obliged to pay for the damage done. Such fault or negligence, if there is no pre-existing contractualrelation between the parties, is called a quasi-delict and is governed by the provisions of thisChapter.
The elements of a quasi-delict are:1. Fault or Negligence2. Damage3. Causal connection between the negligence and the damageProblem: X was driving a car when he ran over a stone. The stone hit a pedestrian on the head. The pedestriandied. Is X liable for quasi-delict?Answer: No, because there was no negligence on the part of X.Problem: A supplier’s employees went on strike, as a result of which the supplier failed to deliver his goods to hisclient. Can the client sue the supplier for quasi-delict?Answer: No. Although there was damage, there was no negligence. [
Client should sue based on breach of contract instead
CASES:Andamo v. IAC
Emmanual and Natividad Andamo owned a parcel of land adjacent to that of the Missionaries of Our Lady of LaSallette. Within the land or Our Lady, waterpaths and an artificial lake were constructed, allegedly inundating anderoding the Andamos’ land. This caused a young man to drown, damaged the Andamos’ crops and fences, andendangered their lives. The Andamos instituted a criminal action against the officers and directors of Our Lady fordestruction by means of inundation under Art. 324 of the RPC. Subsequently, they filed a civil case for damagesagainst the respondents. Upon motion of respondents, the civil case was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, sincethe criminal case instituted ahead of the civil case was still unresolved. This was based on the provision of theRules of Court which provides that criminal and civil actions arising from the same offense may be institutedseparately, but after the criminal action has been commenced, the civil action cannot be instituted until final judgment has been rendered in the criminal action.
Whether the civil action should have been dismissed.
No. The civil action should not have been dismissed since it was based, not on crime, but on quasi-delict.All the elements of a quasi-delict are present:1. damages suffered by the plaintiff;2. fault or negligence of the defendant or some other person for whose acts he must respond; and3. connection of the cause and effect between the fault or negligence of the defendant and the damagesincurred by the plaintiff.In this case, the waterpaths and contrivances built by respondent are alleged to have inundated the land of petitioners. This was caused by the failure of the defendant to install drainage pipes that could have preventedthe inundation. There is therefore a causal connection between the act of building the waterpaths withoutproviding for an adequate drainage system and the damage sustained by the petitioners.Article 2176 covers not only acts “not punishable by law” but also acts criminal in character, whether intentionaland voluntary or negligent. Consequently, a separate civil action lies against the offender in a criminal act,whether or not he is criminally prosecuted and found guilty or acquitted, provided that the offended party is notallowed to recover damages on both scores and would only be entitled to the bigger award of the two.
(2) Distinguished from culpa contractual and culpacriminal
CULPA AQUILIANACULPA CONTRACTUALOBJECT
Complaint is againstnegligenceViolation of contract of carriage
Damages for quasidelictBreach of contract withdamages
Evidence*once the driver isproven negligent,employer is presumednegligent (rebuttablepresumption)Preponderance of Evidence
Exercise of ordinarydiligence on the part of the driver;Exercise of diligence inthe selection andsupervision of the driveron the part of theemployerExercise of extraordinary diligence(in contract of carriage,the diligence required of the common carrier isextraordinary)
CASESCancio v. Isip
Cancio filed 3 counts of violation of BP22 against Isip, who had issued 3 bad checks. The case was dismissed.Subsequently, 3 cases for estafa were filed. The case was dismissed again. Cancio then filed a civil case for