Cresencio Libi and Amelia Yap Libi, petitioners, vs Hon.

Intermediate Appelate Court, Felipe

Gotiong and Shirley Gotiong, respondents.
G.R. No. 70890
September 18, 1992

Wendell Libi, son of petitioners, and Julie Ann Gotiong, the daughter of private
respondent spouses, were sweethearts until Julie broke up with Wendell upon finding out of his
sadistic and irresponsible character.

Wendell tried hard to reconcile with Julie Ann but when the latter refused, Wendell
started making threats. On that fateful day of January 14, 1978, Julie Ann and Wendell died
from a single gunshot wound each coming from the same Smith and Wesson revolver licensed in the
name of petitioner Cresencio Libi.

There being no eyewitnesses to the crime, petitioners and private respondents herein
advanced conflicting versions of the case. Private respondents claimed that with the use of the
same gun, Wendell took his own life after killing Julie Ann. On the other hand, the petitioners
argued that an unknown third party, whom Wendell may have displeased by reason of his work
as a narcotic informant, must have caused the death of Wendell and Julie Ann.

As a result of the death of Julie Ann, private respondents filed an action to recover
damages arising from the vicarious liability of the parents of Wendell (petitioners herein) under
Article 2180 of the New Civil Code. After trial, the case was dismissed for insufficiency of
evidence. Likewise, the counterclaim filed by the petitioners was dismissed for lack of merit.

On appeal lodged by private respondents, the respondent court set aside the dismissal
of the case and held petitioners liable under Art. 2180 of the NCC. Hence this case.

Herein petitioners seek for the reversal of judgment of requiring them to pay P30,000.00
for moral damages, P10,000.00 for exemplary damages, P20,000.00 as attorney's fees and costs.

Issue: Are petitioners liable for vicarious liability under Art 2180 of the NCC?

Held:
The Libi spouses are and should be held primarily liable for the civil liability arising from
criminal offenses committed by their minor son under their legal authority or control, and who
lives in their company.

Petitioners Libi failed to prove that they had exercised due diligence of a good father of a
family over their son Wendell as shown by the fact that it was only when Wendell died that
petitioners came to know that their son Wendell was a CANU agent and that the gun of
petitioner Cresencio Bili was missing from their safety deposit box.

Petitioners are indeed liable under Art. 2180 of the NCC because it is still the duty of the
parents to know the activity of their children and, in this case, had the petitioners been diligent
in supervising the activities of Wendell and in keeping said gun from his reach, the death of Julie
and Wendell could have been prevented.

Petitioners are indeed liable under Art. 2180 of the NCC because it is still the duty of the
parents to know the activity of their children and, in this case, had the petitioners been diligent
in supervising the activities of Wendell and in keeping said gun from his reach, the death of Julie
and Wendell could have been prevented. The liability of the parents for damages caused by
their children imposed under Article 2180 of the New Civil Code covers obligation arising from
both quasi delict and criminal offenses.

ACCORDINGLY, the instant petition is DENIED and the assailed judgment of respondent
Court of Appeals is hereby AFFIRMED with costs against petitioners.