You are on page 1of 14


SAGRADA ORDEN DE PREDICADORES DEL SANTISMO ROSARIO DE FILIPINAS under no obligation whatsoever to pay rentals for the use and occupation of the
GR No L-3756 June 30, 1952 CFI- Plaintiff has always been the owner as the sale of Japanese purchaser was null
Labrador, J and void. The Alien Property Administration (APA) never acquired any right to the
property, but that it held the same In TRUST until the determination as to WON the
FACTS: owner is an enemy citizen. NCP cannot claim any better rights than its predecessor,
 This is an action to recover the possession of a piece of real property (land and APA and it has used the property and sublease the portion, it must pay reasonable
warehouses) in Pandacan, Manila as well as the rentals for its occupation and rentals for its occupation.
 The land was registered to SAGRADA before the war. ISSUE:
 January 4, 1943- the land was acquired by TAIWAN TEKKOSHO, a Japanese WON NCC is liable for rentals or compensation for the use and occupation of
corporation for P140,000 and the title was issued to its name. property.
 CTC No. 64330, Register of Deeds, Manila
 After liberation (April 4, 1946) the Alien Property Custodian of USA (APC USA) HELD:
took possession, control and custody under Sec 12 of the TRADING WITH NCC is not liable. If NCP is liable at all, its obligations must arise from any of the four
ENEMY ACT, for the reason that it belonged to an enemy national. sources of obligations (Law, Contract or quasi-contract, Crime or Negligence ART
 During 1946, the property was occupied by COPRA EXPORT MANAGEMENT 1089 SPANISH CODE). NCC is not guilty of any offense at all because it entered the
COMPANY under a custodian agreement with US Alien Property Custodian premises and occupied it with the permission of the entity which had the legal
 After it was vacated by Copra, it was occupied by NATIONAL COCONUT control and administration thereof, the Alien Property Administration. Neither was
CORPORATION (NCC). there any negligence on its part. There was no privity (of contract or obligation)
 PH Gov made representations with the Office Alien Property Custodian for the between APC and TT which had secured the possession of property from Sagrada by
use of property by the Government. the use if duress such that the AOC or its permittee (NCC) may be held responsible
 March 31, 1947, NCC was authorized to repair the warehouse and actually for the supposed illegality of the occupation of the property by TT.
spent P26,898.
 In 1948, NCC leased 1/3 of the warehouse to DIOSCORO SARILE at P500/mo. There was no express agreement between the Alien Property Custodian and NCC
which was later raised to P1,000 for the latter to pay the rentals on the property. The existence of an implied
 SAGRADA made claim to APC USA – DENIED. agreement to that effect is contrary to the circumstances. When Copra Export
 SAGRADA brought an action with the CFI Manila to annul the sale of property occupied the premises, it did not pay rentals for its custody.
to Taiwan Tekkosho and recover its possession
 Republic of the Philippines was allowed to intervene but the case did not come The Trading with the Enemy Act was purely a measure of conversation, hence, it is
for trial because the parties presented a joint petition in which it was claimed unlikely that rentals were demanded for the use of the property . When NCC
by plaintiff that the sale in favor of TT was null and void because it was succeeded Copra Export in its custody, it must have been also free from payment of
executed under threats, duress and intimidation and it was agreed that the title rentals especially if it was a government corporation.
in the name of TT be cancelled and the original title be issued. NCC has until
February 28, 1949 to recover its equipment and that Philippine Alien Property We have also tried in vain to find a law or provision thereof, or any principle in
Administration be free from responsibility for any act of NCP. quasi contracts or equity, upon which the claim can be supported. On the contrary,
CFI: Released NCP and RP from liability but reversing to Sagrada the right to recover as NCC entered into possession without any expectation of liability for such use and
from NCP. occupation it is only fair and just that it may not be held liable therefore.
1 1946, the day it occupied the premises to the day it vacated. Even if in the judgment annulling the sale, reservation is made of a new action for
NCP: does not contend the P3,000/mo. From Feb 28, 1949 but resists the claim such rentals, the reservation may not be considered as vesting a new right; if no
prior to this date since it interposes that it occupied the property in good faith, right to claim for rentals existed at the time of the reservation, no rights can arise or
accrue from such reservation alone.
2. SERGIO F. NAGUIAT, doing business under the name and style SERGIO F. allegation that CFTI was forced to close business due to financial loss since at the
NAGUIAT ENT., INC. & CLARK FIELD TAXI INC., vs NLRD (3rd Div), NATIONAL time it ceased operation, CFTI was profitably earning and cessation of business was
ORGANIZATION OF WORKINGMEN and its members, LEONARDO T. GALANG due to the untimely closure of Clark Air Base.
GR No. 116123 March 13, 1997  CFTI appealed to NLRC.
Panganiban, J. NLRC: modified resolution and granted separation pay.
Motion for Reconsideration denied. Filed with SC with prayer for issuance of TRO.
 CFTI held a concessionaire’s contract with Army Air Force Exchage Services ISSUE:
(AAFES) for the operation of taxi services within the Clark Air Base. WON NLRC committed GADALJ in issuing appealed resolution.
 Sergio F. Naguiat - CFTI’s President // Antolin Naguiat-Vice President
 CFTI and Naguiat Enterprises are family-owned corporation. HELD:
 Individual respondents were previously CFTI tasxicab drivers. During their Naguiat Exnterprises is not liable because the employees were employed by CFTI.
employment, they were required to pay a daily boundary fee of US$26.50 for CFTI was the actual and direct employer of individual respondents and that Naguiat
those working from 1AM-12NN // US$27 for 12NN-12MN. All incidental Enterprises was neither their indirect employer nor labor-only contractor. It was not
expenses for the maintenance of the vehicles they were driving were involved in the taxi business.
accounted against them, including gasoline expenses.
 The drivers worked at least 3-4x a week, depending on the availability of the CFTI failed to comply with this law-imposed duty or obligation. Consequently, its
taxicabs. They earned not less than US$15 daily. In excess of that amount, they stockholder who was actively engaged in the management or operation of the
were required to make cash deposits to the company, which they could later business should be held personally liable.
withdraw every 15 days.
 The AAFES was dissolved and the services of taxi drivers were terminated on Our jurisprudence is wanting as to the definite scope of “corporate tort”.
Nov 26, 1991.
 The AAFES Taxi Drivers Association, through its president Eduardo Castillo and Section 100, par. 5 of the Corporation Code, states:
CFTI held negotiations as regards the separation benefits that should be “(5) To the extent that the stockholders are actively engage(d) in the management
awarded in favor of the drivers. or operation of business and affairs of a close corporation, the stockholders shall be
 They agreed that the drivers will be given P500 for every year of service as held to strict fiduciary duties to each other and among themselves. Said
severance pay. Most accepted but the respondents refused. stockholders shall be personally liable for corporate torts unless the corporation has
 The drivers, through National Organization of Workingmen (NOWM) which obtained reasonably adequate liability insurance.”
they subsequently joined, filed a complaint against Sergio Nuguiat Mark
Hooper of AAFES and Eduardo Castillo for payment of separation pay due to Essentially, “tort” consists in the violation of a right given or the omission of a duty
termination/phase-out. imposed by law. Simply stated, tort is a breach of a legal duty. Article 283 of the
 In their complaint, private resp alleged that they were regular employees of Labor Code mandates the employer to grant separation pay to employees in case of
Naguiat Enterprises. They claimed to have been assigned to Naguiat Entrprs closure or cessation of operations of establishment or undertaking not due to
after having been hired by CFTI. They averred that they were entitled to serious business losses or financial reverses, which is the condition obtaining at bar.
separation pay based on their latest daily earnings of US$15 for working 16
days a month. Sergio Naguiat and CFTI are solidarily liable. Antolin Naguiat not personally liable
 NAGUIAT: The cessation of business of CFTI was due to great financial losses because there was no evidence on the extent of his participation in the
and lost business opportunity resulting from the phase out of Clark Air Base management of business was proferred.
brought about by Mt. Pinatubo eruption and expiration of US-RP military bases
2 agreement.
LABOR ARBITER: Individual respondents are regular workers of CFTI, ordered the
latter to pay them P1,200 for every year of service for “humanitarian
consideration”, setting aside the earlier agreement of P500. It rejected the
3. GASHEM SHOOKAT BAKSH vs. CA and MARILOU T. GONZALES character. His common law wife is now his legal wide after the solemnization in
GR No 97336 February 19, 1993 Iranian embassy.
Davide Jr., J.
FACTS: The breach of a promise to marry per se is not an actionably wrong (De Jesus vs.
 October 27, 1987, Marilou T. Gonzales, without the assistance of counsel, filed Syquia).
with RTC of Pangasinan a complaint for damages against Gashem Shookat
Baksh for the alleged violation of their agreement to get married. Article 21 is designed to expand the concept of torts or quasi-delict in this
 She alleges that she is 22, a pretty lass of good moral character and that Baksh jurisdiction by granting adequate legal remedy for the untold number of moral
is an Iranian citizen residing at Lozano Apartments, Guilig, Dagupan City and is wrongs which is imposable for human foresight to specifically enumerate and
an exchange student taking medical course at Lyceum Northwestern College in punish in the statue books.
Dagupan City.
 Before August 20, 1987, Baksh courted and proposed to marry her. She Where a man’s promise to marry is in fact the proximate cause of the acceptance of
accepted his love on the condition that they would get married on October of his love by a woman and his representation to fulfill that promise thereafter
that year. According to Gonzales, Baksh forced her to live with him; she was a becomes the proximate cause of the giving of herself unto him in a sexual congress,
virgin before she began living with him and a week before the filing of the proof that he had, in reality, no intention of marrying her and that the promise was
complaint, his attitude towards her started to change and threatened to kill only a subtle scheme or deceptive device to entice or inveigle her to accept him and
her. to obtain her consent to the sexual act, could justify the award of damages
 A day before the filing of the complaint, Baksh repudiated their agreement to pursuant to Article 21 not because of such promise to marry but because of the
marry and asked her not to live with her. She then prayed for payment of fraud and deceit behind it and the willful injury to her honor and reputation which
damages not less than P45,000, reimbursement of actual expenses to P600, followed thereafter. It is essential, however, that such injury should have been
attorney’s fees and costs and granting of such other relief. committed in a manner contrary to morals, good customs or public policy.
 In his Answer with Counterclaim, Baksh admitted only the personal
circumstances of parties as averred in the complaint but denied the rest of The pari delicto rule does not apply in this case because Gonzales may not have
allegation. He claimed he never proposed marriage to or agreed to be married been impelled by the purest of intentons, she eventually submitted to Baksh in
with Gonzales and he did not maltreat her and only told her to stop coming to sexual congress not out of lust, but because of moral seduction.
his place because he discovered that she had deceived him by stealing his
money and passport.
RTC: Applied Article 21 of the Civil Code rendered a decision in favor of Gonzales.
Baksh abused Philippines hospitality and have offended our sense of morality, good
customs, culture and traditions.
Trial court gave full credence to testimony of Gonzales that Baksh would tie her up
and give her sleeping pills. She became pregnant but Baksh gave her medicine to
abort the fetus and told her that she was already married to a girl in Bacolod.
 Baksh appealed with CA
CA: Affirmed RTC ruling.

WON Article 21 of the Civil Code applies to the case at bar.
BAKSH: He is a foreigner and so, he is not conversant with Filipino customs,
traditions and upbringing. As an Iranian Moslem, he is allowed up to 4 wives, thus
rebutting the position of the lower court that he does not possess good moral
4. BACOLOD-MURCIA MILLING CO., INC. vs. FIRST FARMERS MILLING CO., INC., Although it is averred that the defendant’s acts were done in bad faith, the
ETC; RAMON NOLAN, PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK (PNB) and NATIONAL Complaint does not contain any averment of facts showing that the acts were done
INVESTMENT AND DEVT CORP. (NIDC) in the manner alleged. Such a bare statement neither establishes any right or cause
GR No. L-29041 March 24, 1981 of action on the part of Bacolod-Murcia. It is a mere conclusion of law not sustained
Melencio-Herrera, J. by declarations of facts, much less admitted by PNB and NIDC. It does not,
therefore, aid in any wise the complaint in setting forth a cause of action.
 This is an appeal taken by Bacolod-Murcia Milling Co. Inc. from the Order Bad faith is never presumed. To support a judgment for damages, facts which justify
issued by CFI of Rizal dismissing, after a preliminary hearing, on the ground of the inference of a lack or absence of good faith must be alleged and proven.
lack of cause of action, the Amended and Supplemental Complaint against the
defendants PNB and NIDC. The doing of an act which is in itself, is perfectly lawful will not render one liable as
 On March 18, 1966, Bacolod-Murcia had commence an action for Injuction and for a tort, simply because the unintended effect of such act is to enable or assist
Prohibition with Damages against First Farmers Milling Co., Inc. (FFMC), various another person to do or accomplish a wrong, assuming that there was a wrong.
named planters and Ramon Nolan.
 It was alleged that in 1964, FFFMC operated a sugar central known as First
Farmers Sugar Central. The defs transferred their quota A allotments to FFMC
which are illegal.
 Bacolod-Murcia filed a Motion to admit Amended and Supplemental Complaint
and included PNB and NIDC as new defendants since they became creditors of
FFMC central prior to the institution of the instance case.
 It was alleged that NIDC and PNB have extended loans to FFMC in the amount
of P12,210,000 on June 18, 1965 and P4,000,000 on Dec 14, 1966 to assist in
the illegal creation and operation of said mill, hence a joint tortfeasor in the
trespass of Bacolod-Murcia’s right.
PNB and NIDC: Have no participation either directly or indirectly on the alleged
illegal transfers and therefore could not be held liable for any damages. The loans
were extended in the usual and ordinary course of business.
RTC: Dismissed Amended and Supplemental Complaint for lack of cause of action.

WON the allegations of the Amended and Supplemental Complaint constituted a
sufficient cause of action.

Ultimate facts are the important and substantial facts which either directly form
and basis of plaintiff’s primary right and duty or directly make up the wrongful acts
of omissions by the defendant.

When the ground for dismissal is that the Complaint states no cause of action, the
4 rule is that its insufficiency can only be determined by considering the facts alleged
in the Complaint and no other.


5. PORFIRIO P. CINCO vs HON. MATEO CANONOY (CFI Mandaue City), HON. the “harm” done and “reparation” for the harm down. And with respect to
LORENZO B. BARRIA (City Judge), ROMEO HILOT, VALERIANA PEPITO and “harm” it is plain that it includes both injuries to person and property since
CARLOS PEPITO “harm” is not limited to personal but also to property injuries.
GR No. L-33171 May 31, 1979
Melencio-Herrera, J. In fact, examples of quasi-delict in the law itself include tdamage to property.
An instance is Article 2191 (2) of the Civil Code which holds proprietors
FACTS: responsible for damages caused by excessive smoke which may be harmful “to
 On February 25, 1970, Porfirio Cinco filed a complaint in City Court of Mandaue persons or property.”
City, Cebu for the recovery of damages on account of a vehicular accident
involving his automobile and a jeepney driven by Romeo Hilot and operated by The jural concept of quasi-delict is that of an independent source of obligation
Valeriana Pepito and Carlos Pepito. “not arising from the act or omission complained of as a felony.” It bears
 A criminal case was filed again Romeo Hilot, the driver, arising from the same emphasizing that Cinco’s cause of action is based on quasi-delict.
 AT the pre-trial in the civil case, counsel for private resps moved to suspend the Judge gravely abused his discretion in upholding the Decision of City Court of
civil action pending the final determination of the criminal suit, invoking Rule Mandaue, suspending the civil action based on a quasi-delict until after the
111, Sec. 3(b) of the Rules of Court. criminal case finally terminated.
CITY COURT OF MANDAUE: Ordered the suspension of the civil case.
 Cinco’s Motion for Reconsideration was denied, he elevated the matter on
certiorari to CFI of Cebu alleging that the city judge had acted with GAD in
suspending the civil action for being contrary to law and jurisprudence.
CFI: Nov 5, 1970, Judge Canonoy dismissed the Petition on the ground that:
(i) there was no GAD on the part of the City Court in suspending the civil action
inasmuch as damage to property is not one of the instances when an independent
civil action is proper;
(ii) Cinco has another plain, speedy and adequate remedy under the law, which is to
submit his claim for damages in the criminal case;
(iii) the resolution of the court is interlocutory and therefore certiorari is improper;
(iv) Petition is defective because Cinco actually desires Mandamus.
 Motion for Reconsideration was denied. Hence, Petition for Review.

WON there can be an independent civil action for damage to property during
the pendency of the criminal action.

Liability being predicated on quasi-delict the civil case may proceed as a
separate and distinct from the civil liability specifically provided for in Article
2177 of the Civil Code.

5 The concept of quasi-delict, as enunciated in Article 2176, is so broad that it

includes not only injuries to persons but also damage to property. It makes no
distinction between “damage to persons” on the one hand and “damage to
property” on the other. Indeed, the word “damage” is used in two concepts:
6. PEDRO ELCANO and PATRICIA ELCANO, in their capacity as Ascendants of aquiliana or causi-delito. And so, because Justice Bocobo was Chairman of the Code
Agapito Elcano, deceased vs. REGINALD HILL, minor and MARVIN HILL, as Commission that drafted the original text of the new Civil Code, it is to be noted
father and Natural Guardian of said minor that the said Code, which was enacted after the Garcia doctrine, no longer uses the
GR No. L-24803 May 26, 1977 term, “not punishable by law,” thereby making it clear that the concept of culpa
Barredo, J. aquiliana includes acts which are criminal in character or in violation of the penal
law, whether voluntary or negligent.
 Appeal from the order of CFI of Quezon City dismissing, upon motion to dismiss A separate civil action lies against the offender in a criminal act whether or not he is
of defendants, the complaint of plaintiffs for recovery of damages from criminally prosecuted and found guilty or acquitted, provided that the victim do not
Reginald Hill, a minor, married at the time of the occurrence and his father, recover damages on both scores.
Marvin Hill, with whome he was living and getting substinence for the killing by
Reginald of the son of spouses Elcano, named AGAPITO ELCANO, of which, The acquittal of Reginald Hill in the criminal case has not extinguished his liability
when criminally prosecuted, the said accused was acquitted on the ground that for quasi-delict, hence that acquittal is not a bar to the instant action against him.
his act was not criminal because of “lack of intent to kill, coupled with mistake”
 Motion to Dismiss was based on the ff grounds: First, the RPC in article 365 punishes not only reckless but also simple negligence. If
i. The present action is not only against but a violation of sec 1, Rule we were to hold that articles 1902 to 1910 of the Civil Code refer only to fault or
107, which is now Rule III of Revised Rules of Court; negligence not punished by law, accordingly to the literal import of art 1903, the
ii. The action is barred by a prior judgment which is now final and or in legal institution would have very little scope and application in actual life.
iii. The complaint had no cause of action against Marvin Hill because he Secondary, to find the accused guilty in a criminal case, proof of guilt beyond
was relieved as guardian of the other defendant through reasonable doubt is required, while in civil case, preponderance of evidence is
emancipation by marriage. sufficient to make the defendant pay in damages.
CFI: First denied.
Upon Motion for Reconsideration, ordered dismissal of the case. Atty. Hill is not free from responsibility. Pursuant to Article 299, emancipation by
 Spouses Elcano filed petition for review with SC marriage of the minor is not really full or absolute. He can sue and be sued in court
only with the assistance of his father, mother or guardian.
1. WON the present civil action for damages barred by the acquittal of Under Article 2180, “The obligation imposed by article 2176 is demandable not only
Reginald in the criminal case wherein the action for civil liability was not for one’s own acts or omissions but also for those of persons for whom one is
reversed? responsible. The father, and in case of death or incapacity, the mother, are
2. WON Article 2180 of NCC be applied against Atty. Hill, notwithstanding the responsible.
undisputed fact that at the time of the occurrence complained of,
Reginald, through a minor, living with and getting subsistence from his Reginald, although married, was living with his father and getting subsistence from
father, was legally married him at the time of the occurrence in question. Factually, therefore, Reginald was
HELD: still subservient to and dependent on his father, a situation which is not unusual.
A reading of the foregoing excerpts from the opinion in Garcia (penned by Justice
Bocobo)--- that the concurrence of the Penal Code and the Civil Code therein The reason behind join and solidary liability of presuncion with their offending child
referred to contemplate only acts of negligence and not intentional voluntary under Art 2180 is that is the obligation of the parent to supervise their minor
acts—deeper reflection would reveal that the thrust of the pronouncements children in order to prevent them from causing damage to third persons.
6 therein is not so limited, but that in fact actually ecxtends to fault or culpa.

“(W)e will not use the literal meaning of the law to smother and render almost
lifeless a principle of such ancient origin and such full-grown development as culpa
7. SAFEGUARD SECURITY AGENCY and ADMER PAJARILLO vs. LAURO TANGCO, An act or omission causing damage to another may give rise to two separate civil
VAL TANGCO, VERN LARRY TANGCO, VAN LAURO TANGCO et. al liabilities on the part of the offender:
GR No. 165732 December 14, 2006 (1) civil liability ex delicto, under Article 100 of the Revised Penal Code; and
Callejo, Sr., J and Chico-Nazario, J (2) independent civil liabilities, such as those:
(a) not arising from an act or omission complained of as a felony, e.g., culpa
FACTS: contractual or obligations arising from law under Article 31 of the Civil Code,
 On Nov 3, 1997 at about 2:50pm, Evangeline Tangco went to Ecology Bank, intentional torts under Articles 32 and 34, and culpa aquiliana under Article 2176 of
Katipunan Branch to renew her time deposit per advice of the bank cashier. the Civil Code; or
 Evangeline, a duly licensed firearm holder approached security guard Pajarillo (b) where the injured party is granted a right to file an action independent and
and pulled out her firearm from her bad to deposit the same for safekeeping. distinct from the criminal action under Article 33 of the Civil Code.
 Suddenly, Pajarillo shot Evangeline with his service shotgun hitting her in the Either of these liabilities may be enforced against the offender subject to the caveat
abdomen instantly causing her death. under Article 2177 of the Civil Code that the offended party cannot recover
 Lauro Tangco, Evangeline’s husband, together with 6 minor children, filed with damages twice for the same act or omission or under both causes.
RTC of Quezon City a criminal case of Homicide against Pajarillo.
 Tangcos reserved their right to file a separate civil action. The scope of Article 2176 is not limited to acts or omissions resulting from
RTC: Convicted Pajarillo of Homicide negligence. Well-entrenched is the doctrine that Article 2176 covers not only acts
CA: Affirmed RTC decision. committed with negligence, but also acts which are voluntary and intentional.
 On January 14, 1998, Tangcos filed with RTC of Marikina a complaint for
damages against Pajarillo for negligently shooting Evangeline and against Consequently, a separate civil action lies against the offender in a criminal act,
Safeguard for failing to observe the diligence of a good father of a family to whether or not he is criminally prosecuted and found guilty or acquitted, provided
prevent the damage committed by its security guard. that the offended party is not allowed, if he is actually charged also criminally, to
 Petitioners denied the material allegations and alleged Safeguard exercised recover damages on both scores, and would be entitled in such eventuality only to
diligence of a good father of a family in the selection and supervision of the bigger award of the two, assuming the awards made in the two cases vary.
Pajarillo; Evangeline;s death was not due to Pajarillo’s negligence as the latter
acted only in self-defense. In other words, the extinction of civil liability referred to in Par. (e) of Section 3,
RTC: In favor of the Tangcos. Being on guard duty, the situation demanded that he Rule 111, refers exclusively to civil liability founded on Article 100 of the Revised
should have exercised proper prudence and necessary care by asking Evangeline for Penal Code, whereas the civil liability for the same act considered as quasi-delict
him to ascertain the matter instead of shooting her instantly. only and not as a crime is not extinguished even by a declaration in the criminal
Safeguard as employer of Pajarillo to be jointly and severally liable with Pajarillo. case that the criminal act charged has not happened or has not been committed by
While it may be conceded that Safeguard perhaps exercised care in the selection of the accused.
its employees, there was no sufficient evidence to show that Safeguard exercised
the diligence of a good father of a family in the supervision of its employee. Article 2180 of the Civil Code, when the injury is caused by the negligence of the
CA: Affirmed RTC Decision employee, there instantly arises a presumption of law that there was negligence on
Applicable provisions are not Article 2180 in relation to Article 2176 of NCC, on the part of the master or the employer either in the selection of the servant or
quasi-delict, but the provisions on civil liability arising from quasi delict employee, or in the supervision over him after selection or both. The liability of the
 Petitioners filed instant Petition for Review on Certiorari employer under Article 2180 is direct and immediate. Therefore, it is incumbent
upon petitioners to prove that they exercised the diligence of a good father of a
ISSUE: family in the selection and supervision of their employee.
1. WON Pajarillo is guilty of negligence in shooting Evangeline
7 2. WON Safeguard should be held solidarily liable for the damages awarded
to Heirs of Tangco


8. ARTEMIO INIEGO vs. JUDGE GUILLERMO G. PURGANAN, (RTC of Manila Actions for damages based on quasi-delicts are primarily and effectively actions for
Judge) and FOKKER C. SANTOS the recovery of a sum of money for the damages suffered because of Santos alleged
GR No. 166876 March 24, 2006 tortious acts. The damages claimed in such actions represent the monetary
Chico-Nazario, J. equivalent of the injury caused to the plaintiff by the defendant which are thus
sought to be recovered.
 On March 1, 2002, Fokker Santos filed a complaint for quasi-delict and THE SUBJECT MATTER OF ACTIONS FOR DAMAGES BASED ON QUASI-DELICT IS
damages against Jimmy T. Pinion, the driver of the truck involved in a traffic CAPABLE OF PECUNIARY ESTIMATION.
accident and against petitioner Artemio Iniego, as owner of said truck and
employer of Pinion. The amount of damages claimed is within the jurisdiction of RTC since it is the claim
 The complaint stemmed from a vehicular accident that happened on December for all kinds of damages that is the basis of determining the jurisdiction of courts,
11, 1999 when a freight truck allegedly being driven by Pinion hit private whether the claims for damages arise from the same or from different causes of
respondents jitney which Santos was driving. action.
 On August 24, 2002, Santos filed a Motion to Declare defendant in Default
allegedly for failure of the latter to file his answer within the final extended Despite the damages claimed based on quasi delict are actions that are capable of
period. pecuniary estimation, the total amount of damages claimed by Santos nevertheless
 On August 28, 2002, Iniego filed a Motion to Admit and a Motion to Dismiss the still exceeds the jurisdictional limit of P400,000 and remains under RTC jurisdiction.
complaint on the ground that RTC has no jurisdiction over the cause of action.
RTC: On October 21, 2002, Judge Purganan issued the assailed Omnibus Order Actions for damages based on quasi-delicts are actions that are capable of
denying the Motion to Dismiss of Iniego and Motion to Declare Defendant in pecuniary estimation. AS such, they fall within the jurisdiction of either the RTC or
Default of Santos. the municipal courts, depending on the amount of damages claimed. In this case,
 Iniego Filed a Motion for Reconsideration of the Omnibus Order. the amount of damages claimed is within the jurisdiction of the RTC, since it is the
 January 21, 2003, Judge Purganan issued an Order denying petitioners motion claim for all kinds of damages that is the basis of determining the jurisdiction of
for reconsideration. courts, whether the claims for damages arise from the same or from different
CA: Petitioned denied. causes of action.

INIEGO: Actions for damages based on quasi-delict are actions that are capable of Petition denied.
pecuniary estimation; hence, the jurisdiction in such cases falls upon either the
municipal courts or the RTC depending on the value of the damages claimed.

WON moral and exemplary damages claimed by Santos be excluded from the
computation of the total amount of damages for jurisdictional purposes because
the said moral and exemplary damage arose, not from the quasi-delict but from
Santos’ refusal to pay the actual damages.

Actions for damages based on quasi-delicts are primarily and effectively actions for
the recovery of a sum of money for the damages suffered because of he defendants
8 alleged tortious acts and are therefore capable of pecuniary estimation.

What must be determined to be capable or incapable of pecuniary estimation is not

the cause of action, but the subject matter of the actions.
9. JOHN KAM BIAK Y. CHAN, JR vs. IGLESIA NI CRISTO (b) such act or omission causes damage to another;
GR No. 160283 October 14, 2005 (c) such act/omission is caused by fault/negligence; and
Chicho-Nazario, J. (d) there is no pre-existing contractual relation between the parties.

FACTS: The tortious act was the excavation which caused damage to the respondent
 Aringay Shell Gasoline Station is owned by Chan, Jr. It is located in Sta. Rita because it was done surreptitiously within its premises and it may have affected the
East, Aringat, La Union and bounded on the south by a chapel owned by INC. foundation of the chapel. The excavation on respondent’s premises was caused by
 The gasoline station supposedly needed additional sewerage and septic tanks fault. Finally, there was no pre-existing contractual relation between the petitioner
for its washrooms. and Yoro on the one hand, and the respondent on the other.
 The services of Dioscoro Ely Yoro, a retired general of the AFP was procured by
Chan, Jr as the former was allegedly a construction contractor. As a general rule, joint tortfeasors are all the persons who command, instigate,
 After some time, Chan Jr was informed by the members of INC that the digging promote, encourage, advise, countenance, cooperate in, aid or abet the
traversed and penetrated a portion of the land belonging to the latter. The commission of a tort, or who approve of it after it is done, if done for their benefit.
foundation of the chapel was affected as a tunnel was dug directly under it to Verily, the responsibility of two or more persons who are liable for a quasi- delict is
the damage and prejudice of INC. solidary.
 On 18 April 1995, a Complaint against Chan Jr and Teofilo Oller, Chan’s
engineer was filed before RTC of La Union. For the damage caused to respondent, petitioner and Yoro are jointly liable as they
 Chan Jr and Oller filed an Answer with Third Party Complaint impleading Yoro are joint tortfeasors.
as third-party defendant.
 Yoro filed an Answer. “The basis of their solidarity is not the Memorandum of Agreement but the fact
 After 4 years of hearing the case, the trial courted promulgated its decision. that they have become joint tortfeasors. There is solidary liability only when the
RTC: The diggings were not intended for the construction of sewerage and septic obligation expressly so states, or when the law or the nature of the obligation
tanks but were made to construct tunnels to find hidden treasure. Cha Jr and Yoro requires solidarity.
are solidarily liable to INC on a 35%-65% basis and absolving Oller from any liability.
Indubitably, petitioner and Yoro cooperated in committing the tort. They even had
 Yoro filed his own Notice of Appeal
provisions in their MOA as to how they would divide the treasure if any is found
 Trial court disallowed Yoros appear for failure to pay the appellate court docket
within or outside petitioner’s property line. Thus, the MOA, instead of exculpating
and other lawful fees within the reglementary period for taking an appeal.
petitioner from liability, is the very noose that insures that he be so declared as
 Pets filed to CA an appeal.
CA: Denied the appeal.

WON the memorandum of agreement entered into by Chan Jr and Yoro has the
effect of making the latter solely responsible for damages to INC.

The requisites of quasi-delict are the following:
(a) there must be an act or omission;


10. FGU INSURANCE CORPO vs. CA, FILCAR TRANSPORT, INC., and FORTUNE attributable to Dahl-Jensen thus making the damage suffered by the other vehicle
INSURANCE CORPORATION his personal liability.
GR No. 118889 March 23, 1998
Bellosillo, J.
The liability imposed by Art 2180 arises by virtue of a presumption juris tantum of
FACTS: negligence on the part of the persons made responsible thereunder, derived from
 On 21 April 1987, at around 3:00, 2 vehicles, both Mitsubishi Colt Lancers, their failure to exercise due care and vigilance over the acts of subordinates to
cruising northward along EDSA, Mandaluyong City, figured in a traffic accident. prevent them from causing damage. As correctly observed by theca, Art 2180 is
 The car owned by Lydia F. Soriano with plate no PDF 435 was being driven at hardly applicable because none of the circumstances mentioned therein obtains in
the outer lane of the highway by Benjamin Jacildone, while the other car with the case under consideration. FILCAR being engaged in a rent-a-car business was
plate no PCT 792, owned by Filcar Transport and driven by Peter Dahl-Jensen as only the owner of the car leased to Dahl-Jensen. As such, there was no vinculum
lessee, was at the center lane, left of the other vehicle.
juris between them as employer and employee. FILCAR cannot in any way be
 Upon approaching the corner of Pioneer Street, the car owned by FILCAR
swerved to the right hitting the left side of the car of Soriano. responsible for the negligent act of Dahl-Jensen, the former not being an employer
 Dahl-Jensen was a Danish tourist who did not possess a Philippine driver’s of the latter.
 FGU Insurance Corp paid Soriano P25,382.20. Petition denied.
 By way of subrogation, it sued Dahl-Jensen, FILCAR and FORTUNE as insurer of
FILCAR for quasi delict before the RTC of Makati. Dahl-Jensen was dropped
from the complaint upon the motion of the petitioner.
RTC: Dismissed the case for failure of FGU Insurance to substantiate its claim of
CA: Affirmed RTC ruling although based on another ground, the only fault or
negligence of Dahl-Jensen was sufficiently proved but not that of FILCAR.
FGU: Respondents are liable because the registered owner of a vehicle is liable for
damages suffered by third persons although the vehicle is leased to another.

WON for damages suffered by a third party, an action based on quasi-delict may
prosper against a rent-a-car company and consequently, its insurer for fault or
negligence of the car lessee in driving the rented vehicle.

The requisites of quasi-delict are the following:
(a) there must be an act or omission;
(b) such act or omission causes damage to another;
(c) such act/omission is caused by fault/negligence;
FGU failed to prove the existence of the second requisite because only the fault or
1 negligence of Dahl-Jensen was sufficiently established, not that of FILCAR. It should
be noted that the damage caused on the vehicle of Soriano was brought about by
the circumstance that Dahl-Jensen swerved to the right while the vehicle that he
was driving was at the center lane. It is plain that the negligence was solely
11. VICENTE VERGARA vs CA and AMADEO AZARCON then bumped another bicycle; and then said cargo truck rammed the store
GR No 77679 September 30, 1987 warehouse of the plaintiff.
Padilla, J
*Requisites of Quasi-Delict
FACTS: A mishap caused by defective brakes cannot be considered as fortuitous in
 An action for damages based on quasi delict was filed by Amadeo Azarcon. character. Certainly, the defects were curable and the accident preventable.
 The action arose from a vehicular accident that occurred on 5 August 1979 in
Gapan, Nueva Ecija, when Martin Belmonte, while driving a cargo truck The petitioner failed to adduce any evidence to overcome the disputable
belonging to Vicente Vergara, rammed “head-on” the store-residence of presumption of negligence on his part in the selection and supervision of his driver.
Azarcon causing damages thereto which were inventories and assessed at
 Vergara answered and alleged that his driver Martin Bartolome operated said
cargo truck in a very diligent and careful manner; that the steering wheel
refused to respond to his effort and as a result of a blown out tire and despite
application of his brakes, the said cargo truck hit the store-residence of Azarcon
and that the said accident was an act of God for which he cannot be held liable
 Vergara also filed a third party complaint against Travellers Insurance and
Surety Corporation alleging that said cargo truck involved in the vehicular
accident belonging to Vergara was insured by third party defendant insurance
RTC: In favor of Azarcon
CA: Affirmed RTC decision

VERGARDA: CA erred in finding him guilty is not tenable. It was established by

competent evidence that the requisites of quasi delict are present.

WON this act or omission can be considered as a negligent act or omission was
passed upon by the trial court.

The fact of occurrence of the vehicular accident was sufficiently established by the
policy report and the testimony of Patrolman Masiclat. And the fact of negligence
may be deduced from the surrounding circumstances thereof. According to the
1 police report, the cargo was travelling on the right side of the road going to Manila
1 and then it crossed to the center line and went to the left side of the highway; it


12. AMERICAN EXPRESS INTERNATIONAL INC. v. NOEL CORDERO  The Hong Kong AmEx office called up Noel after determining that he was in
GR No. 138550 October 14, 2005 Manila and not in Hong Kong, placed his card in the Inspect Airwarn Support
Sandoval-Gutierrez, J. System.
 When the Watsons sales clerk called up AEI HK Office, its representative said he
FACTS: wants to talk to Noel in order to verify his identity but Noel refused leading to
 This is a petition for review on certiorari of the Decision of the CA dated April the confiscation of his card.
30, 1999.  On March 31, 1992, Noel filed with RTC of Manila a complaint for damages.
 American Express Intl (AEI) is a foreign corporation that issues charge cards to RTC: The inexcusable failure of Noel to inform AEI despite sufficient time was the
its customers, which the latter use to purchase goods and services at proximate cause of the confiscation and cutting of plaintiffs extension card which
accredited merchants worldwide. exposed the latter to public humiliation for which he should be held liable.
 Sometime in 1988, Nilda Cordero, wife of Noel Cordero, applied for and was CA: Affirmed RTC Decision
issued an American Express charge card.
 The issuance of the charge card was covered by Amex Cardmember ISSUE:
Agreement. As cardholder, Nilda, upon signing the back portion of the car WON the lower coursts gravely erred in holding Amex liable to Cordero for moral
manifested her acceptance to the terms of the agreement. damages, exemplary damages and attorney’s fees/
 An extension charge card was likewise issued to Noel Cordero which he also
signed. HELD:
 On November 19, 1991, Noel, with Nilda, daughter, sisters-in-law and uncle-in- In order that an obligation based on quasi-delict may arise, there must be no pre-
law, went on a 3 –day trip to Hong Kong. existing contractual relation between the parties.
 At 7PM on November 30, 1991, the group went to the WATSONS CHEMIST
SHOP located at 227C Ocean Gallery, Kowloon, Hong Kong. But there are exceptions. There may be an action for quasi-delict notwithstanding
 Noel picked up some chocolate candies and handed to the sales clerk her that there is a subsisting contract between the parties.
American Express extension card to pay for his purchases.
 The sales clerk verified the card by making a telephone call to the American A liability for tort may arise even under a contract, where tort is that which breaches the
Express Office in Hong Kong. contract. Stated differently, when an act which constitutes a breach of contract would have
itself constituted the source of a quasi-delictual liability, the contract can be said to have
 Moments later, Susan Chong, the store manager, emerged from behind the
been breached by tort, thereby allowing the rules on tort to apply.
counter and informed Noel that she had to confiscate the card, which she cut
in half with a pair of scissors. Furthermore, to constitute quasi-delict, the fault or negligence must be the proximate cause
 According to Noel, this caused him embarrassment and humiliation considering of the damage or injury suffered by the plaintiff. Proximate cause is that cause which, in
that it was done in front of his family and the other customers. Hence, Nilda natural and continuous sequence, unbroken by any efficient intervening cause, produces the
had to pay for the purchases with her own AmEx charge card. injury and without which the result would not have occurred. Proximate cause is determined
 When they returned to Exelsior Hotel, Nida called up AEI and talked to Senior by the facts of each case upon mixed considerations of logic, common sense, policy and
Authorizer Johnny Chen, who informed her that on November 1, 1991, a precedent.
person in Hong Kong attempted to use a charge card with the same number as
AEI can revoke Noel’s card without notice. It bears reiterating that the subject card would not
1 Noel’s card.
have been confiscated and cut had Noel talked to AEI reps and identified himself as the
2 genuine cardholder. It is thus safe to conclude that there was no negligence on the part of
AEI and that, therefore, it cannot be held liable to Noel for damages.


13. CARAVAN TRAVEL AND TOURS INTL, INC vs ERMILINDA R. ABEJAR The resolution of this case must consider two (2) rules:
GR No 170631 February 10, 2016 First, Article 2180's specification that "[e]mployers shall be liable for the damages caused by their
Leonen, J. employees . . . acting within the scope of their assigned tasks[.]"
FACTS: Second, the operation of the registered-owner rule that registered owners are liable for death or
 On July 13, 2000, Jesmariane Reyes was walking along west-bound lane of Sampaguita St, injuries caused by the operation of their vehicles.
United Paranaque. A Mitsubishi L-300 van with plate no PKM 195 was travelling along the These rules appear to be in conflict when it comes to cases in which the employer is also the
east-bound lane. registered owner of a vehicle.
 To avoid oncoming vehicle, the van swerved left and hit Reyes. Article 2180 requires proof of two things:
 Alex Espinosa, a witness, went to her aid and loaded her in the back of the can. 1. An employment relationship between the driver and the owner; and
 Espinosa told the driver of the van, Jimmy Bautista, to bring Reyes to the hospital. 2. That the driver acted within the scope of his or her assigned tasks.
 Instead of doing so, Bautista appeared to have left the van parked inside to a nearby On the other hand, applying the registered-owner rule only requires the plaintiff to prove that the
subdivision with Reyes still in the van. She was ident and brought to it. defendant-employer is the registered owner of the vehicle.
 Upon investigation, it was found out that the registered owner of the van was Caravan, a The registered-owner rule was articulated as early as 1957 in Erezo, eta!l. v. Jepte,77 where this
corporate engaged in the business of organizing tours and travels. court explained that the registration of motor vehicles, is required by Section 5(/)78 of Republic
 Bautista was Caravan’s employee. Hence, Caravan shouldered the hospitalization expenses of Act No. 4136, the Land Transportation and Traffic Code/
Reyes. Despite medical attendance, Reyes died 2 days after the accident. A victim of recklessness on the public highways is usually without means to discover or identify the
 Ermilinda Abejar, Reyes’ paternal aunt and the person who raised her since 9, filed before person actually causing the injury or damage. He has no means other than by a recourse to the
RTC of Paranaque a Complaint for damages and against Bautista and that Caravan is the registration in the Motor Vehicles Office to determine who is the owner. The protection that the
registered owner of the van. law aims to extend to him would become illusory were the registered owner given the opportunity
RTC: Bautista was grossly negligent in driving the vehicle. Awarded damages in favor of Abejar: to escape liability by
(a) 35,000 actual damages disproving his ownership.
(b) 300,000 moral damages Due diligence in the supervision of employees, on the other and includes the formulation of suitable
(c) 30, 000 exemplary damages rules and regulations for the guidance of employees and
(d) 50, 000 attorney’s fees the issuance of proper instructions intended for the protection of the public and persons with
CA: RTC decision affirmed. Reduced moral damages to 200,000; death indemnity is 50, 000 and the whom the employer has relations through his or its employees and the imposition of necessary
rest shall earn interest at 6% per annum. disciplinary measures upon employees in case of breach or as may be warranted to ensure the
CARAVAN: Abejar has no personality to bring this suit because she is not a real party in interest. performance of acts indispensable to the business of and beneficial to their employer. To this, we
Abejar does not exercise legal or substitute parental authority. She is also not judicially appointed add that actual implementation and monitoring of consistent compliance with said rules should be
guardian or the only living relative of the deceased. the constant concern of the employer, acting through dependable supervisors who should
Bautista’s tasks only pertained to the transport of company personnel or products. regularly report on their supervisory functions.
ISSUE: In order that the defense of due diligence in the selection and supervision of employees m/y be
WON Caravan should be held liable as an employer, pursuant to Article 2180 of CC. deemed sufficient and plausible, it is not enough to emptily invoke the existence of said company
HELD: guidelines and policies on hiring and supervision. As the negligence of the employee gives rise to
RULE 3, SEC 2, “A real party in interest is the party who stands to be benefitted or injured by the the presumption of negligence on the part of the employer, the latter has the burden of proving
judgment in the suit or the party entitles to the avails of the suit…” that it has been diligent not only in the selection of employees but also in the actual supervision of
Abejar is a real party in interest based on two grounds: their work. The mere allegation of the existence of hiring procedures and supervisory policies,
a. Abejar suffered actual personal loss. With her affinity for Reyes, it stands to reason that without anything more, is decidedly not sufficient to overcome presumption.
when Reyes died, Abejar suffered the same anguish that a natural parent would have For deaths caused by quasidelict, the recovery of moral damages is limited to the spouse,
felt upon the loss of one’s child. legitimate and illegitimate descendants, and ascendants of the deceased. Persons exercising
b. Abejar is capacitated to do what Reyes’ actual parents would have been capacitated to substitute parental authority are to be considered ascendants for the purpose of awarding moral
1 do. damages. Persons exercising substitute parental authority are intended to stand in place of a
Contrary to Caravan;s position, it was not fatal to Abejar’s cause that she herself did not adduce child's parents in order to ensure the well-being and welfare of a child
proof that Bautista acted within the scope of his authority. It was sufficient that Abejar proved that
Caravan was the registered owner of the van.


GR No. 217426 December 14, 2017
Perlas-Bernabe, J.

 LWV Construction (LWV) is engaged in the business of recruiting Filipino
workers for deployment to Saudi Arabia while St. Martin is an accredited
member of the Gulf Cooperative Council Approved Medical Centers Association
(GAMCA) and as such, is authorized to conduct medical exams of prospective
applicants to overseas employment.
 On January 10, 2008, LWV referred a prospective applicant, Jonathan V.
Raguindin to St. Martin for a pre-deployment medical exam. Thereafter, St.
Martin cleared Raguindin and found him fit for employment.