATIONAL
POWER
CORPORATION, respondents.
Raymundo A. Armovit for private respondent in L47379.
The Solicitor General for petitioner.
SYLLABUS
1.
PARTY
HAVE
LIABLE
WHERE
HIS
court.
Page 53 of 96
NPC cannot escape liability because its negligence was
2.
DECISION
GUTIERREZ, JR., J p:
These consolidated petitions seek to set aside the
decision of the respondent Court of Appeals which
adjudged the National Power Corporation liable for
damages against Engineering Construction, Inc. The
appellate court, however, reduced the amount of
damages awarded by the trial court. Hence, both
CIVIL
LAW;
CONSEQUENTIAL
DAMAGE;
Corporation
(NPC)
in
G.R.
No.
47379,
"On
Structures,
ID.;
PROPER
EXEMPLARY
IN
ABSENCE
August
4,
and
1964,
plaintiff
Appurtenant
Engineering
Structures,
and
DAMAGES;
OF
BAD
AWARD NOT
FAITH
OR
the
Ipo
Dam
of
the
defendant
National
Power
Page 54 of 96
"By September 1967, the plaintiff corporation already
hit
Central
Luzon,
passing
through
Equipment,
Materials
Parts
and
Plant
P107,175.80;
and
facilities
and
permanent
structures
and
rising
dangerously
at the
it
rate of
sixty
Page 55 of 96
appearing that the contract of sale was consummated,
P19,200.00 as rental.
consequential
to
damages
from
P333,200.00
Page 56 of 96
and removed from the rules applicable to the acts of
by
the
records,
while
there
was
no
categorical
ruled: cdll
facilities
deadline
to
occurred
finish
the
long
after
the
construction.
stipulated
No
bonus,
Page 57 of 96
considered
gross.
In
Dee
Hua
Liong
Electrical
negligence
ruled:
since
compensatory
he
is
not
damages,
entitled
and
again
to
moral
because
or
the
of
Tano
who,
despite
extremely
poor
SO ORDERED.
13.
THIRD DIVISION
OYON-OYON,
GRONDIANO
represented
MONTEROLA,
by
PATROCENIA
and
PATROCENIA
COMMERCIAL
SYLLABUS
1.
LAW;
TRANSPORTATION;
Page 58 of 96
VITUG, J p:
"WHEREFORE,
cdphil
Patrocinia
"1.
criminal
case
the
following
the
from
is
following
"2.
20,000.00
Actual damages
"4.
"5.
Monterola
appealed
judgment
amounts:
the
of Litigation
P7,361.00
10,000.00
payment
of
the
aforementioned
amounts
for
"homicide
thru
reckless
"1.
Page 59 of 96
analyses made by the Court of Appeals in arriving at
court:
the
operation
of
any
other
vehicle
you right?
"A
"Q
visibility was still very poor, and thus failed to see the
"Q
negligence.
"A
"Q
"Q
xxx
"A
the
him.
"Q
by
admitted
xxx
conditions
"A
"xxx
Land
Page 60 of 96
"xxx
xxx
xxx
twenty
per
cent
(Phoenix
Construction
Inc.
v.
Cargo
employees
Corporation,
in
supervising
its
spent
P15,000.00.
There
is
likewise
no
mental
anguish,
fright,
serious
anxiety,
the
rule
would
also
mean
that
an
therefore
entitled
P10,000.00
for
to
an
attorney's
additional
fees
and
amount
of
expenses
of
litigation. cdasia
"Considering, however, the contributory negligence of
Rogelio Monterola in driving at a fast clip despite the
Page 61 of 96
behind the vehicle he was following. We, therefore,
warrant
mitigation
of
petitioners'
liability
for
damages.
3.
SO ORDERED.
personal observation
reported,
may
rule.
ID.; PRESUMPTION OF NEGLIGENCE UNDER
facts
4.
EN BANC
of the
and
the
HEIRS
OF
DOMINGA
ONG,
5.
SYLLABUS
1.
ID.;
HEARSAY
RULE;
REPORTS
NOT
inference
that
the
incident
happened
TORTS;
INTERVENTION
OF
UNFORESEEN
DAMAGES;
LIABILITY
OF
OWNER
OF
Page 62 of 96
at the Caltex service station. It is started while gasoline
fire.
houses
owned
by
appellants.
Issue:
virtually
an
employee
of
Caltex,
not
an
failed
to
prove
negligence
and
that
MAKALINTAL, J p:
Leandro
petitioners
DECISION
petitioners'
amended
complaint
against
respondents.
The action is for damages under Articles 1902 and
1903 of the old Civil Code. It appears that in the
afternoon of March 18, 1948 a fire broke out at the
Caltex service station at the corner of Antipolo street
and Rizal Avenue, Manila. It started while gasoline was
being hosed from a tank truck into the underground
storage, right at the opening of the receiving tank
where the nozzle of the hose was inserted. The fire
spread to and burned several neighboring houses,
including the personal properties and effects inside
them. Their owners, among them petitioners here, sued
respondents Caltex (Phil.), Inc. and Mateo Boquiren,
Flores
in
pulling
of
the
gasoline
hose
contained
between
the
cigarettes
gasoline
and
pumps
matches,
and
the
underground tanks."
Page 63 of 96
of the gasoline station and what the chief of the fire
by
the
Court
of
Appeals
and
hence
court
without
objection
on
the
part
of
Rule 130.
officers
who
conducted
the
investigation.
Was
their
statements
as
"official
information
concerned.
that
is,
without
further
testimonial
Page 64 of 96
The next question is whether or not, without proof as
in
instant
(its)
case
on
the
grounds
that
"as
to
case
of
noncontractual
negligence,
or
culpa
follows:
"In the afternoon of May 5, 1946, while the plaintiffappellee and other companions were loading grass
between the municipalities of Bay and Calauan, in the
province of Laguna, with clear weather and without
any wind blowing, an electric transmission wire,
installed and maintained by the defendant Philippine
Power and Development Co., Inc. alongside the road,
suddenly parted, and one of the broken ends hit the
head of the plaintiff as he was about to board the
truck. As a result, plaintiff received the full shock of
4,400 volts carried by the wire and was knocked
unconscious to the ground. The electric charge coursed
through his body and caused extensive and serious
multiple burns from skull to legs, leaving the bone
exposed in some parts and causing intense pain and
wounds that were not completely healed when the case
was tried on June 18, 1947, over one year after the
mishap."
The defendant therein disclaimed liability on the
ground that the plaintiff had failed to show any specific
act of negligence but the appellate court overruled the
defense under the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. The
court said:
Page 65 of 96
combustible material, in the storage and sale of which
truck and while both the tank and the truck were in
So. 731, 64 L.R.A. 101, 100 Am. St. Rep. 505; Willis vs.
or
employees.
We
further
find
from
the
inference
that
the
incident
happened
Page 66 of 96
In the report submitted by Captain Leoncio Mariano of
following appears:
crossing
and
very
thickly
populated
circumstances.
There
is
no
more
eloquent
which
not
only
material
damages
but
subjected
to
intense
heat.
Defendants'
Page 67 of 96
analogous to those of the present case, states the rule
called
licensed,
LICENSEE
license
it
agreement
being
(Exhibit
understood
(Boquiren)
is
5-Caltex)
and
not
an
agreed
was
that
employee,
Page 68 of 96
January 1, 1948 to December 31, 1948, and thereafter
supervised
the
operator
and
conducted
periodic
prevail
the
over
the
latter."
Shell
Company
of
Page 69 of 96
Wherefore, the decision appealed from is reversed and
respondents- appellees are held liable solidarily to
appellants, and ordered to pay them the aforesaid
sums of P9,005.80 and P10,000.00, respectively, with
interest from the filing of the complaint, and costs.
SYLLABUS
1.
IPSA
LOQUITOR,
APPLIED;
NEGLIGENCE
NOT
normal
JJ., concur.
of
operations
of
furniture
Footnotes
1.
course
2.
REMEDIAL
LAW;
EVIDENCE;
FACTUAL
CIVIL
LAW;
DAMAGES;
DEFICIENCY
AMOUNT
OF
LOSS
SUSTAINED
MAY
BE
15.
THIRD DIVISION
wife
LUZ
ALMONTE
MABLE
and
children
4.
JR.,
SALOME,
ANTONIO,
and
BERNARDO
all
ID.;
SUBROGATION;
INSURER
ENTITLED
Page 70 of 96
insurer is entitled to be subrogated pro tanto to any
inflammable substances.
ID.;
ID.;
DISCRETIONARY;
EXERCISE
INSURER,
REAL
OF
RIGHT,
PARTY
IN
Subsequently,
private
respondents
collected
damages,
P50,000.00
as
moral
damages,
1.
respondent's
insurer
has
to
claim
his
right
to
attorney's fees;
4.
5.
tried to put out the fire, but their efforts proved futile.
damages:
Page 71 of 96
plaintiff should be reduced to P70,000.00 for the house
operations
awarding
excessive
manufacturing
shop,
and/or
unproved
damages.
3.
furniture
2.
of
of negligence.
The
doctrine
whose
of
res
ipsa
loquitur,
reasonable
evidence,
in
the
absence
of
subjected
to
intense
heat.
Defendant's
Page 72 of 96
In the instant case, with more reason should petitioner
3.
Article
SCRA 181.]
2207
of
the
Civil
Code
the
amount
of
Art. 2207.
2.
P70,000.00
P80,000.00.
Such
cannot
be
(Emphasis supplied.)
The law is clear and needs no interpretation. Having
been indemnified by their insurer, private respondents
are only entitled to recover the deficiency from
petitioner. LLphil
and,
its
be said to be excessive.
according
to
private
respondents,
Page 73 of 96
subrogated lies solely within the former's sound
are when the factual findings of the trial court and the
2.
DELIBERATELY
REJECTED,
subrogation
from
respondents is recognized.
and
thus
seek
reimbursement
FALSIFIED
BUT
IN
SUCH
SOME
PORTIONS
MATERIAL
THEREOF
SO ORDERED. prLL
16.
THIRD DIVISION
the latter said that there was a piece of rubber but that
admissible
but
Nevertheless,
it
carries
assuming
no
probative
otherwise,
Dr.
value.
Batiquin's
respondents.
SYLLABUS
1.
RAISED
IN
PETITION
FOR
REVIEW
ON
testimony
be
rejected,
but
such
Page 74 of 96
portions thereof deemed worthy of belief may be
credited.
3.
ID.;
ID.;
ID.;
POSITIVE
TESTIMONY
IS
that
the
absence
of
rubber
drain
was
her
turn
on
the
witness
stand.
was
indeed
found
in
private
respondent
ID.;
ID.;
ID.;
DOCTRINE
failed
to
overcome
the
presumption
of
OF
RES
IPSA
Page 75 of 96
society
today
cannot
and
will
not
tolerate
the
and this Court, as this case would show, let the act go
uncondemned.
Acogido,
at
about
11:45
that
morning.
Page 76 of 96
The piece of rubber allegedly found near private
examination,
it
was
not
mentioned
in
the
the
piece
of
rubber
are
Medical
There
are
now
two
different
versions
on
the
Court by Dr. Kho and (2) that Dr. Kho threw it away as
amount of P25,000.00.
herein.
Page 77 of 96
shown that the removal of said organs were the direct
says [sic] there is [sic] a foreign body that goes with the
and anxiety . . .
(emphasis supplied)
Another
ordering
judgment
is
hereby
entered
portions
SO ORDERED. 21
Dr.
Kho's
testimony,
especially
the
following:
testimonies
of
with
contradictions
and
falsities.
The private respondents commented that the petition
raised only questions of fact, which were not proper for
review by this Court.
her?
A
Yes, I did.
very dirty, it was full of pus. And there was a [piece of]
24
and
then
to
Cebu
City
for
examination
by
Page 78 of 96
Q
rubber]?
reconciled
Dr.
Kho's
testimony
with
Dr.
assuming
otherwise,
Dr.
Batiquin's
This is not to say that she was less than honest when
35
testimony
be
rejected,
but
such
was
Villegas's
indeed
abdomen]
found
in
prevails
private
over
respondent
the
negative
The
thing
speaks
for
itself.
Page 79 of 96
instrumentality causing injury was in defendant's
character
circumstances
of
[the]
accident
and
xxx
xxx
does
not
to
intended
dispense
with
the
Page 80 of 96
CHINA AIR LINES, LTD., petitioner, vs. COURT OF
APPEALS,
JOSE
PAGSIBIGAN,
PHILIPPINE
AIR
PHILIPPINE
AIR
LINES,
INC.
and
ROBERTO
Lines, Ltd.
Reyna,
Montecillo
&
Ongsiako
for
DECISION
REGALADO, J p:
These consolidated petitions seek the review of the
decision of respondent court in CA-G.R. No. 53023-R
entitled "Jose E. Pagsibigan, Plaintiff-Appellant, vs.
Air
Philippine
Siguion
Lines,
Defendants-Appellants;
Inc.
and
China
Roberto
Air
Espiritu,
Lines,
Ltd.,
employees
at
the
airport
made
appropriate
declares:
"WHEREFORE,
except
for
modification
of
the
Page 81 of 96
embarrassment, mental anguish, wounded feelings
airport,
he
was
accompanied
by
his
business
'WHEREFORE,
premises
considered,
judgment
is
(P20,000.00)
plus
Two
Thousand
Pesos
Respondent
him. cdphil
court
also
ruled
out
the
claim
for
Page 82 of 96
As regards the liability of the parties, respondent court
held:
xxx
xxx
xxx
did
not
contribute
to
the
negligence
CAL
derives
no
solace
nor
gains
an
negligence
was
committed
by
him
is
xxx
overcome
the
2.
Dismissal
of
the
cross-claim
of
petitioner
(PAL)
insufficient
xxx
be
1.
presumption
of
and
Roberto
Espiritu
made
the
following
Page 83 of 96
2.
awarding
respondent
Pagsibigan
the
sum
of
wise:
"4.
proximate
error
family
defendant PAL;
result
in
the
of
the
selection
negligence
and
and/or
supervision
of
its
"5.
cause of action;
whether
the
agency
was
or
was
not
for
xxx
"12.
xxx
xxx
leg (CI Flight 812) on June 10, 1968, as set forth in his
ticket (Annex 'A') solely and exclusively by reason of
gross
incompetence
and
inexcusable
negligence
(Emphasis supplied) 7
xxx
xxx
xxx
Page 84 of 96
in cases of such nature, the aggrieved party does not
10
therein
Espiritu.
premised
damages
It,
therefore,
becomes
evident
that
respondent
defendants-appellants
on
the
from
employee's
both
PAL
PAL
and
negligence,
and
Espiritu
Roberto
whereby
without
of carriage. cdrep
supervision
over
him
after
such
selection.
The
Page 85 of 96
Hence, to escape solidary liability for the quasi-delict
party's claim. 13
was
immediately
rectified
when
PAL
respondent
court
found
that
the
mistake
of
negligence
in
the
selection
and
SO ORDERED.
Melencio-Herrera, Paras, Padilla and Sarmiento, JJ.,
concur.
18.
EN BANC
[G.R. No. L-26810. August 31, 1970.]
ROSARIO SANTOS VDA. DE BONIFACIO, VIRGINIA
BONIFACIO,
ROSALINDA
industry.
BONIFACIO,
ZENAIDA
BONIFACIO,
BONIFACIO,
ANDRES
ALBERTO
BONIFACIO,
BONIFACIO,
ROMEO
GENEROSO
BONIFACIO,
CONCEPCION,
JOSE
AGUSTIN
Page 86 of 96
TAYABAS BUS COMPANY and SERGIO DE LUNA,
defendants-appellants.
appellees.
Makasiar, J.,
DECISION
REYES, J.B.L., J p:
Direct appeal to the Supreme Court (lodged prior to the
enactment
of
Republic
Act
No.
5440)
from
the
as
damages
arising
from
vehicular
Page 87 of 96
Of the detailed findings of facts of the trial court, we
(1)
at fault?
(2)
truck was entirely on the left lane and about one (1)
usual, and slacken his pace, for the wet highway could
Page 88 of 96
would not have skidded to the left and invaded the lane
he did not know that anyone else was using the road is
for
vehicles
coming
from
the
opposite
taken
by
the
chief
of
police,
and
2d 319)
That the L.T.B. bus was damaged near the front right
wheel and fender proves that the Mercedes was already
very close to the place of collision when it occurred, so
that the car driver had no chance to evade it. Nor did
said driver, Concepcion, possess any means of knowing
that the bus intruding into his line of travel was
skidding out of control, and could not draw back to its
proper lane.
Appellants
pretend
that
the
Mercedes
car
was
Page 89 of 96
At any rate, so long as the Mercedes car remained in
its proper lane, its speed could not have been the
(a)
the various orders and/or job sheets for said bus No.
27, which has for its first page an order for bus No. 136
Page 90 of 96
Paete to Manila and back, and Paete to San Antonio
profit,
the
gruelling
schedule,
unmindful
of
the
register
upon
the
driver's
health,
and,
Sergio
de
Luna
had
repeatedly
violated
other
than
repeated
warnings
and
The
minor
errors
charged
against
the
appealed
against
assets
of
said
firm
in
1962
were
worth
collision.
2 The
Page 91 of 96
publication of death notices P720.00; tomb
Defendants-appellants
question
the
actual
and
in the top left part of his head, sunken left eye, and a
Bonifacio,
aforenamed
the
sum
plaintiffs
of
P10,000.00;
P5,000.00,
as
to
Alberto
exemplary
leg was under traction and hanging for two (2) weeks,
hospital for one (1) month and four (4) days. Up to the
hospital,
for
treatment.
His
medical
expenses
"ART. 2211.
Page 92 of 96
The findings and conclusions of negligence on the part
RAMOS;
and
GOYENA
ZANAROSA-RAMOS,
for
Ad
Litem
for
minor
ARLEEN
R.
MAGO,
and
IN
CASE
AT
BAR.
Petitioners
decision
appellants.
FINDING
NO
REVERSIBLE
ERROR,
the
19.
FIRST DIVISION
EMILIANO
MANUEL
TRANSPORTATION
CO.,
and
INC.,
SUPERLINES
petitioners,
vs.
Page 93 of 96
given great weight, more so when said findings tally
INJURIES.
382
TML
submitted
treatment,
3.
[1989]);
New
COMMERCIAL
COLLISION;
ISSUE
Owners/Management
LAW;
OF
of
TRANSPORTATION;
UNLICENSED
DRIVER;
by
petitioners
who
allegedly
saw
"the
Appellants,
evidence
to
likewise,
show
contested
expenses
hospitalization
and
for
the
their
incidental
one
month
each
loss
of
income
seem
Page 94 of 96
motion for reconsideration. The decision subject of the
for
"PREMISES
CONSIDERED,
judgment
is
hereby
multiple
physical
injuries
through
reckless
appearing
that
the
defendants
Superlines
Private
respondents
were
passengers
of
an
vehicle. cdll
pictures
railing. Were it not for the railing, the Scout car would
p. 28).
and
sketches
submitted
by
private
Page 95 of 96
officer assigned to conduct the investigation (Rollo, pp.
88-89).
the
driver's
transpired
wheels,"
after
the
testified
on
accident.
matters
that
Discrediting
this
guard railing.
173
Owners/Management
SCRA
of
382
TML
[1989]);
Garments,
New
Inc.
v.
Page 96 of 96
basis of the conflicting claims of the parties and
condition.
Ernesto
evidence
to
show
expenses
for
their
We
consider,
Ramos
and
likewise
Goyena
said
Ramos)
amount
which
are
WHEREFORE,
Medical
Certificates
(Exhs.
to
and
their
the
petition
is
DENIED
SO ORDERED.
Cruz, Davide, Jr. and Bellosillo, JJ ., concur.
Grio-Aquino, J ., is on leave.
and
the