Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Torts and Damages: San Beda College of Law
Torts and Damages: San Beda College of Law
215
I. TORTS
NEGLIGENCE
TORT The omission of that degree of
An unlawful violation of private diligence which is required by the nature
right, not created by contract, and which of the obligation and corresponding to
gives rise to an action for damages. the circumstances of persons, time and
It is an act or omission producing an place. (Article 1173 Civil Code)
injury to another, without any previous
existing lawful relation of which the said Kinds of Negligence:
act or omission may be said to be a 1. Culpa Contractual (contractual
natural outgrowth or incident. negligence)
Governed by CC provisions on
NOTES: Obligations and Contracts, particularly
An unborn child is NOT entitled to Arts. 1170 to 1174 of the Civil Code.
damages. But the bereaved parents may
be entitled to damages, on damages 2. Culpa Aquiliana (quasi-delict)
inflicted directly upon them. (Geluz vs. Governed mainly by Art. 2176 of the
CA, 2 SCRA 802) Civil Code
Defendants in tort cases can either
be natural or artificial being. 3. Culpa Criminal (criminal negligence)
Corporations are civilly liable in the Governed by Art. 365 of the Revised
same manner as natural persons. Penal Code.
Any person who has been injured by
NOTES:
reason of a tortious conduct can sue the
tortfeasor.
The primary purpose of a tort action The 3 kinds of negligence furnish
is to provide compensation to a person separate, distinct, and independent
who was injured by the tortious conduct bases of liability or causes of action.
of the defendant. A single act or omission may give rise
Preventive remedy is available in to two or more causes of action.
some cases.
Classes of Torts:
Culpa Contractual Culpa Aquiliana
A. Negligent Torts The foundation of
B. Intentional Torts the liability of the It is a separate
defendant source of obligation
C. Strict Liability independent of
is the contract contract
In quasi-delict the
In breach of contract presumptive
committed through responsibility for the
A. NEGLIGENT TORTS the negligence of negligence of his
employee, the servants can be
employer cannot rebutted by proof of
Involve voluntary acts or omissions the exercise of due
which result in injury to others without erase his primary and
direct liability by care in their selection
intending to cause the same or because and supervision.
invoking exercise of
the actor fails to exercise due care in diligence of a good
performing such acts or omissions. father of a family in
NOTES:
Negligence is a conduct - the
Culpa Aquiliana Crime determination of the existence of
negligence is concerned with what the
Only involves private Affect the public defendant did or did not do
concern interest The state of mind of the actor is
not important; good faith or use of
The Civil Code by The Revised Penal sound judgment is immaterial. The
means of indem- Code punishes or existence of negligence in a given
nification merely corrects criminal act case is not determined by reference
repairs the damage to the personal judgment but by the
behavior of the actor in the situation
Includes all acts in Punished only if there before him. (Picart vs. Smith)
which any kind of is a penal law clearly
fault or negligence covering them
Negligence is a conduct that creates
intervenes an undue risk of harm to others.
The determination of negligence is a
Liability of the question of foresight on the part of the
Liability is direct and employer of the actor FORESEABILITY.
primary in quasi- actor-employee is
delict subsidiary in crimes Even if a particular injury was not
foreseeable, the risk is still foreseeable
QUASI-DELICT if possibility of injury is foreseeable.
member of the profession practicing the consultant which would hold the
specialty, taking into account the hospital liable solidarily liable for the
advances in the profession. injury suffered by a patient under Article
2180 of the Civil Code. (Ramos vs. CA GR
B. THE CAPTAIN OF THE SHIP DOCTRINE No 124354, April 11, 2002)
The head surgeon is made liable The contract between the
for everything that goes wrong within consultant and the patient is separate
the four corners of the operating room. and distinct the contract between the
It enunciates the liability of the hospital and the patient. The first has
surgeon not only for the wrongful acts of for its object the rendition of medical
those under his physical control but also services by the consultant to the patient,
those wherein he has extension of while the second concerns the provision
control. by the hospital of facilities and services
C. NOT WARRANTORS by its staff such as nurses and laboratory
Physicians are not warrantors of personnel necessary for the proper
cures or insurers against personal injuries treatment of the patient. (Ramos vs. CA
or death of the patient. GR No 124354, April 11, 2002)
D. PROOF 7. Lawyers
Expert testimony should be offered An attorney is not bound to exercise
to prove that the circumstances are extraordinary diligence but only a
constitutive of conduct falling below the reasonable degree of care and skill,
standard of care employed by other having reference to the business he
physicians in good standing when undertakes to do.
performing the same operation.
Medical malpractice can also be DEFENSES IN NEGLIGENCE CASES
established by relying on the doctrine of Kinds of defenses:
res ipsa loquitor; in which case the need A. Complete completely bars
of expert testimony is dispensed with recovery
because the injury itself provides the B. Partial mitigates liability
proof of negligence. (Ramos vs. CA, GR
No.124354, December 29, 1999) 1. PLAINTIFFS CONDUCT AND
Example: The doctrine was applied CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE
in a case of removal of the wrong part of a. Plaintiffs own negligence as the
the body when another part was proximate cause
intended. When the plaintiffs own negligence
was the immediate and proximate
Two pronged evidence: cause of his injury, he cannot
a. Evidence as to the recognized recover damages. (Article 2179
standards of the medical community Civil Code)
in the particular kind of case; and b. Contributory negligence
b. A showing that the physician Conduct on the part of the injured
departed from this standard in his party contributing as a legal cause
treatment. to the harm he has suffered which
Four elements in medical falls below the standard to which
negligence cases: duty, breach, injury he is required to conform for his
and proximate causation own protection. (Valenzuela vs. CA
253SCRA303)
E. LIABILITY OF HOSPITALS AND If the plaintiffs negligence was
CONSULTANTS only contributory, the immediate
There is no employer-employee and proximate cause of the injury
relationship between the hospital and a being the defendants lack of due
physician admitted in the said hospitals care, the plaintiff may recover
medical staff as an active or visiting damages but the courts shall
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
CHAIRPERSON: Romuald Padilla ASST.CHAIRPERSON: Vida Bocar, Joyce Vidad EDP: Alnaiza Hassiman, Dorothy
Gayon
SUBJECT HEADS: Christopher Rey Marasigan (Persons and Family Relations), Alejandro Casabar(Property), Ma.
Rhodora
Ferrer(Wills and Succession), Ian Dominic Pua(Obligations and Contracts), Sha Elijah Dumama(Sales and Lease),
John Stephen
Quiambao(PAT), Christopher Cabigao(Credit Transactions), Ligaya Alipao(Torts and Damages), Anthony
Purganan(LTD),
Ma. Ricasion Tugadi (Conflicts of Law)
San Beda College of Law
223
6. PRESCRIPTION
damage for which the defendant may be was wounded to the time of his death.
held liable and the extent of damage to (People vs. Rellin 77 Phil 1038)
be awarded to the plaintiff.
Cause-in-fact Tests: NOTES:
1. But-for test A cause is not an intervening cause if
2. Substantial Factor test it was already in operation at the time
3. NESS test the negligent act is committed.
Policy test: The directness approach Foreseeable intervening causes
is being applied in this jurisdiction. cannot be considered sufficient
intervening causes.
NOTE: The definition of proximate cause The intervention of unforeseen and
which includes the element of foresight unexpected cause is not sufficient to
is not consistent with the express relieve the wrongdoer from
provision of the Article 2202 of the New consequences of negligence if such
Civil Code; a person may be held liable negligence directly and proximately
whether the damage to the plaintiff may cooperates with the independent cause
be unforeseen. in the resulting injury.
Cause and Conditions
It is no longer practicable to CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE
distinguish between cause and A. Plaintiffs negligence is the cause
condition. Plaintiffs negligence is not
The defendant may be liable even if contributory if it is necessary and
only created conditions, if the conditions sufficient to produce the result.
resulted in harm to either person or EXAMPLES:
property.
1. Only the plaintiff was negligent.
EXAMPLES of Dangerous Conditions:
2. Defendants negligence is not a
1. Those that are inherently
part of the causal set which is a part of
dangerous
the causal chain.
2. Those where a person places a
3. Plaintiffs negligence was pre-
thing which is not dangerous in itself in a
emptive in nature.
dangerous position.
3. Those involving products and
B. Compound Causes
other things which are dangerous
because they are defective.
Plaintiffs negligence may have
duplicative effect, that it, it is sufficient
Efficient Intervening Cause to bring about the effect but his
One which destroys the causal negligence occurs simultaneously with
connection between the negligent act the defendant; the latters negligence is
and the injury and thereby negatives equally sufficient but not necessary to
liability. bring about the effect because damage
There is NO efficient intervening would still have resulted due to the
cause if the force created by the negligence of the plaintiff.
negligent act or omission have either: Plaintiffs negligence is not merely
1. Remained active itself, or contributory because it is a concurring
2. Created another force which proximate cause.
remained active until it directly No recovery can be had. (Aquino,
caused the result, or Torts and Damages)
3. Created a new active risk of
being acted upon by the active force C. Part of the same causal set
that caused the result. Neither plaintiffs negligence nor
EXAMPLE: The medical findings, show defendants negligence alone is
that the infection of the wound by sufficient to cause the injury; the effect
tetanus was an efficient intervening would result only if both are present
cause later or between the time Javier
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
CHAIRPERSON: Romuald Padilla ASST.CHAIRPERSON: Vida Bocar, Joyce Vidad EDP: Alnaiza Hassiman, Dorothy
Gayon
SUBJECT HEADS: Christopher Rey Marasigan (Persons and Family Relations), Alejandro Casabar(Property), Ma.
Rhodora
Ferrer(Wills and Succession), Ian Dominic Pua(Obligations and Contracts), Sha Elijah Dumama(Sales and Lease),
John Stephen
Quiambao(PAT), Christopher Cabigao(Credit Transactions), Ligaya Alipao(Torts and Damages), Anthony
Purganan(LTD),
Ma. Ricasion Tugadi (Conflicts of Law)
San Beda College of Law
228
Kinds:
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
CHAIRPERSON: Romuald Padilla ASST.CHAIRPERSON: Vida Bocar, Joyce Vidad EDP: Alnaiza Hassiman, Dorothy
Gayon
SUBJECT HEADS: Christopher Rey Marasigan (Persons and Family Relations), Alejandro Casabar(Property), Ma.
Rhodora
Ferrer(Wills and Succession), Ian Dominic Pua(Obligations and Contracts), Sha Elijah Dumama(Sales and Lease),
John Stephen
Quiambao(PAT), Christopher Cabigao(Credit Transactions), Ligaya Alipao(Torts and Damages), Anthony
Purganan(LTD),
Ma. Ricasion Tugadi (Conflicts of Law)
San Beda College of Law
230
It may not even matter that the purchase the portion encroached
plaintiff and the defendant are of the upon. (Aquino, Torts and Damages)
same gender.
A builder in good faith who
acted negligently may be held liable
under Art. 2176 NCC.
3) Disconnection of electricity
e. Trespass and Deprivation of or gas service
Property
The right to
2 KINDS: disconnect and deprive the
customer, who unreasonably fails to
1) Trespass to and/or pay his bills, of electricity should be
deprivation of real property exercised in accordance with the law
and rules.
Liability for damages under
the RPC and Article 451 of the Civil Example: If a
Code requires intent or bad faith. company disconnects the electricity
service without prior notice as
Article 448 of the Civil Code required by the rules, the company
in relation to Article 456 does not commits a tort under Article 21 NCC.
permit action for damages where the
builder, planter, or sower acted in
good faith. The landowner is limited
to the options given to him under f. Abortion and Wrongful Death
article 448, that is to appropriate
whatever is built or planted or to Damages may be recovered by both
compel the builder or planter to
spouses if:
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
CHAIRPERSON: Romuald Padilla ASST.CHAIRPERSON: Vida Bocar, Joyce Vidad EDP: Alnaiza Hassiman, Dorothy
Gayon
SUBJECT HEADS: Christopher Rey Marasigan (Persons and Family Relations), Alejandro Casabar(Property), Ma.
Rhodora
Ferrer(Wills and Succession), Ian Dominic Pua(Obligations and Contracts), Sha Elijah Dumama(Sales and Lease),
John Stephen
Quiambao(PAT), Christopher Cabigao(Credit Transactions), Ligaya Alipao(Torts and Damages), Anthony
Purganan(LTD),
Ma. Ricasion Tugadi (Conflicts of Law)
San Beda College of Law
231
i. Public Humiliation
GENERAL RULE: Right to privacy is
Damages may be awarded in cases purely personal in nature, hence:
where the plaintiff suffered humiliation 1) It can be invoked only by the
through the positive acts of the person whose privacy is claimed to have
defendant directed against the plaintiff. been violated.
2) It can be subject to waiver of the
person whose privacy is sought to be
Example: The defendant was held intruded into.
liable for damages under Art. 21 for 3) The right ceases upon the death of
slapping the plaintiff in public. (Patricio the person.
vs. Hon. Oscar Leviste, [1989]) EXCEPTION: A privilege may be given
to the surviving relatives of a deceased
person to protect his memory but the
NOTES: privilege exist for the benefit of the
living, to protect their feelings and to
Under Article 21, damages are prevent the violation of their own rights
recoverable even though no positive law in the character and memory of the
was violated. deceased.
An action can only prosper when Standard to be
damage, material or otherwise, was applied in determining if there was a
suffered by the plaintiff. An action violation of the right is that of a person
based on Articles 19-21 will be dismissed with ordinary sensibilities. It is relative
if the plaintiff merely seeks to the customs of time and place and is
recognition. determined by the norm of an ordinary
Under Articles 19 and 21, the person.
defendant may likewise be guilty of a
tort even if he acted in good faith. Four Types of Invasion of Privacy
(Grand Union Supermarket vs. Espino) a. Intrusio
n upon plaintiffs seclusion or solitude
TORTS AGAINST HUMAN DIGNITY or into his private affairs
TYPES: It is not limited to cases where
1. Violation of the right of privacy the defendant physically trespassed into
Reasonableness of a persons anothers property. It includes cases
expectation of privacy depends on a when the defendant invades ones
two-part test: privacy by looking from outside
a) Whether by his conduct, the (Example: peeping-tom).
individual has exhibited an GENERAL RULE: There is no invasion of
expectation of privacy. right to privacy when a journalist records
b) Whether this expectation is one photographs or writes about something
that the society recognizes as that occurs in public places.
reasonable. EXCEPTION: When the acts of the
journalist should be to such extent that
NOTES: it constitutes harassment or overzealous
GENERAL RULE: Right to privacy can shadowing.
be invoked only by natural persons; The freedom of the press has never
Juridical persons cannot invoke such been construed to accord newsmen
right because the entire basis of right to immunity from tort or crimes committed
privacy is an injury to the feelings and during the course of the newsgathering.
sensibilities of a party, a corporation There is no intrusion when an
would have no such ground. employer investigates an employee or
EXCEPTION: Right against unreasonable when the school investigates its student.
searches and seizure can be invoked by a RA 4200 makes it illegal for any
juridical entity. person not authorized by all the parties
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
CHAIRPERSON: Romuald Padilla ASST.CHAIRPERSON: Vida Bocar, Joyce Vidad EDP: Alnaiza Hassiman, Dorothy
Gayon
SUBJECT HEADS: Christopher Rey Marasigan (Persons and Family Relations), Alejandro Casabar(Property), Ma.
Rhodora
Ferrer(Wills and Succession), Ian Dominic Pua(Obligations and Contracts), Sha Elijah Dumama(Sales and Lease),
John Stephen
Quiambao(PAT), Christopher Cabigao(Credit Transactions), Ligaya Alipao(Torts and Damages), Anthony
Purganan(LTD),
Ma. Ricasion Tugadi (Conflicts of Law)
San Beda College of Law
233
A person is not only liable for that the alternative qualification of the
torts committed by himself, but also for liability of the father and the mother has
torts committed by others with whom he been removed.
has a certain relation or for whom he is
responsible. (Article 2180 Civil Code)
Exercise of diligence of a good NOTES:
father of a family to prevent damage is a
defense.
The basis of liability for the acts
or omissions of their minor
Doctrine of Respondeat Superior
children is the parental authority
the liability is strictly imputed, the
that they exercise over them,
employer is liable not because of his act
except for children 18 to 21.
or omission but because of the act or
omission of the employee; employer The same foreseability test of
cannot escape liability by claiming that negligence should apply to
he exercised due diligence in the parents when they are sought to
selection or supervision of the employee. be held liable under Art. 2180,
GENERAL RULE: Vicarious liability in NCC
the Philippines is not governed by the
doctrine of respondeat superior; The liability is not limited to
employers or parents are made liable not parents, the same is also
only because of the negligent or imposed on those exercising
wrongful act of the person for whom substitute and special parental
they are responsible but also because of authority, i.e., guardian.
their own negligence:
1) Liability is imposed on the The liability is present only both
employer because he failed to under Art 2180 of the NCC and
exercise due diligence in the Art 221 of the Family Code if the
selection or supervision of the child is living in his parents
employee company.
2) Parents are made liable because
they failed to exercise due
diligence Parental authority is not the sole
EXCEPTION: Doctrine of basis of liability. A teacher in
respondeat superior is applicable in: charge is still liable for the acts
1) liability of employers under of their students even if the
Article 103 of the RPC minor student reaches the age of
2) liability of a partnership for the majority.
tort committed by a partner
The parents or guardians can still
Persons Vicariously Liable: (Article be held liable even if the minor
2180 of the Civil Code) is already emancipated provided
1. The Father, or in case of death or that he is below 21 years of age.
incapacity, mother
Parents and other persons
For damage caused by: exercising parental authority can
escape liability by proving that
a) minor children they observed all the diligence
of a good father of a family to
b) living in their company prevent damages. (Art. 2180)
4. Employers
For damages cause by:
6. Schools, Teachers and
a) employees and household Administrators
helpers For damage caused by:
a) pupils and students or
b) acting within the scope of their apprentices
assigned tasks b) in their custody
statutory basis:
c) even if the employer is not if student is minor Art. 219, FC
engaged in any business or if student is no longer a minor
industry Art. 2180, Civil Code
NOTES:
NOTES:
Applies also to teachers of
academic institutions.
Liability of the employer can be
established by proving the existence of Liability attaches to the teacher-
an employer-employee relationship with in-charge.
the actor and the latter caused the
injury while performing his assigned task The school itself is now solidarily
or functions. liable with the teacher-in-
The vicarious liability attaches only charge.
when the tortuous conduct of the
employees relates to or is in the course The liability extends to acts
of his employment. committed even outside the
school so long as it is an official
activity of the school.
2. Partnership
Art. 2180 makes teachers and
heads liable for acts of students Partnership or every partner is liable
and apprentices whether the for torts committed by one of the
latter are minors or not. partners acting within the scope of the
firm business, though they do not
participate in, ratify, or have knowledge
of such torts.
GENERAL RULE: The teacher-in-charge
is liable for the acts of his students. The
Partners are liable as joint tort-
school and administrators are not liable. feasors.
EXCEPTION: It is only the head of the Vicarious liability is similar to the
school, not the teacher who is held liable common law rule on respondeat
where the injury is caused in a school of superior.
arts and trade. Liability is entirely imputed and the
The liability of the teacher partnership cannot obviously invoke
subsists whether the school is diligence in the selection and supervision
academic or non- academic. of the partner.
Liability is imposed only if the
pupil is already in the custody of 3. Spouses
the teacher or head. The student a. absolute community of property
is in the custody of the school The absolute community
authorities as longs as he is property shall be for liabilities incurred
under the control and influence by either spouses by reason of crime or
of the school and within its quasi-delict in case of absence or
premises whether the semester insufficiency of the exclusive property of
had not yet begun or has already the debtor-spouse. (Article 94 Family
ended. Code)
The Payments shall be considered
victim of negligence is likewise advances to be deducted from the share
required to exercise due care in of the debtor spouse upon liquidation of
avoiding injury to himself. the community.
b. conjugal partnership of gains
Other Persons Vicariously Liable:
1. Innkeepers and Hotelkeepers GENERAL RULE: Pecuniary indemni-ties
They are civilly liable for crimes imposed upon the husband or wife are
committed in their establishments in not chargeable against the conjugal
cases of violations of statutes by them, partnership but against the separate
in default of persons criminally liable. properties of the wrongdoer.
(Article 102 Revised Penal Code) EXCEPTION: Conjugal partnership
should be made liable:
They are subsidiarily liable for the 1) When the profits have inured to the
restitution of goods taken by robbery or
benefit of the partnership, or
theft within their houses from guests
2) If one of the spouses committed the
lodging therein, or for payment of the
tort while performing a business or if the
value thereof, provided that:
act was supposed to benefit the it may even include the lessee thereof.
partnership. (Dingcong vs. Kanaan, 72 Phil 14)
c. regime of separation of property
Each spouse is responsible for
his/her separate obligation. 3. Liability of employers
It does not preclude an action based b. knowledge on the part of the third
on negligence (quasi-delict) for the same person of the existence of the contract
act of using noxious or harmful c. interference of the third person
substances. without legal justification.
The existence of a contract is
necessary and the breach must occur
because of the alleged act of
Article 97 and 99 of the Consumer interference; No action can be
Act imposes liability on defective maintained if the contract is void.
products and services upon Malice is not essential.
manufacturers independent of fault. Elements of privilege to interfere
Knowledge of the manufacturer is 1)The defendants purpose is a
not important; the focus is on the justifiable one, and
condition of the product and not on the 2)The actors employ no means of
conduct of the manufacturer or seller. fraud or deception which are
regarded as unfair.
DEFENSES: Extent of Liability:
A. The manufacturer, builder, A. Rule in Daywalt vs. La Corporation
producer, or importer shall not be liable 39PHIL587
when it evidences: Defendant
1) That it did not place the cannot be held liable for more than
product on the market the amount for which the
2) That although it did contracting party who was induced
place the product on the market to break the contract can be held
such product had no defect liable.
3) That the consumer of B. Rule under Article 2201 and 2202
third party is solely at fault. (Article Civil Code
97 Consumer Act) 1) If
B. The supplier of the services shall not in bad faith: defendant is liable for
be held liable when it is proven: all natural and probable
1) That there is no defect in the consequences of his act or omission,
service rendered whether the same is forseen or
2) That the consumer of third party unforeseen.
is solely at fault. (Article 99 Consumer 2) If
Act) in good faith: defandant is liable
only for consequences that can be
Requisites: The plaintiff should foreseen.
allege and prove that:
1) The product was defective; 2. Interference with prospective
2) The product was manufactured advantage
by the defendant; It is a tort committed when there is
3) The defective product was the no contract yet and the defendant is
cause of his injury. only being sued for inducing another not
4 KINDS OF DEFECTIVE PRODUCTS to enter into a contract.
1. manufacturing defect
2. design defect 3. Unfair competition.
3. presentation defect Unfair Competition in agricultural,
4. absence of appropriate warning commercial, or industrial enterprises, or
in labor, through the use of force,
BUSINESS TORTS intimidation , deceit, machination or any
1. Interference of contracts unjust or oppressive or highhanded
Elements: method shall give rise to a right of action
a. existence of a valid contract
CIVIL LAW COMMITTEE
CHAIRPERSON: Romuald Padilla ASST.CHAIRPERSON: Vida Bocar, Joyce Vidad EDP: Alnaiza Hassiman, Dorothy
Gayon
SUBJECT HEADS: Christopher Rey Marasigan (Persons and Family Relations), Alejandro Casabar(Property), Ma.
Rhodora
Ferrer(Wills and Succession), Ian Dominic Pua(Obligations and Contracts), Sha Elijah Dumama(Sales and Lease),
John Stephen
Quiambao(PAT), Christopher Cabigao(Credit Transactions), Ligaya Alipao(Torts and Damages), Anthony
Purganan(LTD),
Ma. Ricasion Tugadi (Conflicts of Law)
San Beda College of Law
243
Doctrine of
Contributory
Avoidable
Negligence
Consequences
Acts of the Plaintiffs act or C. NOMINAL DAMAGES
plaintiff occur omission occurs Nominal damages are adjudicated in
after the act or before or at the order that a right of the plaintiff,
omission of the time of the act or which has been violated or invaded
defendant omission of the by the defendant, may be vindicated
defendant or recognized, and not for the
purpose of indemnifying the plaintiff
for any loss suffered by him.
B. MORAL DAMAGES (Article2221 Civil Code)
Includes physical suffering, mental Small sums fixed by the court
anguish, fright, serious anxiety, without regard to the extent of the
besmirched reputation, wounded harm done to the injured party.
feelings, moral shock, social Law presumes damage although
humiliation, and similar injury. actual or compensatory damages are
No proof of pecuniary loss is not proven.
necessary. They are damages in name only and
GENERAL RULE: The plaintiff must are allowed simply in recognition of
allege and prove: a technical injury based on a
1. The factual basis for moral violation of a legal right.
damages; and
E. LIQUIDATED DAMAGES
Those agreed upon by the parties in
a contract, to be paid in case of
breach thereof.
F. EXEMPLARY OR CORRECTIVE
DAMAGES