Torts and Damages

Session 10 – Art 2195-2206, 2214-2215, Cases 72, 163-180 NPC v CA – Abdullah owns fishpond at the foot of Lanao Lake. Agus Dam was subsequently constructed wherein water overflowed for failure of EEs in Agus Dam to release water during rainy season. Thus, fishpond was damaged. Art 2176. Art 2202. In crimes and quasi-delicts, the defendant shall be liable for all damages, which are the natural and probable consequences of the act or omission complained of. It is not necessary that such damages have been foreseen or could have reasonably foreseen by the defendant. Farolan v Solmac Mktg Comp – Farolan (acting commissioner of customs) and Parayno (acting chief of Customs Intelligence) has not released the shipment of OPP film waste/scrap for making fibers and films. Customs claim that the products is of higher class considered as polypropylene film which is restricted by LOI. BOI is in conflict in their opinion. Solmac sued Farolan and Parayno claims not releasing it is not done in good faith. RTC: damages in their private capacity. But Farolan not liable, first name is different, must be “Ramon” not “Damian.” GOOD FAITH refers to a state of the mind which is manifested by the acts of the individual concerned. It consists of the honest intention to abstain from taking an unconscionable and unscrupulous advantage of another. Good faith is always presumed and it is upon who alleges the contrary that the burden of proof lies. Mistakes concededly committed by public officers are not actionable absent any clear showing that they were motivated by malice or gross negligence amounting to bad faith. Saba v CA – 1934: Pedro de la Cruz. 1949: lease public lot for 15 years. Upon death of Pedro, children sold their share to Emil Ong and Jose Ongchuan. 1966: share of Lourdes Agbayani was sold to Saba. Saba wrote to Emil and jose that all rentals shall be delivered to him but no avail. She sued them. Moral damages may be awarded to compensate one for diverse injuries such as mental anguish, besmirched reputation, wounded feelings and social humiliation. It is not enough that injuries have arisen, it is essential that they have sprung from wrongful act or omission, fraud, malice or bad faith which was the proximate cause. The law could not impose a penalty on the right to litigate. One who exercises his rights does no injury. – damnum adsque injuria rule. Saba was in good faith in filing collection suit. A person may have erred but error alone is not a ground for moral damages. Whatever worries, anxieties and expenses respondents may have suffered were only such as are usually caused to a party haled into court as a defendant in a litigation. Hulst v PR Builders – Dutch spouse bought a residential lot but PR Builders has not developed lot. Spouse to rescind contract to sell and sue PR. In pari delicto. An exception to such rule where, even as the intent to circumvent the constitutional proscription on aliens owning real property was evident by virtue of the execution of the Contract to Sell, such violation of the law did not materialize because the buyer cased the rescission of the contract before the execution of the final deed transferring ownership. Under Art 1414, one who repudiates the agreement and demands his money before the illegal act has taken place is entitled to recover. Hulst is entitled to the recovery only of the amount of P3,187,500, representing purchase price paid to PR. No damages may be recovered on the bases of a void contract; being nonexistent, the agreement produces no juridical tie between the parties involved. Hulst is not entitled to actual, interest, moral and exemplary damages and attorney’s fees. Choa Tek Hee v Phil Publishing Co – Manila Times published an article “charge P193k was spent in administering P200k. Chinese of Cebu files complaint against wealthy Manila Merchant” taken from the file of clerk of court of CFI. Tek Hee, supposed to order hardware products from US but bad reputation because article. ACTUAL –actual pecuniary damages sustained and not damages for injury to his feelings and reputation. PECUNIARY damages – in tort where the injury is clearly proved, but not the exact amount of damages. The very nature of injuries on such could not be fully compensated by money damages. Pecuniary damages for LOSS of ANTICIPATED PROFITS must not be only capable of proof, but must be proved with a reasonable degree of certainty – both in nature and cause from which they proceed . No recovery can be had for loss of profits which are uncertain, contingent, conjectural, or speculative, it must be borne in mind that since profits are prospective they must be uncertain and problematic in some extent, and on that account or on account of difficulties in way of proof, a person complaining of breach of contract cannot be

1 thil lozada

Torts and Damages
deprived of all remedy.” Damages must be established by competent evidence the amount of such, courts cannot give judgment for a greater amount than those actually proven. Exception: ill will or express malice – punitive damages are allowed in discretion of court. The article was false, published with intent to injure the plaintiff’s feelings, and to degrade him in public estimation- implied malice. If the charge complained of is injurious and no justifiable motive for it is apparent, malice is inferred from the falsity of the charge. Mendoza v PAL – Mendoza, owner of theatre in Naga, rented a movie, “Himala ng Birhen” in time for Maskarra festival. It would be shown on Sept 18-19. LVN Pictures sent it thru PAL on Sept 17, it loaded to the plane but sent back to Manila. It was received by Mendoza only on Sept 20. Sued to recover 3k damages loss of profit. Art 2201 – damages only those foreseen at the time of perfection of contract. PAL could not foresee that Mendoza suffered damages in the delay in delivering the film – his plans to exhibit on fiesta were not called to PAL’s attention . Lasam v Smith – Smith owner of car garage, Lasam rented one with their licensed driver. Driver let his unlicensed assistant to drive, car fell on embankment. Conflict if reckless driving or defect on steering gear. Smith’s liability to Lasam was contractual, Smith is liable unless it is shown that the accident was due to a fortuitous event. Expenses incurred as a result of accident greatly exceeded the amount of damages awarded since damages resulting from negligence in the fulfilment of a contractual obligation, the courts have a “discretionary power to moderate the liability according to the circumstances.” Ilao-Oreta v Ronquillo – R check-in in hospital for laparoscopic operation to know the cause of her infertility. IO failed to arrive as scheduled – still on return filght form Hawaii. She forgot to consider time difference. No gross negligence. Common human knowledge that excitement attends the preparations for the honeymoon. Her negligence could then be partly attributed to human frailty which rules out its characterization as gross. The doctor’s negligence not being gross, the spouses are not entitled to recover moral damages. NO Exemplary damages – absent of wanton, fraudulent, reckless, oppressive or malevolent manner. NOR attorney’s fees – not compelled to litigate and incur expenses to protect their interest The list of expenses cannot replace receipts when they should have been issued as a matter of course in business transactions, as in the case of purchase of gasoline and of food. Algarra v Sandejas – plaintiff – personal injuries – commission agent about 20 regular customers. Lost 4 customers. WON value of loss which she suffered can be extended to pain which she experienced by reason of accident. Reparation, to be efficacious and substantial, must rationally include generic idea of complete indemnity. Fraud is not an element. Only when there exists a natural and true relation between such nonfulfillment and the damages, whatever reason there may be to demand them on another account. FORESEEABILITY – if such result and the chain of events connecting it with the act complained of had occurred to his mind, the same would have seemed natural and probable and according to the ordinary course of nature. MEASURING damages – no distinction is made between damage caused maliciously and intentionally and damages caused through mere negligence in so far as the civil liability of the wrongdoer is concerned. Defendant to repair damage done – to put plaintiff in the same position. Exemplary or punitive damages – malicious or wilful intention to cause damages – aggravating circumstance. Nominal damages – only a technical violation of the plaintiff’s rights resulting in no substantial injury to him. Mere noncompliance with the obligations of a contract is not sufficient to sustain a judgment for damages. It must be shown that damages actually existed. A release or compromise for personal injury sustained by negligence attributed to the defendant company was held a bar to an action for the recovery of further damages. Performance not proven to be destructive or injurious and generally acquiesced in by society for so long a time as to have ripened into a custom, cannot be held to be unreasonable or imprudent. The measure of damages is an ultimate fact, to be determined from the evidence submitted to the court.

2 thil lozada

Raagas v Traya – Raagas’ 3 year old son was ran over by a truck. Unconscious for 35 days. Mere acceptance of the offer of defendant would not constitute a waiver of his right to recover damages for the time intervening from the date of the wrongful discharge to the time when he returned to work under the new offer which would consist in the loss of wages for that period. Actual damages must be proved. But ER offered to come back but he denied demanding higher wage Action based on a wrongful discharge is one to recover damages for breach of contract. and the findings of juries should be based. Cariaga v Laguna Tayabas Bus Co – C 4th year medical student. Actual damages – income that C could have earned if he should finish the medical course and pass the corresponding board exams must be deemed to be within the same category because they could have reasonably foreseen by the parties at the time he boarded. If one cannot obtain the thing agreed upon. Mere fact that loss cannot be ascertained with absolute accuracy. No damages of any kind – unforeseen event or fault of boy or his parents Angeles v Lerma – Lacson v Quisumbing – L arrived at airport to attend business & hired Dollar Taxi as carrier. Puentebella v Negros Coal Co – A person injured by breach of contract cannot recover damages for any loss which he might have avoided with ordinary care and at reasonable expense. No moral damages because plaintiff spouse not the party to the contract of carriage nor can invoke quasi-delict since they were not themselves injured as a result of the collision between the bus and train.defendant is mere owner and operator of common carrier and does not participate in or ratify the negligent act of his driver Associated Realty Dev’t Co v CA – Tin purchased lot 54 and estero lot – constructed house – 72 sqm but found that estero lot is government property. Helpless condition – physically and mentally. and attending trials. filing case. EE should have accepted the offer even under old contract. conjecture or guesswork” as to the fact and amount of damages. ER. -guilty of breach of contract but only liable for actual damages not moral damages. absent w/o permission. Lemoine v Alkan – mechanic illegally dismissed – claims incompetent and insubordinate. as long as it does not involve a renunciation of any right already accrued. L suffered injury. through misleading representation and failure to carry out the contract. and it does not permit him to remain idle and collect his wages nevertheless when he has an opportunity to return to his former employment. It was owned by Q. The damages in an action for wrongful discharge are prima facie the amount of wages for the full term. it is on the ground that there are no criteria by which to estimate the amount with the certainty on which the adjudications of courts. actual expenses incurred in shuttling back and forth between places to confer with lawyer. through no fault of his. are the natural and probable consequences of carrier’s breach of obligation – Art 2201 CC. but must depend on actual proof that damages had been suffered and on evidence of actual amount. and any other damages which might have been sustained and which plaintiff could prove. but when excluded. when he wrongfully 3 thil lozada . at the time. bumped with other private car. But Traya claims truck was fully loaded and running low speed. caused losses to plaintiff – he must share the damage. but also the profits which the obligee failed to obtain. is no reason for denying claim. its stands to reason that he should be indemnified the reasonable value of the thing. No Exemplary damages. Indemnification for damages comprehends not only the value of the loss suffered. TRANSPORTATION EXPENSES – in motor vehicle mishaps resulting in injury of passenger. Sued Tin. Where plaintiffs had entered into a contract with a corporation which was subsequently dissolved and whose liabilities had been assumed by another person who. RATIO: to require an EE to labor if he is given the opportunity. courts cannot rely on “speculation. but through the fault of the obligor. injured when bus which he is in crossed train tracks and bumped engine of the train. had he sold it. Lucro cessante – price which the thing could have commanded on the date that the obligation should have been fulfilled and was not –difference in the price from date of acquisition to the presentation of complaint.Torts and Damages Profits are not excluded from recovery because they are profits.

State of health at the time of death 4. Civil liability of bus owner for death caused by his driver. whichever is shorter. Loss of society 5. It was amputated. VP of family corp Factors considered in fixing award 1. Pecuniary loss to plaintiff or beneficiary 2. when he could have done so by appealing to the officers of the company for relief. Pecuniary situation of party liable – not less than 6k – standard amount of award to heirs of deceased arising from criminal offenses. He was a 45-year old chief marine engr with a salary of 375. De Caliston v CA – driver of a bus ran over D a USVA pensioner who died. Shauf sued them for discrimination and unequal employment opportunities. Other factors: 1. (other cases includes patrimonial and moral damages – physical condition and social standing of injured persons) RPC – controlling when civil liability arising from crimes . Mental suffering of beneficiaries 6. No damages against company – DC did nothing tending to prevent said damages or at least to minimize them. De Castelvi v Cia General de Tabacos – DC was permitted to cut woods in hacienda but when Got became the Manager again. subsidiary. becomes. a debtor in bad faith. applied a vacant position in Clark Air Base as a guidance counsellor. Age and life expectancy of deceased 3. Award of pension of 1 year. Without the actual proof of loss. X actual/compensatory damages. dragged and rear wheels passed over his left foot. In actual damages. and insurance proceeds paid to heir of victim by insurance credited in favor of erring driver. 2 kinds of damages: damages for the loss actually sustained and for the profit which the injured party may have failed to realize. His incapacity to continue in the practice of his profession has put an end to one of his activities and has certainly destroyed the principal source of his professional earning in the future. civil service eligible. Only daughter sued. Despite such qualifications. with respect to the EE. the court cannot rely on speculation.Art 107: indemnification of consequential damages caused to: injured party and those suffered by family or third person by reason of the crime No exact rule for measuring human life – amount depends on facts and circumstances of each case.Torts and Damages discharges an EE. married to a US Air Force. The life expectancy of deceased or beneficiary. the award of actual damages is erroneous. Loss of service 4. prevent him from taking cut wood and piled in different places on the hacienda. Earning capacity of deceased 5. his application was refused and instead hired an American living in Maine. Doctoral degree in behavoir and counselling psychology. Alcantara v Surro & Meralco (1953)– A died while attempting to board a bus of Meralco when it was hit by another bus of same company.Art 104: restitution. indemnification of consequential damages . Loss of support 3. worked for 4 years as guidance counsellor in Clark Air Base. Damages which are merely possible are speculative . Medical and funeral expenses 4 thil lozada . Company conceded him all the facilities in order that he might comply with his obligations. reparation of damages. Cases 181-200 Shauf v CA – Shauf is a Filipina. She Masters in UST. he fell off. Tender age of children – 5-13 years old 2. moral damages. to furnish various firms and persons with firewood. entered into during the time said concession was in force. conjecture or guesswork. Award of pension to deceased accident victim which was lost by his death – sure income that was cut short by defendant. Shauf never acquired any vested right to the salaries pertaining to the position as guidance counsellor since she was never appointed to such. 2214-2215. Actual pecuniary damages 6. Pain and suffering of deceased and plaintiffs 7. Session 11 – Art 2195-2206. He was awarded costs of expenses incurred but not for the amputation of his left foot. Borromeo v MERALCO – B about to ride electric car after letting his 2 children ride.

E & D stabbed S while B prevent him from escaping. Bonus is merely a privilege that depends on the financial condition of the ER & not a matter or right.500. Father Mendoza. manner of life.Torts and Damages Introduction of mortality tables is not absolutely essential to prove the life expectancy of a deceased or beneficiary. walks with stiff neck & no full freedom of arms. It depends largely on state of heath. must be duly supported by receipts. S injured his head. merely incidental or dependent upon the award of compensatory damages.306.500 damages & 500 for treatment.Awarded to enable the injured party to obtain means.# of years victim would have lived 2. E enraged. as much as possible. . treatment amounted to 300. Marchan v Mendoza – Mendoza and family suffered multiple injuries. She was a dancer earning 6-8/twice or thrice a week.Need not be proved.152. Testimonial evidence suffices to establish a basis for which the court can make a fair and reasonable estimate of the loss earning capacity. Compensatory damages – 40k – 100/month as Asst Supervisor. R. 26 years old.50 – supported by receipts. social condition. and the jury are not bound by them. Rate of loss sustained by heirs of the deceased NET EARNING CAPACITY = =LIFE EXPECTANCY x [GROSS ANNUAL INCOME (GAI) – LIVING EXPENSES] = [2/3 (80-age at the time of death)] x [GAI – (50% of GAI)] = [2/3(80-44)] x [96k – (50% of 96k) = P 1. by reason of the defendant’s culpable action. Esquillon & Domingo. pain from both sides of cheek. People v Barlaan (2007) – D & S was invited for a drink of the 3 suspects Barlaan. therefore. X factor in determining indemnity Junio & Solaria v Manila Railroad (58 phil 176) – J & S passengers of a car that hit the train while the car was crossing the railroad. When bill of P200. 2. fell in stone embankment – injuries left her permanently disfigured. Asst Supervisor and professional boxer. When plaintiffs prayed in their complaint for such other relief and remedies that may be availed of under the premises. or amusements that will serve to alleviate moral suffering he/she has undergone. Life Expectancy . . took out his knife and the 3 chased d & s. 100/month as boxer – lost use of limbs Exemplary damages – given even if not specifically sought of by plaintiff in complaint. their determination depends upon the discretion of the court. Failure to present documentary evidence to support a claim for loss of earning capacity of the deceased need not be fatal to its cause. diversions. While J’s left leg was amputated.000 ACTUAL damages – must be competent proof of the actual amount of loss. thus is must be proportionate to the suffering inflicted. Civil liability of defendant must be considered but those also of the employer. 5 thil lozada . loss many teeth. He was paralyzed. Civil indemnity – P50K – mandatory and granted to heirs of victim without need of proof other than the commission of crime Moral damages – P50k – awarded in criminal offense resulting in physical injuries. They boarded a bus of Phil Rabbit driven by Marchan which fell into a ditch – very high speed and saw a parked 6x6 truck ahead. Computed 4 year basis. it is in the category of an award designed to compensate the claimant for actual injury and are not meant to enrich complainant at the expense of the defendant. including death Actual damages – P43.Lomboy died while his eldest daughter suffered injuries. as long as prayed for indemnification for damages. passenger in bus. of the spiritual status quo ante. habits. Pleyto v Lomboy (2004)– Phil Rabbit bus driven by Pleyto had a head-on collision with the car boarded by Lomboy. S contributed a little and asked E to pay. Total earnings less expenses necessary in the creation of such earnings and less living and other incidental expenses. the court is called upon the exercise and use its discretion whether the imposition of punitive or exemplary damages even though not expressly prayed or pleaded in the plaintiff’s complaint. But they cannot be recovered as a matter of right. Annual net income of 1. in effect. Factors considered are: 1. It is aimed at restoration. Soberano v Manila Railroad (18 scra 732) – S vending merchant. need not be alleged. and if introduced they are not conclusive. Loss of earning capacity-moral damages – 15k. But thought incapable of pecuniary estimation.

Pilot did not intercept airway “amber I” as he was supposed to do. Heirs are entitled to the following when death occurs as a result of a crime: 1.600/yr. reclusion perpetua entails imprisonment for at least 30 years and carries with it accessory penalties. LOSS or DAMGES sustained by respondents as dependents and intestate heirs of the deceased – consists not of the full amount of his earnings. hit and windshield and penetrated in Q’s face. 33 yrs old. It was a violation of air-traffic rules. whether the claim therefor is made in the criminal proceedings itself or in a separate civil action –items are identical in both procedures except with attorney’s fees and expenses of litigation which can be awarded only when a separate civil action is instituted . 2 mitigating circumstance – passion or obfuscation & voluntary surrender. Life expectancy 33 1/3 years. weather was clear and accident was directly attributable to such. no documentary evidence is available –judicial notice 2. Q died. oppressive or malevolent manner.Torts and Damages Indemnity for loss of earning capacity –P2. 2 were suspect of theft in the neighbourhood. None of parties questioned the propriety of the 4-year basis. loss of earning capacity – item may be considered included in the prayer for “actual damages” and for other “just and equitable reliefs” – art 2206 & 1764 3. Heirs of Raymundo Castro v Bustos (1969) – Bustos was convicted of homicide for killing Castro. D was a manager of a radio station -8. 23 stab wounds. exemplary damages – attended by one or more aggravating circumstances. Fixed by court –separate from fines 5. 10k/month Villa Rey Transit v CA (1970) – Quintos – passenger of bus owned by Villa Rey. employed as daily wage worker earning less than minimum wage under current labor laws. indemnity for the death of the victim of the evidence – 12k without need of evidence and even if mitigating circumstance is present 2. Can be recovered even by illegitimate descendants and ascendants of deceased – in case of death. The penalties of resclusion perpetua and life imprisonment are 2 different penalties. Only NET earnings. moral damages – mental anguish – amount fixed by court.earning less than the minimum wage under labor laws b. attorney’s fees and expenses of litigation – actual amount (only when separate civil action has been filed or exemplary damages are awarded) 6. Art 1764 made it expressly applicable “to death of a passenger caused by the breach of contract by a common carrier. hit bullcart with bamboo pole at the end. reckless.400/yr. whereas life imprisonment has no definite extent or duration. line of work.040K. interests in proper cases 7. Civil liability increased from 12k to 50K –conforming to current doctrine. Exception: testimonial evidence would suffice: 1. Businessman. farming-3. Support = earnings – necessary expenses of his own living. Statement after stabbed – to get even with Bebot and Frankie.liable for loss of earning capacity of deceased to damages for death caused by crime or quasi-delict. 30 yrs old. victim.000/yr. brgy tanod. Davila was one of 33 passengers. The law regarding the items of damages that are recoverable in cases of death caused by a crime. 29 years old. 10pm. Life expectancy of 33 1/3 Computation of loss of earning capacity – see Villa Rey Transit case Art 2206(1). but of the support they received or would have received from him had he not died in consequence of the negligence of petitioner’s agent. X GROSS earnings Davila v PAL – plane crash on Nov 1960.self-employed. emphasized that indemnity for loss of earning capacity and moral damages are recoverable separately from and in 6 thil lozada . it becomes the duty of the court to make the award. fraudulent.Art 2206CC – GR: documentary evidence is necessary. 910 people passed by. People v Baguio (1991) – Paulino. once heirs claim such and are able to prove they are entitled thereto.” Parents entitled to moral damages for mental anguish – long period of uncertainty & suffering 10k Exemplary of 10k – Art 2332 only awarded in contracts and quasi-contract if defendant acted in wanton. and does not carry with it accessory penalties. Dec 19 – letter of condolence from PAL. pook leader. Different in Alcantara v Surro where 4 year basis was used. 4. Art 2204 does not warrant a complete deletion of said item of damages. lawyer & junior partner of father =3. stabbed by men. a.

He must produce the best evidence of which his case is susceptible and if that evidence warrants the inference that has been damaged by the loss of profits which he might with reasonable certainty have anticipated but for the defendant’s wrongful act. No reimbursement of salaries where such sum was owing to workers before hacienda was sold and was not assumed by vendee. Failure of vendee of hacienda and fishponds to pay the alleged additional purchase price which resulted in delay in operations of a rural bank will not justify award of damages where no evidence of proprietorship of the rural bank. he is entitled to recover. GA Machineries v Yaptinchay – GAMi offered to sell a brand new Fordson Dieses Engine to Y. After a year. Rejoinder is not motivated by malice or spite. Precautionary measures were not taken by BEC in wanton disregard of possible consequences. B was electrocuted. co-resp. B sold it to San Jose Devlpt Comp. whether death results from a crime or a quasidelict or a breach of contract of carriage. When the existence of a loss is established. in addition to moral. cannot be predetermined. G was indebted B. 33 yrs old. M again sold it to Guballa. fishpond & all its tools and equipments to B for 7k and B assumed the mortgage on said lot to DBP. temperate. Same rules on damages are generally to be observed. to be exercised in 30 days. it can be merely asked to be fixed by courts. he had sort of epileptic seizure. Art 2200. Every travel earns P396. The benefit to be derived from a contract which one of the parties has absolutely failed to perform is of necessity to some extent. Theses damages may be subject to Art 2204. . It is awarded at the courts discretion.need not be pleaded in complaint. Life expectancy of 31 years was decreased to 25 years considering the nature and quality of his work. Even though defendant does not dispute the amount of actual damages does not necessarily imply that the other party outright is entitled to the award of damages. Claims lost 54k. to pay the same will not justify reimbursement of said expenses as it was not necessary for the vendor to do so. 1. to the vendee-plaintiff below and to another person. who assumed said mortgage obligation. Circumstances. He died. Exemplary damages – 20k . first to come to a jeep full of slaughtered pigs. It is awarded as a deterrent to socially deleterious actions. and that said vendor had a part in getting another to buy the hacienda in question from the vendee-plaintiff which sale did not fully materialize. X brand new. 7 thil lozada . but the injured party is not to be denied all remedy for that reason alone. The antenna of the jeep tangled with the hanging open electric wire of Benguet Elec Coop (7 yrs). Benguet Elec Coop v CA – Bernardo was a meat vendor. B sued G for conspiracy to defraud her as creditor and rejoinder of M. DJ leased it to Shell. and volume of business was shown. its projected start of operations. P150 daily or P54k annual gross income. Art 2206 also apply to death of a passenger caused by breach of contract of common carrier. No recovery on the value of fruit gathered by vendee on the land sold to him and after said sale even if the vendee has not complied with the payment of the mortgage indebtedness on the land which was assumed by said vendee. Enjoyment of fruits of property is an attribute of ownership. Liability of respondent for filing a case and improvident issuance of writ of preliminary injuction at instance of respondent. a matter of speculation. such as fact that vendor (claimant for damages in counterclaim) sold the land twice.88 – freight truck business. Is DJ entitled to damages for wrongful filing of a case against her and the issuance of injunction. Rentals: 792k + interest. But after a week. It was revealed that the engine motor number was tampered. atty’s fees and expenses of litigation Bautista v Maxino – M sold hacienda. The fact that the vendor of a hacienda and fishpond with mortgage thereon in view of the alleged failure of the vendee. 1985. Average actual profits should have been presented. will not justify award of moral damages against plaintiff for filing complaint.Torts and Damages addition to fixed sum in no. liquidated or compensatory damages. Upon stepping on the jeep. 2201. Vda De Javellana v CA – DJ granted an option of lease to Mobil. Jan 14. absolute certainty as to its amount is not required. Mobil sued and filed injunction against them. It need not be proved – determination is contingent upon or incidental to the amount of compensatory damages that may be awarded to claimant.Imposed by way of example or correction for the public good. In quasi-delicts – act or omission is with gross negligence . malfunction occurred.

P claims only done good faith and to bring justice. job or occupation. It caused financial difficulties due to loss of earning capacity for 6mons. E invoked rentals for a year No right of retention to F since house was constructed before buying the lot. Equity not applied when it will not serve justice. P lost candidate filed an administrative complaint against the BEI incldg V for violation of rules of COMELEC – allowed voters to use carbon papers in preparing their ballots.152. L bus exec. But other cable comp. GM of Esso Greenhills Serv Center. profession. ACTUAL or compensatory damages – recoverable because of pecuniary loss in business. Failure to deliver cablegram – gross negligence. Pres & GM of Rodlum. Being engaged in go-kart racing will not merit reduction of one’slife expectancy. There were many contract but O failed to deliver all. his income increased. Globe Mackay Cable & Radio Corp v Barrios – Globe failed to deliver a cable gram form Mercy Hosp. Only usufructuary. or at least ascertain the amount of different items in cross-examination. For only 3 years. the guilty party is liable for all damages which may be reasonably attributed to the non-performance of the obligation. Rodriquez Luna v IAC – Luna died while in go-cart practice area when it collided with Toyota car driven by de la Rose unlicensed. must be proved. Its award is aimed to restoration of spiritual quo ante. bad faith. Repurchased lot but F refused to vacate it without paying him the value of house built on the lot. But V never participated as poll clerk because she was sick and was substituted by Reyes. annual net income of 55k (75k annual gross income – P20k annual personal expenses). that respondents would have had to incur living and sundry expenses. public school teacher assigned as a poll clerk. Direcor of Steadfast Investment Corp. Actual proof of damages alleged to have been suffered. L was forced to buy copra at the open market for the balance that O failed to deliver at a higher price. high potential to increase for next 15 years. Perfecto v Gonzales – Vista. Legaspi Oil Co v CA – Legaspi Oil bought copra from Oseraos. VP of Oasis.Torts and Damages Moral damages – 50k – not intended to enrich the complainant but to serve to obviate his/her spiritual suffering by reason of the culpable action of the defendant. resp thru its different agents at prevailing market price at the perfection of contract. Asst Man of Jose Rodriguez Lanuza Sons. Filing not malicious. Inc. Luna 33 yrs old – life expectancy -30 years. V sued P for damages. Father’s liability for damages made bi his son who later become emancipated but is not abroad and could hardly support himself cannot be merely subsidiary. otherwise. and that wife succeeded in securing another better paying job 6 mons after.703). 13-yr old. the position was given to someone else. O did not submit evidence to rebut the testimony of said witness and the fact that the estimate of the expenses is approximate of the expenses make said estimate inadmissible. thereby reduction the net earning which would have received ($2. Globe us a quasi-public corporation affected with public interest. Floreza v de Evangelista – E borrowed P740 from F. NY admitting Olga B for a rotating internship. if proof is flimsy and nonsubstantial. 8 thil lozada . As a result. It was incumbent upon O to submit evidence in rebuttal. chairman & treasurer of Greenhills Industrial Corp. Damages in form of rentals should be given for continued use and occupation of the property.76. Moral 5k. attorney’s fees 8k. Atty’s fee may be allowed legal interest from time of trial court’s decision – damages in quasi-delict. trade or property. In case of fraud (voluntary or wilful act naturally arise from act or omission). CA decreased LE from 30years10years. Eastern Extension was able to deliver such. Not a dangerous sport – low powered vehicle CA erred in increasing the deceased’s possible expenses without increasing his likely revenues in computing damage awards. E sold lot to F for 1k (740 debt & 260 cash) with right of repurchase of 6years. He lost P46. filing false charges to harass or degrade her. no damages. Imposition of compensatory damages upon defendant tantamount to placing a prohibitive premium upon filing of complaints against public officials for misconduct in office. malice or wanton attitude. and it must be commensurate to the suffering inflicted. F was allowed to build a house of strong materials worth 1k in E’s lot. Exemplary 5k. Increased personal expenses from 20k-30k.

However. moral and exemplary damages as well as attorney’s fees must each be independently identified and justified. malicious or in bad faith. 1226-1230. reckless. 2209-2213. division of Solid Corp. 1959-1961. 1956. Cases 201-223. 416 and 905. exemplary and attorney’s fees.cannot be recovered in an action for breach of contract because such an action is not among those expressly mentioned in Art 2219 of NCC. 1175. The contract provided for liquidated damages in case of 9 thil lozada . 2226-2228. oppressive or abusive. it is recoverable if breach was wanton. MORAL damages -75k .Torts and Damages Herbosa v CA (2002) – H sued for damages for breach of contract. A writ of execution was issued. PVE failed to record of problems in the equipment. levied personal properties of Solid Corp. Through their utter disappoint. an injunction was issued but was delivered late. The claim for actual. to record their wedding ceremony. It was sold & Solidbank sued for damages – moral. CB Circular Nos. They hired PVE. 230 NPC v National Merchandising Corp – NPC purchased crude sulphur form Maria Cristina Fertilizer Plant from a NY firm thru NAMERCO. On the day of auction sale. Exemplary damages – 40k – a warning to all entitled to observe good faith and due diligence in fulfilling contractual obligations Attorney’s fees of 10k Session 12 – Art 1169.

the amount of indemnity in case of a partial breach. Blanco also protests that attorney’s fees worth 25% of total principal indebtedness as exorbitant. It is stipulated in the contract that right to compel for specific performance or recession with interest. Joe’s Radio & Elec v Alto Elec Corp – Bolinao Elec Corp – dealership agreement with Joe’s Radio & Elec Supply. Whether divisible in its nature or not. making them subject to reduction where equity so requires. Art 1403 does not apply in the case at bar when contract is being enforced as to damages against the agent itself for doing what it did without authority. the injured party could choose between requiring specific performance of the obligation or its resolution with indemnity for losses and payment of interest. it can be said. NY firm does not want to include the provision of nonavailability of vessel but Namerco still signed the contract. UP claims justified since A failed to deliver manuscript. Reduced equivalent to the bidder’s bond or 10% selling price of sulphur. In general. the fundamental rules governing them still remain basically the same. that the court may mitigate the sum stipulated therein since it is to be presumed that the parties only contemplated a total breach of the contract. now 1982) Where liquidated damages are agreed upon the same should be enforced instead of awarding only nominal damages. nevertheless. An agent who exceeds his authority is personally liable for damages. Such stipulation does not contravene law. it was 10 thil lozada . NPC sued Namerco & surety. Sy v CA – Distributorship Agreement between Sy and Luzon (producer). Reduced to P15k. Failure to correct. liquidated damages which makes it so. as a penalty. author of RPC of Philippines. Sued to cancel without giving notice. Liquidated damages was equitably reduced. Where there is partial or irregular performance in a contract providing for liquidated damages. It is not always the calling of a sum. it is strictly binding upon defendant. It also stipulated that the non-availability of vessel does not constitute as a fortuitous event. 1 st half delivered but second was not.780 -20% of total cost of 250 TV sets (at price of P1. with interest at the rate of 6% per annum. Liquidated damages agreed upon may be equitably reduced. The contract stipulates that when a violation of contract occurs. Namerco filed a surety bond of 45k. and not as liquidated damages. agreed with resp for exclusive printing of his book. the stipulation in the contract may be considered as liquidated damages to be paid in case of breach of contract.134/set less 30% discount) plus legal interest from date of filing of the original complaint. exceeds the limits of its authority in subsequently signing the contract. the plant stopped the production of sulphur. The sulphur was failed to be delivered because of no available vessel and subsequently. SC however ruled that interest is indicated in trust receipts. The first instalment given not in full. 10K Albert v University Publishing Co – Albert. (1957. the other shall warn to correct such within 60 days. SC: attorney’s fees here are in the nature of liquidated damages ad the stipulation therefor is aptly called a penal clause. Polytrade Corp v Blanco – to recover the purchase price of rawhide delivered. BEC will deliver 500 TV sets. that the principal told it via cable that it should not sign the sales contract unless it wish to assume sole responsibility for the shipment. where one of the obligors failed to comply with what is incumbent upon him. it is the tendency and preference of the law to regard a sum. For 3 mons delivered but short of 60MT. UP will pay 30k for 8 installments but A must deliver the manuscript on the specific date.P39. And this is usually so because of the difficulty or sometimes inability of the parties to ascertain or gauge beforehand. or public order. He would supply Sy 60 metric tons monthly of ipil-ipil to last for 2 years. the 1/3 of the price which is deposited would be returned upon demand. In the case at bar.Torts and Damages delay in delivery. stated to be payable if a contract is not fulfilled. It stipulated if BEC will fail to comply. Penalties and liquidated damages are dealt with separately. Blance questions the grant of RTC of interest of 1% monthly since no such stipulation appears in sales confirmation orders. w/c does not exempt seller from liquidated damages. plus damages equivalent to 20% of total cost of 250 TV sets. in view of the foregoing cited provision of the Code. Liquidated damages . Imposition of interest on principal as of time the complaint was filed is not just where litigation prolonged through no fault of defendant. morals. In reciprocal obligations. to be paid for breach of contract. An agent w/c does not disclose to a third person wishing to purchase crude sulphur from its principal. because then it may be apportioned to the loss actually sustained. a notice of 60 days shall be given for final termination of contract and right to liquidated damages of P20k. SC: both parties violated contract.

He also submitted a draft to deed of sale but Tan refused to accept. The arrears in rental. in the event of the termination or cancellation of the agreement by reason of the lessee's violation of any of the terms and conditions of the agreement is a penal clause that may be validly entered into. and not the other. But it was shown that L was not the sole owner. the building where it was stored. After 2 years. burned. No liquidated damages in 11 thil lozada . L & T are both property owners and men of affairs who are presumed to know how to protect their interests in dealing with other parties. which is in line with an express stipulation of the contract. he was a widower and his children are co-owners.C. L & F became the largest stockholder. It is like the case of an obligation to perform two more independent acts. they are treated the same legally. RTC: T to pay balance + legal interest + 25% of such as attys fees (liquidated damages). A penal clause is an accessory obligation which the parties attach to a principal obligation for the purpose of insuring the performance thereof by imposing on the debtor a special presentation (generally consisting in the payment of a sum of money) in case the obligation is not fulfilled or is irregularly or inadequately fulfilled. Lambert v Fox – John R. the party will pay 1k as liquidated damages. so far as legal results are concerned. Obligo is sued for refusal to pay the agreed penalty 3. Exceptions: purpose: to punish obligor 1. unmeritted amounts of amusement tax delinquency. T refused to pay the balance since loss is force majeure and he still not the owner until full payment was made. agreed to take over the business & accept stocks as payment of debt. Failed to get their signatures. L claims it was because Tan refused to have his credit rating investigated. its creditors. without prejudice to any other obligation still owing. Lawyers Coop v Tabora – Tabora bough Amjur (48 vol plus 4 vols of AmJur Gen Index). Edgar & Co. Fox sold it to E. Art 1226 (1). including L & F. Exceptions: court is authorized to intervene for the purpose of reducing a penalty stipulated in the contract to the extent of benefits . lessor and Sy. Primary purpose: to avoid proving the damages to recover sum stipulated. 25% of amount due as attorney’s fees. 1228. Whatever differences exists between them as a matter of language. SC: petitioner was under no compulsion to enter into such stipulation. it is not a case for the recovery of the liquidated damages Country Bankers Ins Corp v CA – OVEC. On the night delivered. L undertook to arrange with RFC the assumption of mortgage lien but failed to do such. in the absence of other considerations. L will return 5k within 15 days after lapse of 60 day period. 100k. lessee of theatres for 6 years. failure to observe such. L claims liquidated damages is immoral and iniquitous. There is no difference between a penalty and liquidated damages. RTC claims agreement it only good until the corporation reached a sound financial basis. made arrears in monthly rentals & non-payment of amusement taxes. atty fees. After 9 mons. otherwise he shall be liable for additional 5k. Bond shall and may answer only for damages w/c OVEC may suffer as a result of the injunction. They made an agreement not to sell the stocks until after 1 year.148 sqm lot for P85k within 60 days. stationery and book store. its strong competitor. A provision which calls for the forfeiture of the remaining deposit still in the possession of the lessor. with a provision for single liquidated damages for nonperformance. if one is performed. When there is a stipulation to the contrary 2. but must be as liquidated damages. When the obligor is guilty of fraud Penalty can’t substitute for 100k (a month increase in rental) damage resulting from injunction against 290k cash deposit. GR: Parties who are competent to contract may make such agreements within the limitations of the law and public policy as they desire. RTC misapprehended.Torts and Damages in fact divided by an offer and acceptance of part performance. and that the courts will enforce them according to their terms.when the principal obligation has been partly or irregularly fulfilled and the court can see that the person demanding the penalty has received the benefit of such or irregular performance. It could not be assailed when the ground of being iniquitous or unconscionable was not mentioned in his brief. Not an illegal stipulation nor restraint of trade since it protects the corporation and has a reasonable length of time. Mc Cullough. OVEC demands for repossession. Limjoco v CTA – Limjoco received 5k as earnest money and obliged to sell to Tan 3. Failure to perform such. OVEC regained possession.damages sustained not as a result of injunction.

for what could be the liquidated damages.611. His accumulated P179. and 10% of total amount as attorney’s fees from Security Bank. standing and relationship of parties and addressed to the sound discretion of the court. in effect.penalty and interest – runs from time of finality of judgment -interest rate per annum on principal amount – runs from date of filing of complaint. despite an express stipulation therefor in a valid agreement. Liam Law v Olmypic Sawmill Co. INTEREST RATE of 12% . 1974 was only 6%. Where the contract stipulates the rate of interest and the amount of penalty to be paid in case of failure to pay the obligation within a given period. in the absence of express contract as to such rate of interest. CB Circular No 416: July 29. It 3% monthy interest exorbitant and 5% monthly penalty violated Art 1226. goods or credits and the rate allowed in judgments. L only paid P5. resulting from such a breach.219. A penalty stipulation is not necessarily preclusive of interest. shall be twelve per cent (12 %) per annum. A debtor should not be made to pay liquidated damages when his denial to pay the balance of the account is not due to bad faith. Inc – Liam Law loaned 10k without interest to Olympic. Circular should not be given retrospective operation. R granted the project. What may justify a court in not allowing the creditor to impose full surcharges and penalties.Torts and Damages absence of bad faith. Trade & Inv Den Corp v Roblett Industrial Cons Corp – R filed a bid in Kuwait to subcontract the supply of skilled and semi-skilled workers for refinery project. and only on such date that it was increased to 12% by CB Circular No 416.74. The court has to enforce the contractual stipulations in the manner that they have been agreed upon for as long as they are not unconscionable or contrary to morals and public policy. if there is an agreement to that effect.781. It is a question that can be partly subjective and partly objective. both the penalty and the interest can be collected by the creditor.775.189%/annum and penalty of 5% every month of outstanding balance. Purpose: to strengthen the coercive force of the obligation and to provide. the date of the filing of the complaint.” The legal rate of interest before July 29. on the principal amount of P11.584.05 KD. Hence. extent and purpose of the penalty. as amended. Kuwait deemed breached subcontract and bid bond was confiscated. he defaulted in paying. A stipulated penalty may be equitably reduced by the courts it is iniquitous or unconscionable or it the principal obligation has been partly or irregularly complied with.25 should commence on 5 June 1990. The amount of P18. When he resigned he filed a complaint to collect his share in the profitsharing agreement of the company. Consequently. the 2 being distinct concepts which may be separately be demanded. the appropriate interest rate to be applied thereon is 12% per annum reckoned from the time of finality of judgment until fully paid as said amount constitutes a judgment award.78 is not part of the principal debt but it represents rather the interest and penalty charges on the advances made by petitioner to BKME as of the time of filing of the complaint. INTERESTS: rationale: COST of MONEY. O was granted an extension of 3 12 thil lozada . It depends on type. but CB disapproved.638. otherwise known as the "Usury Law. Gobonseng v Unibancard Corp – G applied for credit card with monthly credit limit of 10k from Unibancard. The company refused and instead sought to recover the unliquidated cash advances. mode of breach and its consequencesm supervening realities. in its Resolution No. 2655.029. Viloria v CA – V was the manager of Service Center of Phils. Philguarantee issued a counterguarantee." the Monetary Board. Ligutan v CA – L secured a loan of 120k with interest of 15. which is not exactly the same as a surcharge or a penalty. may not equally justify the non-payment or reduction of interest. 1622 dated July 29. 1974. 1974 “By virtue of the authority granted to it under Section 1 of Act No. PENALTY CLAUSE – an accessory undertaking to assume greater liability on the part of an obligor in case of breach of an obligation. nature of obligation. Interest prescribed in loan financing arrangements is a fundamental part of the banking business and the core of a bank’s existence. It is only when the parties to a contract have failed to fix the rate of interest or when such amount is unwarranted that the Court will apply the 12% interest per annum on a loan or forbearance of money. R filed a bid bond of 1% of total proposed tender price or 159. required to issue performance bond. has prescribed that the rate of interest for the loan or forbearance of any money. the 16% interest per annum.

Any contract which appears to be heavily weighed in favor of one of the parties so as to lead to an unconscionable result is void. Demand letters is not sufficient proof of agreement on 34% interest per annum. only present to Philphos warehouse for release. In four months.” Violated Art 1308. Usury now legally non-existent under CB Circular No 905. The increases in violation of Credit Agreement that its terms “may be amended only by an instrument in writing signed by party to be bound as burdened by such amendment” Art 1956. The 6K for attorney’s fees and legal interest. UCPB applied interest rates on different promissory notes ranging from 18%-34%. P claims K has made overwithdrawals. UCPB was granted both choices which presents opportunity to fix the rate at will. UCPB v Beluso – B granted a credit line of P2.244%. nothing therein could possibly be read as granting the lender carte blanche authority to raise interest rate to levels which would either enslave its borrower or lead to haemorrhaging of his assets. K claims withdrawals signed by unauthorized withdrawals. Padilla never agreed in writing to pay interest increased fixed by PNB beyond 24% per annum. Violation of mutuality principle of contracts. They paid 763.8M with 18% interest per annum. with 4 lands mortgaged. UCPB foreclosed mortgaged to secure payment of debt of P3. UCPB demanded payment of total debt of P2. PNB v CA and Padilla – Padilla asked for a loan of 1. subject to upward/downward adjustment every 30 days thereafter” and a penalty charge of 18% per annum “based on any unpaid principal to be computed from date of default until payment of the obligation. considered repealed with retroactive effect. While the Usury Law ceiling on interest rate was lifted by CB Circular No 905. lawful as it is considered as liquidated damages.” Bank can increase the interest but can also decrease. if Monetary Board is not authorized to make changes for more than every 12 mons. went to 30.692. Failed to pay. Art 1956: no interest shall be due unless it has been expressly stipulated in writing. who is alleging usury. its validity or compliance cannot be left to the will of one of them. PNB relied on own Board Resolution but such are neither laws nor resolutions of Monetary Board. Contract stipulates “with interest at the rate indicative of DBD retail rate or as determined by the Branch Head. the 18% interest rate raised to 48%. Provision that claim of usury deemed admitted if it was not denied specifically and under oath.Torts and Damages months but loan increased to 16K.543 + 25% attorney’s fees. Interest chargeable now depends upon agreement of lender and borrower. Rules of Court as to the allegations of usury being procedural in nature. Increases of interest rate unilaterally imposed by respondent bank without petitioner’s assent are violative of the principle of mutuality of contracts in Art 1308 of CC. F paid the arrears but M still foreclosed mortgaged lands. 13 thil lozada . Floirendo Jr v Metrobank – F loaned for 1M for Reymill Realty. It was renewed for another year but with interest at 15. Phil Phosphate Fertilizer Corp v Kamalig Resources Inc – K purchased fertilizer from Philphos issued Sales Official Receipt. 6k additional for 10k principal. In case at bar. The contract stipulates that interest will be “within limits allowed by law. Art 1310: Courts are granted authority to reduce/increase interest rates equitably. 34% interest per annum on principal claim of Philphos is its unilateral act and no evidence was presented that it was stipulated by the parties.603. not applicable to a case where it is the defendant.932. increases in interest is null and void.783.35M. CB Circular No 905 removed Usury Law ceiling interest rates but it did not authorize PNB to unilaterally and successively increase the agreed interest rates from 18% to 48% in violation of PD 116. PD 116 Sec 2 provides that Monetary Board: interest rate changes for loans or renewal thereof shall not be made oftener than once every twelve months . O claims 6k as usurious interest.03. Interest varied. not the plaintiff. K would resell fertilizer to customers and shall issue Delivery Orders.446% per annum for 1 st 30 days.: The contract must bind both contracting parties. in accordance with the maximum interest rate imposed by law or Monetary Board. demanded to pay if not would charge 34% interest per annum. A fixed margin over the reference rate like 3% so that parties can easily determine the interest rate by applying simple arithmetic. It only presented demand letters which imposes such. and other costs. even less so may a bank which is subordinate to the Board.

iniquitous and unconscionable. Manila passed an ordinance for appropriation for such. 25 hec lot of Zobel minors was bought for such purpose. 12% interest per annum on total amount after judgment becomes final and executory until obligation is satisfied. effective on January 1.e. Stipulation authorizing such interest 1. Svendsen v People – Reyes extended a loan to Svendsen for 200k with interest of 10% a month. the social injury is sought to be repaired through the imposition of the corresponding penalty. Sec 510 of CIvPro – interest thus accruing must be consolidated with the principal as of the date of the judgment of the lower court. still stipulated interest rates are illegal if they are unconscionable – nothing in the said circular grants leaders carte blanche authority to raise interest rates to levels which will either enslave their borrowers or lead to hemorrhaging of their assets. as such. Applicable only to obligations containing stipulation for interest. and parties to a loan agreement have been given wide latitude to agree on any interest rate. The legal interest rate of 12% should apply. After default occurred the defendant became liable for interest as damages regardless of the absence of any express stipulation for interest and regardless of the statement that this instalment should draw no interest. date of filing of information up to finality of judgment). An interest rate of 4% per month or 48% per annum is highly unconscionable and inordinate. when assessed as damages for the non-payment of a debt. whereas with respect to the personal injury of the victim. The stipulation that it would draw no interest was made in the expectation that the obligation would be paid upon date stipulated. 1999 ( date of the check). to the same extent as the general government. they are inexistent and void from the beginning. the civil indemnity to P16k = unpaid interest on P200k loan at 12% per annum as of Feb 2. Applicable only to debts and claims with respect to which no stipulation for interest has been made As to succeeding instalments. promissory notes stipulates interest rate of 4% for 3months. 1999 (date of judicial demand. i. B offered to Y to pay in terms of his stocks in a rural bank. shall be no less than 10k. After default.5M. Dr Lim assigned it to Bulos. it is sought to be compensated through indemnity. Lim loaned form Yasuma 2. While the Usury Law has been suspended by CB Circular No 905. 1983. if not against the law. and parties to a loan agreement have been given wide latitude to agree on any interest rate. Contract contains that 1st instalment was not to bear interest but next 5 instalments were to bear 5% interest per annum. S is civilly liable. after which the whole shall bear interest at the contract rate of 5% per annum until paid. It is sufficient basis to impose a 12% legal interest in favor of petitioner in case at bar as what we have voided is merely stipulated rate of interest and not stipulation that the loan shall earn interest. 12% interest per annum from April 29. to pay additional amount equivalent to 10% of principal amount plus attorney’s fee. 200k was paid. The interest rate of 10% monthly is clearly excessive. A demand established by judgment must be understood as bearing interest whether expressly so stated or not. The Court deems in fair to adjust: 14 thil lozada . it does not specify any margin above or below the DBD retail rate. SC upheld the contract stipulation for compounding of interest. For in criminal case. Where interest is contracted for at a given rate the contract obligation to pay interest is not merged in the judgment but remains in full force until the debt is paid. Art 1109. Interest amounted to 380K. Found overpricing. still stipulated interest rates are illegal if they are unconscionable – nothing in the said circular grants leaders carte blanche authority to raise interest rates to levels which will either enslave their borrowers or lead to hemorrhaging of their assets. A municipal corporation does not enjoy immunity from liability for interest. if brought to court. 1983. While the Usury Law has been suspended by CB Circular No 905. As to 1st instalment. 3. Zobel v City of Manila – City of Manila wanted to establish a cemetery. Bulos Jr v Yasuma – Dr. effective on January 1. 2.. Filed complaint for violation of BP 22. which is civil in nature. Balance paid thru check but bounce. are contra bonos mores.Torts and Damages In case at bar. it is to be treated as if nothing had been said about interest at all. after which interest upon the whole shall be computed at the same rate. it was not paid. interest accrued up to the date of filing of complaint must be consolidated as of that date with the capital. computed from the date of judicial demand.

much less forbearances of any money. goods or credits. 1st instalment of 1k paid. CB Circular Nos. Only 400 was paid even though A is demanding for such. 416 and 905. CB Circular No 416 was issued pursuant to PD 116 which amended Act No 2655 (Usury Law). and making use of the power given to the court by article 1154 of the Civil Code. Ruiz claims as co-owner & asked B to stop paying. SC: Such stipulation is not usurious. Should there be such an agreement. If vendee is in default in the payment of the price of the thing sold. When B was about to pay the 2nd. Obligation to pay any unpaid balance thereof did not cease to be liquidated and determined simply because vendor and vendee. goods. since said rate was fixed only for the interest. the penalty does not include the interest. Right of suspension of payment ended as soon as “the vendor has caused the disturbance or danger to cease. or credits does not fall within the coverage of CB Circular No 416 Action for damages for injury to persons and loss of property and does not involve any loan. goods. he is liable to pay legal interest 15 thil lozada . KS Ohta died. Total indebtedness continue to charge 7% per annum compounded every six months. Inouye. But considering that the obligation was partly performed. B claims not liable for interest since suspension of payment is justified. 10k already paid. and it would have been the duty of the sheriff to allow such credit in this case even in the absence of direction to that effect. nor involving loans or forbearance of any money. RTC: “or for such parts of said amounts as may remain unpaid after execution of this case is returned by this sheriff” – SC: does not have the effect of rendering the judgment indefinite. 1974 from the filing of the complaint. Accrued interest draws legal interest from the time that the suit is filed for its recovery. The law applicable is Art 2209 CC – legal interest is 6% per annum. but defendant’s default in crediting the plaintiff with the proceeds of the sale of sugar. A & R reached a compromise and sued B for the balance. interest is not collectible on the accrued interest. RTC: pay 3. According to this.600 + legal interest. in the suit for collection. goods. disagreed as to its amount. 12% interest per annum & failure to pay at maturity + 25% penalty of such balance. Reformina v Tomol Jr – RTc resolution – declaring the judgment of 370K shall bear legal interest rate of 12% per annum pursuant to CB Circular No 416 dated July 29. or credits. under Art 2209 CC. Where the plaintiff is entitled to the payment of interest on the various amounts due from the defendant by way of damages. Art 1152 permits agreement upon penalty apart from interest . Where the promissory note contains a stipulation to the effect that if the obligation should become the subject of judicial action a certain percentage of the principal should be added to cover expenses of collection. Bareng v CA – B bought from Algegria a cinematographic equipment for 15k. Monetary Board increased legal interest rate from 6% per annum to 12%.Torts and Damages Seton Donne v Inouye – KS Ohta was a guarantor for purchase price in buying a lot to Donna for 30k. S would deliver piculs of export sugar as payment but a part of such did not include the proceeds of sale. Usury Law deals with interest on: 1. because the event which gave rise to the plaintiff’s right to recover interest was not a conventional obligation. Loans 2. and which may be demanded separately. the penalty is not to be added to the interest for the determination of whether the interest exceeds the rate fixed by the law. Soriano v Cia General de Tabacos – crop loan account granted to S. this penalty is reduced to 10% of the unpaid debt.” when compromise between A & R was reached. administrator of estate of Ohta. Rates allowed in judgments – referred to judgments in litigations involving loans or forbearance of any money. Judgment against the administrator should be credited with whatever should be made out of the property of the principal debtor. 5K balance to be paid 4 promissory notes. Forbearances of any money. or credits 3. and said interest did not arise from an obligation of the defendant to pay the same on a contractual basis. Session 13 – Art 2209-2213. Cases 224-247 Bachrach Motors v Espiritu – E bought 2 trucks but failed to pay full amounts. interest upon this item will not be allowed prior to the date of the judgment in the trial court. Any other kind of monetary judgment which has nothing to do with.

of the court a quo. Mercantile was compelled to pay losses.735. Due to negligence of Eastern.915. Whether interest will be paid on the balance from the time that the complaint was flied. CC permit an agreement upon a penalty apart from the monetary interest. Reformina v Tomol Jr – refer to page 13. Failed to make any payment: 6.500 with 12% interest. 1 drum was in bad order because it was opened and unsealed. as agreed upon by the parties? The defendants admitted not only the amount of the balance of the plaintiff but also the 12% interest from Nov 1. and as such the two are different and distinct from each other and may be demanded separately. There is no doubt that the petitioner is liable for both the stipulated monetary interest and the stipulated penalty charge. SC explained the decision: 16 thil lozada . interest at the legal rate even if the surety would thereby become liable to pay more than the total amount stipulated in the bond. Promissory note expressly provides for the imposition of both interest (14% per annum plus 3% service charge) and penalties (2% per month) in case of default on part of petitioner in payment of subject restructured loan. Piczon v Piczon – Piczon as guarantor sentence to pay 12. the penalty does not include the monetary interest. Tan v CA – Tan asked 2 loans amounting to 4M. Creditors suing on a suretyship bond may recover from the surety as part of their damages. If the parties stipulate this kind of agreement. SJ filed a performance bond of P30. After a few payments. Interest does not run from the time the obligation becomes due. but from the filing of the complaint. Inc v Ca – 2 fiber drums of riboflavin were shipped from Japan thru delivery vessel of Eastern Shipping. in lieu of 6% shall be imposed on such amount upon finality of this decision until payment thereof.421. Galang. CCP sued for payment of Tan but Tan claims merely accommodated a friend but he cannot locate him.600 from Plaridel Surety. The penalty charge is also called penalty or compensatory interest. Penalty clauses can be in the form of penalty or compensatory interest. or from Nov 1. Upon arrival. It already sold the logs to a Japanese company but failed to deliver. PLG sued & asks for bond payment. 1953. monetary interest and penalty interest. F would pay 12% interest a year from the date of default plus 25% attorney’s fees and liquidated damages. Outstanding balance of P4. The surety is made to pay interest. 1953. The penalty charge of two percent (2%) per month in the case at bar began to accrue from the time of default by the petitioner.088. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co v Delgado – Firestone agreed to sell goods and merchandise to Dee for Caltex quick service station. 1988.Torts and Damages from the date of filing of complaint unless he deposits in Court the amount due at the start of the action. It is changed to a straight 12% per annum. he defaulted.32. In case of default. and not from the date of the filing of the complaint. interest is payable from such time. Express stipulation in the promissory note permitting compounding interest.411. a reduction of penalty charge is justified. Tan bound to pay interest on total amount of the principal. Interest began to run on the penalty interest upon the filing of the complaint in court. dated February 3. because the claim is unliquidated? The legal interest to be paid is 6% on the amount due computed from the decision. last case. Plaridel Surety & insurance Co v PL Galang Machinery Co – PL Galang & San Jose agreed that SJ would peel and cut veneer logs at P60 for PL. important case Eastern Shipping Lines. An obligation to pay interest is due without need of demand where the contract stipulates from what time interest will be counted. and compounding it is sanctioned by and allowed pursuant to Art 1959 considering: 1. Does interest accrue from the date of first demand or when the obligation becomes due and demandable. Art 2212. Debt: 3. 2. The contract expressly stipulates the interest of 12% per annum commence from date of execution of said document . PLG filed for advance payment & expected delivery. but by reason of its failure to pay when demanded and for having compelled the plaintiff to resort to the courts to obtain payment. Petitioner made partial payments which showed his good faith.03.62. It was insured with Mercantile Insurance Company. A 12% interest. not by reason of the contract. Is interest on claim of Mercantile Insurance should commence from date of filing of complaint at rate of 12% per annum.

whether the case falls under paragraph 1 or paragraph 2. Observe.. i. not constituting a loan or forbearance of money. on the one hand.did not alter the pronounced rule on the application of the 6% or 12% interest per annum. Unlike.. Accordingly. on the other hand. The provisions under Title XVIII on "Damages" of the Civil Code govern in determining the measure of recoverable damages. delicts or quasi-delicts is breached. 1 st.e. the rate of interest. With regard particularly to an award of interest in the concept of actual and compensatory damages." The Nakpil and Sons case ruled that 12% interest per annum should be imposed from the finality of the decision until the judgment amount is paid. First group . be on the amount finally adjudged. and it consists in the payment of a sum of money. shall be adjudged on unliquidated claims or damages except when or until the demand can be established with reasonable certainty. introduced a different time frame for reckoning the 6% interest by ordering it to be "computed from the finality of (the) decision until paid . is breached. from judicial or extrajudicial demand under and subject to the provisions of Article 1169 of the Civil Code.e. and that the 6% interest under the Civil Code governs when the transaction involves the payment of indemnities in the concept of damage arising from the breach or a delay in the performance of obligations in general. When the judgment of the court awarding a sum of money becomes final and executory. inductive. i. IAC. The actual base for the computation of legal interest shall. an interest on the amount of damages awarded may be imposed at the discretion of the court at the rate of 6% per annum. assessed and determined by the courts after proof. shall be 12% per annum from such finality until its satisfaction. regardless of its source. II. Malayan held that the amount awarded should bear legal interest from the date of the decision of the court a quo.'" American Express International v.e. goods or credits. interest 'should be from the date of the decision. the rate of legal interest. Rule of thumb for future guidance I. Second group .Torts and Damages 1. as well as the accrual thereof. law. the "second group" varied on the commencement of the running of the legal interest. No interest. When an obligation. the interest shall begin to run only from the date the judgment of the court is made (at which time the quantification of damages may be deemed to have been reasonably ascertained). ortigas.the basic issue focuses on the application of either the 6% (under the Civil Code) or 12% (under the Central Bank Circular) interest per annum. The cases discussed can be classified into 2 groups according to similarity of issues involved and the corresponding rulings rendered by the court 2. that in these cases.. quasi-contracts. as follows: 1. the contravenor can be held liable for damages. goods or credits. is imposed.. as well as to judgments involving such loan or forbearance of money. where the demand is established with reasonable certainty. 'unliquidated and not known until definitely ascertained. In the absence of stipulation. Escani v Ortigas Jr – Falcon Corp consists of 2 groups of stockholder in the case at bar. When the obligation is breached. however. above. 2. i.e. a loan or forbearance of money. however. this interim period being deemed to be by then an equivalent to a forbearance of credit. 1169. the interest due should be that which may have been stipulated in writing. 4. 2 nd: 17 thil lozada . from the time the complaint is filed until the adjudged amount is fully paid. 3. contracts.' then. Civil Code) but when such certainty cannot be so reasonably established at the time the demand is made. Furthermore. scholey. a common time frame in the computation of the 6% interest per annum has been applied. the rate of interest shall be 12% per annum to be computed from default. 3. explaining that "if the suit were for damages. When an obligation. too. i. 17 depending on whether or not the amount involved is a loan or forbearance. the interest due shall itself earn legal interest from the time it is judicially demanded. the "first group" which remained consistent in holding that the running of the legal interest should be from the time of the filing of the complaint until fully paid. in any case. the interest shall begin to run from the time the claim is made judicially or extrajudicially (Art. or one of indemnity for damage. It is easily discernible in these cases that there has been a consistent holding that the Central Bank Circular imposing the 12% interest per annum applies only to loans or forbearance 16 of money.

2 years after. Where payment of interest is not expressly provided in the promissory note. on the outstanding balance. FORBEARANCE – a contractual obligation of lender or creditor to refrain. But became delinquent in paying rentals. Refer to reformina v tomol. CA: 6 condo units as payment. It is merely a matter of mathematically computing the exact money value thereof. the interest is 12% per annum from time of extra-judicial demand. from the time it was judicially or extrajudicially demanded. Catungal v Hao – The back rental in this case being equivalent to a loan or forbearance of money. The Note already stipulated a late payment penalty of 2. Deemed included in penalty. inasmuch as the annual sugar production and the amount of molasses and bagasse. Differences in billings arose. only as joint debtor & interest rate is 6% not 12%. Manufacturers Bldg Inc v CA – PMMS leased part of Manufacturer’s Building. 2nd group claims that if liable. Based on 2nd mortgage.e. assessed and determined by the courts after presentation of proof. PDCP sued for collection of debt. DSM Cons & Dev Corp v CA – Megaworld hired DSM to contruct condo. It was caught on fire but CB refused claim. Lianga Bay entered into a fire insurance with Country Bankers for stocks-in-trade against fire. with legal interest of 12% per annum. UNLIQUIDATED DAMAGES or CLAIMS are those which are not or cannot be known until definitely ascertained. are undisputed and are in fact based on the records of petitioner. Payment of interest was not expressly stipulated in the Note. i.5% in case of default and acceleration clause. What they are claiming are specific percentages definitely provided under the law. Silos & Matti. Petitioner prayed for “14% interest per annum from May 6. PMMS offered to pay obligation within 6mons from execution of 2nd mortgage. Interest must be 12% per annum. Art 2209. In case at bar. Refer to Eastern Shipping no. Proper interest rate is 6%. Radiowealth Finance Co v Del Rosario – Del Rosario delivered promissory note but defaulted in payment. Inc – Country Bankers is a domestic corp. 1 st groups ceded control of corp to avoid debt. They had a share of 60% in sugar produced. The rate of interest which they might have agreed upon earlier has been obliterated or superseded by the new agreement. 4. from judicial or extrajudicial demand. no agreed upon. then it shall be deemed included in the stipulation for a late payment penalty. FNCB Finance v Estavillo – E bought a Ford Fiera and made a promissory note for payment of balance and penalty of 2. i.e. 1993 until fully paid.Torts and Damages Escano. the proper forum for clarifying the same is the CIAC (imposed said rate). goods or credit. 18 thil lozada . Not entitled to compounding of interest. in turn. during a given period of time. Art 1959. Art 2213.. from requiring the borrower or debtor to repay a loan or debt then due and payable. the parties agreed on an increased rate of interest to 12% per annum. Falcon loaned from PDCP $320. 6% computed from date of filing of complaint. service PVTA at government price. derived from the production during the crop years involved. obligated to redry. PVTA v Tensuan – Management contract was executed between resp cooperative of farmers to sell dry tobacco to CCP and CCP. RA 809 was enacted compelling increased participation of majority planters. Country Bankers Insurance Corp v Lianga Bay & Community Multi-Purpose Cooperative. The controversy on the application of the 6% rate of interest. Refer to Reformina case Interest is due from the moment there is a delay on the part of the obligor to perform his obligation. not the CA.” We disagree.000. insurance claim not a forbearance of money. His vehicle was seized for being in arrears but claims on time. procure.5% monthy to be added to each unpaid instalment until fully paid. Compromise agreement.. Sued for ejectment. Central gives 62% share for those who signed but 60% share if without milling contract. 2undertakings were signed by stockholders where solidary liability with company in their private capacity. But still failed to comply. Rate of interest thereon shall be 12% per annum to be computed form default. Central Azucarera de Bais v CA – Def are sugar cane planters milling their sugarcane with petitioner without any written milling contracts. Nowhere in jurisprudence has a legal rate interest been imposed as a flat rate rather than on a per annum basis.

nothing in the said circular grants lenders carte blanche authority to raise interest rates to levels which will either enslave their borrowers or lead to a hemorrhaging of their assets. Ventura became the co-maker – 100k.333. 905. (3) 230k. until the principal sum due is returned to the creditor. then payment of legal interest or six percent (6%) per annum. Security Bank & Trust Co. To make the latter law applicable to any case other than those specifically provided for by the Usury Law would be to violate the principle of undue delegation of legislative powers since the Monetary Board will be exercising legislative functions which was beyond the intendment of P. (2) 136. and (b) regular or monetary interest in the amount of seventeen percent (17%) per annum. they were properly liable only for: (a) the principal of the loan or P110. CB Circular No 905. 83. Significantly. 1974. Solangon v Salazar – 2 loans with the mortgage on the same land. which fixes the legal rate of interest at 12% per annum is not applicable here since the circular applies only to loans or forbearance of money. They were not liable for penalty or compensatory interest. V RTC Makati. When the judgment of the Court awarding a sum of money becomes final and executor. A stipulated interest rate of 6% per month or 72% per annum is definitely outrageous and inordinate – an interest of 12% per annum is deemed fair and reasonable.100k. the interest due should be that stipulated in writing. Sec 1 and 2.00. See Reformina v Tomol. (1) 60k.Torts and Damages Advanced payment. 116. Art 1256 People v Iglesia – accused stabbed the victim on the left chest with kitchen knife. Filed a collection case. The law applicable is Art 2209. then the payment of additional interest at a rate equal to the regular monetary interest. is the payment of penalty interest at the rate agreed upon. 2nd loan unable to pay but expressed willingness to pay.B. 65k. Art 1306. PNB v CA – Isabela issued several checks as payment for medicines purchased. only in the absence of a stipulation can the court impose the 12% rate of interest. the rate shall be 12% per annum.665. and in the absence thereof. respondent did not question that rate. and in the absence of a stipulation of a particular rate of penalty interest. State Investment House v CA – Refugio & Rafael Aquino accommodated Jose and Marcelina Aquino to a loan of P375k in the State Investment. fixed by the promissory note in Account No. R & R claims not their obligation. 120K. were relieved from the payment not only of penalty or compensatory interest at the rate of twenty-four percent (24%) per annum but also of regular or monetary interest of seventeen percent (17%) per annum. where on the drinking spree before the incident. regular interest continues to accrue since the debtor continues to use such principal amount. Lyndon Phar sued to collect balance. legal rate. R & R pledged shares of stock.65k. IF-82-0904-AA at two percent (2%) per month or twenty-four (24%) per annum. In the case at bar. Central Bank Circular No. Br. 4mons. as a matter of law. 416 dated July 29. 23% interest per annum. it was a contract of sale wherein there was default in the payment of the price and interest was awarded therefor. The appropriate measure for damages in case of delay in discharging an obligation consisting of the payment of a sum or money.000. Article 2209 CC. But fire destroyed before grading & weighing but was already unloaded. The payment of regular interest constitutes the price or cost of the use of money and thus. PNB v CA The rate of interest was agreed upon by the parties freely.D. We believe and so hold that since respondent Aquino spouses were held not to have been in delay. It was delivered to seller’s agent but agent did not turn over 23 checks amounting to 98. In a loan or forbearance of money. and not from the filing of the complaint against the accused. 4 months. R & R acquired another loan. the rate of legal interest shall be 12% per annum from such finality until its satisfaction. The balance are 16.517 for 1 year. Is interest 6% or 12%? 19 thil lozada . The interest here is therefore not within the contemplation of the Usury Law. It is not for respondent court a quo to change the stipulations in the contract where it is not illegal. They requested the release of pledge in the shares of stocks but the State refused claiming that a balance on first loan has not yet paid.691. While the Usury Law ceiling on interest rates was lifted by C. Hence. legal rate. Circular No. The regular or monetary interest continued to accrue under the terms of the relevant promissory note until actual payment is effected. The fact that the respondent Aquino spouses were not in default did not mean that they. 61 – 3 promissory notes granted to Eusebio.90. 6% interest monthly. goods or credits and court judgment thereon. and if no regular interest had been agreed upon. The interest on the damages awarded should be computed from the time of the finality of the decision.

be made with . From such date of finality. 201.a.a. and such interest as may accrue thereon and expenses incurred. TOTAL AMOUNT DUE = principal + interest + service charge + penalty + interest on interest Interest = principal x 16 % per annum x no. RCBC v Alfa RTW Manufacturing Corp – Alfa RTW granted LOC by RCBC for purchase of raw materials of garment business. Trust Receipts stipulated such: 1. Cases 69 (321 scra 584). 2% p. should be imposed. 416. until finality of Judgment. When an obligation arises "from a contract of purchase and sale and not from a contract of loan or mutuum. A penalty of six percent (6%) per annum of the amount due and unpaid must also be imposed computed from the date of demand (in this case on March 9." Once the judgment becomes final and executory." the applicable rate is "6% per annum as provided in Article 2209 of the NCC and not the rate of 12% per annum as provided in (CB) Cir.a." Thus. of years until finality of judgment Attorney’s fees is 10% of the total amount computed as of finality of judgment Total amount due as of the date of finality of judgment will earn an interest of 12% per annum until fully paid.90).Torts and Damages Refer to Eastern Shipping. 1982) until finality of judgment Interest on interest = Interest computed as of the filing of the complaint (March 12. 1�wphi1.a. Session 14 – Art 2216-2225. Tan sued for breach of contract. as long as unpaid. 96. 248-268 Ramos v CA – The amount of damages which should be The principal amount of loans corresponding to each trust receipt must earn an interest at the rate of sixteen percent (16%) per annum with the stipulated service charge of two percent (2%) per annum on the loan principal or the outstanding balance thereof. 1982).5M. from the date of execution until 20 thil lozada awarded. The interest of 16% percent per annum. The court allowed the imposition of 12% legal interest p. 2. the date the decision of the trial court became final. not less than 10% of value of property finality of this Decision. the payment of 12% legal interest per annum should commence from August 25. Trust receipt was executed. Attorney’s fees and costs of collection. from the nature of the case. the total unpaid amount (principal + interest + service charge + penalty + interest on the interest) computed shall earn interest of 12% per annum until satisfied.a. 1993. meet pecuniary loss certain to be suffered but which could not. compensates for pecuniary loss incurred and proved. 2.750 (principal amount + 6% interest). Eastern Assurance & Surety Corp v CA – Tan insured his building against fire for 250k with Eastern. is deemed to be equivalent to a forbearance of credit. – penalty or liquidated damages 4. of years from demand (March 9. The actual base for the computation of this 12% interest after the judgment in this damage suit became final shall be the amount adjudged (P98. The case became final and executory on August 25. also earns interest. Alfa’s liability must not exceed 4M and 7. the agreed “cut-off date” for the payment of legal interest. 1982) x 12% x no. 1994. 6% p. and to be computed from the time the judgment became final and executory until fully satisfied. – service charge 3.691. 16% interest p. computed from the date of the filing of the complaint (March 12. up to September 30. Eastern filed a motion with check for 448. of years from date of execution until finality of judgment Service charge = principal x 2% per annum x no. The building was destroyed but indemnity was denied. of years from date of execution until finality of judgment Penalty = principal x 6% per annum x no. up to the time of trial. on money judgment from the date of its finality until fully paid. No. if they are to adequately and correctly respond to the injury caused: 1. in accordance with the pronouncement in Eastern Shipping the rate of 12% p. Hence. 1982) until finality of this Court’s Decision. the "interim period from the finality of judgment awarding a monetary claim and until payment thereof. 1993. 239.

It also stipulated that the non-availability of vessel does not constitute as a fortuitous event. The parties foresaw that it might be difficult to ascertain the exact amount of damages for nondelivery of the sulphur. Art 2221. the sum awarded by CFI as moral damages may well be considered as nominal. They are not intended for indemnification of loss suffered but for the vindication or recognition of a right violated or invaded. with full knowledge that he was an official delegate of Philippines. he was transferred to tourist class compartment. boarded place of petitioner bound for Tokyo as a first class passenger. SC: 20k nominal damages Nominal damages cannot co-exist with compensatory damages. Nominal damages – 3K. On arrival in Okinawa.Torts and Damages certainty. Northwest Airlines v Cuenca – Cuenca official delegate of Philippines. Since the agent acted in wanton. Namerco filed a surety bond of 45k. temperate damages can and should be awarded on top of actual or compensatory damages in instances where the injury is chronic and continuing. 2 dollar checks was deposited by Jasmin residing in Maranilla st. NY firm does not want to include the provision of nonavailability of vessel but Namerco still signed the contract. the plant stopped the production of sulphur. Where liquidated damages are agreed upon the same should be enforced instead of awarding only nominal damages. reckless. w/c does not exempt seller from liquidated damages. NPC sued Namerco & surety. The reason is that these damages cover two distinct phases. then he may not likewise be entitled to exemplary damages.5% in case of default and acceleration clause. Mangatarem. no incompatibility arises when both actual and temperate damages are provided for. found to have omitted a number of payments for which E produced the corresponding receipts. The respondent suffered not only actual damages but also humiliation and mental anguish over the unwarranted confiscation of the vehicle he cherished and for which he had already made substantial payments. in this case. It would not be correct to hold in this case that the NPC suffered damages in name only or that breach of contract was merely technical in character. True.The actual physical. FNBC Finance v Estavillo – E bought a Ford Fiera and made a promissory note for payment of balance and penalty of 2. no award for moral or exemplary damages was given to Nicolas Cuenca. Petitioner deliberately submitted false statement of accounts. Go’s negligence in fact led to swindling if his employer. Petitioners’ negligence was the root of all the inconvenience and embarrassment experienced by the respondent.5M Moral damages – 2M . in front of other passengers. they happened after the filing of the complaint with constabulary authorities. C sued for 50k exemplary. As such. or where there has been a breach of contract and no substantial injury or actual damages whatsoever have been or can be shown. These are damages recoverable where a legal right is technically violated and must be vindicated against an invasion that has produced no actual present loss of any kind. emotional and financial cost of the care of petitioner would be virtually impossible to quantify. but having been accommodated as a first class passenger in Manila. Nominal damages are damages in name only or are in fact the same as no damages. considering that the said agent had acted in 21 thil lozada . Temperate damages – 1. the award for nominal damages is justified. The sulphur was failed to be delivered because of no available vessel and subsequently. Even the temperate damages herein awarded would be inadequate if petitioner's condition remains unchanged for the next ten years. Pangasinan. No right to claim for moral damages. Cuenca has a “wait-listed” ticket. 20K moral damages. The checks were altered and first Jazmin were sued for estafa. However. The contract provided for liquidated damages in case of delay in delivery. Nominal and exemplary damages should be awarded to respondent because of thoughtless. And because of the unique nature of such cases. He was rudely compelled. and oppressive manner. C was entitled to believe that such was a confirmation of his reservation and he would be kept on the position. Napocor v National Merchandising Corp – NPC purchased crude sulphur form Maria Cristina Fertilizer Plant from a NY firm thru NAMERCO. Go v IAC – Jazmin is a retired employee of US Fed Govt residing in 34 Maravilla St. to move or be left behind in case of noncompliance. His vehicle was seized for being in arrears but claims on time. At any rate. In other words. if not malicious acts of the petitioner. He had no choice but to obey.

Yap took possession and renamed it to Harvardian Colleges. no more than nominal damages can be awarded. interests and charges). Armovit and family planned to spend Christmas in Phils. Art 2224 Moral 50k – it is mandatory in cases of murder and homicide without need of allegation and proof other than the death of the victim. Cresencia. MCC Industrial Sales Corp v Ssangyong Corp – MMC. They sued for annulment of such. and not for the purpose of indemnifying the plaintiff for any loss suffered by him. moral 30K. exemplary 10K. atty’s fee 5K. they were rudely informed that the flight was already taking off. the award of nominal damages is unnecessary and improper. Ingal v People – 19 year old was stabbed in a carinderia. When they were bumped off rudely is a clear indicia of malice and bad faith and establish that respondents committed a breach of contract. it will be delivered after opening of LC but MMC only got half the amount of LC. resulted in death of Medina as passenger. But C is still the registeres owner/operator in the Motor Vehicles Office and Public Service Commission. Even asked for several extensions. the RTC ruling out the claim for moral damages to the corporation also rules out any award from such nominal and exemplary damages to the stockholders. They were delayed for a day. S ordered & paid in full the steel from POSCO. But upon arrival on 915am. On return trip. Mindanao Academy v Yap – Nuqui and son sold land with 2 schools (Mindanao Academy and Misamis Academy) to Yap. which was the proper party plaintiff. But found out that there are many co-owners in such school that has not consented the sale. Actual damages not proven. Where the interests of the stockholders were already represented by the corporation itself. S cancelled contract & sought to recover $97. 220MT stainless steel in Korea. Through practice. The steel items indicated in sales contract with Korean corporation are different in all respects from the items ordered by petitioner MCC. Nominal damages -200K. Nominal damages – 200 – not for indemnification of loss suffered by them but for the vindication of their right violated. Plaintiffs do not appear entitled to actual or compensatory damages but only to nominal damages. Nominal damages are ‘recoverable where a legal right is technically violated and must b e vindicated against an invasion that has produced no actual present loss of any king or where there has been a breach of contract and no substantial injury or actual damages whatsoever have been or can be shown. nominal 10K. CFI: compensatory-6K. Medina v Cresencio – jeep smashed in Meralco post. in order to preclude further contest thereon.Torts and Damages the manner described above. Petitioner knowingly breached its contractual obligation and obstinately refused to pay despite repeated demands from respondent. Moral damages – 100k each. even in size and quantity. Nominal damages cannot co-exist with actual or compensatory damages.317. and no cause of action accruing to them separately from the corporation is alleged in the complaint. they kept it in warehouse. Purpose: vindicate or recognize a right that has been violated. Filipino corporation. Nominal damages cannot exist with compensatory damages. Bongal v Ensoy – B sued for damages against their counsel Atty E because of negligence in failure to allege the existence of improvement in the contested land and failed to remit docket fee and estimated cost of printing the record on appeal within the prescribed period upon perfection of appeal.300. Heirs filed separate civil action against wife of driver and registered owner. award of nominal damages in their favor precludes the recovery of temperate or moderate damages. Where the court has already awarded compensatory and exemplary damages that are in themselves a judicial recognition that plaintiff’s right was violated. Where damages sought to be recovered are only speculative and uncertain. 22 thil lozada . S asked several times for the opening but to no avail. C claims sold to buyer who also sold it to another. Actual damages – 1. Armovit v CA – Dr.37 (losses from warehousing expenses. ordered from Ssangyong. the sales agent wrote in the ticket the time of their departure on 1030am. Temperate 25K – proper in homicide or murder cases when no evidence of burial and funeral expenses is presented in the trial court. said award may also be considered as one of exemplary damages. Nominal and exemplary damages not awarded to stockholders already represented by the corporation.

it was not an assurance that the appellant would succeed in recovering the amount claimed in this complaint. furnish independent. though he cannot. Its attention was called to the error. M fully paid the price but Robes failed to execute final deed of sale and issuance of TCT. the grant of nominal being the same as though there had been in fact no damages. in such case. if based upon the violation of a legal right. M sued. Rafols v Batangas Transpo – Rafols boarded a bus but fell into a ravine and sustained injuries. the law presumes a damage. Nominal damages by their very nature are small sums fixed by the court without regard to the extent of the harm done to the injured party. and that even if the appeal in Civil Case No 18833 had been duly perfected. the bank apologized and promised not to happen again. An injustice is not perpetrated and that when damage is caused a citizen. their residential lot was made a collateral. it being a significant part of the foundation of his business. Notice of foreclosure was published thrice. according to the circumstances of the case. The assessment of nominal damages is left to the discretion of the court. On first publication. Any adverse reflection thereon constitutes some material loss to him. injury to one’s commercial credit or to the goodwill of a business firm is often hard to show with certainty in terms of money. no notice that there is no delay in payment but in second and third. 2219. as necessary implication of Art 2221. Araneta v Bank of America – Araneta engaged in import and export business. Nominal damages – 3K – clear negligence on the part of SSS when they mistook the loan account of Socorro J. SSS v CA – Cruz applied for loan in SSS. the assessment of damages being left to the discretion of the court according to the circumstances of the case. Cruz for that of private respondent Socorro C. On the first error. 2k nominal is excessive. 2220 He is not entitled to actual damages but has been awarded nominal damages by trial court. rather than that the plaintiff should suffer. such award precludes the recovery of temperate or moderate damages.Torts and Damages Ventanilla v Centeno – Atty Centeno failed to pay the cash appeal bond by client Ventilla in the case for recovery of 4k. nominal damage is a substantial claim. It was found that M’s lot was included among the properties of corporation mortgaged to GSIS to secure obligation of P10M.” eventhough the account has sufficient amount. Temperate damages – customer’s check can be wrongfully refused payment without some impeachment of h is credit. Nominal 200. The financial credit of a businessman is a prized and valuable asset. Nominal 10k. They are recoverable where some injury has been done the amount of which the evidence fails to show. They paid monthly but only with slight delay. He maintains a dollar current account with the respondent. He experience twice that he issued a check but was dishonoured and stamped “Account Closed. There are cases where from the nature of the case. Art 2217. The right of the vendee to acquire title to the lot bought by her was violated by petitioner and this entitles her at the very least to nominal damages. Robes Francisco Realty & Dev Corp v CFI of Rizal – Robes sold to Millian a 276sqm lot. No moral and temperate damages. “besmirched reputation” The basis of moral damages was the damage itself to his reputation as an established and well known international trader. and placed reliance on the automatic acceleration clause in the contract. from the nature of the case. which must in fact be an actual injury. without redress from the defendant’s wrongful act. The judge should be empowered to calculate moderate damages in such cases. in truth nominal damages 23 thil lozada . definite proof of pecuniary loss cannot be offered. although actual or compensatory damages are not proven. For instance. Nominal damages of 100 must be discarded for the grant of actual necessarily must exclude any nominal. The SSS was of the belief that it was acting in the legitimate exercise of its right under the mortgage contract in the face of irregular payments made by respondents. although the court is convinced that there has been such loss. V’s cause of action for moral damages is not predicated upon any of those specifically enumerated in Art 2217. but it adamantly refused to acknowledge its mistake. Cruz. since nominal is given only if there is no proof of actual. distinct proof thereof. there was. the latter should have a right of redress particularly when it arises from a purely private and contractual relationship between said individual and the System. Considering it is not for indemnification of loss suffered but for the vindication or recognition of a right violated or invaded. The filing alone of the foreclosure application should not be a ground for an award of moral damages in the same way that a clearly unfounded civil action is not among the grounds for moral damages .

malevolent conduct.000. oppressive. in the very least. His remaining balance owin gin bank was only 30K out of 180k. Malice is an essential ingredient. for the wrongful issuance and levy of an attachment (malicious attachment) is identical or is analogous to the ordinary action for malicious prosecution. or exemplary damages were granted to the latter. not as an equivalent of a wrong inflicted. though incapable of pecuniary estimation. to the probable profits of the business. The action to recover damages from the attachment plaintiff. 2217) and its causal relation to defendant's acts.00 as moral damages and P10. Article 2219 provides that moral damages may be recovered in the following and analogous cases . damages must be compensatory merely. . are in the category of an award designed to compensate the claimant for actual injury suffered and not to impose a penalty on the wrongdoer. Art. moral damages are recoverable only by the party injured and not by his next of kin.00 as compensatory damages. 200k is excessive.000. 2216). De la Torre claims that his father is still Northwest Airlines. reckless. Consolidated Plywood Industries v CA – Consolidated verbally agreed with Kho that Kho would overhaul the logs of Consolidated from the concession area to the logpond. and confined to the actual loss from deprivation of the property attached or injury to it. malice. Fraud. (3) malicious prosecution . or in case of closing business. but simply in recognition of the existence of a technical injury. during the time of its stoppage. A Taiwan log importer charged C with cancellation fee of a chartered and LC extension fee for failure to deliver. Moral damages cannot be recovered against the employer in actions based on a breach of contract of carriage in the absence of malice. Khos withdrew all its trucks which violated the terms of their agreement. Hauling agreement had no fixed date of termination. P30. C would provide verbal assistance to 180K for the cost of repairs and re-conditioning of trucks. essential that the claimant satisfactorily prove the existence of the factual basis of the damage (Art. While no proof of pecuniary loss is necessary in order that moral damages may be awarded. had been retained by the provincial sheriff for a period of 38 days. no such compensatory. Lazatin v Twano – Lazatin sued Twano for price of 225 autotrucks purchased from the US government. Soberano v Manila Railroad – Soberano boarded BAL. subsidiary of MRR. it is. There was substantial compliance by Kho’s obligation in teh contract." while in the case of Commissioner Cuenca. San Miguel Brewery v Magno – Butuan City passed an Ordinance 11 imposing 2% tax on gross sales receipts on all 24 thil lozada . or bad faith must be proved to support a claim for moral damages if only physical injuries are sustained.000. They are partners in buying and selling such. unless it is alleged and established that the writ was maliciously sued out. or bad faith . and are allowed.024 chicken eggs. 2219 also provides that moral damages may be awarded in "analogous cases" to those enumerated. fraud.” or. and "nominal damages cannot coexist with compensatory damages. All of which go to show that the attachment defendant is not entitled to moral damages. moral. unless there is express statutory provision to the contrary. there is no conflict between that case and Medina. to “negligence so gross as to amount to malice.” In case of physical injuries. and that he has the right to avail of the right to repurchase. the amount of indemnity being left to the discretion of the court (Art. The terms “fraud” or “in bad faith” have reference to “wanton. The bus hit a stone embankment which resulted to S’s serious physical injuries and los of his 3.000.00 award for nominal damages was eliminated principally because the aggrieved party had already been awarded P6. Her husband sued the defendant for damages. After a year. nevertheless. This is so because moral damages.Torts and Damages are damages in name only and not in fact. for in the latter. Negligence of driver does not per se justify an inference of malice or bad faith on the part of the company. No moral damages can be inferred from the mere fact that the redemption price to which defendants were entitled. . the P10.00 as exemplary damages. Where there is no issue of malice. Enervida v de la Torre – Enervida filed a complaint to annul the sale made by his father to De la Torre alleging that the sale was done with the prohibitive period of 5 years under the Homestead Patent. Moral damages 50k. Northwest case v Medina case . but we do not think the Code intended" a clearly unfounded civil action or proceedings" to be one of these analogous cases wherein moral damages may be recovered.

But in such a case. 2 trucks was seized. A corporation may have a good reputation which. Out of 3 bidders.59 which represents payment of the its whole debt. moral shock or social humiliation which are basis of moral damages. Mambulao had already ceased operations at the time of foreclosure sales. PNB claims that there is still a balance. though incapable of pecuniary estimation. DCIM was leased to Ultra but ejected because of violations in the contract. Purefoods unilaterally cancelled the award and granted to Jardine (not participated in bidding). Its electricity was disconnected but TEAM filed a complaint in RTC. Where the broadcast is libelous per se. Nominal damages 100 Mambulao Lumber v PNB – Mambulao Lumber granted industrial loan of 100k by PNB. resulting in its humiliation in the business realm. serious anxiety. Filipinas Broadcasting Network v Ago-Medical & Educ Center – “Expose” is radio program hosted by Algre and Rima wherein they commented that Ago is a dumping ground of moral and physical misfits. the project was granted to FEMSCO. fixing a tax of P. the sale of the land was done. Ago sued for malicious imputations and damages. mental anguish and moral shock. evidence of an honest mistake or the want of character or reputation of the party libeled goes only in mitigation of damages.500 and 15. there must be pleading and proof of moral suffering. FEMSCO submitted a performance bond. Therefore. Ago did not suffered substantial damage. 25 thil lozada . In such a case. Meralco inspected and found out that it was again tampered. however. and NS Bldg.25 per case on sale of beer. M deposited 738. it cannot experience physical suffering or sentiments like wounded feelings. and was granted. the properties will be levied. (see joint tortfeasor discussion) Jardine Davies v CA – Purefoods conducted a bidding for the supply and installation of generators in its plant. greedy for moeny and that its Physical Therapy course is not recognized by DECS.500 was released. The proceeds is 56. fright and the like. reduced from 2M. the law implies damages. Article 2219(7) does not qualify whether the plaintiff is a natural or juridical person. Moral damages 150K not 300k. a corporation is not entitled to moral damages because. TEAM asked Ultra to pay but refused. designed to compensate the claimant for actual injury suffered and not to impose a penalty on the wrongdoer. The same cannot be considered in this case. Moral damages of 1M. Moral damages may be awarded. a juridical person such as a corporation can validly complain for libel or any other form of defamation and claim for moral damages. are in the category of an award. 110 and warned that in case of non-payment. As a rule. serious anxiety. mental anguish. not being a natural person. M failed to pay and the sheriff flied a notice of foreclosure mortgaged land and the chattel mortgage. The only exception to this rule is when the corporation has a reputation that is debased. The Sheriff was sued in its private capacity. An artificial person like Mambulao cannot experience physical sufferings. Only 27. It is essential to prove the existence of the factual basis of the damage and its causal relation to petitioner's acts. and was again reconnected. not to enrich recipient. Meralco v TEAM Electronics Corp – Meralco agreed to supply electricity to the 2 building of TEAM: DCIM Bldg. it is imperative for the claimant to present proof to justify the award. only to be cancelled later. San Miguel was religious is paying tax based on Ordinance 11. even the NS Bldg. mental anguish. Moral damages. FEMSCO sued Purefoods for breach of contract and Jardine for interefence of contractual relations. wounded feelings. and whatever adverse effects of the foreclosure could have upon its reputation or business standing would undoubtedly be the same whether the sale was conducted in Manila or Camarines Norte.Torts and Damages alcoholic or malt beverages.908. No moral damages. It was amended by Ordinance 110. But City treasurer demand payment of tax according to Or. FEMSCO’s reputation was tarnished after it immediately ordered equipment from its suppliers on account of the urgency of the project. However. may also be a ground for the award of moral damages. Meralco found out that the meter in DCIM was tampered and was asked to pay the differential in electricity bill. fright. M requested the suspension of foreclosure of the chattel mortgage. if besmirched. Neither in such a case is the plaintiff required to introduce evidence of actual damages as a condition precedent to the recovery of some damages.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful