Welcome to Scribd. Sign in or start your free trial to enjoy unlimited e-books, audiobooks & documents.Find out more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword or section
Like this

Table Of Contents

0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
torts digest compi

torts digest compi



|Views: 16,293|Likes:
Published by cornerkick

More info:

Published by: cornerkick on May 12, 2008
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





133. Lopez et.al vs. Pan Am, 16 SCRA 431Facts:Then Senate Pro Tempore Lopez booked 1
class tickets from Tokyo to San Francisco. He wastraveling with wife, daughter and son-in-law.On May 24, 1960, they arrived in Tokyo only to discover that they no longer had 1
classaccommodations. They took flight under protest ‘cause Senator had scheduled meeting and wife hadcheck-up at Mayo clinicDamages claimed > breach of contract in bad faithIssue: WON they can recover moral damagesHELD: Yes, bad faith existedRatio:1) 2220: moral damages are recoverable in breach of contracts where the defendant acted fraudulently or in bad faith2) Badges of Bad Faitha) Employee Herranz cancelled reservationof Lopez’ together with that of the Rufinos
only theRufinos cancelledb) Despite knowledge that reserv ations have been cancelled, when lopez party called in toconfirm, they assured them of 1
class accommodations3) Such willful non-disclosure of the cancellation or pretense that the reservations of the plaintiffs stood isthe factor to which is attributable the breach of the resulting contract4) It is humiliating to be compelled to travel as such, contrary to what is rightfully to be expected from thecontractual undertakingMoral damages sustained by Senator:- social humiliation, wounded feelings, mental anguish-senator siya ek ek-P 100, 000Wife: discomfort sustained in tourist class for 13 hours =physical suffering
P50, 000daughter/husband: P25, 000 for social humiliation
lose of prestige? 134. Zulueta vs Pan Am, 43 SCRA 397Facts: <person’s case>Rafael Zulueta, with his wife & daughter were passengers aboard flight No. 841-23 from Honoluluto Manila. Plane had 30 minute stop-over in Wake island where they (passengers) were allowed todisembark.Mr. Zulueta disembarked so he could relieve himself but found CR full of soldiers so he went tobeach…hmmFlight was delayed. He was later found. “ You people almost made me miss your flight. You havea defective announcing system and I was not paged.”Away…away… later asked to open their bags <allegedly another person, which they (Pan Am)were never able to identify mentioned something about a bomb>.K. Siton, airport manager, offloaded Mr. Zulueta but allowed wife and daughter to continue withflight.Issue: non moral damages may be recovered.HELD: YesRatio:1) 21: Any person who willfully causes lose or injury to another in a manner that is contrary to morals,good customs or public policy shall compensate the latter for the damage.2) 2217: Moral damages include physical suffering mental anguish, fright, serious anxiety, besmirchedreputation, wounded feelings, moral shock, social humiliation and similar injury. Though incabale of pecuniary computation, moral damages may be recovered if they are the proximate result of thedefendant’s wrongful act/omission.a) rude reception (captain: What in the hell do you think you are?)b) abusive language/scornful reference: monkeysc) unfriendly attitude, ugly stares, unkind remarks received
d) arbitrary/high-handed decision of leaving him at islande) wife suffered nervous breakdown because of the embarrassment, insults, humiliations.3) Contract between carrier involves special & peculiar obligations and duties. There’s a promise and dutyof protection and courteous treatment4) Contract of air carriage generates a relation attended with a public duty. Neglect or malfeasance of carrier’s employees naturally could give ground for an action for damages1 M
500T ( he contributed to gravity)135. Yutuk vs. manila Electric, 2 SCRA 337Facts:Meralco Jaime went to Yutuk’s house and told maid that he wanted to enter premises to checkmeter. Yutuk told him that meter was outside. Later, electricity was cut off and when Yutuk asked himwhat the trouble was, he replied with another question: Why she was paying only 50% of bills.Yutuk thought Jaime came to fix her defective meter which she had reported to Meralco’scollectors but Jaime told her that she was stealing electric current using by using a jumper.Filed case for slander vs. Jaime
convictedMeralco filed for theft > dismissedIssue: Moral damagesHeld: YesRatio: While moral damages are incapable of pecuniary estimation, they are made recoverable, if they arethe proximate result of the defendant’s wrongful act or omission; and since these damages affectaggrieved party’s moral feelings and personal pride, “ these should be weighed in the determination of theindemnity.”Issue: WON there was bad faithHELD: no really but “ at the very least, the facts of case show the appellant did it with reckless negligenceRatio:1. when Yutuk reported incident, company showed unwillingness to entertain* said they would only if Jaime would be convicted in slander case2. then filed complaint for theft!-motivated purely by malice and ill-will and as a retaliatory measure for civil axn filed by plaintiff - filed case only 4 mos after supposed discovery thereof 250thou-exorbitant25,000 MD-mental anguish by reason of false imputation- besmirched rep, ridicule, humiliation- personal circs and reputation considered136. SimexSimex, engaged in exportation of food products, deposited 100thou with Bank. Later issued checksagainst account. Bounced.Bank investigation: amt not credited to account and was immdtly rectifiedMD at 20thou1.initial carelessness of bank, aggravated by lack of promtitufe in repairing error justifies award2.MP awarded not to penalize but to compensate plaintiff for injuries3.Corpo: no MD except when it has good repu that is debased, resulting in its social humilation4.damages suffered
credit line cancelled
orders not acted upon pending receipt of payment
reputation tarnished
standing in biz com reduced
prestige as reliable debtor diminished
137. magbanua6 petitioners were share tenant of defendants. Defendants diverted free flow of water from lots whichcaused land to dry up. Def then asked them to vacate areas for they could no longer plant without water.MD YES1. 2219 permits award for MD for acts under 21“ any person who willfully causes loss or injury to another in a manner contrary to yada yada”2. obvious they were denied H20 so they would vacate land.138 Tan KoepeMasa had been PTNR’s tenant for 10 years. He wrote asking for conversion of share tenancy relation toone of leasehold, applied for conversion, authorized.PETR filed 6 crim cases!MD YES1.unfounded successive complaints even without oral testimonies prove existence of factual basisfor MD2.suffered humiliation of incarceration3.motive: harassment and embarrassment and retaliatory measure for conversion award139. FordFacts:Girl slapped another girl during election.MD YES1.2219: any person who willfully causes loss or injury to another in a manner contrary to xx2.slap is unlawful aggression3.face personifies one’s dignity and slapping it is a personal affront4.considering position and fact that it was election day, nothing but shame, humiliation anddishonor would have been heaped upon her by the indignities she had to suffer.5thou141. bagumbayanFamily went to watch concert and waiter spilled drinks on wifeNO MD1.embarrassment is not the mental anguish contemplated in 2217 for which MD can be recovered2.mental suffering: distress or serious pain distinguished from annoyance, regret, or vexation142. Vda de medinaAvarque was driving jeepney which smashed into MERALCO post resulting in passenger Medina’s death.At that time, Cresencia had not acquired approval from PUB service commission for the sale of jeepney.Absoulte owner was Rosario.NO AND1. untenable since AND cannot co-exist with compensatory damages2. ND’s purpose is to vindicate or recognize right that has been violated, in order to preclude further contest thereon, and not for the purpose of indemnifying plaintiff for any loss suffered by him3. Ct’s award of compensatory/exemplary damages are in themselves judicial recognition that plaintiff’sright was violated.143. Northwest

Activity (233)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads
jjandbobscribd liked this
anajuanito liked this
Monica Sanchez liked this
Arolaine Lim liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->