You are on page 1of 11

Quirante v iac 31 jan1989 counsel, is the judgment creditor who may enforce the judgment for attorney's

FACTS: fees by execution

Dr. Indalecio Casasola had a contract with a building contractor named 2. claims are based on the contract for professional services, with the attorney as
Norman Guerrero the creditors and the clients as the debtors
Philippine American General Insurance Co. Inc. (Philamgen) acted as It is further observed that the supposed contract alleged by petitioners as the
bondsman for Guerrero. In view of Guerrero's failure to perform his part of basis for their fees provides that the recovery of the amounts claimed is subject
the contract within the period specified, Dr. Casasola, thru his counsel, Atty. to certain contingencies
John Quirante, sued both Guerrero and Philamgen We are of the considered view that the orderly administration of justice dictates
Philamgen filed a cross-claim against Guerrero for indemnification that such issue be likewise determined by the court a quo inasmuch as it also
RTC: in favor of Dr. Indalecio Casasola by rescinding the contract necessarily involves the same contingencies in determining the propriety and
ordering Guerrero and Philamgen to pay actual damages of P129,430, moral assessing the extent of recovery of attorney's fees by both petitioners herein. The
damages of P50,000, exemplary damages of P40,000 and attorney's fees court below will be in a better position, after the entire case shall have been
of P30,000 ordering Guerrero alone to pay liquidated damages of P300/day from adjudicated
December 15, 1978 to July 16, 1979 and ordering Philamgen to pay Dr. We, therefore, take exception to and reject that portion of the decision of the
Casasola the amount of the surety bond equivalent to P120,000. respondent court which holds that the alleged confirmation to attorney's fees
Petition to quash the writ of execution and to compel the trial court to give due should not adversely affect the non-signatories thereto, since it is also premised
course to the appeal was dismissed on the eventual grant of damages to the Casasola family, hence the same
In the mean time, Dr. Casasola died leaving his widow and several children as objection of prematurity obtains and such a holding may be pre-emptive of
survivors factual and evidentiary matters that may be presented for consideration by the
Quirante filed a motion in the trial court for the confirmation of his attorney's trial court.
According to him, there was an oral agreement between him and the late Manila electric company v ramoy 4 march 2008
Dr. Casasola that in case of recovery of the surety bond - P30K and in FACTS: In the year 1987, the National Power Corporation (NPC) filed with the
case of damages excess of the surety bond, divided equally bet. the heirs, MTC Quezon City a case for ejectment against several persons allegedly illegally
Atty. Quirante and Atty. Cruz. occupying its properties in Baesa, Quezon City. among the defendants in the
RTC: granted the motion for confirmation ejectment case was Leoncio Ramoy, one of the plaintiffs in the case at bar. On
ISSUE: W/N Atty. Quirante can claim attorney's fees April 28, 1989 the MTC rendered judgment for MERALCO to demolish or
HELD: NO. present recourse is hereby AFFIRMED remove the building and structure they built on the land of the plaintiff and to
attorney's fees may be asserted either in: vacate the premises. On June 20, 1999 NPC wrote to MERALCO requesting the
the very action in which the services in question have been rendered -as in this immediate disconnection of electric power supply to all residential and
case commercial establishments beneath the NPC transmission lines along Baesa,
the Court may pass upon said claim, even if its amount were less than the Quezon City.
minimum prescribed by law for the jurisdiction of said court, upon the theory In a letter dated August 17, 1990 MERALCO requested NPC for a joint survey to
that the right to recover attorney's fees is but an incident of the case in which determine all the establishments which are considered under NPC property. In due
the services of counsel have been rendered time, the electric service connection of the plaintiffs was disconnected. During the
rests on the assumption that the court trying the case is to a certain degree ocular inspection ordered by the Court, it was found out that the residence of the
already familiar with the nature and extent of the lawyer's services plaintiffs-spouses was indeed outside the NPC property.
The rule against multiplicity of suits will in effect be served ISSUES:
a separate action (1) WON the Court of Appeals gravely erred when it found MERALCO negligent
2 Kinds of Attorney's fees when it disconnected the subject electric service of respondents.
1. item of damages provided for under Article 2208 of the Civil Code wherein the (2) WON the Court of Appeals gravely erred when it awarded moral and
award is made in favor of the litigant, not of his counsel, and the litigant, not his exemplary damages and attorneys fees against MERALCO under the
circumstances that the latter acted in good faith in the disconnection of the electric RTC ruled in favor of the spouses. Defendants were ordered to demolish their house
services of the respondents. and vacate the premises and return the possession of the lot to the spouses with
RULING: damages. Defendants counterclaim as well as the 3rd-party complaint were
(1) No. The Court agrees with the CA that under the factual milieu of the present dismissed for lack of merit and with no cause of action. On appeal, CA affirmed the
case, MERALCO failed to exercise the utmost degree of care and diligence RTC. Saying that, there was no basis that the error was Vergon's fault and that they
required of it, pursuant to Articles 1170 & 1173 of the Civil Code. It was not cannot invoke the defense of a purchaser in good faith for wrongful occupation of the
enough for MERALCO to merely rely on the Decision of the MTC without land.
ascertaining whether it had become final and executory. Verily, only upon finality Thus, this petition.
of the said Decision can it be said with conclusiveness that respondents have no Issue: In the main, it is petitioners' position that they must not bear the damage alone.
right or proper interest over the subject property, thus, are not entitled to the Petitioners insist that they relied with full faith and confidence in the reputation of
services of MERALCO. Vergon's agents when they pointed the wrong property to them. Even the President
(2) No. MERALCO willfully caused injury to Leoncio Ramoy by withholding from of Vergon, Felix Gonzales, consented to the construction of the house when he
him and his tenants the supply of electricity to which they were entitled under the signed the building permit. Also, petitioners are builders in good faith.
Service Contract. This is contrary to public policy because, MERALCO, being a vital Held: Petition is partly meritorious.
public utility, is expected to exercise utmost care and diligence i the performance of RTC erred in out rightly ordering petitioners to vacate the subject property or to pay
its obligation. Thus, MERALCOs failure to exercise utmost care and diligence in the respondent spouses the prevailing price of the land as compensation. Article 527[14]
performance of its obligation to Leoncio Ramoy is tantamount to bad faith. Leoncio of the Civil Code presumes good faith, and since no proof exists to show that the
Ramoy testified that he suffered wounded feelings because of MERALCOs actions. mistake was done by petitioners in bad faith, the latter should be presumed to have
Furthermore, due to the lack of power supply, the lessees of his four apartments on built the house in good faith (Art. 448).
subject lot left the premises. Clearly, therefore Leoncio Ramoy is entitled to moral The builder in good faith can compel the landowner to make a choice between
damages in the amount awarded by the CA. Nevertheless, Leoncio is the sole person appropriating the building by paying the proper indemnity or obliging the builder to
entitled to moral damages as he is the only who testified on the witness stand of his pay the price of the land. The choice belongs to the owner of the land, a rule that
wounded feelings. Pursuant to Article 2232 of the Civil Code, exemplary damages accords with the principle of accession, i.e., that the accessory follows the principal
cannot be awarded as MERALCOs acts cannot be considered wanton, fraudulent, and not the other way around. However, even as the option lies with the landowner,
reckless, oppressive or malevolent. Since the Court does not deem it proper to award the grant to him, nevertheless, is preclusive. He must choose one. He cannot, for
exemplary damages in this case then the CAs award of attorneys fees should likewise instance, compel the owner of the building to remove the building from the land
be deleted, as pursuant to Article 2208 of the Civil Code of which the grounds were without first exercising either option. It is only if the owner chooses to sell his land,
not present. and the builder or planter fails to purchase it where its value is not more than the
Briones v macabagdal 3 august 2010 value of the improvements, that the owner may remove the improvements from the
Facts: land. The owner is entitled to such remotion only when, after having chosen to sell
Respondents spouses purchased a land from Vergon Realty located in a subdivision his land, the other party fails to pay for the same.
in Las Pinas (Lot 2R) with a registered TCT. Vergon on the other hand owns the Moreover, petitioners have the right to be indemnified for the necessary and useful
adjacent land (Lot 2S). expenses they may have made on the subject property. Articles 546 and 548 of the
In 1984, after obtaining the building permit and approval of Vergon, Jose Civil Code provide,
Macabagdal constructed a house on Lot 2R which they thought was Lot 2S. After ART. 546. Necessary expenses shall be refunded to every possessor; but only the
being informed of the mix up, spouses immediately demanded for demolition of the possessor in good faith may retain the thing until he has been reimbursed therefor.
house constructed. Jose, refused. Spouses then filed an action to recover ownership Useful expenses shall be refunded only to the possessor in good faith with the same
and possession of the said land in RTC Makati. right of retention, the person who has defeated him in the possession having the
Jose, insisted that the lot which they constructed their house was the lot which was option of refunding the amount of the expenses or of paying the increase in value
consistently pointed to them by the Vergon's agents over the 7-year period of paying which the thing may have acquired by reason thereof.
the lot. They interposed the defense of being buyers in good faith and impleaded ART. 548. Expenses for pure luxury or mere pleasure shall not be refunded to the
indemnity from Vergon because of the warranty against eviction, in case the suit is possessor in good faith; but he may remove the ornaments with which he has
decided against them.
embellished the principal thing if it suffers no injury thereby, and if his successor in 2. The PRC officers' practice of pre-signing checks is a seriously negligent and
the possession does not prefer to refund the amount expended. highly risky behavior which makes them also contributor to the loss. It's own
Consequently, the respondent-spouses have the option to appropriate the house on negligence must therefore mitigate the petitioner's liability. Moreover, the person
the subject land after payment to petitioners of the appropriate indemnity or to oblige who stole the checks is also an employee of the plaintiff, a cleck in its accounting
petitioners to pay the price of the land, unless its value is considerably more than the department at that. As the employer, PRC supposedly should have control and
value of the structures, in which case petitioners shall pay reasonable rent. supervision over its own employees.
As to the liability of Vergon, petitioners failed to present sufficient evidence to show 3. The court held that the petitioner is liable for 60% of the total amount of damages
negligence on Vergon's part. It is the plaintiff who has to prove by a preponderance while PRC should shoulder 40% of the said amount.
of evidence: (1) the damages suffered by the plaintiff; (2) the fault or negligence of Andrada v pilhino sales 23 feb. 2011
the defendant or some other person for whose act he must respond; and (3) the FACTS:
connection of cause and effect between the fault or negligence and the damages Respondent Pilhino sued Jose Andrada, Jr. and his wife, Maxima to recover a sum of
incurred. money. The RTC issued a writ of preliminary attachment, which came to be
Bank of America vs. phil racing club 30 july 2009 implemented against two trucks owned by Jose Andrada, Jr.
Facts: However, the Hino truck could not be transferred to Pilhinos name due to its having
1. Plaintiff PRCI is a domestic corporation which maintains a current account with been already registered in the name of petitioner Moises Andrada. Pilhino thus
petitioner Bank of America. Its authorized signatories are the company President and instituted an action in the RTC to annul the deed of sale between Jose and Moises.
Vice-President. By virtue of a travel abroad for these officers, they pre-signed checks The RTC dismissed the case for all the respondents in that case, except for the
to accommodate any expenses that may come up while they were abroad for a Spouses Moises and Clemencia. This was affirmed by the CA.
business trip. The said pre-signed checks were left for safekeeping by PRCs ISSUE: Whether or not Pilhino should be held liable for the damages the
accounting officer. Unfortunately, the two (2) of said checks came into the hands of petitioners sustained from Pilhinos levy on execution upon the Hino truck.
one of its employees who managed to encash it with petitioner bank. The said check HELD:
was filled in with the use of a check-writer, wherein in the blank for the 'Payee', the The petition lacks merit.
amount in words was written, with the word 'Cash' written above it. CIVIL LAW: Questions of fact
2. Clearly there was an irregularity with the filling up of the blank checks as both The CA found that Pilhino had acted in good faith in bringing Civil Case No.
showed similar infirmities and irregularities and yet, the petitioner bank did not try to 21,898-93 to annul the deed of sale involving the Hino truck executed by Jose
verify with the corporation and proceeded to encash the checks. Andrada, Jr. in favor of Moises Andrada, considering that Pilhino had believed that
3. PRC filed an action for damages against the bank. The lower court awarded actual the sale in favor of defendants-appellants [had been] resorted to so that Jose Andrada
and exemplary damages. On appeal, the CA affirmed the lower court's decision and [might] evade his obligations.
held that the bank was negligent. Hence this appeal. Petitioner contends that it was Petitioners insistence that abuse of rights was not established requires the
merely doing its obligation under the law and contract in encashing the checks, since consideration and review of factual issues. Hence, this appeal cannot succeed, for an
the signatures in the checks are genuine. appeal by petition for review on certiorari cannot determine factual issues. In the
Issue: Whether or not the petitioner can be held liable for negligence and thus exercise of its power of review, the Court is not a trier of facts and does not normally
should pay damages to PRC undertake the re-examination of the evidence presented by the contending parties
Both parties are held to be at fault but the bank has the last clear chance to prevent during the trial. Perforce, the findings of fact by the CA are conclusive and binding
the fraudulent encashment hence it is the one foremost liable . on the Court.
1. There was no dispute that the signatures in the checks are genuine but the presence DENIED.
of irregularities on the face of the check should have alerted the bank to exercise Eastern shipping v ca 12 july 1994
caution before encashing them. It is well-settled that banks are in the business FACTS
impressed with public interest that they are duty bound to protect their clients and Two fiber drums were shipped owned by Eastern Shipping from Japan. The
their deposits at all times. They must treat the accounts of these clients with shipment as insured with a marine policy. Upon arrival in Manila unto the custody of
meticulousness and a highest degree of care considering the fiduciary nature of their metro Port Service, which excepted to one drum, said to be in bad order and which
relationship. The diligence required of banks are more than that of a good father of a damage was unknown the Mercantile Insurance Company. Allied Brokerage
family. Corporation received the shipment from Metro, one drum opened and without seal.
Allied delivered the shipment to the consignees warehouse. The latter excepted to "General Conditions for the Construction of PCIB Tower II Extension" (the
one drum which contained spillages while the rest of the contents was escalation clause).
adulterated/fake. As consequence of the loss, the insurance company paid the Pursuant to the contract, Pan Pacific commenced the mechanical works in the project
consignee, so that it became subrogated to all the rights of action of consignee site, the PCIB Tower II extension building in Makati City. The project was
against the defendants Eastern Shipping, Metro Port and Allied Brokerage. The completed in June 1992. Respondent accepted the project on 9 July 1992.
insurance company filed before the trial court. The trial court ruled in favor of In 1990, labor costs and prices of materials escalated. On 5 April 1991, in
plaintiff an ordered defendants to pay the former with present legal interest of 12% accordance with the escalation clause, Pan Pacific claimed a price adjustment
per annum from the date of the filing of the complaint. On appeal by defendants, the of P5,165,945.52. Respondents appointed project engineer, TCGI Engineers, asked
appellate court denied the same and affirmed in toto the decision of the trial court. for a reduction in the price adjustment. To show goodwill, Pan Pacific reduced the
ISSUE price adjustment toP4,858,548.67.
(1) Whether the applicable rate of legal interest is 12% or 6%. On 28 April 1992, TCGI Engineers recommended to respondent that the price
(2) Whether the payment of legal interest on the award for loss or damage is to be adjustment should be pegged atP3,730,957.07. TCGI Engineers based their
computed from the time the complaint is filed from the date the decision appealed evaluation of the price adjustment on the following factors:
from is rendered. 1. Labor Indices of the Department of Labor and Employment.
HELD 2. Price Index of the National Statistics Offices
(1) The Court held that the legal interest is 6% computed from the decision of PD 1594 and its Implementing Rules and Regulations as amended, 15 March 1991.
the court a quo. When an obligation, not constituting a loan or forbearance of money, Shipping Documents submitted by PPSCI.
is breached, an interest on the amount of damaes awarded may be imposed at the Sub-clause 70.1 of the General Conditions of the Contract Documents.
discretion of the court at the rate of 6% per annum. No interest shall be adjudged on Pan Pacific contended that with this recommendation, respondent was already
unliquidated claims or damages except when or until the demand can be established estopped from disclaiming liability of at least P3,730,957.07 in accordance with the
with reasonable certainty. escalation clause.
When the judgment of the court awarding a sum of money becomes final and Due to the extraordinary increases in the costs of labor and materials, Pan Pacifics
executor, the rate of legal interest shall be 12% per annum from such finality until operational capital was becoming inadequate for the project. However, respondent
satisfaction, this interim period being deemed to be by then an equivalent to a withheld the payment of the price adjustment under the escalation clause despite Pan
forbearance of money. Pacifics repeated demands. Instead, respondent offered Pan Pacific a loan of P1.8
The interest due shall be 12% PA to be computed fro default, J or EJD. million. Against its will and on the strength of respondents promise that the price
(2) From the date the judgment is made. Where the demand is established with adjustment would be released soon, Pan Pacific, through Del Rosario, was
reasonable certainty, the interest shall begin to run from the time the claim is made constrained to execute a promissory note in the amount of P1.8 million as a
judicially or EJ but when such certainty cannot be so reasonably established at the requirement for the loan. Pan Pacific also posted a surety bond. The P1.8 million was
time the demand is made, the interest shll begin to run only from the date of released directly to laborers and suppliers and not a single centavo was given to Pan
judgment of the court is made. Pacific.
(3) The Court held that it should be computed from the decision rendered by the Pan Pacific made several demands for payment on the price adjustment but
court a quo. respondent merely kept on promising to release the same. Meanwhile, the P1.8
Pan pacific v equitable 18 march 2010 million loan matured and respondent demanded payment plus interest and penalty.
Facts: Pan Pacific refused to pay the loan. Pan Pacific insisted that it would not have
Pan Pacific Service Contractors, Inc. (Pan Pacific) is engaged in contracting incurred the loan if respondent released the price adjustment on time. Pan Pacific
mechanical works on airconditioning system. On 24 November 1989, Pan Pacific, alleged that the promissory note did not express the true agreement of the parties.
through its President, Ricardo F. Del Rosario (Del Rosario), entered into a contract Pan Pacific maintained that the P1.8 million was to be considered as an advance
of mechanical works (Contract) with respondent for P20,688,800. Pan Pacific and payment on the price adjustment. Therefore, there was really no consideration for the
respondent also agreed on nine change orders for P2,622,610.30. Thus, the total promissory note; hence, it is null and void from the beginning.
consideration for the whole project was P23,311,410.30. The Contract stipulated, Respondent stood firm that it would not release any amount of the price adjustment
among others, that Pan Pacific shall be entitled to a price adjustment in case of to Pan Pacific but it would offset the price adjustment with Pan Pacifics outstanding
increase in labor costs and prices of materials under paragraphs 70.1 and 70.2 of the balance of P3,226,186.01, representing the loan, interests, penalties and collection
charges. Pan Pacific refused the offsetting but agreed to receive the reduced amount In the event that on the 6th month, Sison would decide not to purchase the
of P3,730,957.07 as recommended by the TCGI Engineers for the purpose of property, Frias has 6 months to pay 3M (amount shall earn compounded bank
extrajudicial settlement, less P1.8 million and P414,942 as advance payments. interest for the last 6 months only)
On 6 May 1994, petitioners filed a complaint for declaration of nullity/annulment of 3M treated as a loan and the property considered as the security for the mortgage
the promissory note, sum of money, and damages against the respondent with the Upon notice of intention to purchase, Sison has 6 months to pay the balance of
RTC. 3.4M (6.4M less 3M MOA consideration)
Issue: Whether the CA, in awarding the unpaid balance of the price adjustment, erred Frias received from Sison 3M (2M in cash; 1M post-dated check dated February 28,
in fixing the interest rate at 12% instead of the 18% bank lending rate. 1990, instead of 1991, which rendered the check stale). Frias gave Sison the TCT and
Held: the Deed of Absolute Sale over the property. Sison decided not to purchase the
Under Article 2209 of the Civil Code, the appropriate measure for damages in case property, so shenotified Frias through a letter dated March 20, 1991 [Frias received it
of delay in discharging an obligation consisting of the payment of a sum of money is only on June 11, 1991],and Sison reminded Frias of their agreement that the 2M Sison
the payment of penalty interest at the rate agreed upon in the contract of the parties. paid should be considered as a loan payable within 6 months. Frias failed to pay this
In the absence of a stipulation of a particular rate of penalty interest, payment of amount.
additional interest at a rate equal to the regular monetary interest becomes due and Sison filed a complaintfor sum of money with preliminary attachment. Sison averred
payable. Finally, if no regular interest had been agreed upon by the contracting that Frias tried to deprive her of the security for the loan by making a false report of
parties, then the damages payable will consist of payment of legal interest which is the loss of her owners copy of TCT, executing an affidavit of loss and by filing a
6%, or in the case of loans or forbearances of money, 12% per annum. It is only petition[1] for the issuance of a new owners duplicate copy. RTC issued a writ of
when the parties to a contract have failed to fix the rate of interest or when such preliminary attachment upon the filing of a 2M bond.
amount is unwarranted that the Court will apply the 12% interest per annum on a RTC found that Frias was under obligation to pay Sison 2M with compounded interest
loan or forbearance of money. pursuant to their MOA. RTC ordered Frias to pay Sison:
The written agreement entered into between petitioners and respondent provides for 2M + 32% annual interest beginning December 7, 1991 until fully paid
an interest at the current bank lending rate in case of delay in payment and the 70k representing premiums paid by Sison on the attachment bond with legal
promissory note charged an interest of 18%. interest counted from the date of this decision until fully paid
To prove petitioners entitlement to the 18% bank lending rate of interest, petitioners 100k moral, corrective, exemplary damages [liable for moral damages because of
presented the promissory note prepared by respondent bank itself. This promissory Frias fraudulent scheme]
note, although declared void by the lower courts because it did not express the real
100k attorneys fees + cost of litigation
intention of the parties, is substantial proof that the bank lending rate at the time of
CA affirmed RTC with modification32% reduced to 25%. CA said that there was
default was 18% per annum. Absent any evidence of fraud, undue influence or any
no basis for Frias to say that the interest should be charged for 6 months only. It said
vice of consent exercised by petitioners against the respondent, the interest rate that a loan always bears interest; otherwise, it is not a loan. The interest should
agreed upon is binding on them.
commence on June 7, 1991 until fully paid, with compounded bank interest prevailing
Frias vs san diego sison 3 april 2007 at the time [June 1991] the 2M was considered as a loan (as certified by the bank).
On 7 Dec 1990, Bobie Rose Frias and Dr. Flora San-Diego Sison entered into a MOA
ISSUES & HOLDING Ratio only discusses topic of INTEREST (as per syllabus)
over Friasproperty
WON compounded bank interest should be limited to 6 months as contained in
MOA consideration is 3M the MOA. NO
Sison has 6 months from the date of contracts execution to notify Frias of her
WON Sison is entitled to moral damages. YES
intention to purchase the property with the improvements at 6.4M
WON the grant of attorneys fees is proper, even if not mentioned in the body of
Prior to this 6 month period, Frias may still offer the property to other persons,
the decision. NO
provided that 3M shall be paid to Sison including interest based on prevailing
CA committed no error in awarding an annual 25% interest on the 2M even beyond
compounded bank interest + amount of sale in excess of 7M [should the property the 6-month stipulated period. In this case, the phrase for the last six months only
be sold at a price greater than 7M]
should be taken in the context of the entire agreement.
In case Frias has no other buyer within 6 months from the contracts execution, SC notes that the agreement speaks of two (2) periods of 6 months each (see FACTS
no interest shall be charged by Sison on the 3M words in bold & underline). No interest will be charged for the 1st 6-month period
[while Sison was making up her mind], but only for the 2nd 6-month period after Sison
decided not to buy the property. There is nothing in the MOA that suggests that interest no "rude and rough" reception, no "menacing attitude," no "supercilious
will be charged for 6 months only even if it takes forever for Frias to pay the loan. manner," no "abusive language and highly scornful reference" was given
The payment of regular interest constitutes the price or cost of the use of money, and her
until the principal sum due is returned to the creditor, regular interest continues to awarded only if he or she was subjected to contemptuous conduct despite
accrue since the debtor continues to use such principal amount. For a debtor to the offender's knowledge of his or her social and financial standing
continue in possession of the principal of the loan and to continue to use the same after proper to award moral damages to Lucila for her physical sufferings, mental
maturity of the loan without payment of the monetary interest constitutes unjust anguish, fright, serious anxiety and wounded feelings
enrichment on the part of the debtor at the expense of the creditor. She sustained multiple injuries on the scalp, limbs and ribs. She lost all her
CA DECISION AND RESOLUTION AFFIRMED WITH MODIFICATION teeth. She had to undergo several corrective operations and
Award of attorneys fees deleted treatments. Despite treatment and surgery, her chin was still numb and
[1] At first, Frias petition was granted, but it was eventually set aside, since RTC thick. She felt that she has not fully recovered from her injuries. She even
granted Sisons petition for relief from judgment (as Sison was in possession of the had to undergo a second operation on her gums for her dentures to fit. She
owners duplicate copy). suffered sleepless nights and shock as a consequence of the vehicular
Keirulf v ca 13 march 1997 accident.
FACTS: Exemplary damages are designed to permit the courts to mould behavior that has
February 28, 1987 7:45 pm: Pantranco bus driven by Jose Malanum lost control socially deleterious consequences, and its imposition is required by public policy
and swerved to the left flying over the center island occupying the east-bound to suppress the wanton acts of an offender
lane of EDSA. The front of the bus hit the front of the Isuzu pickup driven by discretion of the court
Legaspi smashed to pieces and inflicting physical injury to Legaspi and his (1) They may be imposed by way of example or correction only in addition,
passenger Lucila Kierulf. Both were treated at the Quezon City General Hospital among others, to compensatory damages, and cannot be recovered as a
The bus also hit and injured a pedestrian who was then crossing EDSA matter of right, their determination depending upon the amount of
Despite the impact, the bus continued to move forward and its front portion compensatory damages that may be awarded to the claimant;
rammed against a Caltex gasoline station, damaging its building and gasoline (2) the claimant must first establish his right to moral, temporate, liquidated
dispensing equipment or compensatory damages; and
RTC: proximate cause was the negligence of the defendant's driver. Pantranco (3) the wrongful act must be accompanied by bad faith, and the award
North Express, Incorporated to pay Lucila Kierulf, Victor Kierulf for the would be allowed only if the guilty party acted in a wanton, fraudulent,
damages of the Isuzu pick-up and Porfirio Legaspi reckless, oppressive or malevolent manner."
CA: Affirmed with modification by adding P25,000 attorney's fees and to pay exemplary damages awarded increased to P200,000
costs The fact of gross negligence duly proven, we believe that Legaspi, being
ISSUE: W/N both Lucila should be awarded moral damages also a victim of gross negligence, should also receive exemplary damages
HELD: YES. AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION. The award of moral damages to Moral damages, though incapable of pecuniary estimation, are in the category of
Lucila and Legaspi is hereby INCREASED to P400,000.00 and P50,000.00 an award designed to compensate the claimant for actual injury and are not
respectively; exemplary damages to Lucila is INCREASED to P200,000.00. Legaspi meant to enrich complainant at the expense of defendant
is awarded exemplary damages of P50,000.00 Porfirio that he had been incapacitated for 10 months and that during said
Rodriguez case ruled that when a person is injured to the extent that he/she is no period he did not have any income
longer capable of giving love, affection, comfort and sexual relations to his or P16,500 as compensation for loss of earning capacity for the period is
her spouse, that spouse has suffered a direct and real personal loss. The loss is amply supported by the records and is demandable under Article 2205 of
immediate and consequential rather than remote and unforeseeable; it is personal the Civil Code
to the spouse and separate and distinct from that of the injured person. Victor's Lucila's claim of loss of earning capacity has not been duly proven
claim for deprivation of his right to consortium, although argued before A party is entitled to adequate compensation for such pecuniary loss
Respondent Court, is not supported by the evidence on record. actually suffered and duly proved
The social and financial standing of Lucila cannot be considered in awarding
moral damages.
Mere proof of Lucila's earnings consisting of her 1983 and 1984 income tax failed to exercise the required diligence in the selection and supervision of
returns would not suffice to prove earnings for the years 1985 and Rivera.
1986. The incident happened on February 28, 1987. b. The complaint prayed for the award of actual, exemplary and moral damages
An estimate, as it is categorized, is not an actual expense incurred or to be and attorneys fees in favor of respondents.
incurred in the repair. The reduction made by respondent court is reasonable 3. BF Metal and Rivera averred that:
considering that in this instance such estimate was secured by the complainants a. Respondents were not the proper parties-in-interest to prosecute the action since
themselves they were not the registered owner of the jeep.
in order that moral damages may be awarded, there must be pleading and proof b. the sole and proximate cause of the accident was the fault and negligence of
of moral suffering, mental anguish, fright and the like. While no proof of Umuyon.
pecuniary loss is necessary in order that moral damages may be awarded, the c. Petitioner exercised due diligence in the selection and supervision of its
amount of indemnity being left to the discretion of the court it is nevertheless employees.
essential that the claimant should satisfactorily show the existence of the factual 4. During the trial, respondents presented:
basis of damages and its causal connection to defendant's acts. This is so a. The testimonies of Umuyon, SPO1 Rico Canaria, SPO4 Theodore Cadaweg and
because moral damages, though incapable of pecuniary estimation, are in the Nicanor Fajardo, the auto-repair shop owner who gave a cost estimate for the
category of an award designed to compensate the claimant for actual injury repair of the wrecked jeep.
suffered and not to impose a penalty on the wrongdoer. b. Document showing the cost estimate of Pagawaan Motors, Inc. which pegged
Moral damages are awarded to enable the injured party to obtain means, the repair cost of the jeep at P96,000, and the cost estimate of Fajardo Motor
diversions or amusements that will serve to alleviate the moral suffering he/she Works done which reflected an increased repair cost at P130,655.
has undergone, by reason of the defendant's culpable action. c. A copy of the Decision in Criminal Case No. 4742 finding Rivera guilty of
Its award is aimed at restoration, as much as possible, of the spiritual status quo reckless imprudence resulting in damage to property with physical injuries.
ante; thus, it must be proportionate to the suffering inflicted. Since each case 5. The court declared Rivera negligent
must be governed by its own peculiar circumstances, there is no hard and fast a. When he failed to determine with certainty that the opposite lane was clear
rule in determining the proper amount. The yardstick should be that the amount before overtaking the vehicle in front of the truck he was driving.
awarded should not be so palpably and scandalously excessive as to indicate that b. Also negligent in the selection and supervision of its employees when it failed to
it was the result of passion, prejudice or corruption on the part of the trial prove the proper dissemination of safety driving instructions to its drivers.
judge. Neither should it be so little or so paltry that it rubs salt to the injury 6. *CA: Petitioner and Rivera appealed the decision
already inflicted on plaintiffs. a. The court affirmed the RTCs finding that Riveras negligence was the
B.F. METAL vs. SPOUSES LOMOTAN and RICO UMUYON proximate cause of the accident and that petitioner was liable under Article
FACTS: 2180 of the Civil Code for its negligence in the selection and supervision of its
1. Respondent Rico Umuyon was driving the owner-type jeep owned by Spouses employees.
Lomotan. b. However, it modified the amount of damages awarded to respondents.
a. The jeep was cruising at a moderate speed of 20 to 30 kmph. 7. Motion for reconsideration denied by CA.
b. Suddenly, at the opposite lane, the speeding ten-wheeler truck driven by Onofre 8. *SC: Only petitioner filed the instant petition, expressly stating that it is
Rivera overtook a car by invading the lane being traversed by the jeep and assailing only the damages awarded by the appellate court
rammed into the jeep. ISSUE#1: W/N the amount of actual damages based only on a job estimate should
c. The jeep was a total wreck be lowered
d. Umuyon suffered an injury which entailed his hospitalization for 19 days. HELD: YES
e. Due to the injuries he sustained, Umuyon could no longer drive, reducing his Except as provided by law or by stipulation, one is entitled to an adequate
daily income fromP150 to P100 compensation only for such pecuniary loss suffered by him as he has duly
2. *RTC: Respondents instituted a separate and independent civil action for proved. Such compensation is referred to as actual or compensatory damages.
damages against BF Metal Corporation and Rivera. Actual damages are such compensation or damages for an injury that will put the
a. The complaint alleged that Riveras gross negligence and recklessness was the injured party in the position in which he had been before he was injured. They
immediate and proximate cause of the vehicular accident and that petitioner pertain to such injuries or losses that are actually sustained and susceptible of
measurement. To justify an award of actual damages, there must be competent proof could be lawfully due when the accused is found guilty of physical injuries,
of the actual amount of loss. Credence can be given only to claims which are duly lascivious acts, adultery or concubinage, illegal or arbitrary detention, illegal arrest,
supported by receipts. illegal search, or defamation.
In the instant case, no evidence was submitted to show the amount actually spent for Undoubtedly, petitioner is liable for the moral damages suffered by respondent
the repair or replacement of the wrecked jeep. Spouses Lomotan presented two Umuyon. Its liability is based on a quasi-delict or on its negligence in the supervision
different cost estimates to prove the alleged actual damage of the wrecked jeep. and selection of its driver, causing the vehicular accident and physical injuries to
Exhibit "B," is a job estimate by Pagawaan Motors, Inc., which pegged the repair respondent Umuyon. Rivera is also liable for moral damages to respondent Umuyon
cost of the jeep at P96,000.00, while Exhibit "M," estimated the cost of repair based on either culpa criminal or quasi-delict. Since the decision in the criminal
at P130,655.00. An estimate is competent to prove actual damages. Courts cannot case, which found Rivera guilty of criminal negligence, did not award moral
simply rely on speculation, conjecture or guesswork in determining the fact and damages, the same may be awarded in the instant civil action for damages.
amount of damages. Jurisprudence show that in criminal offenses resulting to the death of the victim, an
As correctly pointed out by petitioner, the best evidence to prove the value of the award within the range ofP50,000.00 to P100,000.00 as moral damages has become
wrecked jeep is reflected in Exhibit "I," the Deed of Sale showing the jeeps the trend. Under the circumstances, because respondent Umuyon did not die but had
acquisition cost at P72,000.00. However, the depreciation value of equivalent to 10% become permanently incapacitated to drive as a result of the accident, the award
of the acquisition cost cannot be deducted from it in the absence of proof in support of P30,000.00 for moral damages in his favor is justified.
thereof. However, there is no legal basis in awarding moral damages to Spouses Lomotan
ISSUE#2: W/N respondents also entitled to moral and exemplary damages whether arising from the criminal negligence committed by Rivera or based on the
HELD: Only Spouses Lomotan are not entitled to moral damages negligence of petitioner under Article 2180. Article 2219 speaks of recovery of moral
Petitioner argues that the award of moral damages was premised on the resulting damages in case of a criminal offense resulting in physical injuries or quasi-
physical injuries arising from the quasi-delict; since only respondent Umuyon delicts causing physical injuries, the two instances where Rivera and petitioner are
suffered physical injuries, the award should pertain solely to him. Correspondingly, liable for moral damages to respondent Umuyon. Article 2220 does speak of
the award of exemplary damages should pertain only to respondent Umuyon since awarding moral damages where there is injury to property, but the injury must be
only him was entitled to moral damages. willful and the circumstances show that such damages are justly due. There being no
In the case of moral damages, recovery is more an exception rather than the rule. proof that the accident was willful, Article 2220 does not apply.
Moral damages are not punitive in nature but are designed to compensate and Exemplary or corrective damages are imposed, by way of example or correction for
alleviate the physical suffering, mental anguish, fright, serious anxiety, besmirched the public good, in addition to moral, temperate, liquidated or compensatory
reputation, wounded feelings, moral shock, social humiliation, and similar harm damages. Exemplary damages cannot be recovered as a matter of right; the court will
unjustly caused to a person. In order that an award of moral damages can be aptly decide whether or not they should be adjudicated. In quasi-delicts, exemplary
justified, the claimant must be able to satisfactorily prove that he has suffered such damages may be granted if the defendant acted with gross negligence.While the
damages and that the injury causing it has sprung from any of the cases listed in amount of the exemplary damages need not be proved, the plaintiff must show that
Articles 2219 and 2220 of the Civil Code. Then, too, the damages must be shown to he is entitled to moral, temperate or compensatory damages before the court may
be the proximate result of a wrongful act or omission. The claimant must establish consider the question of whether or not exemplary damages should be awarded.
the factual basis of the damages and its causal tie with the acts of the defendant. In To serve as an example for the public good, the Court affirms the award of
fine, an award of moral damages would require, firstly, evidence of besmirched exemplary damages in the amount of P100,000.00 to respondents. Because
reputation or physical, mental or psychological suffering sustained by the claimant; exemplary damages are awarded, attorneys fees may also be awarded in consonance
secondly, a culpable act or omission factually established; thirdly, proof that the with Article 2208 (1). The Court affirms the appellate courts award of attorneys
wrongful act or omission of the defendant is the proximate cause of the damages fees in the amount of P25,000.00.
sustained by the claimant; and fourthly, that the case is predicated on any of the WHEREFORE, the instant petition for certiorari is PARTIALLY GRANTED.
instances expressed or envisioned by Article 2219 and Article 2220 of the Civil The Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CV No. 58655
Code. In culpa aquiliana, or quasi-delict, (a) when an act or omission causes is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION. The award of actual damages for the cost
physical injuries, or (b) where the defendant is guilty of intentional tort, moral of repairing the owner-type jeep is hereby REDUCED to P72,000.00 while the
damages may aptly be recovered. This rule also applies to breaches of contract where moral damages of P30,000.00 is awarded solely to respondent Umuyon. All other
the defendant acted fraudulently or in bad faith. In culpa criminal, moral damages awards of the Court of Appeals are AFFIRMED. full satisfaction.
According to the SC, the trial court correctly imposed the penalty of reclusion
People v lizano 27 april 2007 perpetua for the rape of AAA, who was then under 12 years old. The SC affirmed the
Facts: award of P50,000.00 as civil indemnity and P50,000.00 as moral damages.
Lizano was charged with three (3) counts of rape in three (3) separate Informations Civil indemnity is automatically imposed upon the accused without need of proof
to all of which he pleaded not guilty. Trial then proceeded. other than the fact of the commission of rape.
AAA had been staying in her grandmothers house together with Lizano and his Moral damages is also automatically granted in rape cases without need of further
wife, BBB. BBB is AAAs aunt. proof other than the commission of the crime because it is assumed that a rape victim
AAA, only 11 at the time, was sleeping inside the house when appellant lay down had actually suffered moral injuries entitling her to such award.
beside her and began undressing her while threatening to kill her, her grandmother Occena v icamina 22 jan 1990
and aunt should she reveal his acts to anybody. Lizano took off this clothes, went on Facts: Eulogio Occena, herein petitioner, filed a criminal complaint for Grave Oral
top of AAA and inserted his inserted his penis into her vagina, causing her to feel Defamation against herein private respondent Cristina Vegafria for allegedly openly,
pain. publicly and maliciously uttering the following insulting words and statements: "Gago
AAAs age was established by her birth certificate and testimony from her mother. A ikaw nga Barangay Captain, montisco, traidor, malugus, Hudas," which, freely
medical clerk testified on the medical findings of the medico-legal which saw translated, mean: "You are a foolish Barangay Captain, ignoramus, traitor, tyrant,
superficial lacerations of the hymen. Judas" and other words and statements of similar import which caused great and
Lizano testified for himself raising the defenses of denial and alibi. Lozano claims irreparable damage and injury to his person and honor.
that he was driving his tricycle the whole day. He recalled an incident where he Private respondent as accused therein entered a plea of not guilty. Trial thereafter
asked AAA to get a spare part of a tricycle in the living room. Unable to follow his ensued, at which petitioner, without reserving his right to file a separate civil action
orders, appellant followed AAA inside the house. It was at that moment when his for damages actively intervened thru a private prosecutor.
wife, BBB, arrived and accused him of raping AAA. Lizano claims that BBB had After trial, private respondent was convicted of the offense of Slight Oral Defamation
induced AAA to charge him with rape because of their frequent quarrels. and was sentenced to pay a fine of Fifty Pesos (P50.00) with subsidiary imprisonment
RTC found him guilty of 1 count of rape. in case of insolvency and to pay the costs. No damages were awarded to petitioner in
The CA affirmed the RTC in toto. view of the trial court's opinion that "the facts and circumstances of the case as adduced
Note: at this point, the decision hasnt mentioned any moral damages yet or any kind by the evidence do not warrant the awarding of moral damages."
of penalty. Disagreeing, petitioner sought relief from the Regional Trial Court.
Issues: W/N the prosecution established his guilt beyond reasonable doubt Issue:
In the rape cases, conviction or acquittal issue boils down to credibility. Findings of (1) Whether or not the decision of the Municipal Trial Court constitutes the final
fact of the trial court should not be disturbed on appeal since conclusions as to the adjudication on the merits of private respondent's civil liability;
credibility of witnesses in rape cases hinge heavily on the sound judgment of the trial (2) Whether or not petitioner is entitled to an award of damages arising from the
court remarks uttered by private respondent and found by the trial court to be defamatory.
The trial court observed: The private complainant AAA then an 11 years old [sic] Held:
girl in a clear, convincing and straightforward manner testified on how the rape We find merit in the petition.
occurred. Her clear account of the first incident of rape unequivocally show that she (1) The decision of the Municipal Trial Court as affirmed by the Regional Trial Court
was indeed raped by the accused Filomino Lizano. cannot be considered as a final adjudication on the civil liability of private respondent
During the trial, AAA recounted the rape incident and positively identified appellant simply because said decision has not yet become final due to the timely appeal filed
as the perpetrator. AAA was also consistent in her story when he first reported her by petitioner with respect to the civil liability of the accused in said case. It was only
ordeal to the police and it was reduced to writing. the unappealed criminal aspect of the case which has become final.
Lizanos main argument is premised on the delay of reporting the crime. The OSG (2) Civil obligations arising from criminal offenses are governed by Article 100 of the
correctly points out that delay in reporting a rape incident does not impair the Revised Penal Code which provides that "(E)very person criminally liable for a felony
credibility of the victim in the face of threats of death or physical violence. AAA is also civilly liable," in relation to Article 2177 of the Civil Code on quasi-delict, the
satisfactorily explained the delay. Appellant threatened to kill her, her grandmother provisions for independent civil actions in the Chapter on Human Relations and the
and aunt should she report the incident to anybody. provisions regulating damages, also found in the Civil Code.
In the case at bar, private respondent was found guilty of slight oral defamation and RBS and not VIVA which was actually prejudiced when the complaint was filed by
sentenced to a fine of P50.00 with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency, but ABS-CBN
no civil liability arising from the felonious act of the accused was adjudged. This is ISSUE:
erroneous. As a general rule, a person who is found to be criminally liable offends two 1. W/N RBS is entitled to damages. -YES
(2) entities: the state or society in which he lives and the individual member of the 2. W/N VIVA is entitled to damages. - NO
society or private person who was injured or damaged by the punishable act or HELD: REVERSED except as to unappealed award of attorney's fees in favor of
omission. The offense of which private respondent was found guilty is not one of those VIVA Productions, Inc.
felonies where no civil liability results because either there is no offended party or no 1. YES.
damage was caused to a private person. There is here an offended party,hence, we rule One is entitled to compensation for actual damages only for such pecuniary
that for the injury to his feelings and reputation, being a barangay captain, petitioner loss suffered by him as he has duly proved. The indemnification shall
is entitled to moral damages in the sum of P5,000.00 and a further sum of P5,000.00 comprehend not only the value of the loss suffered, but also that of the
as exemplary damages. profits that the obligee failed to obtain. In contracts and quasi-contracts the
Abs cbn vs ca 21 jan 1999 damages which may be awarded are dependent on whether the obligor acted
FACTS: with good faith or otherwise, It case of good faith, the damages recoverable
Viva, through Del Rosario, offered ABS-CBN through its vice-president Charo are those which are the natural and probable consequences of the breach of
Santos-Concio, a list of 3 film packages or 36 titles from which ABS-CBN may the obligation and which the parties have foreseen or could have reasonably
exercise its right of first refusal foreseen at the time of the constitution of the obligation. If the obligor acted
Mrs. Concio informed Vic through a letter that they can only purchase 10 titles to be with fraud, bad faith, malice, or wanton attitude, he shall be responsible for
schedules on non-primetime slots because they were very adult themes which the all damages which may be reasonably attributed to the non-performance of
ruling of the MTRCB advises to be aired at 9:00 p.m the obligation. In crimes and quasi-delicts, the defendant shall be liable for
February 27, 1992: Del Rosario approached ABS-CBN's Ms. Concio with a list all damages which are the natural and probable consequences of the act or
consisting of 52 original movie titles as well as 104 re-runs proposing to sell to ABS- omission complained of, whether or not such damages has been foreseen or
CBN airing rights for P60M (P30M cash and P30M worth of television spots) April could have reasonably been foreseen by the defendant. Actual damages
2, 1992: Del Rosario and ABS-CBN general manager, Eugenio Lopez III met may likewise be recovered for loss or impairment of earning capacity in
wherein Del Rosario allegedly agreed to grant rights for 14 films for P30M cases of temporary or permanent personal injury, or for injury to the
April 06, 1992: Del Rosario and Mr. Graciano Gozon of RBS Senior vice-president plaintiff's business standing or commercial credit.
for Finance discussed the terms and conditions of Viva's offer to sell the 104 films, The claim of RBS for actual damages did not arise from contract, quasi-
after the rejection of the same package by ABS-CBN contract, delict, or quasi-delict. It arose from the fact of filing of the
April 07, 1992: Ms. Concio sent the proposal draft of 53 films for P35M which complaint despite ABS-CBN's alleged knowledge of lack of cause of
Viva's Board rejected since they will not accept anything less than P60M action. Needless to state the award of actual damages cannot be
April 29, 1992: Viva granted RBS exclusive grants for P60M comprehended under the above law on actual damages. RBS could only
RTC: Issued TRO against RBS in showing 14 films as filed by ABS-CBN. probably take refuge under Articles 19, 20, and 21 of the Civil Code.
RBS also set up a cross-claim against VIVA In this case, ABS-CBN had not yet filed the required bond; as a matter of
RTC: ordered ABS-CBN to pay RBS P107,727 premium paid by RBS to the surety fact, it asked for reduction of the bond and even went to the Court of
which issued their bond to lift the injunction, P191,843.00 for the amount of print Appeals to challenge the order on the matter, Clearly then, it was not
advertisement for "Maging Sino Ka Man" in various newspapers, P1M attorney's necessary for RBS to file a counterbond. Hence, ABS-CBN cannot be held
fees, P5M moral damages, P5M exemplary damages and costs. Cross-claim to responsible for the premium RBS paid for the counterbond
VIVA was dismissed. Neither could ABS-CBN be liable for the print advertisements for "Maging
ABS-CBN appealed. VIVA and Del Rosario also appealed seeking moral and Sino Ka Man" for lack of sufficient legal basis.
exemplary damages and additional attorney's fees. Article 2217 thereof defines what are included in moral damages, while
CA: reduced the awards of moral damages to P2M, exemplary damages to P2M and Article 2219 enumerates the cases where they may be recovered, Article
attorney's fees to P500,000. Denied VIVA and Del Rosario's appeal because it was 2220 provides that moral damages may be recovered in breaches of contract
where the defendant acted fraudulently or in bad faith. RBS's claim for
moral damages could possibly fall only under item (10) of Article 2219
(10) Acts and actions referred to in Articles 21, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30,
32, 34, and 35.
The award of moral damages cannot be granted in favor of a corporation
because, being an artificial person and having existence only in legal
contemplation, it has no feelings, no emotions, no senses, It cannot, therefore,
experience physical suffering and mental anguish, which call be experienced
only by one having a nervous system. A corporation may recover moral
damages if it "has a good reputation that is debased, resulting in social
humiliation" is an obiter dictum. On this score alone the award for damages
must be set aside, since RBS is a corporation.
exemplary damages are imposed by way of example or correction for the
public good, in addition to moral, temperate, liquidated or compensatory
damages. They are recoverable in criminal cases as part of the civil liability
when the crime was committed with one or more aggravating circumstances in
quasi-contracts, if the defendant acted with gross negligence and in contracts
and quasi-contracts, if the defendant acted in a wanton, fraudulent, reckless,
oppressive, or malevolent manner
It may be reiterated that the claim of RBS against ABS-CBN is not based on
contract, quasi-contract, delict, or quasi-delict, Hence, the claims for moral and
exemplary damages can only be based on Articles 19, 20, and 21 of the Civil
There is no adequate proof that ABS-CBN was inspired by malice or bad
faith. If damages result from a person's exercise of a right, it is damnum
absque injuria.