433. NAWASA vs.

Judge Catolico, 19 SCRA 980 (1967

!AC"S # A civil case was instituted by the Province of Misamis
Occidental to recover from the NAWASA the possession, administration,
operation and control of the Misamis Waterworks System and the Orquieta
Waterworks System, which had been taken over by the NAWASA since !"#,
actin$ in pursuance of %epublic Act No& '('& )n the said case, the *rial +ourt,
presided by ,ud$e +atolico, rendered -ud$ment orderin$ that.
/ the Province is the absolute owner of said Systems and orderin$ the
NAWASA to return the same to the Province, to refund thereto the sum of
P',(""&00 which the Province had delivered to the NAWASA when it took
over the Systems,
1/ to render 2 within thirty 3'4/ days from notice of said decision 2 an
accountin$ of the income reali5ed by the Systems since April !"#,
'/ or, in defect of such accountin$, to pay to the Province the sum of
P6,(1'&6# monthly, the avera$e monthly income of the two 31/ Systems7
from April, !"#, to the date of the return thereof to the Province
0/ to $a% t&e'eto ()0,000, as te*$e'ate, $u+itive a+d e,e*$la'%
da*ages, and P",444 by way of attorney8s fees, in addition to the costs&
*hereafter, ,ud$e +atolico issued 1 writs of e9ecution over NAWASA:s
opposition and its petition to post a supersedeas bond to stay e9ecution&
NAWASA then filed a petition for certiorari with the Supreme +ourt assailin$ the
writs of e9ecution issued by the respondent ,ud$e&
-SS./ 0 AR1.2/N"S # Was Judge Catolico co''ect i+ a3a'di+g
te*$e'ate, $u+itive, a+d e,e*$la'% da*ages a+d atto'+e%s 4ees i+ 4avo' o4
t&e ('ovi+ce o4 2isa*is5
6789-N1 0 RA"-7 9/C-9/N9- # N7. *he lower court was not -ustified,
however, in awardin$ P"4,444 as e9emplary and temperate dama$es, and
P",444, as attorney8s fees, for the NAWASA took over the Systems in compliance
with said %epublic Act No& '(', which it was entitled to assume to be
constitutional& )n other words, it had acted in $ood faith& *he fact that %A '('
was subsequently declared unconstitutional is of no moment since at the time
NAWASA acted in pursuance of it, it acted so in $ood faith on the assumption
that the law was constitutional&
434. 7ctot vs. :;a+e<= "ee&a+>ee
1.R. No. l48643, Ja+ua'% 18, 198? = 111 SCRA 79
;9emplary dama$es in a Mandamus case
!AC"S
< Octot was a =overnment ;mployee who held the position of Security =uard&
Pursuant to P> #, he was dismissed from the service as he had a pendin$ libel
case a$ainst him& ?ater on he was acquitted from the criminal case&
< Alfredo )mbon$ then filed a request for Octot:s reinstatement& *he request was
favorably acted upon by all levels& *he papers were sent to Octot statin$ that his
request for reinstatement may be $iven due course pursuant to ?O) #06& Octot
failed to appear and so he was personally furnished with the necessary papers to
be filed to support his appointment& Octot sent a letter a$ain askin$ for
reinstatement& *he re$ional health director then instructed Octot to appear to
furnish the necessary documents& Octot did not appear but filed a case for
mandamus for his reinstatement&
< As his reinstatement was never disputed, he was reinstated&
-SS./S 0 AR1.2/N"S
1. W@N 7ctot ca+ clai* ;ac>3ages
?. W@N 7ctot ca+ clai* *o'al da*ages
3. W@N 7ctot ca+ clai* e,e*$la'% da*ages
6789-N1 0 RA"-7 9/C-9/N9-
No. < )n the absence of bad faith or abuse of discretion, Octot cannot claim
backwa$es and dama$es& *here was no bad faith in this case as the dismissal
was due to law, P> #& Also, ?O)#06 does not provide for payment of back wa$es
No. < *he delay in the reinstatement of Octot was due to his own fault& Also
seein$ as there was no @ad Aaith involved and that it doesn:t involve the
situations under 11! and 1114, moral dama$es cannot be claimed
No. < ;9emplary dama$es are not usually recoverable in a mandamus case
unless the defendant patently acted with vindictiveness and wantonness& )t is
$ranted by way of e9ample or correction for the public $ood&
< ReAuisites
*hey may be imposed by way of e9ample or correction only in
addition,
1 amon$ others, to compensatory dama$es, and cannot be
recovered as a matter of ri$ht, their determination dependin$ upon
the amount of compensatory dama$es that may be awarded to the
claimant&
' *he claimant must first establish his ri$ht to moral, temperate,
liquidated or compensatory dama$es&
0 *he wron$ful act must be accompanied by bad faith, and the award
would be allowed only if the $uilty party acted in a wanton,
fraudulent, reckless, oppressive or malevolent manner&
43). (at'icio v. 8eviste=(adilla
1.R. 8B)183?, A$'il ?6, 1989
/,e*$la'% 9a*age i+ C'i*i+al Cases
!AC"S
< Petitioner was a +atholic priest appointed >irector =eneral of !6# %eli$ious
and Municipal *own Aiesta of Pilar, +api5&
< On # May !6# at about 4.44 o8clock in the evenin$, while a benefit dance
was onB$oin$ in connection with the celebration of the town fiesta, petitioner
to$ether with two 31/ policemen were posted near the $ate of the public
auditorium& Private respondent @ienvenido @acalocos, President of the
Association of @aran$ay +aptains of Pilar, +api5 and a member of the
San$$unian$ @ayan, who was in a state of drunkenness, struck a bottle of beer
on the table causin$ an in-ury on his hand which started to bleed& Ce approached
petitioner in a hostile manner and asked the latter if he had seen his wounded
hand, and before petitioner could respond, private respondent, without
provocation, hit petitioner8s face with his bloodied hand& As a consequence, a
commotion ensued&
< A criminal complaint for DSlander by >eed was flied by petitioner but was
dismissed& Subsequently, a complaint for dama$es was filed by petitioner with
the court a quo& *he court awarded moral and e9emplary dama$es in favor of
petitioner as well as attorney:s fees&
< Petitioner moved for e9ecution of -ud$ment but this was denied owin$ to the
pendency of a motion for reconsideration& Subsequently, the court dismissed the
complaint, promptin$ the filin$ of the sub-ect petition on 1 $rounds. 3/ lack of
service of copy of M%, and 31/ admission of private respondent of slappin$
petitioner entitles petitioner to award of dama$es&
-SS./S 0 AR1.2/N"S # W@N $etitio+e' is e+titled to da*ages
o'igi+all% a3a'ded ;% "C.
6789-N1 0 RA"-7 9/C-9/N9-
< Ees& Moral and e9emplary dama$es should be $iven& Petitioner is also entitled
to attorney:s fees&
< *here is no question that moral dama$es may be recovered in cases where a
defendant8s wron$ful act or omission has caused the complainant physical
sufferin$, mental an$uish, fri$ht, serious an9iety, besmirched reputation,
wounded feelin$s, moral shock, social humiliation and similar in-ury&
o Private respondent8s contention that there was no bad faith on his part in
slappin$ petitioner on the face and that the incident was merely accidental is not
tenable& )t was established before the court a quo that there was an e9istin$ feud
between the families of both petitioner and private respondent and that private
respondent slapped the petitioner without provocation in the presence of several
persons&
o *he act of private respondent in hittin$ petitioner on the face is contrary
to morals and $ood customs and caused the petitioner mental an$uish, moral
shock, wounded feelin$s and social humiliation& Private respondent has to take
full responsibility for his act and his claim that he was unaware of what he had
done to petitioner because of drunkenness is definitely no e9cuse and does not
relieve him of his liability to the latter&
o *he fact that no actual or compensatory dama$e was proven before the
trial court, does not adversely affect petitioner8s ri$ht to recover moral dama$es&
Moral dama$es may be awarded in appropriate cases referred to in the chapter
on human relations of the +ivil +ode 3Articles ! to '#/, without need of proof
that the wron$ful act complained of had caused any physical in-ury upon the
complainant
< ;9emplary or corrective dama$es may be imposed upon herein private
respondent by way of e9ample or correction for the public $ood& ;9emplary
dama$es are required by public policy to suppress the wanton acts of the
offender& *hey are an antidote so that the poison of wickedness may not run
throu$h the body politic& *he amount of e9emplary dama$es need not be proved
where it is shown that plaintiff is entitled to either moral, temperate or
compensatory dama$es, as the case may be, althou$h such award cannot be
recovered as a matter of ri$ht &
< )n cases where e9emplary dama$es are awarded to the in-ured party, attorney8s
fees are also recoverable&
436 (&ili$$i+e Ai'li+es v. CA= Regalado
1.R. No. 1?0?6? Jul% 17, 1997 = ?7) SCRA 6?1
!AC"S
< ?eo Pante-o was bound for Suri$ao +ity from +ebu +ity via Philippine Airlines&
Cis fli$ht was postponed due to the typhoon Osan$&
< Since he was stranded with the other passen$ers, he asked the Philippine
Airlines officer for hotel accommodations while waitin$ for the ne9t scheduled
fli$ht which was on the followin$ day&
< Philippine Airlines refused to $ive him hotel accommodations, which was
unfortunate because he did not have any cash at that time& A kind coBpassen$er,
;n$r& >umlao offered Pante-o to share his room, Pante-o promised to pay him
when they $et back to Suri$ao&
< Fpon reachin$ Suri$ao, he learned that the hotel e9penses of the passen$ers
were reimbursed& At this point, Pante-o informed Oscar ,ere5a, PA?8s Mana$er
for >eparture Services at Mactan Airport and who was in char$e of cancelled
fli$hts, that he was $oin$ to sue the airline for discriminatin$ a$ainst him& )t was
only then that ,ere5a offered to pay respondent Pante-o P'44&44 which, due to
the ordeal and an$uish he had under$one, the latter decline&
-SS./S 0 AR1.2/N"S # W@N (a+teCo is e+titled to 27RA8 a+d
/D/2(8AR: 9A2A1/S 4o' 'e4usi+g to $'ovide &otel acco**odatio+s to
(a+teCo
6789-N1 0 RA"-7 9/C-9/N9- # :/S. (AN"J7 -S /N"-"8/9 "7
27RA8 AN9 /D/2(8AR: 9A2A1/S AS "6/R/ WAS EA9 !A-"6 7N "6/
(AR" 7! (6-8-(((-N/ A-R8-N/S A""/N9AN"S.
< *o be$in with, it must be emphasi5ed that a contract to transport passen$ers is
quite different in kind and de$ree from any other contractual relation, and this is
because of the relation which an air carrier sustain with the public& )ts business is
mainly with the travellin$ public& )t invites people to avail of the comforts and
advanta$es it offers& *he contract of air carria$e, therefore, $enerates a relation
attended with a public duty& Ne$lect or malfeasance of the carrier8s employees
naturally could $ive $round for an action for dama$es
< Assumin$ ar$uendo that the airline passen$ers have no vested ri$ht to these
amenities in case a fli$ht is cancelled due to force ma-eure, what makes
petitioner liable for dama$es in this particular case and under the facts obtainin$
herein is its blatant refusal to accord the soBcalled amenities equally to all its
stranded passen$ers who were bound for Suri$ao +ity& No compellin$ or
-ustifyin$ reason was advanced for such discriminatory and pre-udicial conduct&
< More importantly, it has been sufficiently established that it is PA?:S standard
company policy, whenever a fli$ht has been cancelled, to e9tend to its hapless
passen$ers cash assistance or to provide them accommodations in hotels with
which it has e9istin$ tieBups& )n fact, PA?:s Mactan Airport Mana$er for departure
services, Oscar ,ere5a, admitted that PA? has an e9istin$ arran$ement with
hotels to accommodate stranded passen$ers&
437. -+dust'ial -+su'a+ce vs. Eo+dad = (a+ga+i;a+
1.R. No. 1367??, A$'il 1?, ?000 =
!AC"S
F *he present Petition finds its roots in an incident which involved three vehicles.
a =alant Si$ma car driven by =race ?adaw Morales, a packed passen$er
-eepney ori$inally driven by ?i$orio @ondad, and a >M *ransit @us driven by
;duardo Mendo5a&
F )nvesti$ation disclosed that shortly before the accident took place, GB' 3>&M&
*ransit @us/ was travelin$ alon$ South ;9pressway comin$ from Alaban$
towards the $eneral direction of Makati& When upon reachin$ a place at HM Post
0 Iin frontJ of Merville Subd&, said GB' hit and bumped the rear left side portion of
GB I@ondads8 -eepneyJ which was then at IstopJ position due to flat tireI7J due to
the severe impact cause by GB' it swerved to the left and collided with the ri$ht
side portion of GB1 IMorales8 carJ which was travellin$ IinJ the same direction
takin$ the innermost lane GB1 was dra$$ed to its left side and hit the concrete
wall& All vehicles incurred dama$es and sustainin$ in-uries to the occupant of GB
and the passen$ers of GB'& Gictims were brou$ht to the hospital for treatment
F @efore the %e$ional *rial +ourt of Makati on April 1, !(", Petitioner )ndustrial
)nsurance +ompany, )nc& and =race ?adaw Morales filed a +omplaint for
dama$es 6 a$ainst >M *ransit +orporation, ;duardo >ia5, Pablo @ondad and
?i$orio @ondad& Petitioner contended that it had paid Morales P1!,(44 for the
dama$es to her insured car& )t also asserted that the >ecember 6, !(0
accident had been caused Dsolely and pro9imatelyD by the D-oint $ross and
wanton ne$li$ence, carelessness and imprudence of both defendant drivers
;duardo >ia5 y Mendo5a and ?i$orio @ondad y Cernande5, who failed to
e9ercise and observe the dili$ence required by law in the mana$ement and
operation of their respective vehicles and by their defendant employers7 >&M&
*ransit +orporation and Pablo @ondad, respectively, for their failure to e9ercise
the dili$ence required of them by law in the selection and supervision of their
employees includin$ their aforementioned involved drivers
F )n its October 0, !! >ecision, the trial court e9culpated the @ondads and
ordered petitioner to pay them actual, moral and e9emplary dama$es, as well as
attorney8s fees& Petitioner appealed to the +ourt of Appeals, which affirmed the
rulin$ of the trial court with modification& Cence, this Petition for %eview&
-SS./S 0 AR1.2/N"S # W@N "&e a3a'd 4o' da*ages 3as $'o$e'
6789-N1 0 RA"-7 9/C-9/N9-
< Ees& )n -ustifyin$ the award of attorney8s fees and other liti$ation e9penses, the
appellate court held that respondents were compelled to liti$ate an unfounded
suit because of petitioner8s ne$li$ence and lack of prudence in not verifyin$ the
facts before filin$ this action& )n affirmin$ the award of moral dama$es, it
accepted the trial court8s -ustification that respondents had Dbeen recklessly and
without basis & & & impleaded by the plaintiff in spite of the clear lan$ua$e in the
*raffic )nvesti$ation%eport & & & submitted by Pfc& A$apito >omin$o&D
< Attorney8s fees may be awarded by a court if one who claims it is compelled to
liti$ate with third persons or to incur e9penses to protect one8s interests by
reason of an un-ustified act or omission on the part of the party from whom it is
sou$ht& )n this case, the records show that petitioner8s suit a$ainst respondents
was manifestly un-ustified& )n the first place, the contact between the vehicles of
respondents and of Morales was completely due to the impact of the onrushin$
bus& *his fact is manifest in the police investi$ation report and, si$nificantly, in the
findin$s of facts of both lower courts& Moreover, even a cursory e9amination of
the events would show that respondents were not even remotely the cause of the
accident& *heir vehicle was on the shoulder of the road because of a flat tire& )n
view of their emer$ency situation, they could not have done anythin$ to avoid
$ettin$ hit by the bus& Gerily, an ordinary person has no reason to think that
respondents could have caused the accident& )t is difficult to ima$ine how
petitioner could have thou$ht so& More si$nificantly, petitioner knew that
respondents were not the cause of the accident& *his is evident from its failure to
even make a prior formal demand on them before initiatin$ the suit& )ndeed, the
cause of the accident was the ne$li$ence of the >M *ransit bus driver&
< )n the same vein, we affirm the award of moral dama$es& *o sustain this award,
it must be shown that 3/ the claimant suffered in-ury, and 31/ such in-ury sprun$
from any of the cases listed in Articles 11! and 1114 of the +ivil +ode& )t is not
enou$h that the claimant alle$es mental an$uish, serious an9iety, wounded
feelin$s, social humiliation, and the like as a result of the acts of the other party& )t
is necessary that such acts be shown to have been tainted with bad faith or ill
motive& )n the case at bar, it has been shown that the petitioner acted in bad faith
in compellin$ respondents to liti$ate an unfounded claim& As a result,
%espondent ?i$orio @ondadD could no lon$er concentrate on his -ob&D Moreover,
Pablo @ondad became sick and even suffered a mild stroke& )ndeed,
respondents8 an9iety is not difficult to understand& *hey were innocently attendin$
to a flat tire on the shoulder of the road7 the ne9t thin$ they knew, they were
already bein$ blamed for an accident& Worse, they were forced to commute all
the way from ?a$una to Makati in order to attend the hearin$s& Fnder the
circumstances of this case, the award of moral dama$es is -ustified&
< ?ikewise, we affirm the award of e9emplary dama$es because petitioner8s
conduct needlessly dra$$ed innocent bystanders into an unfounded liti$ation&
)ndeed, e9emplary dama$es are imposed by way of e9ample or correction for the
public $ood, in addition to moral, temperate, liquidated or compensatory
dama$es
438. (eo$le o4 t&e (&ili$$i+es, vs. Al;io'
=1.R. No. 11)079 = !e;'ua'% 19, ?001 =
G.-S.2E-N1, J.#
!AC"S
< *he %*+ found Arancisco Albior $uilty of rape, and sentenced him to suffer the
penalty of reclusion perpetua& *he victim, ?orena *olentino was also awarded
moral dama$es in the amount of P"4,444&
-SS./ # W&et&e' o' +ot t&e a3a'd o4 da*ages a'e su44icie+t5
6789-N1 0 RA"-7 9/C-9/N9-
< *he +ourt affirmed the rulin$ of trial court, findin$ that the accused Albior was
indeed $uilty of rape& Cowever, the court modified the award of civil dama$es&
*he lower court failed to $rant the necessary civil indeminity which is mandated
by -urisprudence to be awarded to rape victims& An additional P"4,444 was
$ranted by the court, and this was held to be separate and distinct from that of
the award of moral dama$es&
(Note# t&is is t&e o+l% 'elated $'o+ou+ce*e+t 3it& 'ega'd to da*ages i+
t&is case.
439. "'ade's Ro%al Ea+> v. Radio (&ili$$i+es Net3o'>, -+c. = Co'o+a
1.R. No. 138)10, 7cto;e' 10, ?00?=
!AC"S # On April ", !(", the @ureau of )nternal %evenue 3@)%/
assessed plaintiffs %adio Philippines Network 3%PN/, )ntercontinental
@roadcastin$ +orporation 3)@+/, and @anahaw @roadcastin$ +orporation 3@@+/
of their ta9 obli$ations for the ta9able years !6( to !('& On March 1", !(6,
Mrs& ?ourdes +& Gera, plaintiffs: comptroller, sent a letter to the @)% requestin$
settlement of plaintiffs: ta9 obli$ations& *he @)% $ranted the request and
accordin$ly, on ,une 1#, !(#, plaintiffs purchased from defendant *raders %oyal
@ank 3*%@/ three 3'/ mana$er:s checks to be used as payment for their ta9
liabilities& >efendant *%@, throu$h Aida NuKe5, *%@ @ranch Mana$er at
@roadcast +ity @ranch, turned over the checks to Mrs& Gera who was supposed
to deliver the same to the @)% in payment of plaintiffs: ta9es& Sometime in
September, !((, the @)% a$ain assessed plaintiffs for their ta9 liabilities for the
years !6!B(1& )t was then they discovered that the three 3'/ mana$ers checks
3Nos& '4#"1, '4#"4 and '46!#/ intended as payment for their ta9es were never
delivered nor paid to the @)% by Mrs& Gera& )nstead, the checks were presented
for payment by unknown persons to defendant Security @ank and *rust
+ompany 3S@*+/, *aytay @ranch as shown by the bank:s routin$ symbol transit
number 3@%S*N 404416/ or clearin$ code stamped on the reverse sides of the
checks& Meanwhile, for failure of the plaintiffs to settle their obli$ations, the @)%
issued warrants of levy, distraint and $arnishment a$ainst them& *hus, they were
constrained to enter into a compromise and paid @)% P(,!#1,11"&1" in
settlement of their unpaid deficiency ta9es&
*hereafter, plaintiffs sent letters to both defendants, demandin$ that the amounts
covered by the checks be reimbursed or credited to their account& *he
defendants refused, hence, the instant suit&
-SS./S 0 AR1.2/N"S
W&et&e' "RE s&ould ;e &eld solel% lia;le 3&e+ it $aid t&e a*ou+t o4 t&e
c&ec>s i+ Auestio+ to a $e'so+ ot&e' t&a+ t&e $a%ee i+dicated o+ t&e 4ace
o4 t&e c&ec>, t&e Eu'eau o4 -+te'+al Reve+ue5
6789-N1 0 RA"-7 9/C-9/N9-
Petitioner ou$ht to have known that, where a check is drawn payable to the order
of one person and is presented for payment by another and purports upon its
face to have been duly indorsed by the payee of the check, it is the primary duty
of petitioner to know that the check was duly indorsed by the ori$inal payee and,
where it pays the amount of the check to a third person who has for$ed the
si$nature of the payee, the loss falls upon petitioner who cashed the check& )ts
only remedy is a$ainst the person to whom it paid the money& )t should be noted
further that one of the sub-ect checks was crossed& *he crossin$ of one of the
sub-ect checks should have put petitioner on $uard7 it was dutyBbound to
ascertain the indorser:s title to the check or the nature of his possession&
Petitioner should have known the effects of a crossed check. 3a/ the check may
not be encashed but only deposited in the bank7 3b/ the check may be ne$otiated
only once to one who has an account with a bank and 3c/ the act of crossin$ the
check serves as a warnin$ to the holder that the check has been issued for a
definite purpose so that he must inquire if he has received the check pursuant to
that purpose, otherwise, he is not a holder in due course& @y encashin$ in favor
of unknown persons checks which were on their face payable to the @)%, a
$overnment a$ency which can only act only throu$h its a$ents, petitioner did so
at its peril and must suffer the consequences of the unauthori5ed or wron$ful
endorsement& )n this li$ht, petitioner *%@ cannot e9culpate itself from liability by
claimin$ that respondent networks were themselves ne$li$ent& A bank is
en$a$ed in a business impressed with public interest and it is its duty to protect
its many clients and depositors who transact business with it& )t is under the
obli$ation to treat the accounts of the depositors and clients with meticulous care,
whether such accounts consist only of a few hundreds or millions of pesos&
Since *%@ did not pay the ri$htful holder or other person or entity entitled to
receive payment, it has no ri$ht to reimbursement& Petitioner *%@ was remiss in
its duty and obli$ation, and must therefore suffer the consequences of its own
ne$li$ence and disre$ard of established bankin$ rules and procedures& We
a$ree with petitioner, however, that it should not be made to pay e9emplary
dama$es to %PN, )@+ and @@+ because its wron$ful act was not done in bad
faith, and it did not act in a wanton, fraudulent, reckless or malevolent manner&
440 Si+ga$o'e Ai'li+es 8td. Hs. !e'+a+de<= CalleCo
1.R. No. 14?30). 9ece*;e' 10, ?003=
!AC"S
< Andion Aernande5 is an acclaimed soprano here in the Philippines and abroad&
At the time of the incident, she was availin$ an educational $rant from the
Aederal %epublic of =ermany, pursuin$ a Master:s >e$ree in Music ma-orin$ in
Goice&
< She was invited to sin$ before the Hin$ and Lueen of Malaysia on Aebruary '
and 0, !!& Aor this sin$in$ en$a$ement, an airline passa$e ticket was
purchased from petitioner Sin$apore Airlines which would transport her to Manila
from Arankfurt, =ermany on ,anuary 1(, !!& Arom Manila, she would proceed
to Malaysia on the ne9t day& )t was necessary for the respondent to pass by
Manila in order to $ather her wardrobe7 and to rehearse and coordinate with her
pianist her repertoire for the aforesaid performance&
< *he petitioner issued the respondent a Sin$apore Airlines ticket for Ali$ht No&
SL 16, leavin$ Arankfurt, =ermany on ,anuary 16, !! bound for Sin$apore
with onward connections from Sin$apore to Manila& Ali$ht No& SL 16 was
scheduled to leave Arankfurt at .0" in the afternoon of ,anuary 16, !!,
arrivin$ at Sin$apore at (."4 in the mornin$ of ,anuary 1(, !!& *he connectin$
fli$ht from Sin$apore to Manila, Ali$ht No& SL 61, was leavin$ Sin$apore at .44
in the mornin$ of ,anuary 1(, !!, arrivin$ in Manila at 1.14 in the afternoon of
the same day&
< On ,anuary 16, !!, Ali$ht No& SL 16 left Arankfurt but arrived in Sin$apore
two hours late or at about .44 in the mornin$ of ,anuary 1(, !!& @y then, the
aircraft bound for Manila had left as scheduled, leavin$ the respondent and about
1" other passen$ers stranded in the +han$i Airport in Sin$apore&
< Fpon disembarkation at Sin$apore, the respondent approached the transit
counter who referred her to the ni$htstop counter and told the lady employee
thereat that it was important for her to reach Manila on that day, ,anuary 1(,
!!& *he lady employee told her that there were no more fli$hts to Manila for
that day and that respondent had no choice but to stay in Sin$apore& Fpon
respondent:s persistence, she was told that she can actually fly to Con$ Hon$
$oin$ to Manila but since her ticket was nonBtransferable, she would have to pay
for the ticket& *he respondent could not accept the offer because she had no
money to pay for it& Cer pleas for the respondent to make arran$ements to
transport her to Manila were unheeded&
< *he respondent then requested the lady employee to use their phone to make a
call to Manila& Over the employees: reluctance, the respondent called her mother
to inform the her that she missed the connectin$ fli$ht& *he respondent contacted
a family friend who picked her up from the airport for her overni$ht stay in
Sin$apore&
< *he ne9t day, after bein$ brou$ht back to the airport, the respondent proceeded
to petitioner:s counter which says. M)mmediate Attention *o Passen$ers with
)mmediate @ookin$&N *here were four or five passen$ers in line& *he respondent
approached petitioner:s male employee at the counter to make arran$ements for
immediate bookin$ only to be told. M+an:t you see ) am doin$ somethin$&N She
e9plained her predicament but the male employee uncarin$ly retorted. M)t:s your
problem, not ours&N
< *he respondent never made it to Manila and was forced to take a direct fli$ht
from Sin$apore to Malaysia on ,anuary 1!, !!, throu$h the efforts of her
mother and travel a$ency in Manila& Cer mother also had to travel to Malaysia
brin$in$ with her respondent:s wardrobe and personal thin$s needed for the
performance that caused them to incur an e9pense of about P"4,444&
< As a result of this incident, the respondent:s performance before the %oyal
Aamily of Malaysia was below par& @ecause of the rude and unkind treatment she
received from the petitioner:s personnel in Sin$apore, the respondent was
en$ulfed with fear, an9iety, humiliation and embarrassment causin$ her to suffer
mental fati$ue and skin rashes& She was thereby compelled to seek immediate
medical attention upon her return to Manila for Macute urticaria&N
< %*+ held. 3P44,444&44/ P;SOS as e9emplary dama$es7 petitioner appealed,
+A affirmed in toto& Petitioner further appealed, hence this case&

-SS./S 0 AR1.2/N"S
< W@N $etitio+e' s&ould ;e &eld lia;le 4o' e,e*$la'% da*ages
6789-N1 0 RA"-7 9/C-9/N9-
:/S, $etitio+e' s&ould ;e &eld lia;le 4o' e,e*$la'% da*ages
< When an airline issues a ticket to a passen$er, confirmed for a particular fli$ht
on a certain date, a contract of carria$e arises& *he passen$er then has every
ri$ht to e9pect that he be transported on that fli$ht and on that date& )f he does
not, then the carrier opens itself to a suit for a breach of contract of carria$e&
< Article 11'1 of the +ivil +ode provides that in a contractual or quasiBcontractual
relationship, e9emplary dama$es may be awarded only if the defendant had
acted in a Mwanton, fraudulent, reckless, oppressive or malevolent manner&N )n
this case, petitioner:s employees acted in a wanton, oppressive or malevolent
manner& *he award of e9emplary dama$es is, therefore, warranted in this case&
< @ad faith was imputed by the trial court when it found that the petitioner:s
employees at the Sin$apore airport did not accord the respondent the attention
and treatment alle$edly warranted under the circumstances& *he lady employee
at the counter was unkind and of no help to her& *he respondent further alle$ed
that without her threats of suin$ the company, she was not allowed to use the
company:s phone to make lon$ distance calls to her mother in Manila& *he male
employee at the counter where it says. M)mmediate Attention to Passen$ers with
)mmediate @ookin$N was rude to her when he curtly retorted that he was busy
attendin$ to other passen$ers in line& *he trial court concluded that this
inattentiveness and rudeness of petitioner:s personnel to respondent:s pli$ht was
$ross enou$h amountin$ to bad faith& *his is a findin$ that is $enerally bindin$
upon the +ourt which we find no reason to disturb&
441. N(C vs Cou't o4 A$$eals = Ca'$io
1.R. No. 106804, August 1?, ?004=
A$$licatio+ o4 /,e*$la'% 9a*ages i+ /*i+e+t 9o*ai+
!AC"S
< Private respondent Pobre is the owner of a #(,!#! squareBmeter land
3DPropertyD/ located in Albay& Pobre be$an developin$ the Property as a resortB
subdivision, which he named as D*iwi Cot Sprin$s %esort Subdivision&D *he
+ommission on Golcanolo$y certified that thermal mineral water and steam were
present beneath the Property and found the thermal mineral water and steam
suitable for domestic use and potentially for commercial or industrial use&
< NP+ then became involved with Pobre8s Property in three instances& !i'st was
when Pobre leased to NP+ for one year eleven lots from the approved
subdivision plan& Seco+d was sometime in !66, the first time that NP+ filed its
e9propriation case a$ainst Pobre to acquire an (,'&#4 squareBmeter portion of
the Property& *he trial court ordered the e9propriation of the lots upon NP+8s
payment of P1" per square meter or a total amount of P146,6!4& NP+ be$an
drillin$ operations and construction of steam wells& While this first e9propriation
case was pendin$, NP+ dumped waste materials beyond the site a$reed upon
by NP+ with Pobre& *he dumpin$ of waste materials altered the topo$raphy of
some portions of the Property& NP+ did not act on Pobre8s complaints and NP+
continued with its dumpin$& "&i'd was in !6! when NP+ filed its second
e9propriation case a$ainst Pobre to acquire an additional ",""0 square meters of
the Property& NP+ needed the lot for the construction and maintenance of
Na$la$bon$ Well Site&
< Pobre filed a motion to dismiss the second complaint for e9propriation& Pobre
claimed that NP+ dama$ed his Property& Pobre prayed for -ust compensation of
all the lots affected by NP+8s actions and for the payment of dama$es&
< NP+ filed a motion to dismiss the second e9propriation case on the $round that
NP+ had found an alternative site and that NP+ had already abandoned in !(
the pro-ect within the Property due to Pobre8s opposition& *he trial court $ranted
NP+8s motion to dismiss but the trial court allowed Pobre to adduce evidence on
his claim for dama$es& *he trial court admitted Pobre8s e9hibits on the dama$es
because NP+ failed to ob-ect
-SS./S 0 AR1.2/N"S
W@N N(C is lia;le to 'es$o+de+t to $a% da*ages5
6789-N1 0 RA"-7 9/C-9/N9-
N(C lia;le to $a% te*$e'ate a+d e,e*$la'% da*ages.
< NP+8s abuse of its eminent domain authority is appallin$& Cowever, we cannot
award moral dama$es because Pobre did not assert his ri$ht to it& We also
cannot award attorney8s fees in Pobre8s favor since he did not appeal from the
decision of the +ourt of Appeals denyin$ recovery of attorney8s fees&
< Nonetheless, we find it proper to award P"4,444 in temperate dama$es to
Pobre& *he court may award temperate or moderate dama$es, which are more
than nominal but less than compensatory dama$es, if the court finds that a party
has suffered some pecuniary loss but its amount cannot be proved with certainty
from the nature of the case& As the trial and appellate courts noted, Pobre8s
resortOsubdivision was no lon$er -ust a dream because Pobre had already
established the resortBsubdivision and the prospect for it was initially
encoura$in$& *hat is, until NP+ permanently dama$ed Pobre8s Property& NP+ did
not -ust destroy the property& NP+ dashed Pobre8s hope of seein$ his Property
achieve its full potential as a resortBsubdivision&
< *he lesson in this case must not be lost on entities with eminent domain
authority& Such entities cannot trifle with a citi5en8s property ri$hts& *he power of
eminent domain is an e9traordinary power they must wield with circumspection
and utmost re$ard for procedural requirements& *hus, we hold NP+ liable for
e9emplary dama$es of P44,444& ;9emplary dama$es or corrective dama$es
are imposed, by way of e9ample or correction for the public $ood, in addition to
the moral, temperate, liquidated or compensatory dama$es& Petition denied for
lack of Merit. Decision of the Court of Appeals Affirmed.
44?. 9e 8eo+ v CA P Paras
=&%& No& ?B'!' Au$ust ', !(( P
!AC"S
< Sps& @riones 3,uan @riones and Ma$dalena @ernardo/ were former re$istered
owners of the fishpond situated at San %oque, Paombon$, @ulacan& Said
property was mort$a$ed twice to secure a loan obtained from, initially
Cermo$enes *antoco but was later on assi$ned to, >r& +ornelio *antoco,
Cermo$enes: father, in the amounts of P14,444 and P#(,(10 3the later havin$ a
4Q interest per annum/& @oth mort$a$es were duly re$istered in the Office of
the %e$ister of >eeds of @ulacan and duly annotated at the back of the *+*&
< While these two mort$a$es were still subsistin$ the Sps& @riones sold the
fishpond, which is the sub-ect matter of said two mort$a$es, to plaintiff Sps& >e
?eon 3Aortunato de ?eon and ,uana A& =on5ales de ?eon/ in the amount of
P14,444&44& Of the amount of P14,444&44, the Sps& @riones actually received
only the amount of P',444&44 on ,une 1, !"!, as the amount of P(!,444&44
was withheld by the Aortunato de ?eon who assumed to answer the mort$a$e
indebtedness of the @riones to the *antocos& After the sale Sps& >e ?eon
satisfied the mort$a$e loan of P14,444&44 includin$ 4Q interest per annum to
Cermo$enes *antoco who then accordin$ly e9ecuted a deed of dischar$e of
mort$a$e, but the mort$a$e in favor of +ornelio S& *antoco in the amount of
P#(,(10 was not satisfied& On Aebruary ", !#1 plaintiffs made payment of
P1!,'(1&"4 to the >r& +ornelio&
< *ryin$ to set the record strai$ht, >r& +ornelio made the clarification that the
principal obli$ation of the @riones as of May 1", !"! was P#(,(10&44 and on
,anuary 1#, !#1 when a letter of demand was sent to them their total obli$ation
includin$ the a$reed interest amounted to P((,(((&!(& Cence the above
mentioned PN@ check will be held in abeyance pendin$ remittance of the total
obli$ation after which the necessary document will be e9ecuted&
< On May (, !#1 the Sps& >e ?eon filed a complaint with the +ourt of Airst
)nstance of @ulacan a$ainst defendant +ornelio S& *antoco for dischar$e of
mort$a$e& On May ', !#1 >r& +ornelio filed his answer with counterclaim and
third party complaint a$ainst the Sps& @riones with petition for leave to file third
party complaint& Ce alle$ed by way of special and affirmative defenses, amon$
others, that the true and real amount of obli$ation of the Sps& @riones is the sum
of P#(,(10&44, Philippine currency, with 4Q interest secured by a second
mort$a$e in favor of defendant, e9ecuted and si$ned by the @riones spouses on
May 1#,!"!, which deed of second mort$a$e was duly re$istered in the Office
of the %e$ister of >eeds of Malolos, @ulacan on May 16, !"! and properly
annotated at the back of *ransfer +ertificate of *itle No& 1(1!# issued in the
names of ,uan @riones and Ma$dalena @ernardo7 that the amount of P1!,'(1&"4
sent by Sps& >e?eon as alle$ed counsel of the spouses ,uan @riones and
Ma$dalena @ernardo was accepted by >r& +ornelio as part payment or partial
e9tin$uishment of the mort$a$e loan of P#(,(10&44 with 4Q interest thereon per
annum from May 11, !"!, and Sps& >e ?eon have been informed of the tenor of
said acceptance and application and, that the latter did not accede to the
demand of the former to have the mort$a$e lien on the property in question
cancelled or dischar$ed because the full amount of the mort$a$e debt of
P#(,(10&44 plus the 4Q interest thereon from May 11, !"! has not yet been
fully paid either by the plaintiffs or by the spouses ,uan @riones and Ma$dalena
@ernardo&
< %*+ dismissed the complaint and ordered for Sps& >e ?eon to pay >r& +ornelio
the sum of P#0,!1&#4 with interest thereon at 4Q per annum from Aebruary ",
!#1 until fully paid7 payment of the sum of P44,444 as moral and e9emplary
dama$es, and further sum of P4,444 as attorney:s fees
< On appeal, +A affirmed the -ud$ment of trial court with modification respectin$
the award of moral and e9emplary dama$es as well as attorney:s fees&
-SS./S 0 AR1.2/N"S
W@N t&e a3a'd o4 (60,000 i+ t&e co+ce$t o4 *o'al a+d e,e*$la'% da*ages
is $'o$e'5
6789-N1 0 RA"-7 9/C-9/N9-
:/S. Res$o+de+t Cou't 4ou+d *alice i+ 9e 8eo+Is 'e4usal to satis4% 9'.
"a+tocoJs la34ul clai* a+d i+ t&ei' su;seAue+t 4ili+g o4 t&e $'ese+t case
agai+st t&e latte', a+d too> i+to co+side'atio+ t&e 3o''ies a+d *e+tal
a+,iet% o4 latte' as a 'esult t&e'eo4.
< Moral dama$es include physical sufferin$, mental an$uish, fri$ht, serious
an9iety, besmirched reputation, wounded feelin$s, moral shock, social
humiliation and similar in-ury& *hou$h incapable of pecuniary computation, moral
dama$es may be recovered if they are the pro9imate result of the defendant8s
wron$ful act or omission&
< On the other hand, -urisprudence sets certain conditions when e9emplary
dama$es may be awarded, to wit. 3/ *hey may be imposed by way of e9ample
or correction only in addition, amon$ others, to compensatory dama$es and
cannot be recovered as a matter of ri$ht, their determination dependin$ upon the
amount of compensatory dama$es that may be awarded to the claimant7 31/ the
claimant must first establish his ri$ht to moral, temperate, liquidated or
compensatory dama$es7 and 3'/ the wron$ful act must be accompanied by bad
faith, and the award would be allowed only if the $uilty party acted in a wanton,
fraudulent, reckless, oppressive or malevolant manner&
< As a lawyer in the practice of law since his admission to the @ar in !1!, who
has held several important positions in the $overnment petitioner Aortunato de
?eon could not have missed the import of the annotation at the back of *+*
re$ardin$ the second mort$a$e for the sum of si9ty ei$ht thousand ei$ht hundred
twentyBfour pesos 3P#(,(10&44/ of the property he was buyin$, in favor of
respondent +ornelio *antoco& *he same annotation was transferred to the new
*+* issued in the name of >e ?eon after the sale of the property was effected
and entered in the re$istry of deeds of @ulacan on ,une ', !"!& Aurthermore,
Sps& >e ?eon cannot deny havin$ assumed the mort$a$e debts of the Sps&
@riones amountin$ to P(!,444&44 in favor of the *antocos& *he DPatunayD
e9ecuted by the Sps& @riones on ,une ', !"! $ives the information that their
property, and fishpond, was sold by them to the spouses Aortunato de ?eon and
,uana A& =on5ales for the amount of one hundred twenty thousand pesos
3Pl14,444&44/, payment made to them, as follows.
Pinana$utan na amin$ pa$kakautan$ kay =& Cermo$enes *antoco han$$an$
Mayo !"! P (!,444&44
+ash na tinan$$ap namin P@+ +heck No& "6404 ,444&44
Pa$are No& ,unio , !"! 4,444&44
Pa$are No& 1 ,unio , !"! 4,444&44
RRRRRRRR
Habuuan P 14,444&44
< At the bottom of the DPatunayD in the handwritin$ of petitioner Aortunato de
?eon is a statement si$ned by him si$nifyin$ that he was assumin$ the
spouses8debt of P(!,444&44 to respondent *antoco, in the followin$ words. Ang
pagkautang na P89,000.00 sa mga Tantoco ay aking inaasumihan.
< *he e+title*e+t to *o'al da*ages &avi+g ;ee+ esta;lis&ed t&e a3a'd o4
e,e*$la'% da*ages is $'o$e'& And while the award of moral and e9emplary
dama$es in an a$$re$ate amount may not be the usual way of awardin$ said
dama$es there is no question of >r& *antoco8s entitlement to moral and
e9emplary dama$e& "&e a*ou+t s&ould ;e 'educed, however, for bein$
e9cessive compared to the actual losses sustained by the a$$rieved party& Moral
dama$es thou$h incapable of pecuniary estimations, are in the cate$ory of an
award desi$ned to compensate the claimant for actual in-ury suffered and not to
impose a penalty of the wron$doer&
< )n the case of Miranda %ibaya v& @autista, this +ourt considered 1"Q of the
principal amount as reasonable& )n the case at bar, the +ourt of Appeals found on
Aebruary 1, !64 that the outstandin$ balance of the disputed loan was
P#0,!1&#!& twenty five percent thereof is P#,1'4&44 but considerin$ the
depreciation of the Philippine peso today, it is believed that the award of moral
and e9emplary dama$es in the amount of (?),000.00 is 'easo+a;le&
443. (eo$le v. C'ist'o;al= Guisu*;i+g
1R No. 116?79 Ja+ua'% ?9, 1996=
!AC"S
< *he pain rape causes becomes more e9cruciatin$ when the victim carries the
life of an unborn within her womb& *hat tender and innocent life, born of love and
its parents: participation in the mystery of life, is thereby placed in undue dan$er&
Such was the case of +herry *amayo, a married woman& She was twentyBei$ht
years old, with one child and another on the way, when tra$edy struck& She was
se9ually assaulted on ' March !(#& Aortunately, the life in her womb survived&
< She accused %o$elio +ristobal of rape in a sworn complaint
< Cavin$ found sufficient $round to en$ender a wellBfounded belief that the crime
char$ed has been committed and the accused was probably $uilty thereof, the
court ruled that the accused should be held for trial& Accordin$ly, it issued a
warrant for his arrest and fi9ed his bail bond at P6,444&44& *he accused was
arrested but was later released on bail& *hereafter, the court increased the
amount of bail to P'4,444&44 and, consequently, ordered the rearrest of the
accused& Fnfortunately, by this time, he was nowhere to be found&
< *he trial court found the accused $uilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of
rape and sentenced him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua and to
indemnify the complainant, +herry *amayo, in the amount of P'4,444&44&
< *he trial court found clear and convincin$ the cate$orical testimony of +herry
*amayo of havin$ been accosted from behind, knocked to the $round, bo9ed,
submer$ed in water, taken three meters from the creek, and raped&
< *he Appellee disa$rees with him and prays that the assailed decision be
affirmed with modification of the award for moral dama$es, which should be
increased from P'4,444&44 to P"4,444&44&
-SS./S 0 AR1.2/N"S
W&et&e' it is $'o$e' to i+c'ease t&e *o'al da*ages a+d e,e*$la'%
da*ages5
6789-N1 0 RA"-7 9/C-9/N9-
Ees&
Aor se9ually assaultin$ a pre$nant married woman, the accused has shown
moral corruption, perversity, and wickedness& Ce has $rievously wron$ed the
institution of marria$e& *he imposition then of e9emplary dama$es by way of
e9ample to deter others from committin$ similar acts or for correction for the
public $ood is warranted& We hereby fi9 it at P1",444&44& Pursuant to the current
policy of this +ourt, the moral dama$es awarded by the trial court should be
increased from P'4,444&44 to P04,444&44& *he award of moral dama$es is
increased from P'4,444&44 to P04,444&44, and the accused is further ordered to
pay e9emplary dama$es in the amount of P1",444&44&