Torts and Damages

San Beda College of Law
215
MEMORY AID IN CIVIL LAW
TORTS AND DAMAGES
I. TORTS
NEGLIGENCE
TORT The omission of that degree of
An unlawful violation of private diligence which is required by the nature
right, not created by contract, and which of the obligation and corresponding to
gives rise to an action for damages. the circumstances of persons, time and
It is an act or omission producing an place. (Article 1173 Civil Code)
injury to another, without any previous
existing lawful relation of which the said Kinds of Negligence:
act or omission may be said to be a 1. Culpa Contractual (contractual
natural outgrowth or incident. negligence)
Governed by CC provisions on
NOTES: Obligations and Contracts, particularly
An unborn child is NOT entitled to Arts. 1170 to 1174 of the Civil Code.
damages. But the bereaved parents may
be entitled to damages, on damages 2. Culpa Aquiliana (quasi-delict)
inflicted directly upon them. (Geluz vs. Governed mainly by Art. 2176 of the
CA, 2 SCRA 802) Civil Code
Defendants in tort cases can either
be natural or artificial being. 3. Culpa Criminal (criminal negligence)
Corporations are civilly liable in the Governed by Art. 365 of the Revised
same manner as natural persons. Penal Code.
Any person who has been injured by
NOTES:
reason of a tortious conduct can sue the
tortfeasor.
The primary purpose of a tort action The 3 kinds of negligence furnish
is to provide compensation to a person separate, distinct, and independent
who was injured by the tortious conduct bases of liability or causes of action.
of the defendant. A single act or omission may give rise
Preventive remedy is available in to two or more causes of action.
some cases.
Classes of Torts:
Culpa Contractual Culpa Aquiliana
A. Negligent Torts The foundation of
B. Intentional Torts the liability of the It is a separate
defendant source of obligation
C. Strict Liability independent of
is the contract contract
In quasi-delict the
In breach of contract presumptive
committed through responsibility for the
A. NEGLIGENT TORTS the negligence of negligence of his
employee, the servants can be
employer cannot rebutted by proof of
Involve voluntary acts or omissions the exercise of due
which result in injury to others without erase his primary and
direct liability by care in their selection
intending to cause the same or because and supervision.
invoking exercise of
the actor fails to exercise due care in diligence of a good
performing such acts or omissions. father of a family in
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE

CHAIRPERSON: Romuald Padilla ASST.CHAIRPERSON: Vida Bocar, Joyce Vidad EDP: Alnaiza Hassiman, Dorothy
Gayon
SUBJECT HEADS: Christopher Rey Marasigan (Persons and Family Relations), Alejandro Casabar(Property), Ma.
Rhodora
Ferrer(Wills and Succession), Ian Dominic Pua(Obligations and Contracts), Sha Elijah Dumama(Sales and Lease),
John Stephen
Quiambao(PAT), Christopher Cabigao(Credit Transactions), Ligaya Alipao(Torts and Damages), Anthony
Purganan(LTD),
Ma. Ricasion Tugadi (Conflicts of Law)
216
an ordinarily prudent person would

the selection and have used in the same situation?
supervision of the If not then he is guilty of
employee. negligence.
2. Could a prudent man, in the case
under consideration, foresee harm as
a result of the course pursued?
If so, it was the duty of the actor to
take precautions to guard against harm.
NOTES:
Negligence is a conduct - the
Culpa Aquiliana Crime determination of the existence of
negligence is concerned with what the
Only involves private Affect the public defendant did or did not do
concern interest The state of mind of the actor is
not important; good faith or use of
The Civil Code by The Revised Penal sound judgment is immaterial. The
means of indem- Code punishes or existence of negligence in a given
nification merely corrects criminal act case is not determined by reference
repairs the damage to the personal judgment but by the
behavior of the actor in the situation
Includes all acts in Punished only if there before him. (Picart vs. Smith)
which any kind of is a penal law clearly
fault or negligence covering them
Negligence is a conduct that creates
intervenes an undue risk of harm to others.
The determination of negligence is a
Liability of the question of foresight on the part of the
Liability is direct and employer of the actor FORESEABILITY.
primary in quasi- actor-employee is
delict subsidiary in crimes Even if a particular injury was not
foreseeable, the risk is still foreseeable
QUASI-DELICT if possibility of injury is foreseeable.
Whoever by act or omission causes Forseeability involves the question of

damage to another, there being fault or PROBABILITY, that is, the existence of
negligence is obliged to pay for the some real likelihood of some damage and
damage done. (Article 2176 Civil Code) the likelihood is of such appreciable
weight reasonably to induce, action to
avoid it.
Essential Requisites for a quasi-
delictual action:
1. Act or omission constituting fault or Calculation of Risk
negligence; Interests are to be balanced only in
2. Damage caused by the said act or the sense that the purposes of the actor,
omission; and the nature of his act and the harm that
3. Causal relation between the damage may result from action or inaction are
and the act or omission. elements to be considered.
Tests of Negligence Circumstances to consider in

1. Did the defendant in doing the determining negligence: (PEST-GAP)
alleged negligent act use the 1. Time
reasonable care and caution which 2. Place
3. Emergency
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
217
Emergency rule The law fixes no arbitrary age at

GENERAL RULE: An individual who which a minor can be said to have the
suddenly finds himself in a situation necessary capacity to understand and
of danger and is required to act appreciate the nature and consequence
without much time to consider the of his acts. (Taylor vs. Meralco, 16 Phil
best means that may be adopted to 8)
avoid the impending danger is not Applying the provisions of the
guilty of negligence if he fails to Revised Penal Code, Judge Sangco takes
undertake what subsequently and the view that a child who is 9 or below is
upon reflection may appear to be a conclusively presumed to be incapable of
better solution. negligence. In the other hand, if the
EXCEPTION: When the emergency child is above 9 years but below 15,
was brought by the individuals own there is a disputable presumption of
negligence. (Valenzuela vs. CA 253 absence of negligence.
SCRA 303). Absence of negligence does not
4. Gravity of Harm to be avoided
necessarily mean absence of liability.
5. Alternative Course of Action
If the alternative presented to
Liability without fault: a child under
the actor is too costly, the harm 9 years can still be subsidiarily liable
that may result may be still be with his property (Art. 100, RPC)
considered unforeseeable to a Absence of negligence of the child
reasonable man. may not excuse the parents from their
6. Social value or utility of activity vicarious liability under Art. 2180 NCC or
7. Person exposed to the risk Art. 221 FC.
GOOD FATHER OF A FAMILY (pater 2. Physical Disability

familias): Mere weakness of a person will not
- this is the standard of conduct used in be an excuse in negligence cases.
the Philippines However if defect amounts to a real
- a man of ordinary intelligence and disability the standard of conduct is that
prudence or an ordinary reasonable of a reasonable person under like
prudent man disability.
a reasonable man deemed to have
knowledge of the facts that a man should 3. Experts and professionals
be expected to know based on ordinary They should exhibit the care and skill
human experience. (PNR vs IAC, 217 of one who is ordinarily skilled in the
SCRA 409) particular field that he is in.
- a prudent man who is expected to know When a person holds himself out as
the basic laws of nature and physics, e.g. being competent to do things requiring
gravity. professional skill, he will be held liable
for negligence if he fails to exhibit the
SPECIAL RULES care and skill of one ordinarily skilled in
1. Children the particular work which he attempts to
The action of the child will not do.
necessarily be judged according to the An expert will not be judged based
standard of an adult. But if the minor is on what a non-expert can foresee.
mature enough to understand and The rule regarding experts is
appreciate the nature and consequence applicable not only to professionals who
of his actions, he will be considered have undergone formal education.
negligent if he fails to exercise due care
and precaution in the commission of such 4. Nature of activity
acts. There are activities which by nature
impose duties to exercise a higher
NOTES: degree of diligence.
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE

Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
218
Examples: under the circumstances indicated

a. Banks, by the very nature of their therein.
work, are expected to exercise the However, Dean Guido Calabresi
highest degree of diligence in the believes that there should be a uniform
selection and supervision of their standard between a men and a women.
employees.
b. Common carriers are required to Other Factors to Consider in
exercise extraordinary diligence in the Determining Negligence:
vigilance over their passengers and A. VIOLATION OF RULES AND
transported goods. (Article 1733 Civil STATUTES
Code). 1. Statutes
GENERAL RULE: Violation of a
5. Intoxication statutory duty is NEGLIGENCE PER SE
GENERAL RULE: Mere intoxication is (Cipriano vs. CA, 263SCRA711). When the
not negligence, nor does the mere fact Legislature has spoken, the standard of
of intoxication establish want of ordinary care required is no longer what a
care. But it may be one of the reasonably prudent man would do under
circumstances to be considered to prove the circumstances but what the
negligence. Legislature has commanded.
EXCEPTION: Under Art. 2185 of the EXCEPTIONS:
Civil Code, it is presumed that a person a. When unusual conditions occur and
driving a motor vehicle has been strict observance may defeat the
negligent if at the time of the mishap, purpose of the rule and may even
he was violating any traffic regulation. lead to adverse results.
b. When the statute expressly
6. Insanity provides that violation of a
The insanity of a person does not statutory duty merely establishes a
excuse him or his guardian from liability presumption of negligence.
based on quasi-delict.
Bases for holding an insane person NOTE: Rule as to proof of proximate
liable for his tort: cause
a. Where one of two innocent persons GENERAL RULE: Plaintiff must show
must suffer a loss, it should be borne by that the violation of the statute is the
the one who occasioned it. proximate or legal cause of the injury
b. To induce those interested in the or that it substantially contributed
estate of the insane person to restrain thereto. (Sanitary Steam Laundry, Inc.
and control him. vs. CA 300SCRA20)
c. The fear that an insanity would EXCEPTION: In cases where the
lead to false claims of insanity and avoid damage to the plaintiff is the damage
liability. sought to be prevented by the statute.
In such cases, proof of violation of
7. Women statute and damage to the plaintiff
In determining the question of may itself establish proximate cause.
contributory negligence in performing (Teague vs. Fernandez 51SCRA181).
such act, the age, sex, and condition of
the passengers are circumstances 2. Administrative Rule
necessarily affecting the safety of the Violation of a rule promulgated by
passenger, and should be considered. administrative agencies is not negligence
(Cangco vs. Manila Railroad Co. GR per se but may be EVIDENCE OF
No.12191, October 14, 1918) NEGLIGENCE.
Although there is no unequivocal
statement of the rule, Valenzuela vs. CA 3. Private Rules of Conduct.
253SCRA303 appears to require a Violation of rules imposed by
different standard of care for women private individuals (e.g. employers) is
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
219
merely a POSSIBLE EVIDENCE OF

NEGLIGENCE.
A. Presumptions of Negligence
B. PRACTICE AND CUSTOM 1. In motor vehicle mishaps, the owner
Compliance with the practice and is presumed negligent if he was in the
custom in a community will not vehicle and he could have used due
automatically result in a finding that the diligence to prevent the misfortune.
actor is not guilty of negligence. Non- (Article 2184 Civil Code)
compliance with the practice or custom 2. It is disputably presumed that a
in the community does not necessarily driver was negligent if he had been
mean that the actor was negligent. found guilty of reckless driving or
In Yamada vs. Manila Railroad Co., violating traffic regulations at least
the owner of an automobile struck by a twice for the next preceding two
train while crossing the tracks sought to months. (Article 2184 Civil Code)
establish absence of negligence of its 3. The driver of a motor vehicle is
driver by evidence of a custom of presumed negligent if at the time of the
automobile drivers of Manila by which mishap, he was violating any traffic
they habitually drove their cars over the regulation. (Article 2185 Civil Code)
railroad crossings without slackening 4. GENERAL RULE: Prima facie
speed. The SC rejected the argument by presumption of negligence of the
ruling that: a practice which is dangerous defendant arises if death or injury
to human life cannot ripen into custom results from his possession of dangerous
which will protect anyone who follows it. weapons or substance.
EXCEPTION: When such possession or
C. COMPLIANCE WITH STATUTES use is indispensable to his occupation or
Compliance with a statute is not business. (Article 2188 Civil Code)
conclusive that there was no negligence. 5. GENERAL RULE: Presumption of
Example: A defendant can still be negligence of the common carrier arises
held liable for negligence even if he can in case of loss, destruction or
establish that he was driving below the deterioration of the goods, or in case of
speed limit. Compliance with the speed death or injury of passengers.
limit is not conclusive that he was not EXCEPTION: Upon proof of exercise of
negligently driving his car. extraordinary diligence.
Gross Negligence - Negligence where B. Res Ipsa Loquitur

there is want of even slight care and
diligence. The thing or transaction speaks for
itself.
PROOF OF NEGLIGENCE It is a rule of evidence peculiar to
GENERAL RULE: the law of negligence which recognizes
If the plaintiff alleged in his that prima facie negligence may be
complaint that he was damaged because established in the absence of direct
of the negligent acts of the defendant, proof, and furnishes a substitute for
the plaintiff has the burden of proving specific proof of negligence.
such negligence. (Taylor vs. MERALCO
16Phil8)
The quantum of proof required is Requisites of Res Ipsa Loquitor:
preponderance of evidence. (Rule 133 1. The accident was of a kind which
Revised Rules of Court) ordinarily does not occur in the
EXCEPTIONS: Exceptional cases when absence of someones negligence;
the rules or the law provides for cases 2. The instrumentality which caused
when negligence is presumed. the injury was under the exclusive
A. Presumptions of Negligence control and management of the
B. Res Ipsa Loquitur person charged with negligence; and
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE

Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
220
3. The injury suffered must not have Abandonment of persons in danger and
been due to any voluntary action or abandonment of ones own victim is
contribution on the part of the considered, under certain circumstances
person injured; absence of as a crime against security (Article 275
explanation by the defendant. RPC); and
In Africa vs. Caltex (Phil.) Inc. Mar No driver of a motor vehicle concerned
31, 1966, defendant Caltex was liable for in a vehicular accident shall leave the
damage done to the property of its scene of the accident without aiding the
neighbors when fire broke out in a Caltex victim unless he is excused from doing
service station. The gasoline station, so. (Section 55 RA 4136 [Land
with all its appliances, equipment and Transportation and traffic Code])
employees, was under the control of the
defendant. The persons who knew how 2. Owners, Proprietors and Possessors
the fire started were the defendant and of Property
its employees, but they gave no GENERAL RULE: The owner has no duty
explanation whatsoever. to take reasonable care towards a
trespasser for his protection or even to
The doctrine is not applicable if protect him from concealed danger.
there is direct proof of absence or NOTE: Damage to any person resulting
presence of negligence. (S.D. Martinez, from the exercise of any rights of
et al vs. William Van Buskirk) ownership is damage without injury
(Damnum absque injuria)
AFFIRMATIVE DUTIES AND EXCEPTIONS:

MISCELLANEOUS ACTIVITIES: a. Visitors and tolerated possession
1. Duty to Rescue The owner is still liable if the
A. Duty to the rescuer plaintiff is inside his property by
The defendants are liable for the tolerance or by implied permission.
injuries to persons who rescue people in Owners of buildings or
distress because of the acts or omissions premises owe duty of care to
of the said defendants. visitors.
There is liability to the rescuer b. Doctrine of Attractive Nuisance
and the law does not discriminate One who maintains on his
between the rescuer oblivious to the premises dangerous instrumentalities
peril and the one who counts the costs. or appliances of a character likely to
The risk of rescue, if only not attract children in play, and who
wanton, is born of the occasion. fails to exercise ordinary care to
One who was hurt trying to prevent children from playing
rescue another who was injured through therewith or resorting thereto, is
negligence may recover damages. liable to a child of tender years who
(Santiago vs. De leon CA-GR No.16180-R is injured thereby, even if the child
March 21, 1960) is technically a trespasser in the
Danger of personal injury or premises.
death. NOTE: A swimming pool or pond or
reservoir of water is NOT considered
attractive nuisance. (Hidalgo
B. Duty to rescue Enterprises vs. Baladan 91 Phil 488)
GENERAL RULE: There is no general
duty to rescue; a person is not liable for
quasi-delict even if he did not help a
person in distress.
EXCEPTIONS: A limited duty to rescue
is imposed in certain cases:
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE

Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
221
c. State of Necessity In quasi-delictual actions against the

The owner of a thing has no right employer, the employee may use the
to prohibit the interference of provisions of the Labor Code which
another with the same if the imposes upon the employer certain
interference is necessary to avert duties with respect to the proper
imminent danger and the threatened maintenance of the work place or
damage, compared to the damage the provisions of adequate facilities
arising to the owner from the to ensure the safety of the
interference, is much greater. employees.
(Article 432 Civil Code) Articles 1711 and 1712 of the Civil
It is also a recognized justifying Code impose liability without fault
circumstance under the RPC. on the part of the employers.
In both the Civil Code and the
RPC, the owner may demand from B. Employees
the person benefited, indemnity for Employees are bound to exercise due
the damages. care in the performance of their
functions for the employers; absence
Use of properties that injures another such due care, the employee may be
An owner cannot use his property in held liable.
such a manner as to injure the rights of
others. (Article 431 Civil Code). 4. Banks
Hence the exercise of the right of The business of banks is one affected
the owner may give rise to an action by public interest. Because of the
based on quasi-delict if the owner nature of its functions, a bank is under
negligently exercises such right to the obligation to treat the accounts of its
prejudice of another. depositors with meticulous care, always
having in mind the fiduciary nature of
Liability of Proprietors of buildings their relationship. (PBC vs. CA [1997])
New Civil Code include provisions
that apply to proprietors of a building or 5. Common carriers
structure which involve affirmative duty From the nature of their business
of due care in maintaining the same: and for reasons of public policy, they are
Articles 2190 and 2191. bound to exercise extraordinary
Third persons who suffered damages diligence in the vigilance over the goods
may proceed only against the engineer or and the safety of the passengers.
architect or contractor if the damage The case against the common carrier
referred to in Articles 2190 and is for the enforcement of an obligation
2191should be a result of any defect in arising from breach of contract.
construction. The same act which breached the
Nevertheless, actions for damages contract may give rise to an action based
can still be maintained under Article on quasi delict. (Air France vs
2176 for damages resulting from Carrascoso, L21438, Sept. 28, 1996)
proprietors failure to exercise due care
in the maintenance of his building and 6. Doctors
that he used his property in such a way A. STANDARD OF CARE
that he injured the property of another. The proper standard is whether,
the physician if a general practitioner,
3. Employers and Employees has exercised the degree of care and
A. Employers skill of the average qualified
Actions for quasi-delict can still be practitioner, taking into account the
maintained even if employees advances in the profession.
compensation is provided for under A physician who holds himself out
the Labor Code. as a specialist should be held to the
standard of care and skill of the average
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
222
member of the profession practicing the consultant which would hold the
specialty, taking into account the hospital liable solidarily liable for the
advances in the profession. injury suffered by a patient under Article
2180 of the Civil Code. (Ramos vs. CA GR
B. THE CAPTAIN OF THE SHIP DOCTRINE No 124354, April 11, 2002)
The head surgeon is made liable The contract between the
for everything that goes wrong within consultant and the patient is separate
the four corners of the operating room. and distinct the contract between the
It enunciates the liability of the hospital and the patient. The first has
surgeon not only for the wrongful acts of for its object the rendition of medical
those under his physical control but also services by the consultant to the patient,
those wherein he has extension of while the second concerns the provision
control. by the hospital of facilities and services
C. NOT WARRANTORS by its staff such as nurses and laboratory
Physicians are not warrantors of personnel necessary for the proper
cures or insurers against personal injuries treatment of the patient. (Ramos vs. CA
or death of the patient. GR No 124354, April 11, 2002)
D. PROOF 7. Lawyers
Expert testimony should be offered An attorney is not bound to exercise
to prove that the circumstances are extraordinary diligence but only a
constitutive of conduct falling below the reasonable degree of care and skill,
standard of care employed by other having reference to the business he
physicians in good standing when undertakes to do.
performing the same operation.
Medical malpractice can also be DEFENSES IN NEGLIGENCE CASES
established by relying on the doctrine of Kinds of defenses:
res ipsa loquitor; in which case the need A. Complete completely bars
of expert testimony is dispensed with recovery
because the injury itself provides the B. Partial mitigates liability
proof of negligence. (Ramos vs. CA, GR
No.124354, December 29, 1999) 1. PLAINTIFFS CONDUCT AND
Example: The doctrine was applied CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE
in a case of removal of the wrong part of a. Plaintiffs own negligence as the
the body when another part was proximate cause
intended. When the plaintiffs own negligence
was the immediate and proximate
Two pronged evidence: cause of his injury, he cannot
a. Evidence as to the recognized recover damages. (Article 2179
standards of the medical community Civil Code)
in the particular kind of case; and b. Contributory negligence
b. A showing that the physician Conduct on the part of the injured
departed from this standard in his party contributing as a legal cause
treatment. to the harm he has suffered which
Four elements in medical falls below the standard to which
negligence cases: duty, breach, injury he is required to conform for his
and proximate causation own protection. (Valenzuela vs. CA
253SCRA303)
E. LIABILITY OF HOSPITALS AND If the plaintiffs negligence was
CONSULTANTS only contributory, the immediate
There is no employer-employee and proximate cause of the injury
relationship between the hospital and a being the defendants lack of due
physician admitted in the said hospitals care, the plaintiff may recover
medical staff as an active or visiting damages but the courts shall
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
223
mitigate the damages to be foreseen, it must be impossible to

awarded (Article 2179 Civil Code). avoid;
Doctrine of Comparative c. The occurrence must be such as to
Negligence render it impossible for the debtor
The to fulfill his obligation in a normal
relative degree of negligence of manner; and
the parties is considered in d. The obligor must be free from any
determining whether and to what participation in the aggravation of
degree, either should be the injury resulting to the creditor.
responsible for his negligence NOTE: When an act of God concurs
(apportionment of damages). with the negligence of defendant to
This is produce an injury, the defendant is
the doctrine being applied in our liable if the injury would not have
jurisdiction wherein the resulted but for his own negligent
contributory negligence of the conduct or omission. The whole
plaintiff does not completely bar occurrence is humanized and removed
recovery but merely results in from the rules applicable to acts of
mitigation of liability; it is a partial God. (NAPOCOR vs. CA [1993])
defense. GENERAL RULE: It is a complete
The defense and a person is not liable if
the cause of the damage is a fortuitous
court is free to determine the
event.
extent of the mitigation of the
defendants liability depending
EXCEPTION: It is merely a partial
defense and the courts may mitigate
upon the circumstances.
the damages if the loss would have
resulted in any event (Art. 2215(4)
2. IMPUTED CONTRIBUTORY
Civil Code).
NEGLIGENCE
Negligence is imputed if the actor is
4. ASSUMPTION OF RISK
different from the person who is
Volenti non fit injuria: One is not
being made liable.
legally injured if he has consented to the
The defendant will be subject to
act complained of or was willing that it
mitigated liability even if the
should occur.
plaintiff was not himself personally
negligent but because the negligence
of another is imputed to the It is a complete defense.
plaintiff.
It is applicable if the negligence was Elements:
on the part of the person for whom
the plaintiff is responsible, and a. The plaintiff must know that the
especially, by negligence of an risk is present;
associate in the transaction where he
was injured. b. He must further understand its
nature; and that
3. FORTUITOUS EVENTS
Essential requisites:
a. The cause of the unforeseen and c. His choice to incur it is free and
unexpected occurrence, or of the voluntary.
failure of the debtor to comply
with his obligation, must be KINDS:
independent of the human will;
b. It must be impossible to foresee a. Express waiver of the right to
the event which constitutes the recover
caso fortuito, or if it can be
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE

Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
224
There is assumption of risk if the a) The employees assume the

plaintiff, in advance has expressly ordinary risks inherent in the
waived his right to recover damages for industry in which he is employed.
the negligent act of the defendant.
- As to abnormal risks, there
NOTE: A person cannot contract away his must be cogent and convincing
right to recover damages resulting from evidence of consent.
negligence. Such waiver is contrary to
public policy and cannot be allowed. b) When a passenger boards a
However, the waiver contemplated by common carrier, he takes the risks
this prohibition is the waiver of the right incidental to the mode of travel he
to recover before the negligent act was has taken.
committed.
If waiver was made after the cause iii. Dangerous Activities
of action accrued, the waiver is valid and
may be construed as a condonation of
Persons who voluntarily
the obligation.
participate in dangerous activities
assume the risks which are usually
present in such activities.
b. Implied Assumptions
EXAMPLE: A professional
i. Dangerous Conditions athlete is deemed to assume the
risks of injury to their trade.
A person who, knowing that he
is exposed to a dangerous condition iv. Defendants negligence
voluntarily assumes the risk of such
dangerous condition may not recover
When the plaintiff is aware of
from the defendant who maintained
the risk created by the defendants
such dangerous conditions.
negligence, yet he voluntarily
Example: A person who main-
decided to proceed to encounter it,
tained his house near a railroad track
there is an implied admission.
assumes the usual dangers attendant
to the opera-tion of a locomotive.
(Rodrigueza vs. Manila Railroad Co., EXAMPLE: If the plaintiff has
GR No. 15688, Nov. 19, 1921). been supplied with a product which
he knows to be unsafe, he is deemed
to have assumed the risk of using
ii. Contractual Relations
such unsafe product.
There may be implied

assumption of risk if the plaintiff
5. DEATH OF THE DEFENDANT
entered into a contractual relation
Death of the defendant does not
with the defendant. By entering into
extinguish the obligation based on quasi-
a relationship freely and voluntarily
delict.
where the negligence of the
An action survives even if the
defendant is obvious, the plaintiff
defendant dies during the pendency of
may be found to accept and consent
the case if the case is an action to
to it.
recover for an injury to persons or
property by reason of tort committed by
EXAMPLES: the deceased. It is no defense at all.
6. PRESCRIPTION
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE

Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
225
An action based on quasi-delict Nearest Cause

prescribes in four years from the date of That cause which is the last link in
the accident. (Article 1146 Civil Code) the chain of events; the nearest in point
of time or relation.
Relations Back Doctrine Proximate cause is not necessarily
An act done at one time is the nearest cause but that which is the
considered by fiction of law to have procuring efficient and predominant
been done at some antecedent cause.
period. (Allied Banking Corp vs. CA, Concurrent Causes
1989) The actor is liable even if the active
EXAMPLE: A doctor negligently
and substantially simultaneous operation
transfused blood to a patient that
of the effects of a third persons
was contaminated with HIV. If the
innocent, tortious or criminal act is also
effect became apparent only after
a substantial factor in bringing about the
five (5) years, the four (4) year
harm so long as the actors negligent
prescriptive period should commence
conduct actively and continuously
only when it was discovered.
operate to bring about harm to another.
(Africa vs. Caltex)
Where several causes producing the
7. INVOLUNTARINESS injury are concurrent and each is an
It is a complete defense in quasi- efficient cause without which the injury
delict cases and the defendant is would not have happened, the injury
therefore not liable if force was exerted may be attributed to all or any of the
on him. (Aquino, Torts and Damages) causes and recovery may be had against
any or all of the responsible persons.
EXAMPLE: When the defendant was Where the concurrent or successive
forced to drive his vehicle by armed negligent acts or omissions of two or
men. He was, at pain of death, forced to more persons, although acting
drive at a very fast clip because the independently, are in combination the
armed men were escaping from the direct and proximate cause of a single
policemen. The defendant cannot be injury to a third person, and it is
held liable, if a bystander is hit as a impossible to determine what proportion
consequence. each contributed to the injury, either of
them is responsible for the whole injury,
even though his act alone might not have
CAUSATION caused the entire injury; they become
joint tort-feasors and are solidarily liable
Proximate Cause for the resulting damage under Article
That cause which in natural and 2194 of the Civil Code.
continuous sequence, unbroken by any
efficient intervening cause, produces the
injury, without which the result would NOTE: Primary cause remains the
not have occurred. proximate cause even if there is an
intervening cause which merely
Remote Cause cooperated with the primary cause and
That cause which some independent which did not break the chain of
force merely took advantage of to causation.
accomplish something not the natural
effect thereof. Tests of Proximate Cause
Two-part test
1. Cause-in-fact Test
2. Policy Test
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE

Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
226
NOTE: In determining the proximate a. Duplicative causation

cause of the injury, it is first necessary When two or more sets operate
to determine if the defendants simultaneously to produce the
negligence was the cause-in-fact of the effect; the effect is over-
damage to the plaintiff. (Cause-in-fact determined.
test) b. Pre-emptive causation
If the When, though coming about first
defendants negligence was not in time, one causal set trumps
the cause-in-fact, the inquiry another potential set lurking in the
stops. background; the causal potency of
If it is, the the latter is frustrated.
inquiry shifts to the question of limit
of the defendants liability. (Policy Multiple causation
test) If there are a number of candidate
CAUSE-IN-FACT TESTS: conditions, which, taken one at a time,
1. But-For Test would not in fact have been sufficient to
The defendants conduct is the cause the accident and the accident was
cause-in-fact if damage would not have a cumulative effect of all the candidate
resulted had there been no negligence conditions.
on the part of the defendant.
Conversely, defendants negligent Policy Tests:
conduct is not the cause in fact of the 1. Foreseeability Test
plaintiffs damage if the accident could 2. Natural and Probable Consequence
not have been avoided in the absence Test
thereof. 3. Natural and Ordinary or Direct
Consequence Test
2. Substantial Factor test 4. Hindsight Test
The conduct is the cause-in-fact of 5. Orbit of Risk Test
the damage if it was a substantial factor 6. Substantial Factor Test
in producing the injuries.
In order to be a substantial factor in Policy Tests may be divided into Two
producing the harm, the causes set in Groups:
motion by the defendant must continue 1. FORESIGHT PERSPECTIVE/
until the moment of the damage or at FORESEEABILITY TESTS
least down the setting in motion of the The defendant is not liable for the
final active injurious force which unforeseeable consequences of his acts
immediately produced or preceded the Liability is limited within the risk
damage. created by defendants negligent acts.
NOTE: If the defendants conduct was
already determined to be the cause in 2. DIRECT PERSEPECTIVE/ DIRECT
fact of the plaintiffs damage under the COSEQUENCES TESTS
but for test, it is necessarily the cause in The defendant is liable for damages
fact of the damage under the substantial which are beyond the risk.
factor test. Direct consequences are those which
follow in sequence from the effect of
3. NESS Test defendants act upon conditions existing
The candidate condition may still be and forces already in operation at the
termed as a cause where it is shown to time without intervention of any
be a necessary element in just one of external forces, which come into active
several co-present causal set each operation later.
independently sufficient for the effect.
Tests applied in the Philippines:
Two ways by which co-presence may New Civil Code has a chapter on
manifest itself: Damages which specifies the kind of
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
227
damage for which the defendant may be was wounded to the time of his death.
held liable and the extent of damage to (People vs. Rellin 77 Phil 1038)
be awarded to the plaintiff.
Cause-in-fact Tests: NOTES:
1. But-for test A cause is not an intervening cause if
2. Substantial Factor test it was already in operation at the time
3. NESS test the negligent act is committed.
Policy test: The directness approach Foreseeable intervening causes
is being applied in this jurisdiction. cannot be considered sufficient
intervening causes.
NOTE: The definition of proximate cause The intervention of unforeseen and
which includes the element of foresight unexpected cause is not sufficient to
is not consistent with the express relieve the wrongdoer from
provision of the Article 2202 of the New consequences of negligence if such
Civil Code; a person may be held liable negligence directly and proximately
whether the damage to the plaintiff may cooperates with the independent cause
be unforeseen. in the resulting injury.
Cause and Conditions
It is no longer practicable to CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE
distinguish between cause and A. Plaintiffs negligence is the cause
condition. Plaintiffs negligence is not
The defendant may be liable even if contributory if it is necessary and
only created conditions, if the conditions sufficient to produce the result.
resulted in harm to either person or EXAMPLES:
property.
1. Only the plaintiff was negligent.
EXAMPLES of Dangerous Conditions:
2. Defendants negligence is not a
1. Those that are inherently
part of the causal set which is a part of
dangerous
the causal chain.
2. Those where a person places a
3. Plaintiffs negligence was pre-
thing which is not dangerous in itself in a
emptive in nature.
dangerous position.
3. Those involving products and
B. Compound Causes
other things which are dangerous
because they are defective.
Plaintiffs negligence may have
duplicative effect, that it, it is sufficient
Efficient Intervening Cause to bring about the effect but his
One which destroys the causal negligence occurs simultaneously with
connection between the negligent act the defendant; the latters negligence is
and the injury and thereby negatives equally sufficient but not necessary to
liability. bring about the effect because damage
There is NO efficient intervening would still have resulted due to the
cause if the force created by the negligence of the plaintiff.
negligent act or omission have either: Plaintiffs negligence is not merely
1. Remained active itself, or contributory because it is a concurring
2. Created another force which proximate cause.
remained active until it directly No recovery can be had. (Aquino,
caused the result, or Torts and Damages)
3. Created a new active risk of
being acted upon by the active force C. Part of the same causal set
that caused the result. Neither plaintiffs negligence nor
EXAMPLE: The medical findings, show defendants negligence alone is
that the infection of the wound by sufficient to cause the injury; the effect
tetanus was an efficient intervening would result only if both are present
cause later or between the time Javier
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
228
together with normal background The doctrine has no role in this

conditions. jurisdiction where common law concept
Negligence of the plaintiff of contributory negligence has itself
cooperated with the negligence of the been rejected in Article 2179 of the Civil
defendant in order to bring about the Code.
injury; determination of proximate cause
is only a matter of degree of 3. Third View
participation. There can be no conflict between
the doctrine of last clear chance and
D. Defendants Negligence is the Only doctrine of comparative negligence if
cause the former is viewed as a rule or phrase
Defendants negligence was of proximate cause;
sufficient AND necessary to bring about However, the doctrine of last clear
the injury. chance is no longer applicable if the
However, if plaintiffs negligence force created by the plaintiffs
increased or aggravated the resulting negligence continues until the happening
damage or injury liability of the of the injurious event.
defendant should also be mitigated
under contributory negligence rule or Cases when the doctrine was held
under the doctrine of avoidable inapplicable (PICCA)
consequences. 1. If the plaintiff was not negligent.
Doctrine of Last Clear Chance or 2. The party charged is required to act
Discovered Peril instantaneously, and if the injury cannot
The negligence of the plaintiff does be avoided by the application of all the
not preclude a recovery for the means at hand after the peril is or should
negligence of the defendant where it have been discovered.
appears that the defendant, by 3. If defendants negligence is a
exercising reasonable care and concurrent cause and which was still in
prudence, might have avoided injurious operation up to the time the injury was
consequences to the plaintiff inflicted.
notwithstanding the plaintiffs 4. Where the plaintiff, a passenger,
negligence. filed an action against a carrier based on
contract.
Alternative Views: 5. If the actor, though negligent, was
1. Prevailing view not aware of the danger or risk brought
Doctrine is applicable in this about by the prior fraud or negligent act.
jurisdiction.
Even if plaintiff was guilty of
antecedent negligence, the defendant is B. INTENTIONAL TORTS
still liable because he had the last clear Include conduct where the actor
chance of avoiding the injury. desires to cause the consequences of his
act or believes that the consequences
2. Minority View are substantially certain to result from
The historical function of the it.
doctrine was to mitigate the harshness of
the common law rule of contributory
negligence which prevented any recovery
at all by the plaintiff who was also They are found in Chapter 2 of the
negligent even if his negligence was Preliminary Title of the NCC entitled
relatively minor as compared with the Human Relations. Although this
wrongful act or omission of the chapter covers negligent acts, the torts
defendant. mentioned herein are mostly intentional
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE

Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
229
in nature or torts involving malice or bad a. Breach of promise to marry

faith.
GENERAL RULE: Breach of promise to
marry by itself is not actionable.
HUMAN RELATIONS EXCEPTION: In cases where there is
another act independent of the breach
1. Principle of Abuse of Rights of promise to marry which gives rise to
(ART.19) liability:
Elements: 1. Cases where there was financial

damage.
2. Social humiliation caused to one of
a. Legal right or duty;
the parties.
b. The right or duty is exercised in
bad faith; and
c. For the sole intent of prejudicing 3. Where there was moral seduction.
or injuring another.
EXAMPLE: If the principal NOTES:
unreasonably terminated an agency
agreement for selfish reasons. Moral seduction, although not
(Valenzuela vs. CA, 190 SCRA 1) punishable, connotes the idea of deceit,
NOTE: This rule is a departure from the enticement, superior power or abuse of
traditional view that a person is not confidence on the part of the seducer to
liable for damages resulting from the which the woman has yielded. (Gashem
exercise of ones right. Shokat Baksh vs. CA)
2. Article 20 of the Civil Code

Sexual intercourse is not by itself a
Speaks of the general sanction for all basis for recovery; damages could only
other provisions of law which do not be awarded if the sexual intercourse is
especially provide for their own not a product of voluntariness or mutual
sanction. desire.
NOTE: Article 20 does not distinguish;

the act may be done willfully or
negligently. b. Seduction without breach of
promise to marry
3. Acts contra bonus mores (Article 21

Civil Code)
Seduction, by itself, is also an act
contrary to morals, good customs and
public policy.
Elements:
The defendant is liable if he
a. Act which is legal;
employed deceit, enticement, superior
b. The act is contrary to morals, good
power or abuse of confidence in
customs, public order or public policy;
successfully having sexual intercourse
and
with another even if he satisfied his lust
c. The act is done with intent to injure.
without promising to marry the offended
NOTE: Damages are recoverable even if
party.
no positive law was violated.
Kinds:
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
230
It may not even matter that the purchase the portion encroached
plaintiff and the defendant are of the upon. (Aquino, Torts and Damages)
same gender.
A builder in good faith who
acted negligently may be held liable
under Art. 2176 NCC.
c. Sexual assault 2) Trespass to or deprivation of

personal property
Defendant is liable for all forms of
sexual assault including crimes defined In the field of tort, trespass
under the RPC as rape, acts of extends to all cases where a person
lasciviousness and seduction. is deprived of his personal property
even in the absence of criminal
liability.
d. Desertion by a spouse NOTE: It may cover cases where the

defendant was deprived of personal
property for the purpose of obtaining
A spouse has a legal obligation to live possession of real property
with his/her spouse.
EXAMPLE: The defendant

If a spouse does not perform his/her who was landlord, was held liable
duty to the other, he may be liable for
because he deprived the plaintiffs,
damages for such omission because the
his tenants, of water in order to
same is contrary to law, morals, good
force them to vacate the lot they
customs and public policy.
were cultivating. (Magbanua vs. IAC
137 SCRA 352)
3) Disconnection of electricity
e. Trespass and Deprivation of or gas service
Property
The right to
2 KINDS: disconnect and deprive the
customer, who unreasonably fails to
1) Trespass to and/or pay his bills, of electricity should be
deprivation of real property exercised in accordance with the law
and rules.
Liability for damages under
the RPC and Article 451 of the Civil Example: If a
Code requires intent or bad faith. company disconnects the electricity
service without prior notice as
Article 448 of the Civil Code required by the rules, the company
in relation to Article 456 does not commits a tort under Article 21 NCC.
permit action for damages where the
builder, planter, or sower acted in
good faith. The landowner is limited
to the options given to him under f. Abortion and Wrongful Death
article 448, that is to appropriate
whatever is built or planted or to Damages may be recovered by both
compel the builder or planter to
spouses if:
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
231
1) the abortion was caused maliciously and without probable cause,

through the physicians negligence, or after the termination of such
prosecution, suit or proceeding in favor
2) was done intentionally of the defendant therein.
without their consent
The gist of the action is putting legal
Husband of a woman who voluntarily process in force regularly, for mere
procured her abortion may recover purpose of vexation or injury. (Drilon vs.
damages from the physician who caused CA [1997])
the same on account of distress and
mental anguish attendant to the loss of
the unborn child and the disappointment
of his parental expectation. (Geluz vs. Elements:
CA 2SCRA802)
1. The fact of the prosecution and
the further fact that the defendant was
himself the prosecutor; and that the
g. Illegal Dismissal action was finally terminated with an
acquittal;
The right of the employer to dismiss
an employee should not be confused with 2. That in bringing the action, the
the manner in which the right is prosecutor acted without probable
exercised and the effects flowing cause;
therefrom;
3. The prosecutor was actuated or
If the dismissal was done anti- impelled by legal malice.
socially and oppressively, the employer
should be deemed to have violated
Article 1701 of the Civil Code (which NOTES:
prohibits acts of oppression by either
capital or labor against the other) and Malice is the inexcusable intent to
Article 21 NCC. injure, oppress, vex, annoy or humiliate.
Presence of probable cause signifies
An employer may be held liable for absence of malice.
damages if the manner of dismissing is
contrary to morals good customs and
public policy.
Absence of malice signifies good
faith on the part of the defendant; good
faith may even be based on mistake of
EXAMPLE: False imputation of law.
misdeed to justify dismissal or any
similar manner of dismissal which is done
abusively.
Acquittal presupposes that a criminal
information is filed in court and final
judgment rendered dismissing the case;
nevertheless, prior acquittal may include
dismissal by the prosecutor after
h. Malicious Prosecution preliminary investigation. (Globe Mackay
and Radio Corp. vs. CA; Manila Gas Corp
An action for damages brought by vs. CA)
one against another whom a criminal
prosecution, civil suit, or other legal
proceeding has been instituted
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
232
i. Public Humiliation
GENERAL RULE: Right to privacy is
Damages may be awarded in cases purely personal in nature, hence:
where the plaintiff suffered humiliation 1) It can be invoked only by the
through the positive acts of the person whose privacy is claimed to have
defendant directed against the plaintiff. been violated.
2) It can be subject to waiver of the
person whose privacy is sought to be
Example: The defendant was held intruded into.
liable for damages under Art. 21 for 3) The right ceases upon the death of
slapping the plaintiff in public. (Patricio the person.
vs. Hon. Oscar Leviste, [1989]) EXCEPTION: A privilege may be given
to the surviving relatives of a deceased
person to protect his memory but the
NOTES: privilege exist for the benefit of the
living, to protect their feelings and to
Under Article 21, damages are prevent the violation of their own rights
recoverable even though no positive law in the character and memory of the
was violated. deceased.
An action can only prosper when Standard to be
damage, material or otherwise, was applied in determining if there was a
suffered by the plaintiff. An action violation of the right is that of a person
based on Articles 19-21 will be dismissed with ordinary sensibilities. It is relative
if the plaintiff merely seeks to the customs of time and place and is
recognition. determined by the norm of an ordinary
Under Articles 19 and 21, the person.
defendant may likewise be guilty of a
tort even if he acted in good faith. Four Types of Invasion of Privacy
(Grand Union Supermarket vs. Espino) a. Intrusio
n upon plaintiffs seclusion or solitude
TORTS AGAINST HUMAN DIGNITY or into his private affairs
TYPES: It is not limited to cases where
1. Violation of the right of privacy the defendant physically trespassed into
Reasonableness of a persons anothers property. It includes cases
expectation of privacy depends on a when the defendant invades ones
two-part test: privacy by looking from outside
a) Whether by his conduct, the (Example: peeping-tom).
individual has exhibited an GENERAL RULE: There is no invasion of
expectation of privacy. right to privacy when a journalist records
b) Whether this expectation is one photographs or writes about something
that the society recognizes as that occurs in public places.
reasonable. EXCEPTION: When the acts of the
journalist should be to such extent that
NOTES: it constitutes harassment or overzealous
GENERAL RULE: Right to privacy can shadowing.
be invoked only by natural persons; The freedom of the press has never
Juridical persons cannot invoke such been construed to accord newsmen
right because the entire basis of right to immunity from tort or crimes committed
privacy is an injury to the feelings and during the course of the newsgathering.
sensibilities of a party, a corporation There is no intrusion when an
would have no such ground. employer investigates an employee or
EXCEPTION: Right against unreasonable when the school investigates its student.
searches and seizure can be invoked by a RA 4200 makes it illegal for any
juridical entity. person not authorized by all the parties
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
233
to any private communication to secretly wrongful publicizing of the private

record such communication by means of affairs and activities of an individual
a tape recorder (Ramirez vs CA, Sept. which are outside the realm of
28, 1995) legitimate public concern.
Use of a telephone extension for The publication of facts
purposes of overhearing a private derived from the records of official
conversation without authorization does proceedings which are not otherwise
not violate RA 4200. declared by law as confidential,
NOTE: There are instances where the cannot be considered a tortious
school might be called upon to exercise conduct.
its power over its student for acts
committed outside the school premises c. Publicit
and beyond school hours in the y which places a person in a false
following: light in the public eye
1. In cases of violation of school The interest to be protected in
policies or regulations occurring in this tort is the interest of the
connection with school sponsored individual in not being made to
activity off-campus; or appear before the public in an
2. In cases where the misconduct of objectionable false light or false
the student involves his status as a position.
student or affects the good name EXAMPLE: Defendant was held liable
and reputation of the school. for damages when he published an
unauthorized biography of a famous
b. Publicat baseball player exaggerating his
ion of Embarrassing Private Facts feats on the baseball field,
Requisites: portraying him as a war hero. (Spahn
1. Publicity is given to any private vs. Messner)
or purely personal information about If the publicity given to the
a person; plaintiff is defamatory, hence an
2. Without the latters consent; and action for libel is also warranted; the
3. Regardless of whether or not action for invasion of privacy will
such publicity constitutes a criminal afford an alternative remedy.
offense, like libel or defamation, the May be committed by the media
circumstance that the publication by distorting a news report.
was made with intent of gain or for
commercial and business purposes Tort of Putting Defamation
invariably serves to aggravate the Another in False
violation of the right. Light
1. As to gravamen of claim
PUBLIC FIGURE - A The gravamen of The gravamen of
person, who by his accomplishments, claim is not the claim is the reputa-
fame or mode of living or by adopting a reputational harm tional harm
profession or calling which gives the but rather the
embarrassment of a
public a legitimate interest in his doings,
person being made
his affairs and his character. into some-thing he is
not
NOTE: Public figures, most especially 2. As to publication
those holding responsible positions in The statement should Publication is
government enjoy a more limited right be actually made in satisfied if a letter is
to privacy compared to ordinary public sent to a third person
individuals. 3. As to the defamatory character of the
The interest sought to be statements
protected is the right to be free from Defendant may still What is published
unwarranted publicity, from the be held liable even if lowers the esteem in
the statements tells which the plaintiff is
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
234
something good held TORTS WITH INDEPENDENT CIVIL

about the plaintiff ACTIONS
1. Violation of civil and political rights
d. Commer (Article 32)
cial appropriation of likeness Although the same normally involves
The unwarranted publication of a intentional acts, it can also be
persons name or the unauthorized committed through negligence.
use of his photograph or likeness for Public officer who is a defendant
commercial purposes is an invasion cannot escape liability under the
of privacy. doctrine of state immunity; the said
With respect to celebrities, doctrine applies only if acts involved
however, the right of publicity is are done by officers in the
often treated as a separate right performance of their official duty
that overlaps but is distinct from the within the ambit of their powers;
right of privacy. They treat their officers do not act within the ambit
names and likeness as property and of their powers if they violate the
they want to control and profit constitutional rights of persons.
therefrom.
2. Defamation, Fraud, and Physical
2. Interference with Family and other injuries (Article 33)
relations A. Defamation
The gist of the tort is an interference Defamation is an invasion of the
with one spouses mental attitude interest in reputation and good
toward the other and the conjugal name, by communication to others
kindness of marital relations which tends to diminish the esteem
resulting in some actual conduct in which the plaintiff is held, or to
which materially affects it. excite adverse feelings or opinion
It extends to all cases of wrongful against him.
interference in the family affairs of Includes the crime of libel and
others whereby one spouse is slander.
induced to leave the other spouse or RPC considers the statement
conduct himself or herself that the defamatory if it is an imputation of
comfort of married life is destroyed. circumstance tending to cause the
If the interference is by the parents dishonor, discredit or contempt of
of the spouse, malice must be natural or juridical person or to
proven. blacken the memory of one who is
dead.
3. Intriguing to Cause Alienation Requisites for one to be liable
for defamatory imputations:
4. Vexation and Humiliation a. It must be defamatory
Discrimination against a person on b. It must be malicious
account of his physical defect, which c. It must be given publicity
causes emotional distress, may result d. The victim must be
in liability on the part of the identifiable
offending party.
Sexual Harassment falls under this NOTES:
category. Test in determining the
- a civil action separate and distinct from defamatory character of the
the criminal action may be imputation: A charge is sufficient if
commenced under RA 7877. the words are calculated to induce the
- 2 types of Sexual harassment: hearers to suppose and understand
a) quid pro quo cases that the person/s against whom they
b) hostile environment cases were uttered were guilty of a certain
offense, or are sufficient to impeach
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
235
their honesty, virtue, or reputation, or 1)The defendant must have made

to hold the person/s up to public false representation to the
ridicule. plaintiff
Dissemination to a number of 2)The representation must be one
persons is not required, of fact
communication to a single individual 3)The defendant must know that
is sufficient publication. the representation is false or be
GENERAL RULE: Every defamatory reckless about whether it is false
imputation is presumed to be 4)The defendant must have acted
malicious, even if it be true, if no on the false representation
good intention or justifiable motive 5)The defendant must have
for making it is shown. intended that the false
EXCEPTIONS: representation should be acted
1. A private communication on
made by any person to another 6)The plaintiff must have suffered
in the performance of any legal, damage as a result of acting on
moral or social duty; and the false representation
2. A fair and true report, made Half-truths are
in good faith, without any likewise included; it is actionable if
comments or remarks, of any the withholding of that which is not
judicial, legislative or other stated makes that which is stated
official proceedings which are absolutely false.
not of confidential nature, or of Misrepresentati
any statement, report, or speech on upon a mere matter of opinion is
delivered in said proceedings or not an actionable deceit.
of any other act performed by
public officers in the exercise of C. Physical injuries
their functions. Battery an intentional infliction
of a harmful or offensive bodily
contact; bodily contact is offensive if
It is not sufficient that the it offends a reasonable persons
offended party recognized himself as sense of dignity.
the person attacked or defamed, it Assault intentional conduct by
must be shown that at least a third one person directed at another
person could identify him as the which places the latter in
object of the libelous publication. apprehension of immediate bodily
In order to escape liability, the harm or offensive act.
defendant may claim that the Includes bodily injuries causing
statements made are privileged. death.
Physical injuries which resulted
Two kinds of privileged because of negligence or imprudence
communication: is not included in Article 33; they are
1) Absolutely privilege Those already covered by Article 2176 of
which are not actionable even if the Civil Code.
the author acted in bad faith.
2) Qualifiedly privilege not 3. Neglect of duty by police officers
actionable unless found to have (Article 34)
been made without good Subsidiary liability of cities and
intention or justifiable motive. municipalities, is imposed so that
they will exercise great care in
B. Fraud selecting conscientious and duly
Elements of deceit qualified policemen and exercise
supervision over them in the
performance of their duties.
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
236
EXCEPTION: In case of libel and

CIVIL LIABILITY ARISING FROM DELICT physical injuries wherein the
Every person criminally liable for a plaintiff initially opted to claim
felony is also civilly liable. (Article damages in the criminal proceeding
100 RPC) can file another case under Article
The reason is because a crime has a 33 of the Civil Code.
dual character: as an offense against
the State and against the private Effect of Pardon
person injured by it. Pardon does not erase civil liability.
Dual character of crimes applies to While pardon removes the existence
cases governed by special laws. of guilt so that in the eyes of the law the
Example: violation of the BP 22 offender is deemed innocent and treated
results in criminal and civil liability. as though he never committed the
There is civil liability even if the offence, it does not operate to remove
offense is a public offense, like in all the effects of the previous conviction.
bigamy.
Persons liable are the principal, DEFENDANTS IN TORT CASES
accomplice and accessories.
It includes restitution, reparation of Concurrent Negligence or Acts
damages and indemnification of 1. Joint Tort-feasors
consequential damages. All the persons who
The rule on proximate cause in command, instigate, promote,
quasi-delict cases is applicable to encourage, advice, countenance,
cases involving civil liability arising cooperate in, aid, or abet the
from delict. Art. 2202, NCC commission of a tort, or who approve of
it after it is done, if done for their
Circumstances affecting Civil Liability benefit; they are each liable as a
1. Justifying circumstances principal, to the same extent and in the
Defendant is free from civil same manner as if they have performed
liability if justifying circumstances the wrongful act themselves.
are properly establishes. The responsibility of two or more
2. Exempting Circumstances persons liable for quasi-delict is solidary
They do not erase the civil (Article 2194 Civil Code); they are not
liability. liable pro rata, they are jointly and
3. Mitigating and Aggravating severally liable for the whole amount.
Circumstances
Damages to be adjudicated 2. Motor vehicle mishaps
may either be decreased or The owner is solidarily liable with
increased depending on the presence the driver, if the former, who was in the
of mitigating or aggravating vehicle, could have, by the use of due
circumstances. diligence, prevented the misfortune.
(Article 2184 Civil Code)
Effect of Death Solidary liability is imposed on the
A. DEATH AFTER FINAL JUDGMENT: owner not because of his imputed
extinguishes criminal liability of the liability but because his own omission is
person liable but will not extinguish a concurring proximate cause of the
the civil liability. injury.
B. DEATH BEFORE FINAL JUDGMENT: Vicarious Liability or Doctrine of

GENERAL RULE: The defendant is Imputed Negligence
relieved from both criminal and civil
liability arising from criminal
liability.
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE

Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
237
A person is not only liable for that the alternative qualification of the
torts committed by himself, but also for liability of the father and the mother has
torts committed by others with whom he been removed.
has a certain relation or for whom he is
responsible. (Article 2180 Civil Code)
Exercise of diligence of a good NOTES:
father of a family to prevent damage is a
defense.
The basis of liability for the acts
or omissions of their minor
Doctrine of Respondeat Superior
children is the parental authority
the liability is strictly imputed, the
that they exercise over them,
employer is liable not because of his act
except for children 18 to 21.
or omission but because of the act or
omission of the employee; employer The same foreseability test of
cannot escape liability by claiming that negligence should apply to
he exercised due diligence in the parents when they are sought to
selection or supervision of the employee. be held liable under Art. 2180,
GENERAL RULE: Vicarious liability in NCC
the Philippines is not governed by the
doctrine of respondeat superior; The liability is not limited to
employers or parents are made liable not parents, the same is also
only because of the negligent or imposed on those exercising
wrongful act of the person for whom substitute and special parental
they are responsible but also because of authority, i.e., guardian.
their own negligence:
1) Liability is imposed on the The liability is present only both
employer because he failed to under Art 2180 of the NCC and
exercise due diligence in the Art 221 of the Family Code if the
selection or supervision of the child is living in his parents
employee company.
2) Parents are made liable because
they failed to exercise due
diligence Parental authority is not the sole
EXCEPTION: Doctrine of basis of liability. A teacher in
respondeat superior is applicable in: charge is still liable for the acts
1) liability of employers under of their students even if the
Article 103 of the RPC minor student reaches the age of
2) liability of a partnership for the majority.
tort committed by a partner
The parents or guardians can still
Persons Vicariously Liable: (Article be held liable even if the minor
2180 of the Civil Code) is already emancipated provided
1. The Father, or in case of death or that he is below 21 years of age.
incapacity, mother
Parents and other persons
For damage caused by: exercising parental authority can
escape liability by proving that
a) minor children they observed all the diligence
of a good father of a family to
b) living in their company prevent damages. (Art. 2180)
This has already been modified by

Art. 221 of the Family Code to the extent
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
238
The burden of proof rests on the While the employer incurs no

parents and persons exercising liability when an employees conduct,
parental authority. act or omission is beyond the range of
employment, a minor deviation from the
assigned task of an employee, however
2. Guardians does not affect the liability of an
For damage caused by employer. (Valenzuela vs. CA, 253 SCRA
a. minors or incapacitated persons 303)
b. under their authority It is a defense that the employer
c. living in their company exercised proper diligence in the
selection and supervision of negligent
3. Owners and managers of employee.
establishments
For damage caused by: 5. State
a) their employees For damage caused by:
a) a special agent
b) in the service of the branches in b) not when the damage has been
which they are employed, or caused by the official to whom the
task done properly pertains
c) on the occasion of their
Public officers who are guilty of
tortuous conduct are personally liable
functions
for their actions.
4. Employers
For damages cause by:
6. Schools, Teachers and
a) employees and household Administrators
helpers For damage caused by:
a) pupils and students or
b) acting within the scope of their apprentices
assigned tasks b) in their custody
statutory basis:
c) even if the employer is not if student is minor Art. 219, FC
engaged in any business or if student is no longer a minor
industry Art. 2180, Civil Code
NOTES:
NOTES:
Applies also to teachers of
academic institutions.
Liability of the employer can be
established by proving the existence of Liability attaches to the teacher-
an employer-employee relationship with in-charge.
the actor and the latter caused the
injury while performing his assigned task The school itself is now solidarily
or functions. liable with the teacher-in-
The vicarious liability attaches only charge.
when the tortuous conduct of the
employees relates to or is in the course The liability extends to acts
of his employment. committed even outside the
school so long as it is an official
activity of the school.
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE

Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
239
Whenever the school or teacher a. The innkeeper was notified in

is being made liable, the parents advance of the deposit of such goods
and those exercising substitute within the inn; and
parental authority are not free b. The guest shall have followed the
from liability because Art. 219 of directions which such innkeeper or his
the Family Code expressly representative may have given with
provides that they are respect to the care and vigilance over
subsidiarily liable. the goods.
2. Partnership
Art. 2180 makes teachers and
heads liable for acts of students Partnership or every partner is liable
and apprentices whether the for torts committed by one of the
latter are minors or not. partners acting within the scope of the
firm business, though they do not
participate in, ratify, or have knowledge
of such torts.
GENERAL RULE: The teacher-in-charge
is liable for the acts of his students. The
Partners are liable as joint tort-
school and administrators are not liable. feasors.
EXCEPTION: It is only the head of the Vicarious liability is similar to the
school, not the teacher who is held liable common law rule on respondeat
where the injury is caused in a school of superior.
arts and trade. Liability is entirely imputed and the
The liability of the teacher partnership cannot obviously invoke
subsists whether the school is diligence in the selection and supervision
academic or non- academic. of the partner.
Liability is imposed only if the
pupil is already in the custody of 3. Spouses
the teacher or head. The student a. absolute community of property
is in the custody of the school The absolute community
authorities as longs as he is property shall be for liabilities incurred
under the control and influence by either spouses by reason of crime or
of the school and within its quasi-delict in case of absence or
premises whether the semester insufficiency of the exclusive property of
had not yet begun or has already the debtor-spouse. (Article 94 Family
ended. Code)
The Payments shall be considered
victim of negligence is likewise advances to be deducted from the share
required to exercise due care in of the debtor spouse upon liquidation of
avoiding injury to himself. the community.
b. conjugal partnership of gains
Other Persons Vicariously Liable:
1. Innkeepers and Hotelkeepers GENERAL RULE: Pecuniary indemni-ties
They are civilly liable for crimes imposed upon the husband or wife are
committed in their establishments in not chargeable against the conjugal
cases of violations of statutes by them, partnership but against the separate
in default of persons criminally liable. properties of the wrongdoer.
(Article 102 Revised Penal Code) EXCEPTION: Conjugal partnership
should be made liable:
They are subsidiarily liable for the 1) When the profits have inured to the
restitution of goods taken by robbery or
benefit of the partnership, or
theft within their houses from guests
2) If one of the spouses committed the
lodging therein, or for payment of the
tort while performing a business or if the
value thereof, provided that:
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE

Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
240
act was supposed to benefit the it may even include the lessee thereof.
partnership. (Dingcong vs. Kanaan, 72 Phil 14)
c. regime of separation of property
Each spouse is responsible for
his/her separate obligation. 3. Liability of employers
Article 1711 of the NCC imposes an

C. STRICT LIABILITY obligation on owners of enterprises and
When the person is made liable other employers to pay for the death or
independent of fault or negligence upon injuries to their employees.
submission of proof of certain facts Liability is strict because it exists
specified by law. even if the cause is purely accidental.
NOTE: Strict liability tort can be If the mishap was due to the
committed even if reasonable care was employees own notorious negligence, or
exercised and regardless of the state of voluntary act or drunkenness, the
mind of the actor at that time. employer shall not be liable for
compensation.
TYPES:
When the employees lack of due
care contributed to his death or injury,
1. Animals the compensation shall be equitably
reduced.
GENERAL RULE: The possessor of an If the death or injury is due to the
animal or whoever may make use of the negligence of a fellow-workman the
same is responsible for the damages latter and the employer shall be
which it may cause although it may solidarily liable for compensation.
escape or be lost. If a fellow-workers intentional or
EXCEPTION: When the damage was malicious act is the only cause of the
caused by force majeure or by the death or injury, the employer shall not
person who suffered the damage. be answerable unless it should be shown
(Article 2183 Civil Code) that the latter did not exercise due
diligence in the selection or supervision
NOTES: of the plaintiffs fellow-worker.
If the acts of a third person cannot 4. Nuisance

be foreseen or prevented, then the
situation is similar to that of force Any act, omission, establishment,
majeure and the possessor is not liable. business, condition of property, or
(Francisco, Torts and Damages) anything else which:
Art. 2183 is applicable whether the
animal is domestic, domesticated, or
a. Injures or endangers the health or
wild.
safety of others;
b. Annoys or offends the senses;

2. Falling objects
The head of a family that lives in a
building or a part thereof is responsible c. Shocks, defies or disregards decency
for damages caused by things thrown or or morality;
falling from the same. (Article 2193 Civil
Code) d. Obstructs or interferes with the free
passage of any public highway or street,
or any body of water; or
The term head of the family is not
limited to the owner of the building, and
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
241
e. Hinders or impairs the user of

property. (Article 694 Civil Code)
There is strict liability on the part of

the owner or possessor of the property
where a nuisance is found because he is PRODUCT AND SERVICE LIABILITY
obliged to abate the same irrespective of
the presence or absence of fault or Alternative theories on basis of liability
negligence. 1. Fraud or misrepresentation
Not all expression of opinion are
Every successive owner or possessor actionable misrepresentations if they are
of property who fails or refuses to abate established to be inaccurate.
a nuisance in that property started by a
former owner or possessor is liable 2. Warranties
therefore in the same manner as the one The Consumer Act recognizes that
who created it. (Article 686 Civil Code) the provisions of the Civil Code on
conditions and warranties shall govern all
5. Product liability by manufacturers contracts of sale with conditions and
Manufacturers and processors of warranties.
foodstuffs, drinks, toilet articles and Retailer shall be subsidiarily liable
similar goods shall be liable for death or under the warranty in case of failure of
injuries caused by any noxious or harmful both the manufacturer and distributor to
substances used, although no contractual honor the warranty.
relation exists. (Article 2187 Civil Code) Privity of contract is not necessary.
Other cases of liability without fault: 3. Negligence
1. Proprietor of a building or structure, In product liability law, certain
for damages resulting from its total or standards are already imposed by special
partial collapse, if it should be due to laws, rules and regulations of proper
lack of necessary repairs. . government agencies; certain acts or
2. Breach of implied warranties. omissions are expressly prohibited by the
3. Consumer Act (R.A. 7394) any statutes thereby making violation
Filipino or foreign manufacturer, thereof negligence per se.
producer and importer, independently of It is negligence per se if
fault shall be liable for redress for
manufacturer manufactured products
damages caused to consumers by defects
which do not comply with the safety
resulting from:
standards promulgated by appropriate
a. design;
government agencies.
b. manufacture;
c. construction;
4. Delict
d. assembly and erection;
e. formulas and handling and
The liability may be based on
making up; or criminal negli-gence under the RPC or
f. presentation or packing of their violation of any special law.
products as well as for the
insufficient or inadequate 5. Strict liability
information on the use and hazards Manufacturers and processors of
thereof. foodstuffs, drinks, toilet articles, and
4. Even when an act or event causing similar goods, shall be liable for death or
damage to anothers property was not injuries caused by any noxious or harmful
due to the fault or negligence of the substances used although no contractual
defendant, the latter shall be liable for relation exists. (Article 2187 Civil Code)
indemnity if through the act or event he
was benefited. (Art. 23 Civil Code) Privity of contract is not required.
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
242
It does not preclude an action based b. knowledge on the part of the third
on negligence (quasi-delict) for the same person of the existence of the contract
act of using noxious or harmful c. interference of the third person
substances. without legal justification.
The existence of a contract is
necessary and the breach must occur
because of the alleged act of
Article 97 and 99 of the Consumer interference; No action can be
Act imposes liability on defective maintained if the contract is void.
products and services upon Malice is not essential.
manufacturers independent of fault. Elements of privilege to interfere
Knowledge of the manufacturer is 1)The defendants purpose is a
not important; the focus is on the justifiable one, and
condition of the product and not on the 2)The actors employ no means of
conduct of the manufacturer or seller. fraud or deception which are
regarded as unfair.
DEFENSES: Extent of Liability:
A. The manufacturer, builder, A. Rule in Daywalt vs. La Corporation
producer, or importer shall not be liable 39PHIL587
when it evidences: Defendant
1) That it did not place the cannot be held liable for more than
product on the market the amount for which the
2) That although it did contracting party who was induced
place the product on the market to break the contract can be held
such product had no defect liable.
3) That the consumer of B. Rule under Article 2201 and 2202
third party is solely at fault. (Article Civil Code
97 Consumer Act) 1) If
B. The supplier of the services shall not in bad faith: defendant is liable for
be held liable when it is proven: all natural and probable
1) That there is no defect in the consequences of his act or omission,
service rendered whether the same is forseen or
2) That the consumer of third party unforeseen.
is solely at fault. (Article 99 Consumer 2) If
Act) in good faith: defandant is liable
only for consequences that can be
Requisites: The plaintiff should foreseen.
allege and prove that:
1) The product was defective; 2. Interference with prospective
2) The product was manufactured advantage
by the defendant; It is a tort committed when there is
3) The defective product was the no contract yet and the defendant is
cause of his injury. only being sued for inducing another not
4 KINDS OF DEFECTIVE PRODUCTS to enter into a contract.
1. manufacturing defect
2. design defect 3. Unfair competition.
3. presentation defect Unfair Competition in agricultural,
4. absence of appropriate warning commercial, or industrial enterprises, or
in labor, through the use of force,
BUSINESS TORTS intimidation , deceit, machination or any
1. Interference of contracts unjust or oppressive or highhanded
Elements: method shall give rise to a right of action
a. existence of a valid contract
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
243
by a person who thereby suffers damage. There is no liability even if there is

(Article 27 Civil Code) damage because there was no injury.
CASES INCLUDED:
a. passing off and disparagement of
products There can be damage without injury.
b. interference
c. misappropriation
In order that a plaintiff may maintain
d. monopolies and predatory pricing
an action for the injuries of which he
complains, he must establish that such
4. Securities Related Torts
injuries resulted from a breach of duty
Kinds
which the defendant owed to the
a. Fraudulent Transactions
plaintiff.
b. Misstatements or Omission of
statement of a material fact
Injury Damage Damages
required to be stated
Legal Loss, hurt The recom-
Defendants are free from liability if invasion of or harm pense or
they can prove that at the time of the a legal which compensation
acquisition the plaintiff knew of the right results awarded for
untrue statement or if he was aware of from the the damage
the falsity. injury suffered
Extent of Damages: Not exceeding
triple the amount of the transaction. NOTES:
Prescriptive Period: Action must be A complaint for damages is a
brought within 2 years after discovery of personal action. (Baritua vs. CA, 267
facts constituting the cause of action and SCRA 331)
within 5 yrs after such cause of action Proof of pecuniary loss is necessary
accrued. to successfully recover actual
damages from the defendant. No
II. DAMAGES proof of pecuniary loss is necessary
in case of moral, nominal,
DAMAGE temperate, liquidated or exemplary
The detriment, injury or loss which damages.
are occasioned by reason of fault of The assessment of such damages,
another in the property or person. except liquidated ones, is left to the
discretion of the court according to
DAMAGES the circumstances of each case.
The pecuniary compensation,
recompense or satisfaction for an injury Kinds of damages (MANTLE)
sustained or as otherwise expressed, the 1. Actual or Compensatory
pecuniary consequences which the law 2. Moral
imposes for the breach of some duty or 3. Nominal
violation of some rights. 4. Temperate or moderate
5. Liquidated
DAMNUM ABSQUE INJURIA (Damage 6. Exemplary or corrective
Without Injury)
A. ACTUAL OR COMPENSATORY
A person may have suffered physical DAMAGES
hurt or injury, but for as long as no legal Comprehends not only the value of
injury or wrong has been done, there is the loss suffered but also that of the
no liability. profits which the obligee failed to
obtain.
Classification:
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE

Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
244
1. Dano emergente loss of what a Loss of profits

person already possesses May be determined by considering
2. Lucro cessante failure to the average profit for the preceding
receive as a benefit that would years multiplied by the number of
have pertained to him years during which the business was
NOTE: The latter type includes: affected by the wrongful act or
1. Loss or impairment of breach.
earning capacity in cases of
temporary or permanent Attorneys fees
personal injury. They are actual damages. It is due to
2. Injury to the plaintiffs the plaintiff and not to the counsel.
business standing or commercial Plaintiff must allege the basis of his
credit.
claim for attorneys fees in the
complaint; the basis should be one of
In crimes and quasi-delict, the the 11 cases specified in Article 2208
defendant shall be liable for all of the Civil Code.
damages which are the natural and
probable consequences of the act Interests
and omission complained of. It is not Award of interest in the concept of
necessary that such damages have
actual and compensatory damages
been foreseen or could have
actual damages.
reasonably foreseen by the
defendant. (Article 2202 Civil Code)
The rate of interest, as well as the
accrual thereof is imposed as
The amount should be that which
follows:
would put plaintiff in the same
1. When the obligation is breached
position as he would have been if he
and it consist of payment of sum
had not sustained the wrong for
of money, i.e., a loan or
which he is now getting his
forbearance of money:
compensation or reparation.
a. The interest due should be
To recover damages, the amount of that which may have been
loss must not only be capable of stipulated in writing;
proof but must actually be proven. furthermore, the interest
Uncertainty as to the precise amount due shall itself earn legal
is not necessarily fatal. interest from the time it is
judicially demanded.
LOSS OF EARNING CAPACITY: b. In the absence of stipulation,
Variables considered are: the rate of interest shall be
1. life expectancy 12% per annum to be
2. net income/earnings computed from default, i.e.,
from judicial or extra-
Formula: judicial demand under and
{2/3 x (80age of death)} x mo. Earnings x 12 subject to the provisions of
2 Article 1169 of the Civil
NOTE: Code.
Life expectancy is computed as 2. When the obligation, not
follows: constituting a loan or
{ 2/3 x (80-age at death) } forbearance or money, is
Net earnings is the total of the breached:
earnings less expenses necessary for An interest on the amount of
the creation of such earnings and damages to be awarded may
less living or other incidental be imposed at the discretion
expenses. of the court at the rate of 6%
per annum.
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE

Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
245
No interest shall be adjudged 2. Its causal relation to the

on unliquidated claims or defendants act
damages, except when or EXCEPTION: Moral damages may be
until demand can be awarded to the victim in criminal
established with reasonable proceedings without the need for
certainty. pleading of proof of the basis thereof.
Where the demand is
established with reasonable Requisites for award of moral damages:
certainty, the interest shall 1. There must be an injury whether
begin to run from the time physical, mental or psychological,
the claim is made judicially clearly sustained by the claimant;
or extrajudicially. 2. There must be a culpable act or
3. When the judgment of the court omission.;
awarding the sum of money 3. Such act or omission is the proximate
becomes final and executory, the cause of the injury;
rate of legal interest shall be 12% 4. The damages is predicated on the
per annum from such finality cases cited in Art.2219.
until its satisfaction.
NOTE: The award of moral damages
Doctrine of Avoidable Consequences cannot be granted in favor of a
A party cannot recover damages corporation because, being an artificial
flowing from consequences which person, it has no feelings, no emotions,
the party could reasonably have no senses. It cannot therefore
avoided. experience physical suffering and mental
It has a reasonable corollary: a anguish which can be experienced only
person who reasonably attempts to by one having a nervous system.
minimize his damages can recover
the expenses that he incurred.
Doctrine of
Contributory
Avoidable
Negligence
Consequences
Acts of the Plaintiffs act or C. NOMINAL DAMAGES
plaintiff occur omission occurs Nominal damages are adjudicated in
after the act or before or at the order that a right of the plaintiff,
omission of the time of the act or which has been violated or invaded
defendant omission of the by the defendant, may be vindicated
defendant or recognized, and not for the
purpose of indemnifying the plaintiff
for any loss suffered by him.
B. MORAL DAMAGES (Article2221 Civil Code)
Includes physical suffering, mental Small sums fixed by the court
anguish, fright, serious anxiety, without regard to the extent of the
besmirched reputation, wounded harm done to the injured party.
feelings, moral shock, social Law presumes damage although
humiliation, and similar injury. actual or compensatory damages are
No proof of pecuniary loss is not proven.
necessary. They are damages in name only and
GENERAL RULE: The plaintiff must are allowed simply in recognition of
allege and prove: a technical injury based on a
1. The factual basis for moral violation of a legal right.
damages; and
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE

Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),
246
Nominal damages cannot co-exist compensatory damages that may be

with actual or compensatory awarded;
damages. 3. The act must be accompanied by bad
faith or done in wanton, fraudulent,
D. TEMPERATE OR oppressive or malevolent manner.
MODERATE DAMAGES
These are damages, which are more
than nominal but less than
compensatory, and may be
recovered when the court finds that
some pecuniary loss has been
suffered but its amount cannot be
proved with certainty. (Article 2224
Civil Code)
In cases where the resulting injury
might be continuing and possible
future complications directly arising
from the injury, while certain to
occur are difficult to predict,
temperate damages can and should
be awarded on top of actual or
compensatory damages; in such
cases there is no incompatibility
between actual and temperate
damages.
E. LIQUIDATED DAMAGES
Those agreed upon by the parties in
a contract, to be paid in case of
breach thereof.
F. EXEMPLARY OR CORRECTIVE
DAMAGES
Imposed by way of example or

correction for the public good, in
addition to the moral, temperate,
liquidated or compensatory damages.
Requisites for the award of

exemplary damages:
1. They are imposed by way of example
in addition to compensatory damages
and Imposed only after the claimants
right to them has been established;
2. They cannot be recovered as a
matter of right, their determination
depending upon the amount of
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE

Gayon
Rhodora
John Stephen
Purganan(LTD),

Torts and Damages

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

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 and Damages

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

San Beda College of Law

MEMORY AID IN CIVIL LAW