TORTS AND DAMAGES

Atty. Sta. Barbara

1. When did the NCC take effect? August 3, 1988

2. Pure tort v. Impure tort

Pure Impure
Non-contractual Contractual

- FGU V. GP sarmiento

3. Right v. Obligation Obligation

What is the relationship
4. What is an obligation?
- Makati Stock Exchange
o Right – claim or title to an interest in anything whatsoever
that is enforceable by law
o Obligation – a juridical necessity to give, to do or not to do
(Art. 1156)
o For every right enjoyed by any person, there is a
corresponding obligation on the part of another person to
respect such right
Art. 1156
An obligation is a juridical necessity to give, to do or not to do

5. What are the sources of Art. 1157

obligation? Obligations arise from:
1. Law
2. Contracts
3. Quasi-contracts
4. Acts or omissions punished by law
5. Quasi-delicts
6. What are the essential requisites
of an obligation? 1) Active subject who has the power to demand a prestation
o Creditor, oblige
2) Passive subject who is obliged
o Debtor, obligor
3) An object consisting of an activity which must be observed by the
debtor
o Prestation
4) A vinculum juris between the active and passive subject because of
which the debtor is bound to the creditor and obliged to fulfil the
desired prestation
7. Application of requisites of an
obligation to a tort Active Subject Victim
Passive Subject Violator of the right
Prestation Duty to observe the standards of
care set by society in dealing with
other persons
Vinculum juris Violation of the duty

8. Is tort an obligation? Yes

9. What is the prestation in a tort? Duty to observe the standards of care set by society in dealing with other
persons

AVCB Bibo Notes

Disclaimer: The writer merely provided suggested answers. Use at your own risk. Page 1
 TORTS AND DAMAGES
Atty. Sta. Barbara

10. Can torts arise from:

Contract Contract Yes – provided that all the elements of a quasi-delict is

present and that the contract is merely incidental
Quasi-contract? Quasi-contract

Delict?
Delict Yes
Law?

Law Strict liability

- The liability is independent of wrongful intent or
negligence
- The vinculum juris is created by law

11. Test to determine if the law is the If the law itself provides for its creation
source of an obligation

12. What are the sources of a tort? New Civil Code

13. Joint tortfeasor Chan Jr. v. INC

- Joint tortfeasors are all the persons who command, instigate,
promote, encourage, advise, countenance, cooperate in, aid or abet
the commission of a tort, or who approve of it after it is done, if done
for their benefit

14. Is there a quasi-delict case that Art. 1146 of the NCC

prescribes for more (or less) than The following actions must be instituted within 4 years:
four years? 1) Upon an injury to the rights of the plaintiff;
2) Upon a quasi-delict

Art. 1147
The following actions must be filed within 1 year
1) For forcible entry and detainer
2) For defamation

Art. 1148
The limitations of action mentioned in Art. 1140 to 1142, and 1144
to 1147 are without prejudice to those specified in other parts of this
Code, in the Code of Commerce, and in special laws

Art. 1723
The engineer or architect who drew up the plans and specifications
for a building is liable for damages within 15 years from the
completion of the structure, the same should collapse by reason of
a defect in those plans and specifications, or due to the defects in
the ground.

The contractor is likewise responsible for the damages if the edifice

falls, within the same period, on account of defects in the
construction or the use of materials of inferior quality furnished by

AVCB Bibo Notes

Disclaimer: The writer merely provided suggested answers. Use at your own risk. Page 2
 TORTS AND DAMAGES
Atty. Sta. Barbara

him, or due to any violation of the terms of the contract. If the

engineer or architect supervises the construction, he shall be
solidarily liable with the contractor

Acceptance of the building, after completion, does not imply waiver

of any of the cause of action by reason of any defect mentioned in
the preceeding paragraph.

The action must be brought within 10 years following the collapse of

the building

15. Catch-all provisions under the Civil Art. 19

Code Every person must, in the exercise of his rights and in the
performance of his duty, act with justice, give everyone his due, and
observe honesty and good faith

Art. 20
Every person who, contrary to law, wilfully or negligently causes
damage to another shall compensate the latter for the same

Art. 21
Any person who wilfully causes loss or injury to another in a manner
that is contrary to morals, good customs or public policy shall
compensate the latter for the damage

16. Define a quasi-delict Art. 2176

Whoever by act or omission causes damage to another, there being
fault or negligence is obliged to pay for the damage done. Such
fault or negligence, if there is no pre-existing contractual relation
between the parties, is called a quasi-delict and is governed by the
provisions of this Chapter

17. What is Art. 22 Art. 22

Every person who through an act of performance by another, or any
What do you call Art. 22? other means, acquires or comes into possession of something at
the expense of the latter without just or legal ground, shall return
Is it a source of tort liability? the same to him

What kind of tort? - Principle against unjust enrichment

- It is independent of solution indebiti since there is no undue
payment/payment by mistake
- Conditions:
a. Benefited without just cause
b. Benefit is derived at another’s expense
- Accion in Rem Verso
a. Defendant is enriched
b. Plaintiff suffered a loss
c. Enrichment is without just ground
d. There is no other action available

18. Definition of Tort in Naguiat Case Sec. 100(5) of the Corporation Code
(5) To the extent that the stockholders are actively engaged in the
management or operation of the business and affairs of a close

AVCB Bibo Notes

Disclaimer: The writer merely provided suggested answers. Use at your own risk. Page 3

19. Prima facie tort doctrine
20. Art. 2187
Does it apply only to a natural
person?
Is it applicable to juridical persons?
21. If one drinks shampoo, is that
covered under Art. 2187?
22. If a person ate rat poison, is Art.
2187 applicable?
Assuming there was no fault on
the part of the victim, is it
applicable?
23. Requisites of quasi-delict under
FGU v. CA
24. Requisites of quasi-delict under
Chan v.
AVCB Bibo Notes
Disclaimer: The writer merely provided suggested answers. Use at your own risk.
TORTS AND DAMAGES
Atty. Sta. Barbara
corporation, the stockholders shall be held to strict fiduciary duties
to each other and among themselves. Said stockholders shall be
personally liable for corporate torts unless the corporation has
obtained reasonably adequate liability insurance
Tort – consists n the violation of a right given or the omission of a duty
imposed by law; breach of a legal duty
The infliction of intentional harms, resulting in damage, without excuse or
justification, by an act or a series of acts which would otherwise be lawful
Although it is not the law that all unjustified intentional infliction or injury is
tortuous, it is the sound tendency of the law to impose liability for unjustified
intentional conduct which is calculated in the ordinary course of events to
damage, and which does, in fact, damage another
Cause of action arises only where the defendant can be shown to have
acted maliciously, in the sense of an actual intention to harm the plaintiff,
and aside from any other motive
Must have been motivated entirely by disinterest malevolence, that is, the
intentional malicious injury to another is done solely to harm the other
There can be no recovery for prima facie tort unless special damages are
alleged with sufficient particularity. There must be a showing of special
damages.
Art. 2187
Manufacturers and processors of foodstuffs, drinks, toilet articles and similar
goods shall be liable for death or injuries caused by any noxious or harmful
substances used, although no contractual relation exists between them and
the consumers
Noxious – physically harmful or destructive to living beings; constituting a
harmful influence on mind or behaviour
No.
No.
a. Damage suffered by the plaintiff
b. Fault or negligence of the defendant
c. Connection of cause and effect between the fault or negligence of
the defendant and the damage incurred by the plaintiff
a. There must be an act or omission
b. Such act or omission causes damage to another
c. Such act or omission is caused by fault or negligence; and
d. There is no pre-existing contractual relation between the parties
Page 4

th
25. Is the removal of the 4
requirement contrary to law? Is it a
form of judicial legislation?
Granting that Art. 2176 mentioned
that there should be no existing
contractual relationship
26. Why is the prestation not
mentioned as a requisite of a
quasi-delict?
27. In the case of FGU v. Sarmiento,
what are the three interests that
are being protected?
28. Test to determine whether a
contract is breached by a tort
29. Art. 2183
30. A person was hit by a kalesa. Can
the injured person sue under Art.
2183?
Is Art. 2183 a strict liability tort?
AVCB Bibo Notes
Disclaimer: The writer merely provided suggested answers. Use at your own risk.
TORTS AND DAMAGES
Atty. Sta. Barbara
No.
It is now well-settled that an action based on quasi-delict can be maintained
even if there is an existing contractual relation between the parties.
However, in all such cases, the elements of quasi-delict are present and the
existence of a contract is merely incidental
Duty is equated with the standard of care required under the circumstances
Where the law imposes upon a person the duty to do something, his
omission or non-performance will render him liable to whoever may be
injured thereby. Clearly then, the “duty” requirement is in reality not a
separate element but is considered part of the “negligence” issue or the first
element of quasi-delict; the “duty” issue is collapsed into the issue of
“negligence”
Expectation Interest His interest in having the benefit of
his bargain by being put in as good
a position as he would have been
in had the contract been performed
Reliance Interest Interest in being reimbursed for
loss caused by reliance on the
contract by being put in as good a
position
Restitution Interest Interest in having restored to him
any benefit that he has conferred
on the other party
American Express
- When an act which constitutes a breach of contract would have
itself constituted the source of quasi-delictual liability, the contract
can be said to have been breached by a tort, thereby allowing the
rules on tort to apply
Art. 2183
The possessor of an animal or whoever may make use of the same
is responsible for the damage which it may cause, although it may
escape or be lost. This responsibility shall cease only in case the
damage should come from force majeure or form the fault of the
person who has suffered damage.
Yes.
The owner is liable only for such damage that may be produced as a
consequence of the special danger from the animal, resting from its nature
as a living thing with impulses of its own. Hence, the owner will not be liable
if the animal is bodily moved by others and should fall, causing injury to
another; nor when it merely follows the will of the person guiding it. But the
owner will be liable, if it runs wild because it is frightened by some noise or
object, because, in this case, the damage would result from the special
danger to the animal (DE LEON)
Page 5

31. What if the kuchero was thrown
out by the horse, is the owner
liable?
32. Can you file a separate civil action
under BP22?
33. Where did the SC get the civil
liability of BP22 given that there is
no civil liability clause under
BP22?
34. Art. 100 of the RPC
35. Extinction of civil liability under the
RPC
Is loss of the thing due a ground
for the extinguishment of civil
action based on quasi-delict/delict
36. Pardon v. Amnesty
AVCB Bibo Notes
Disclaimer: The writer merely provided suggested answers. Use at your own risk.
TORTS AND DAMAGES
Atty. Sta. Barbara
Exceptions:
a. By force majeure;
o Necessary that the same be extraordinary and unforeseen
b. By the person who suffered the damage;
It is a strict liability tort.
- Possessor or user is still liable even if damage is caused by the
negligence or fault of third person unless equated with force
majeure
The owner of an animal was held not liable for injuries caused by it to its
caretaker, who was paid by the owner for his work. Being injured was one of
the risks of the caretaker’s occupation. It was his business to prevent the
animal from causing injury to himself or to anyone. Hence, the heirs of the
caretaker who died as a consequence of his injuries cannot sue the owner
(Afialda v. Hisole)
Rule 111, Sec. 1(b)1 of the Rules of Court
- The criminal action for violation of BP 22 shall be deemed to include
the corresponding civil action. No reservation to file such civil action
separately shall be allowed
1) Art. 20 of the NCC
2) There is an offended private party
3) To significantly lower the number of cases filed in the before the
courts for collection based on dishonored checks
Art. 100 of the RPC
Every person criminally liable for a felony is also civilly liable
Art. 112. Extinction of civil liability
Civil liability established in Art. 100, 101, 102 and 103 of this Code
shall be extinguished in the same manner as other obligations, in
accordance with the provisions of the Civil Law
Art. 1231 of the NCC
a. By payment or performance;
b. By the loss of the thing due;
c. By the condonation or remission of the debt
d. By the confusion or merger of the rights of creditor and debtor;
e. By compensation
f. By novation
Other causes of extinguishment of obligations such as annulment,
rescission, fulfilment of a resolutory condition, and prescription, are
governed elsewhere in this Code
Pardon Amnesty
Definition
Act of grace, proceeding from the Commonly denotes a general
Page 6
 TORTS AND DAMAGES
Atty. Sta. Barbara

power entrusted with the execution
of the laws, which exempts the
individual, on whom it is bestowed,
from the punishment the law inflicts
for a crime he has committed
It is the private, though official act
of the executive magistrate,
delivered to the individual for
whose benefit it is intended, and
not communicated officially to the
court
pardon to rebels for their treason or
other high political offenses, or the
forgiveness which one sovereign
grants to the subjects of another,
who have offended by some
breach the law of nations (Llamas
v. Executive Secretary)
Granted by President with
concurrence of Congress

A deed to the validity of which

delivery is essential, and delivery is
not complete without acceptance
(Monsanto v. Factoran)
Effect
Art. 36, RPC Looks backward and abolishes and
A pardon shall not work the puts into oblivion the offense itself.
restoration of the right to hold It so overlooks and obliterated the
public office, or the right of offense with which he is charged
suffrage, unless such rights be that the person released by
expressly restored by the terms of amnesty stands before the law
the pardon precisely as though he had
committed no offense
A pardon shall in no case exempt
the culprit from the payment of the
civil indemnity imposed upon him
by the sentence

37. Art. 113 of the RPC Art. 113 of the RPC

Except in case of extinction provided in Art. 112, the offender shall
continue to be obliged to satisfy the civil liability resulting from the
crime committed by him, notwithstanding the fact that he has
served his sentence, consisting of deprivation of liberty or other
rights, or has not been required to serve the same by reason of
o Amnesty
o Pardon
o Commutation of sentence
o Any other reasons

38. Accused was convicted of a crime

with penalty of imprisonment and Yes.
civil liability. While serving
sentence, he was granted
amnesty.

Can the victim ask for the civil

liability?
39. In a crime, is the principal, Art. 110 of the RPC
accomplice, accessory solidarily Notwithstanding the provisions of the next preceding article, the

AVCB Bibo Notes

Disclaimer: The writer merely provided suggested answers. Use at your own risk. Page 7
 TORTS AND DAMAGES
Atty. Sta. Barbara

liable? principals, accomplices, and accessories, each within their

respective class, shall be liable serverally (in solidum) among
themselves for their quotas, and subsidiarily for those of the other
persons liable

The subsidiary liability shall be enforced:

1) Against the property of the principals
2) Against that of the accomplices
3) Against that of the accessories

Whenever the liability in solidum or the subsidiary liability has been

enforced, the person by whom payment has been made shall have
a right of action against the others for the amount of their respective
shares
40. Fault v. Negligence
FAULT NEGLIGENCE
Where the action which has Art. 1173
caused the damage was intentional The omission of that diligence
which is required by the
Responsibility for wrongdoing or circumstances of persons, place
failure and time

Failure to observe for the

protection of the interests of
another person the degree of care,
precaution and vigilance, which the
circumstances justly demand,
whereby such other person suffers
injury

41. Art. 2178 Art. 1172

Responsibility arising from negligence in the performance of every kind of
obligation is also demandable, but such liability may be regulated by the
courts, according to the circumstances

Art. 1173
The fault or negligence of the obligor consists in the omission of that
diligence which is required by the nature of the obligation and corresponds
with the circumstances of the persons, of the time and of the place. When
negligence shows bad faith, the provisions of Articles 1171 and 2201,
paragraph 2, shall apply.

If the law or contract does not state the diligence which is to be observed in
the performance, that which is expected of a good father of a family shall be
required.

Art. 1171.
Responsibility arising from fraud is demandable in all obligations.
Any waiver of an action for future fraud is void.

Art. 2201(2)
In case of fraud, bad faith, malice or wanton attitude, the obligor

AVCB Bibo Notes

Disclaimer: The writer merely provided suggested answers. Use at your own risk. Page 8
 TORTS AND DAMAGES
Atty. Sta. Barbara

shall be responsible for all damages which may reasonably

attributed to the non-performance of the obligation

Art. 1174
Except in cases expressly specified by the law, or when it is otherwise
declared by stipulation, or when the nature of the obligation requires the
assumption of risk, no person shall be responsible for those events which,
could not be foreseen, or which, though foreseen, were inevitable.

42. Intentional Torts
Minority v. Majority view
Intentional tort – where the actor desires to cause the consequences of his
act or believe the consequences are substantially certain to result from it;
includes: (ABFDI2)
- Assault
- Battery
- False imprisonment
- Defamation
- Invasion of privacy
- Interference of property

MINORITY VIEW MAJORITY VIEW

That the entire notion of quasi-
delict is founded on fault or
negligence that excludes all
notions of intent, deliberateness,
bad faith or malice
In the general scheme of the
Philippine legal system, intentional
and malicious acts, with certain
exceptions, are to be governed by
the RPC, while negligent acts or
omissions are to be covered by Art. coherent.
2176. In between these opposite
spectrums are injurious acts, which
in the absence of art. 21, would
have been beyond redress
Cases espousing the view
Baksh v. CA
- Art. 21 is designed to
expand the concept of torts
or quasi-delict in this
jurisdiction by granting
adequate legal remedy for
the untold number of moral
wrongs which is impossible
for human foresight to
specifically enumerate
- Art. 2176 is limited to
negligent acts or omissions
That inclusion of intentional acts to
quasi-delict under the term “fault”
- The liability of “fault or
negligence” may therefore
provide for a general right
of action that covers
intentional and negligent
acts or omissions
To make the system of liabilities or
obligations in this jurisdiction more
- In intentional torts, the
intentional wrongful act
creates the vinculum juris.
Hence, it fits within the
conceptual framework of
quasi-delict where the
wrongful act creates the
vinculum juris
Elcano v. Hill
- That Art. 2176, where it
refers to “fault or
negligence covers not only
acts “not punishable by
law” but also acts criminal
in character, whether
intentional and voluntary or
negligent.”

AVCB Bibo Notes

Disclaimer: The writer merely provided suggested answers. Use at your own risk. Page 9

43. Rule on recover/double recovery
44. Justifying circumstances
o Circumstances which
make the act of the
accused legal
o The person is deemed not
to have transgressed the
law and is free from civil
liability
AVCB Bibo Notes
Disclaimer: The writer merely provided suggested answers. Use at your own risk.
TORTS AND DAMAGES
Atty. Sta. Barbara
and excludes the notion of
wilfulness or intent; tort is a
much broader term than
culpa aquilana
Safeguard Security Agency v.
Tangco
- Art. 2176, where it refers to
“fault or negligence” covers
not only acts “not
punishable by law” but also
acts criminal in charater,
whether intentional and
voluntary or negligent.
Chan Jr. v. INC
- The tortuous act was the
excavation which caused
damage to the responded
because it was done
surreptitiously within its
premises and it may have
affected the foundation of
the chapel. The excavation
on respondent’s premises
was caused by fault.
Art. 2177
- Responsibility for fault or negligence under the preceding article is
entirely separate and distinct from the civil liability arising from
negligence under the Penal Code. But the plaintiff cannot recover
damages twice for the same act or omission of the defendant
Art. 11. Justifying circumstances
1. Anyone who acts in defense
of his person or rights
provided that the ff
circumstances concur:
Unlawful aggression
Reasonable necessity
Lack of sufficient provocation
2. Anyone who acts in defense
of the person or rights of his
spouse, ascendants,
descendants, or legitimate,
natural, or adopted brothers
or sisters or of his relatives by
affinity in the same degree,
provided that the first and
second requisites prescribed
in the next preceding
circumstance are present and
Page 10
 TORTS AND DAMAGES
Atty. Sta. Barbara

the further requisite, in case

the provocation was given by
the person attacked, that the
one making defense had no
part therein

3. Anyone who acts in defense

of the person or rights of a
stranger, provided, that the
first and second requisites
mentions in the first
circumstance of this article
are present and that the
person defending be not
induced by revenge,
resentment, or other evil
motive

4. Any person who, in order to

avoid an evil or injury, does
an act which causes damage
to another, provided that the ff
requisites are present:
1) That the evil sought to be
avoided actually exists
2) That the injury feared be
greater than that done to
avoid it
3) That there be no other
practical and less harmful
means of preventing it
The persons for whose benefit
the harm has been prevent shall
be civilly liable in proportion to
the benefit which they may have
received
The court shall determine, in
their sound discretion, the
proportionate amount for which
each one shall be liable

5. Any person who acts in the

fulfilment of a duty or in the
lawful exercise of a right or
office

6. Any person who acts in

obedience to an order issued
by a superior for some lawful
purpose

45. Exempting Circumstances

o Merely exempt the person Art. 12 Art. 101, RPC
from punishment 1. An imbecile or an insane
o Do not erase civil liability person, unless the latter has
acted during a lucid interval

When the imbecile or an

insane person has committed
an act which the law defines
as a felony (delito), the court

AVCB Bibo Notes

Disclaimer: The writer merely provided suggested answers. Use at your own risk. Page 11
 TORTS AND DAMAGES
Atty. Sta. Barbara

shall order his confinement in

one of the hospitals or
asylums established for
persons thus afflicted, which
shall not be permitted to leave Civil liability shall devolve upon
without first obtaining the those having such a person
permission of the same court under their legal authority or
control, unless it appears that
2. A child 15 yo or under at the there was no fault or negligence
time of the commission of the on their part
offense. However, the child
shall be subjected to an Should there be no person
intervention program pursuant having such person, or if such
to sec. 20 of RA 9344 person be insolvent, said
insane, imbecile or minor shall
3. A child above 15 yo but below respond with their own property,
18 at the time of the excepting property exempt from
commission of the offense execution, in accordance with
who shall be subjected to an the civil law
intervention program pursuant
to Sec. 20 of the Act, unless
he acted with discernment, in
which case such child shall be
subjected to appropriate
diversion proceedings under
Sec. 23 to 31 of RA 9344

4. Any person who while

performing a lawful act with Allegedly free from civil liability
due care, causes an injury by as an accident
mere accident without fault or
intention of causing it

5. Any person who acts under

compulsion of irresistible force
6. Any person who acts under
the impulse of an
uncontrollable fear of an equal
or greater injury
7. Any person who fails to
perform an act required by
law, when prevented by some
lawful or insuperable cause
Persons using violence or
causing the fears shall be
primarily liable and secondarily,
or , if there be no such persons,
those doing the act shall be
liable, saving always to the latter
that part of their property
exempt from execution
Allegedly free from civil liability
as non-performance of duty
when prevented by a lawful or
insuperable cause

46. State of Necessity

Art. 101(2) Art. 432
What is the basis of civil liability? Art. 11(4) Any person who, in order The owner of a thing has no

AVCB Bibo Notes

Disclaimer: The writer merely provided suggested answers. Use at your own risk. Page 12
 TORTS AND DAMAGES
Atty. Sta. Barbara

to avoid an evil or injury, does an right to prohibit the interference

act which causes damage to
another, provided that the ff
requisites are present:
4) That the evil sought to
be avoided actually
exists
5) That the injury feared
be greater than that
done to avoid it
6) That there be no other
practical and less
harmful means of
preventing it
of another with the same, if the
interference is necessary to
avert an imminent danger and
the threatened damage,
compared to the damage
arising to the owner from the
interference, is much greater.
The owner may demand from
the person benefited indemnity
for the damage to him.

The persons for whose benefit the
harm has been prevented shall be
civilly liable in proportion to the
benefit which they may have
received
Gives the owner the right to
demand payment of damage from
the person benefited

47. Effect of death of the accused on The death of the accused after arraignment and during the pendency of the
appeal criminal action shall extinguish the civil liability arising from the delict

However, the independent civil action instituted under sec. 3 of this rule or
which thereafter is instituted to enforce liability arising from other sources of
obligation may be continued against the estate or legal representative of the
accused after proper substitution or against said estate, as the case may be

48. Effect of death on civil actions
1. If the accused dies before arraignment, the criminal case shall be
dismissed without prejudice to the right of the offended party to file
a civil action to recover damages against the estate of the
deceased
2. If he dies after arraignment and during the pendency of the criminal
action, the civil liability arising from the delict or offense charged
shall be extinguished
3. Where an independent civil action has been instituted, the same
may be continued against the estate or against legal representative
of the deceased after proper substitution, whether the death of the
accused occurred before or after arraignment

49. Ways of instituting civil action for
damages caused by wrongful
conduct
1. Deemed instituted with the criminal action
2. Separately instituted, the right to institute separately having been
reserved in the criminal action
3. Instituted prior to the criminal action
4. Injured party opting to consider the punishable act or omission as a
quasi-delict
5. Arising from a non-punishable act or omission

50. Scope of civil liability 1. Restitution

2. Reparation of the damage caused
3. Indemnification

AVCB Bibo Notes

Disclaimer: The writer merely provided suggested answers. Use at your own risk. Page 13

51. What is a dependent civil action?
In what way is it dependent?
AVCB Bibo Notes
Disclaimer: The writer merely provided suggested answers. Use at your own risk.
TORTS AND DAMAGES
Atty. Sta. Barbara
Art. 29.
When the accused in a criminal prosecution is acquitted on the
ground that his guilt has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt,
a civil action for damages for the same act or omission may be
instituted. Such action requires only a preponderance of evidence.
Upon motion of the defendant, the court may require the plaintiff to
file a bond to answer for damages in case the complaint should be
found to be malicious.
If in a criminal case the judgment of acquittal is based upon
reasonable doubt, the court shall so declare. In the absence of any
declaration to that effect, it may be inferred from the text of the
decision whether or not the acquittal is due to that ground.
Art. 30
When a separate civil action is brought to demand civil liability
arising from a criminal offense, and no criminal proceedings are
instituted during the pendency of the civil case, a preponderance of
evidence shall likewise be sufficient to prove the act complained of.
Art. 31
When the civil action is based on an obligation not arising from the
act or omission complained of as a felony, such civil action may
proceed independently of the criminal proceedings and regardless
of the result of the latter
Civil liability arising from crime is impliedly instituted with the criminal action
but a separate case may be filed to enforce the same
- Such case may be:
o Filed ahead of the criminal action or
o After reservation, upon rendition of final judgment in the
case
Both the cases, the civil action is dependent on the
criminal action
- Rules:
1) If a case was filed ahead of the criminal case, the separate
action shall be suspended until a final judgment is rendered in
the criminal case;
2) If no case is filed, a separate case cannot be filed until rendition
of final judgment;
3) Civil liability is extinguished if the criminal case resulted in an
acquittal with a finding that the act complained of was not
actually committed by the accused
- If the state pursues an appeal on the criminal aspect of a decision
of the trial court acquitting the accused and private complainant/s
failed to reserve the right to institute a separate civil action, the civil
liability ex delicto that is inherently attached to the offense is
likewise appealed
o Appeal of the civil liability ex delicto is impliedly instituted
with the petition for certiorari assailing pursue a separate
appeal from that of the state without violating the doctrine of
non-forum shopping
Page 14
 TORTS AND DAMAGES
Atty. Sta. Barbara

52. Effect of Acquittal of a criminal
case
Rule 111, Sec. 2(b) of the Rules of Criminal Procedure
Civil liability is extinguished if the criminal case resulted in the
acquittal with a finding that the act complained of was not actually
committed, apply only to dependent civil actions, meaning, civil
liability arising from crimes or ex delicto and not to civil liability
arising from quasi-delict

53. Medical Battery Dr. Rubi Li v. Sps. Solimant (Dissenting Opinion)

- A patient is subject to an examination or treatment without express
or implied consent
- This battery approach to informed consent seeks to protect the
patients physical integrity and personal dignity from harmful and
unwarranted contact

Is it a strict liability tort?

- Yes

54. Lost chance rule on medical Lost opportunity for a better outcome is, itself, the injury for which the
practice? negligently injured person may recover

The loss of a chance of achieving a favourable outcome or of avoiding an

adverse consequence should be compensable and should be valued
approximately, rather than treated as an all-or-nothing proposition. Pre-
existing conditions must, of course, be taken into account in valuing the
interest destroyed

Essence: there was a chance that he would have been better off with
adequate care. Because of the negligence, this chance has been lost.

Lost chance is the lost opportunity for better result

Court apportions damages by valuing the chance of better result as a

percentage of the value of the entire life or limb.
- Ex:
o Value of a patient’s 50% chance of survival is 50% of the
value of the total like
o If medical malpractice reduced the chance of survival from
50%-20%, that patient’s compensation would be equal to
30% of the value of their life

55. Doctrine of Informed Consent
Unless excused, the doctor must secure the consent of his patient to a
particular treatment or an investigative procedure. Consent is an integral
part of the physician-patient relationship and doctors are duty bound to
obtain an authorization for care carried out in their offices or elsewhere.
However, consent of the patient may be express or implied

Elements:
1. Physician had the duty to disclose material risks;
2. Physician failed to disclose or inadequately disclosed those risks;
3. As a direct and proximate result of the failure to disclose, the patient
consented to treatment she otherwise would not have consented to;
and
4. The plaintiff was injured by the proposed treatment
- Gravamen: the plaintiff to point to significant undisclosed
AVCB Bibo Notes
Disclaimer: The writer merely provided suggested answers. Use at your own risk. Page 15
 TORTS AND DAMAGES
Atty. Sta. Barbara

information relating to the treatment which would have altered her

decision to undergo it

Two types of causation

1. Adequate disclosure would have caused the plaintiff to decline the
treatment
o The Objective Reasonable Patient Test is applicable only in
this causation
o Expert testimony is not required because it is plainly a
matter to which plaintiffs themselves could testify and is
within the knowledge of the average layperson
2. The treatment proximately caused injury to the plaintiff
o Critical since a medical procedure performed without
informed consent does not, in itself, proximately cause an
actionable injury to a plaintiff; a plaintiff must show that he
or she has suffered some injury as a result of the
undisclosed risk to present a complete cause of action
o Expert testimony is essential to demonstrate that the
treatment was the proximate cause of the injury to the
plaintiff

Is Res Ipsa Loquitur applicable?

- No. *Writer’s opinion: Since the second causation of the Doctrine of
Implied Consent requires expert testimony, the court cannot, from
its fund of common knowledge can determine the standard of care*

56. “Indeed, the patient’s reliance Interpret:

upon the physician is a trust of the -
kind which traditionally has
exacted obligations beyond those
associated with armslength
transactions.58”

DEFENSES

1. Justification v. Defenses
Justification
Furnish the defendant a legal privilege
to commit acts that would, except for
the justification, count as a tort
Assert that the defendant’s act was
rightful and that others should act in the
same way.
Furnish defenses to intentional tort
claims
Defense
Usually refer to affirmative defenses
Those on which the defendant has the
burden of proof and the burden of
persuasion
Ex:
- Statute of limitations or
prescription
- Contributory negligence that
are based on plaintiff’s own
misconduct
- Governmental immunity

AVCB Bibo Notes

Disclaimer: The writer merely provided suggested answers. Use at your own risk. Page 16
 TORTS AND DAMAGES
Atty. Sta. Barbara

2. Illegal transaction Plaintiff must prove that the illegal transaction has no connection to the injury
sustained

Ex: Candy won from an illegal bingo had a poisonous substance. Plaintiff may still
claim against the manufacturer

3. Necessity or self- a. Public necessity or safety - Acts pertaining to the public welfare,
protection convenience, necessity or safety which conflict with private rights are not
tortuous. However, a subsequent exceeding of one’s authority may
constitute one a trespasser ab initio
b. Defense of property
c. Self-defense

4. Consent A person may, by language or acts, manifest a definite assent to conduct which
would be violative of his rights in the absence of consent

5. Practical jokes; horseplay That fact that there was no intention to inflict injury on the plaintiff is no justification
for an act which does not cause injury

When one does an act which proves injurious to another, an action in tort arises in
favour of the injured person although the act was done without malice and no injury
was intended

6. Last clear chance on Instructs the court to disregard the plaintiff’s contributory negligence if the
plaintiff defendant’s negligence occurred after the plaintiff’s contributory negligence; purely
on chronology
7. Immunities Special protection sometimes accorded to certain defendants like public entities or
officers and family members for reasons of public policy

Unlike justification or defense, it is not dependent on the plaintiff’s behaviour, but on

the defendant’s status or relationship to the plaintiff

Ex:
- Spouses could not sue each other; doctrine of legal identity of spouses
- Parent-child immunity precludes tort actions between parents and their non-
adult children; immunity has never been held to bar property or purely
economic torts
- Governmental immunity

8. Other defenses a. When the defendant’s acts was involuntary because of force or intimidation
b. When the act is in the exercise of a right or the performance of a duty, unless
there is abuse
c. When the damage is caused by a fortuitous event
d. When the defendant acted under emergency conditions or circumstances
and his conduct did not contribute to the creation of the emergency
e. When the defendant who is responsible for acts or omissions of another
proves the exercise of due diligence
f. When the prescriptive period for quasi-delict has expired
g. When the defendant’s conduct otherwise tortuous has not caused any
damage or injury
h. When the plaintiff has voluntarily waived or abandoned his right to enforce
civil liability of the defendant for damages

AVCB Bibo Notes

Disclaimer: The writer merely provided suggested answers. Use at your own risk. Page 17
 TORTS AND DAMAGES
Atty. Sta. Barbara

9. Prescription of Quasi- Art. 1146.

delict The following actions must be instituted within 4 years:
1. Upon an injury to the rights of the plaintiff
2. Upon a quasi-delict
The prescriptive period is counted from the day the action may be
brought which means from the day quasi-delict occurred or was
committed

Art. 1155.
The prescription of actions is interrupted when they are:
1. Filed before the court
2. When there is a written extrajudicial demand – the demand must be in
writing and made before the expiration of the period fixed by law. A
written extrajudicial demand wipes out the period that has already
elapsed and starts anew the prescriptive period; it does not mean that
the prescription will not run anymore; the effect of the interruption is to
wipe out the period that has already elapsed and make the period start
anew from the date of interruption
3. And when there is any written acknowledgment of the debt by the debtor

Will partial payment interrupt prescriptive period?

10. Doctrine of Unforeseen Art. 1266

events The debtor in obligations to do shall also be released when the prestation
becomes legally or physically impossible without the fault of the obligor

Art. 1267
When the service has become so difficult as to be manifestly beyond the
contemplation of the parties, the obligor may also be released therefrom, in
whole or in part.
o Rebus sic stantibus – the parties stipulate in the light of certain
prevailing conditions, and once these conditions cease to exist, the
contract also ceases to exist
Not absolute application; parties to the contract must be
presumed to have assumed the risks of unfavourable
developments. It is therefore only in absolutely exceptional
changes of circumstances that equity demands assistance
of the debtor

11. Contributory Negligence Art. 2179

When the plaintiff’s own negligence was the immediate and proximate cause
of his injury, he cannot recover damages. But if his negligence was only
contributory, the immediate and proximate cause of the injury being the
defendant’s lack of due care, the plaintiff may recover damages, but the
courts shall mitigate the damages to be awarded

12. Emergency Rule Gan v. CA

- An individual who suddenly finds himself in a situation of danger and is
required to act without much time to consider the best means that may be
adopted to avoid the impending danger is not guilty of negligence if he fails

AVCB Bibo Notes

Disclaimer: The writer merely provided suggested answers. Use at your own risk. Page 18
 TORTS AND DAMAGES
Atty. Sta. Barbara

to undertake what subsequently and upon reflection may appear to be a

better solution, unless the emergency was brought by his own negligence

How is it related to art. 1173

- “… corresponds with the circumstances of the persons, of the time and of the
place.”

AVCB Bibo Notes

Disclaimer: The writer merely provided suggested answers. Use at your own risk. Page 19