SPECIAL TORTS
except:
 GR: concept of torts applies to persons
 PERSONAL TORT- one involving or
consisting in an injury to the person or to the
reputation or feelings
 PROPERTY TORT- injury or damage to real
or personal property
SPECIAL TORTS ON HUMAN RELATIONS
 HUMAN RELATIONS- rules needed to
govern the inter-relationships of human
beings in a society for the purpose of
maintaining social order
Article 19. Every person must, in the exercise of
his rights and in the performance of his duties, act
with justice, give everyone his due, and observe
honesty and good faith.
 Principle of Abuse of Rights
 Departs from classical theory “he who uses a
right injures no one”
 Absence of good faith is essential to abuse of
right
 Elements of Abuse of Right:
a. There is a legal right or duty
b. Which is exercised in bad faith
c. For the sole intent of prejudicing or
injuring another
 Rationale is that right ends when it
disappears, and it disappears when it is
abused
 GOOD FAITH- honest intention to refrain
from taking undue advantage of another
 BAD FAITH- dishonest purpose or some
moral obliquity and conscious performance of
a wrong
 Provisions of human rights are merely guides
for human conduct in the absence of specific
legal provisions and definite contractual
provisions
 Damnum Absque Injuria (Damage without
prejudice)- person who only exercises his
legal rights does no injury
 Art. 19 not a panacea for all human hurts and
social grievances
Article 20. Every person who, contrary to law,
wilfully or negligently causes damage to another,
shall indemnify the latter for the same.
 Article provides the general sanction which is
the indemnification of damages
 No right impaired, no basis for damages
Article 21. Any person who wilfully causes loss
or injury to another in manner that is contrary to
morals, good customs or public policy shall
compensate the latter for the damage.
 Reason is that there are may injurious acts
which have not been foreseen by lawmakers
 Damages are recoverable even though no
positive law has been violation but it is
necessary that the act should have been
willfully done and it is contrary to morals,
good customs or public policy
 Breach of promise to marry is not actionable
a. When there is criminal seduction
- Deception, enticement, superior power
or abuse of confidence on the part of the
seducer to which the woman yielded
b. Actual damages suffered
- In case of birth of child, support is
demandable
- In case of rape, rapist is compelled to
support child
Article 22. Every person who through an act of
performance by another, or any other means,
acquires or comes into possession of something
at the expense of the latter without just or legal
ground, shall return the same to him.
 No person may unjustly enrich himself at the
expense of another
 Article is applicable if:
a. Someone acquires or comes into
possession of “something” which means
delivery or acquisition of “things”
b. Acquisition is undue and at the expense
of another, which means without any just
or legal ground
 Services are not included
 Accion in Rem Verso- action is only
subsidiary
 Distinguished Accion in Rem Verso from
Solutio INdebiti
a. RV- not necessary that payment be
made by mistake
SI- payment made by mistake
 Requisites of Accion Rem Verso:
a. Defendant has been enriched
b. Plaintiff has suffered a loss
c. The enrichment of defendant is without
just or legal ground
d. Plaintiff has no other action based on
contract, quasi- contract, crime or quasi-
delict
 Article not applicable if property is acquired
by virtue of final judgment
 Government is not exempted from principle
of unjust enrichment
Article 23. Even when an act or event causing
damage to another's property was not due to the
fault or negligence of the defendant, the latter
shall be liable for indemnity if through the act or
event he was benefited.
Article 24. In all contractual, property or other
relations, when one of the parties is at a
disadvantage on account of his moral
dependence, ignorance, indigence, mental
weakness, tender age or other handicap, the
courts must be vigilant for his protection.
 This article tempered Art. 3
 Courts are directed not to neglect the extra
protection needed by the disadvantaged and
handicapped
 State as parens patriae is obliged to minimize
the risk of harm to those who because of their
minority
1
Article 26. Every person shall respect the dignity,
personality, privacy and peace of mind of his
neighbors and other persons. The following and
similar acts, though they may not constitute a
criminal offense, shall produce a cause of action
for damages, prevention and other relief:
(1) Prying into the privacy of another's
residence;
(2) Meddling with or disturbing the private
life or family relations of another;
(3) Intriguing to cause another to be
alienated from his friends;
(4) Vexing or humiliating another on
account of his religious beliefs, lowly
station in life, place of birth, physical
defect, or other personal condition.
 Coverage not limitative
- All acts violative of person’s rights to
dignity, personality, privacy and peace of
mind
 RIGHT TO PRIVACY- right to be left alone
and unnoticed if he chooses so
 General classes of torts actions for invasion
of privacy:
a. Appropriation of plaintiff’s name or
likeness for the defendant’s benefit
b. Intrusion upon plaintiff’s solitude or
seclusion
c. Public disclosure of private facts
d. False light in the public eye
 Prying in to privacy of another’s residence,
damages could be recovered
 Disturbance of private life or family relations
is entitled for damages
 If there is no more affection to alienate, no
recovery of damages could be made
 Alienation from one’s friend is liable for
damages
 Vexing of humiliating another on account of
his religious belief, damages could be
recovered
 Unauthorized use of picture is an actionable
wrong
 Unwarranted notice of foreclosure is an
actionable wrong
 Moral damages recoverable under Art. 26
Article 27. Any person suffering material or moral
loss because a public servant or employee
refuses or neglects, without just cause, to perform
his official duty may file an action for damages
and other relief against the latter, without
prejudice to any disciplinary administrative action
that may be taken.
 Purpose of law is to eliminate corruption
 Requisites for filing of action:
a. Public servant or employee refuses or
neglects to perform his official duty
b. There is no valid reason for the refusal or
neglect to perform official duty
c. That injury or damage is suffered by the
plaintiff
 Law applies only to acts of nonfeasance-
non-performance of some acts which a
person is obliged or has responsibility to
perform
 NONFEASANCE- omission of an act which a
person ought to do
 MISFEASANCE- improper doing of an act
which a person might lawfully do
 MALFEASANCE- doing of an act which a
person ought not to do at all
 Nature of duty must be ministerial
- If discretionary, acted in a notoriously
arbitrary manner
 Good faith not a defense
 Strictest compliance with the public official’s
duty is required until the last day of his tenure
 Article not applicable when public officer
acted within the scope of his official capacity
and in line of duty
Article 28. Unfair competition in agricultural,
commercial or industrial enterprises or in labor
through the use of force, intimidation, deceit,
machination or any other unjust, oppressive or
highhanded method shall give rise to a right of
action by the person who thereby suffers
damage.
 UNFAIR COMPETITION- employing
deception or any other means contrary to
good faith
 Unfair Competition could be committed either
through:
a. Force
b. Intimidation
c. Deceit
d. Machination, or any other unjust,
oppressive or high-handed method
 True test of Unfair Competition- whether
certain goods have been intentionally clothed
with an appearance which is likely to deceive
the ordinary purchaser exercising ordinary
care
 Reason is that it is necessary in a system of
free enterprise
Article 29. When the accused in a criminal
prosecution is acquitted on the ground that his
guilt has not been proved beyond reasonable
doubt, a civil action for damages for the same act
or omission may be instituted. Such action
requires only a preponderance of evidence. Upon
motion of the defendant, the court may require
the plaintiff to file a bond to answer for damages
in case the complaint should be found to be
malicious.
If in a criminal case the judgment of acquittal is
based upon reasonable doubt, the court shall so
declare. In the absence of any declaration to that
effect, it may be inferred from the text of the
decision whether or not the acquittal is due to that
ground.
 Rationale of this article is it will correct a
serious defect in the law leading from
injustice
 Kinds of acquittal:
a. Guilt has not been proved beyond
reasonable doubt
b. Accused Is not author of the crime
c. Crime complained of did not exist
 acquittal not been proved beyond reasonable
doubt may still file a civil action for damages
2
 acquittal which bars civil action
a. accused is not author of crime
b. no crime existed
c. finding in a final judgment that the act
form which civil liability arise did not exist
 acquittal which does not bar civil action:
a. liability of accused is not criminal but only
civil
b. civil liability is not derived from or based
on criminal act which the accused is
acquitted
c. civil action is based on quasi delict
 prescription of criminal action is not a bar to
civil action
 article 29 refers to dependent civil actions
and not to independent civil actions
 there is duty of judge to be specific and
accurate
 finding on civil liability of the accused shall be
made in case of acquittal except if there is
clear showing that the act which the civil
liability might arise did not exist
 rules on dependent and independent civil
action:
- DCA if not reserved will be impliedly
instituted with criminal action
- DCA if reserved may be prosecuted
independently but must await for
outcome of crim case
- DCA must be suspended when there is
crim case
- ICA can proceed simultaneously with
crim case
 Prescription of action ex quasi delicto does
not operate as a bar to an action to enforce
the civil liability arising from crime
 Rationale of reservation is the avoidance of
multiple suits between same litigants arising
out of same act or omission of offender
Article 30. When a separate civil action is
brought to demand civil liability arising from a
criminal offense, and no criminal proceedings are
instituted during the pendency of the civil case, a
preponderance of evidence shall likewise be
sufficient to prove the act complained of.
 Also speaks of dependent civil action
 There is no need to reserve independent civil
action
 Dependent civil actions to be pursued
independently must be reserved (waives the
civil action, reserves to institute separately
and institute prior to criminal case)
 Reason for reservation is to prevent offended
party from recovering damages twice
 Reservation must be made before the
prosecution starts presenting its evidence
 If party failed to make reservation of
dependent civil action, the civil action is
deemed instituted with criminal case
 For practicality, court trying the criminal case
must be informed of the filing or pendency of
independent civil action
Article 31. When the civil action is based on an
obligation not arising from the act or omission
complained of as a felony, such civil action may
proceed independently of the criminal
proceedings and regardless of the result of the
latter.
 Independent civil action which arises from
some other acts such as contract or suit
based on culpa contractual
Article 32. Any public officer or employee, or any
private individual, who directly or indirectly
obstructs, defeats, violates or in any manner
impedes or impairs any of the following rights and
liberties of another person shall be liable to the
latter for damages:
(1) Freedom of religion;
(2) Freedom of speech;
(3) Freedom to write for the press or to
maintain a periodical publication;
(4) Freedom from arbitrary or illegal
detention;
(5) Freedom of suffrage;
(6) The right against deprivation of
property without due process of law;
(7) The right to a just compensation when
private property is taken for public use;
(8) The right to the equal protection of the
laws;
(9) The right to be secure in one's person,
house, papers, and effects against
unreasonable searches and seizures;
(10) The liberty of abode and of changing
the same;
(11) The privacy of communication and
correspondence;
(12) The right to become a member of
associations or societies for purposes not
contrary to law;
(13) The right to take part in a peaceable
assembly to petition the Government for
redress of grievances;
(14) The right to be a free from
involuntary servitude in any form;
(15) The right of the accused against
excessive bail;
(16) The right of the accused to be heard
by himself and counsel, to be informed of
the nature and cause of the accusation
against him, to have a speedy and public
trial, to meet the witnesses face to face,
and to have compulsory process to
secure the attendance of witness in his
behalf;
(17) Freedom from being compelled to be
a witness against one's self, or from
being forced to confess guilt, or from
being induced by a promise of immunity
or reward to make such confession,
except when the person confessing
becomes a State witness;
(18) Freedom from excessive fines, or
cruel and unusual punishment, unless
the same is imposed or inflicted in
accordance with a statute which has not
been judicially declared unconstitutional;
and
(19) Freedom of access to the courts.
In any of the cases referred to in this
article, whether or not the defendant's act
or omission constitutes a criminal
3
 offense, the aggrieved party has a right
to commence an entirely separate and
distinct civil action for damages, and for
other relief. Such civil action shall
proceed independently of any criminal
prosecution (if the latter be instituted),
and may be proved by a preponderance
of evidence.
The indemnity shall include moral damages.
Exemplary damages may also be adjudicated.
The responsibility herein set forth is not
demandable from a judge unless his act or
omission constitutes a violation of the Penal Code
or other penal statute.
 This article constitutes constitutional torts
 Guarantee the protection of civil liberties of
people
 Reason is that citizens will have adequate
civil remedies because of these independent
civil actions
 Private person may be offender even if he
acted in good faith
 Suspension of privilege of habeas corpus
does not bar action for damages anchored on
illegal searches
 Purpose if Art. 32 is to provide sanction to the
deeply cherished rights and freedoms
enshrined in the Constitution
 Judges are exempted from damages except
if the judge’s act constitutes a violation of
penal statutes such as:
a. Art. 204- knowingly rendering unjust
judgment
b. Art. 205- knowingly rendering a
manifestly unjust judgment through
inexcusable negligence or ignorance
c. Art. 206- knowingly rendering an unjust
interlucotory order
d. Art. 207- maliciously delaying
administration of justice
 Public officer may be held liable for damages
if in the course of performance of his
functions of his office he:
a. Acted with malice, bad faith and
negligence
b. Where public officer violated a
constitutional right of plaintiff
Article 33. In cases of defamation, fraud, and
physical injuries a civil action for damages,
entirely separate and distinct from the criminal
action, may be brought by the injured party. Such
civil action shall proceed independently of the
criminal prosecution, and shall require only a
preponderance of evidence.
 Rationale is to allow citizen to enforce his
rights in private action brought by him
 Involves independent civil action for
damages based on fraud, defamation and
physical injuries
 Only preponderance of evidence is required
 Defamation includes libel and slander
 Fraud covers estafa or swindling
 Physical injuries covers all kinds of physical
injuries
 OLD RULE: Art. 33 applies only to injuries
intentionally committed
 NEW RULE: In Corpus v. Paje, allowed to
apply to injuries which arose from criminal
negligence
 Effect of intervention in criminal case:
- If filed a separate civil action, cannot
intervene in criminal case
- If he intervened, he cannot later file a civil
action to recover moral and exemplary
damages
- Judgment in criminal case bars civil
action under Art. 33
Article 34. When a member of a city or municipal
police force refuses or fails to render aid or
protection to any person in case of danger to life
or property, such peace officer shall be primarily
liable for damages, and the city or municipality
shall be subsidiarily responsible therefor. The civil
action herein recognized shall be independent of
any criminal proceedings, and a preponderance
of evidence shall suffice to support such action.
 Independent civil action covers:
a. There is danger to life or property of
person
b. Member of police force who is present in
the scene refused or failed to render aid
or protection to person
c. Damages are caused to person or
property of victim
 Liability of officer is primary and city or
municipality is subsidiary
 Defense of good father of family not available
to city or municipality
OTHER SPECIAL TORTS:
a. ObliCon
b. Construction of building under Special
Contracts
c. Family Code
d. RPC
e. Chapter on Nuisance
f. Chapter on Common Carriers
g. Chapter on Quasi-Contracts
h. Chapter on Deposit and Loss of Things
in Hotels
i. Special laws like Anti-Sexual
Harrassment Act
TORTS INVOLVING DISRESPECT TO DEAD
OR WRONGFUL INTERFERENCE WITH
FUNERAL RIGHTS
Article 309. Any person who shows disrespect to
the dead, or wrongfully interferes with a funeral
shall be liable to the family of the deceased for
damages, material and moral.
 Disrespect to dead is an actionable wrong
 Libel may be committed to a dead person
 Unlawful interference in funeral of dead
person subject to damage
 Who can file action for damages:
a. Spouse
b. Descendants
c. Ascendants
d. Brothers and sisters
TORTS INVOLVING NUISANCE
4
 NUISANCE- is a serious hindrances to the d. Permanent- nuisance which by the
enjoyment of life and property nature of the structure creates
permanent inconvenience
Article 694. A nuisance is any act, omission, e. Continuing- nuisance which by its nature
establishment, business, condition of property, or will continue to exist indefinitely unless
anything else which: abated
(1) Injures or endangers the health or f. Intermittent- nuisance which recurs off
safety of others; or and on and may be discontinued at
(2) Annoys or offends the senses; or anytime
(3) Shocks, defies or disregards decency  Nuisance are subject to summary abatement
or morality; or
(4) Obstructs or interferes with the free Article 696. Every successive owner or
passage of any public highway or street, possessor of property who fails or refuses to
or any body of water; or abate a nuisance in that property started by a
(5) Hinders or impairs the use of former owner or possessor is liable therefor in the
property. same manner as the one who created it.
 NUISANCE- anything which hinders the Article 697. The abatement of a nuisance does
comfortable enjoyment of life and hinders the not preclude the right of any person injured to
free use of customary way of property recover damages for its past existence.
 From French word “nuire”- injury, hurt or Article 698. Lapse of time cannot legalize any
harm nuisance, whether public or private.
 Distinctions between Negligence and Article 699. The remedies against a public
Nuisance nuisance are:
Negligence Nuisance (1) A prosecution under the Penal Code
Basis Lack of Attaches or any local ordinance: or
proper care regardless of (2) A civil action; or
and degree of care or (3) Abatement, without judicial
diligence skill proceedings.
Condition Already Continuing harm Article 700. The district health officer shall take
of act done care that one or all of the remedies against a
Remedy Action for Abatement without public nuisance are availed of.
damages judicial Article 701. If a civil action is brought by reason
proceedings of the maintenance of a public nuisance, such
action shall be commenced by the city or
 Causes of nuisance:
municipal mayor.
a. Injury or danger to health or safety
Article 702. The district health officer shall
b. Annoyance or offense to the senses
determine whether or not abatement, without
c. Shock, defiance or indifference to norms
judicial proceedings, is the best remedy against a
of decency or morality
public nuisance.
d. Observance to free passage of any
Article 703. A private person may file an action
public highway or street or any body of
on account of a public nuisance, if it is specially
water
injurious to himself.
e. Hindrance to or impairment of use of
Article 704. Any private person may abate a
property
public nuisance which is specially injurious to him
by removing, or if necessary, by destroying the
Article 695. Nuisance is either public or private.
thing which constitutes the same, without
A public nuisance affects a community or
committing a breach of the peace, or doing
neighborhood or any considerable number of
unnecessary injury. But it is necessary:
persons, although the extent of the annoyance,
(1) That demand be first made upon the
danger or damage upon individuals may be
owner or possessor of the property to
unequal. A private nuisance is one that is not
abate the nuisance;
included in the foregoing definition.
(2) That such demand has been rejected;
 Kinds of nuisance according to number of
(3) That the abatement be approved by
persons affected:
the district health officer and executed
a. Public- affects community or
with the assistance of the local police;
neighborhood or considerable number of
and
persons
(4) That the value of the destruction does
b. Private- one which affects an individual
not exceed three thousand pesos.
or few persons
 Abatement could be done:
 Other classification of nuisance as to nature:
a. By removing the thing which constitutes
a. Nuisance per se- nuisance which is
the nuisance
always a nuisance under any
b. By destroying the thing when necessary
circumstances
without disturbing the peace of the
b. Nuisance per accidens- nuisance by
community, or doing unnecessary injury
reason of location, surrounding or in a
 Requisites of abatement:
manner it is conducted or managed
a. Demand must be made to owner or
c. Temporary- nuisance which if properly
possessor of property to give him
attended does not constitute a nuisance
opportunity to abate nuisance voluntarily

5
 b. Demand was rejected without valid
reason
c. Abatement is with approval of District
Health Officer
d. Abatement is executed with assistance of
local police to maintain peace and order
e. Value of destruction must not exceed 3k
Article 705. The remedies against a private
nuisance are:
(1) A civil action; or
(2) Abatement, without judicial
proceedings.
Article 706. Any person injured by a private
nuisance may abate it by removing, or if
necessary, by destroying the thing which
constitutes the nuisance, without committing a
breach of the peace or doing unnecessary injury.
However, it is indispensable that the procedure
for extrajudicial abatement of a public nuisance
by a private person be followed.
Article 707. A private person or a public official
extrajudicially abating a nuisance shall be liable
for damages:
(1) If he causes unnecessary injury; or
(2) If an alleged nuisance is later
declared by the courts to be not a real
nuisance.
 Remedies of property owner whose property
had been destroyed as nuisance:
a. Go to court as to determination if property
is a nuisance
b. File for injunction
c. File a case for replevin
d. File for damages
TORTS IN OBLICON
Article 1170. Those who in the performance of
their obligations are guilty of fraud, negligence, or
delay, and those who in any manner contravene
the tenor thereof, are liable for damages. (1101)
 Fraud- intentional evasion of faithful
performance of obligation
 Negligence or fault- omission of that diligence
required by the nature of the obligation
 Delay- fault or tardiness in the performance
of obligation after it had become due and
demandable
 Violation of terms of contract- act of
contravening the tenor ad terms and
conditions of the contract
 Fortuitous events excuse non-performance
of obligations except:
a. When law expressly provides liability
b. When there is stipulation between the
parties
c. When nature of the obligation requires
the assumption of risk
Article 1171. Responsibility arising from fraud is
demandable in all obligations. Any waiver of an
action for future fraud is void. (1102a)
Article 1172. Responsibility arising from
negligence in the performance of every kind of
obligation is also demandable, but such liability
may be regulated by the courts, according to the
circumstances. (1103)
 Mitigation of damages in contract, quasi-
contracts and quasi-delicts:
a. Plaintiff himself has contravened the
terms of contract
b. Plaintiff has derived some benefit as
result of the contract
c. In case where exemplary damages are
awarded, the defendant acted with
advice of counsel
d. The loss would have resulted in any
event
e. Since filing of action, defendant has done
his best to lessen the plaintiff’s loss or
injury
Article 1173. The fault or negligence of the
obligor consists in the omission of that diligence
which is required by the nature of the obligation
and corresponds with the circumstances of the
persons, of the time and of the place. When
negligence shows bad faith, the provisions of
articles 1171 and 2201, paragraph 2, shall apply.
If the law or contract does not state the diligence
which is to be observed in the performance, that
which is expected of a good father of a family
shall be required. (1104a)
 DILIGENCE- attention and care required of a
person in the given situation and is the
opposite of negligence
 DUE DILIGENCE- that measure of prudence,
activity or assiduity, as is properly to be
expected from, and ordinarily exercised by
reasonable and prudent men under the
particular circumstances
 NECESSARY DILIGENCE- degree of
diligence which a person placed in a
particular situation must exercise in order to
entitle hi, to the protection of law
 GROSS NEGLIGENCE- thoughtless
disregard of consequences without exerting
any effort to avoid them
 Kinds of diligence:
a. Diligence st
Article 1174. Except in cases expressly specified
by the law, or when it is otherwise declared by
stipulation, or when the nature of the obligation
requires the assumption of risk, no person shall
be responsible for those events which could not
be foreseen, or which, though foreseen, were
inevitable. (1105a)
 FORTUITOUS EVENT- occurrence or
happening which could not be foressen, or if
even foressen, is inevitable
 Classes of Fortuitous Event:
a. As to origin:
1. Fortuitous event- absolutely
independent of human intervention
2. Force majeure- caused by acts of
persons
b. As to foreseeability:
1. Ordinary fortuitous event- could be
foreseen but inevitable
2. Extraordinary- could not be foreseen
 Requisites to exempt obligor from liability by
reason of fortuitous event:
a. Cause of breach must be independent of
debtor’s will
b. Event must either be unforeseeable or
unavoidable
6
 c. Event must be of such as to render it
impossible for debtor to fulfill his
obligation in normal manner
d. Debtor must be free from any
participation
 Exceptions which make obligor liable for
failure to perforam obligation due to fortuitous
event:
a. When it is expressly stipulated
b. When nature of obligation requires
assumption of risk
c. When obligor is in delay
d. When obligor has promised the same
thing to two or more persons who do not
have interest
e. When possessor is in bad faith
f. When obligor contributed to the loss
g. When obligor is guilty of fraud,
negligence or delay or if he contravened
the tenor
h. When injury could have been avoided by
human precaution
Article 1314. Any third person who induces
another to violate his contract shall be liable for
damages to the other contracting party. (n)
 Requisites of interference in contractual
relations:
a. There must be existing valid contract
between two or more persons
b. Third person to the contract is aware of
existence of contract
c. Third person interferes by inducing a
party to violate the contract and it was
violated
d. Interference or intermeddling is without
legal justification or valid excuse
TORTS INVOLVING CONSTRUCTION
Article 1723. The engineer or architect who drew
up the plans and specifications for a building is
liable for damages if within fifteen years from the
completion of the structure, the same should
collapse by reason of a defect in those plans and
specifications, or due to the defects in the ground.
The contractor is likewise responsible for the
damages if the edifice falls, within the same
period, on account of defects in the construction
or the use of materials of inferior quality furnished
by him, or due to any violation of the terms of the
contract. If the engineer or architect supervises
the construction, he shall be solidarily liable with
the contractor.
Acceptance of the building, after completion,
does not imply waiver of any of the cause of
action by reason of any defect mentioned in the
preceding paragraph.
The action must be brought within ten years
following the collapse of the building. (n)
TORTS INVOLVING FAMILY CODE
Art. 218. The school, its administrators and
teachers, or the individual, entity or institution
engaged in child are shall have special parental
authority and responsibility over the minor child
while under their supervision, instruction or
custody.
Authority and responsibility shall apply to all
authorized activities whether inside or outside the
premises of the school, entity or institution. (349a)
Art. 219. Those given the authority and
responsibility under the preceding Article shall be
principally and solidarily liable for damages
caused by the acts or omissions of the
unemancipated minor. The parents, judicial
guardians or the persons exercising substitute
parental authority over said minor shall be
subsidiarily liable.
The respective liabilities of those referred to in the
preceding paragraph shall not apply if it is proved
that they exercised the proper diligence required
under the particular circumstances.
All other cases not covered by this and the
preceding articles shall be governed by the
provisions of the Civil Code on quasi-delicts. (n)
Art. 221. Parents and other persons exercising
parental authority shall be civilly liable for the
injuries and damages caused by the acts or
omissions of their unemancipated children living
in their company and under their parental
authority subject to the appropriate defenses
provided by law. (2180(2)a and (4)a )
Art. 236. Emancipation for any cause shall
terminate parental authority over the person and
property of the child who shall then be qualified
and responsible for all acts of civil life. (412a)
TORTS INVOLVING COMMON CARRIERS
 Elements of Carriage:
a. Consent of parties (passage ticket)
b. Object of contract (transportation of
goods or passengers from departure to
arrival
c. Consideration (fare paid)
 COMMON CARRIERS- persons,
corporations, firms or associations engaged
in the business of carrying or transporting
passengers or goods or both, by land, water
or air, for compensation, offering their
services to the public
 Test to determine common carrier of foods:
a. He must be engaged in business of
carrying goods for others as public
employment
b. He must undertake to carry goods of the
kind to which his business is confined
c. He must undertake to carry by method by
which his business is concluded and over
his established roads
d. Transportation must be for hire
Article 1732. Common carriers are persons,
corporations, firms or associations engaged in
the business of carrying or transporting
passengers or goods or both, by land, water, or
air, for compensation, offering their services to
the public.
Article 1733. Common carriers, from the nature
of their business and for reasons of public policy,
are bound to observe extraordinary diligence in
the vigilance over the goods and for the safety of
the passengers transported by them, according to
all the circumstances of each case.
7
Such extraordinary diligence in the vigilance over
the goods is further expressed in articles 1734,
1735, and 1745, Nos. 5, 6, and 7, while the
extraordinary diligence for the safety of the
passengers is further set forth in articles 1755
and 1756.
SUBSECTION 2. Vigilance Over Goods
Article 1734. Common carriers are responsible
for the loss, destruction, or deterioration of the
goods, unless the same is due to any of the
following causes only:
(1) Flood, storm, earthquake, lightning, or
other natural disaster or calamity;
(2) Act of the public enemy in war,
whether international or civil;
(3) Act or omission of the shipper or
owner of the goods;
(4) The character of the goods or defects
in the packing or in the containers;
(5) Order or act of competent public
authority.
 Common carriers are responsible for:
a. Loss
b. Destruction
c. Deterioration of goods
- Except:
1. Natural disaster or calamity
2. Act of the public enemy in war
3. Act or omission of the shipper or
owner of goods
4. The character of goods or defects in
the packing or in the containers
5. Order or act of competent public
authority
Article 1735. In all cases other than those
mentioned in Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 of the
preceding article, if the goods are lost, destroyed
or deteriorated, common carriers are presumed
to have been at fault or to have acted negligently,
unless they prove that they observed
extraordinary diligence as required in article
1733.
Article 1736. The extraordinary responsibility of
the common carrier lasts from the time the goods
are unconditionally placed in the possession of,
and received by the carrier for transportation until
the same are delivered, actually or constructively,
by the carrier to the consignee, or to the person
who has a right to receive them, without prejudice
to the provisions of article 1738.
 Extent of period of extraordinary
responsibility lasts from the time the goods
are unconditionally put in possession of and
received by the said carrier until the same are
delivered to the consignee or person who has
the receive them
 Prescription of action in cases of misdelivery
or loss of cargo:
a. 10 years from accrual of action if based
on written contract
b. 4 years if based on quasi-delict
Article 1737. The common carrier's duty to
observe extraordinary diligence over the goods
remains in full force and effect even when they
are temporarily unloaded or stored in transit,
unless the shipper or owner has made use of the
right of stoppage in transitu.
Article 1738. The extraordinary liability of the
common carrier continues to be operative even
during the time the goods are stored in a
warehouse of the carrier at the place of
destination, until the consignee has been advised
of the arrival of the goods and has had
reasonable opportunity thereafter to remove
them or otherwise dispose of them.
Article 1739. In order that the common carrier
may be exempted from responsibility, the natural
disaster must have been the proximate and only
cause of the loss. However, the common carrier
must exercise due diligence to prevent or
minimize loss before, during and after the
occurrence of flood, storm or other natural
disaster in order that the common carrier may be
exempted from liability for the loss, destruction, or
deterioration of the goods. The same duty is
incumbent upon the common carrier in case of an
act of the public enemy referred to in article 1734,
No. 2.
Article 1740. If the common carrier negligently
incurs in delay in transporting the goods, a natural
disaster shall not free such carrier from
responsibility.
Article 1741. If the shipper or owner merely
contributed to the loss, destruction or
deterioration of the goods, the proximate cause
thereof being the negligence of the common
carrier, the latter shall be liable in damages,
which however, shall be equitably reduced.
Article 1742. Even if the loss, destruction, or
deterioration of the goods should be caused by
the character of the goods, or the faulty nature of
the packing or of the containers, the common
carrier must exercise due diligence to forestall or
lessen the loss.
Article 1743. If through the order of public
authority the goods are seized or destroyed, the
common carrier is not responsible, provided said
public authority had power to issue the order.
Article 1744. A stipulation between the common
carrier and the shipper or owner limiting the
liability of the former for the loss, destruction, or
deterioration of the goods to a degree less than
extraordinary diligence shall be valid, provided it
be:
(1) In writing, signed by the shipper or
owner;
(2) Supported by a valuable
consideration other than the service
rendered by the common carrier; and
(3) Reasonable, just and not contrary to
public policy.
Article 1745. Any of the following or similar
stipulations shall be considered unreasonable,
unjust and contrary to public policy:
(1) That the goods are transported at the
risk of the owner or shipper;
(2) That the common carrier will not be
liable for any loss, destruction, or
deterioration of the goods;
(3) That the common carrier need not
observe any diligence in the custody of
the goods;
(4) That the common carrier shall
exercise a degree of diligence less than
that of a good father of a family, or of a
8
 man of ordinary prudence in the vigilance
over the movables transported;
(5) That the common carrier shall not be
responsible for the acts or omission of his
or its employees;
(6) That the common carrier's liability for
acts committed by thieves, or of robbers
who do not act with grave or irresistible
threat, violence or force, is dispensed
with or diminished;
(7) That the common carrier is not
responsible for the loss, destruction, or
deterioration of goods on account of the
defective condition of the car, vehicle,
ship, airplane or other equipment used in
the contract of carriage.
Article 1746. An agreement limiting the common
carrier's liability may be annulled by the shipper
or owner if the common carrier refused to carry
the goods unless the former agreed to such
stipulation.
Article 1747. If the common carrier, without just
cause, delays the transportation of the goods or
changes the stipulated or usual route, the
contract limiting the common carrier's liability
cannot be availed of in case of the loss,
destruction, or deterioration of the goods.
 Agreement limiting liability cannot be availed
of if:
a. There was delay in transporting of goods;
b. There was change in stipulated or usual
route
Article 1748. An agreement limiting the common
carrier's liability for delay on account of strikes or
riots is valid.
Article 1749. A stipulation that the common
carrier's liability is limited to the value of the goods
appearing in the bill of lading, unless the shipper
or owner declares a greater value, is binding.
Article 1750. A contract fixing the sum that may
be recovered. by the owner or shipper for the
loss, destruction, or deterioration of the goods is
valid, if it is reasonable and just under the
circumstances, and has been fairly and freely
agreed upon.
 Requisites for fixing amount recoverable bu
the shipper in case of loss:
a. Contract is reasonable and just under
circumstances
b. It has beem fairly and freely agreed upon
Article 1751. The fact that the common carrier
has no competitor along the line or route, or a part
thereof, to which the contract refers shall be taken
into consideration on the question of whether or
not a stipulation limiting the common carrier's
liability is reasonable, just and in consonance with
public policy.
Article 1752. Even when there is an agreement
limiting the liability of the common carrier in the
vigilance over the goods, the common carrier is
disputably presumed to have been negligent in
case of their loss, destruction or deterioration.
Article 1753. The law of the country to which the
goods are to be transported shall govern the
liability of the common carrier for their loss,
destruction or deterioration.
Article 1754. The provisions of articles 1733 to
1753 shall apply to the passenger's baggage
which is not in his personal custody or in that of
his employee. As to other baggage, the rules in
articles 1998 and 2000 to 2003 concerning the
responsibility of hotel-keepers shall be
applicable.
SUBSECTION 3. Safety of Passengers
Article 1755. A common carrier is bound to carry
the passengers safely as far as human care and
foresight can provide, using the utmost diligence
of very cautious persons, with a due regard for all
the circumstances.
 PASSENGERS- person who rides on a
vehicle of a common carrier with the consent
of the latter for the purpose of reaching a
particular destination, and generally a fixed
fare
 SPECIFIC PASSENGERS- people inside the
means of transportation who do not pay
transportation fare
a. Concessionaires doing business
b. Newsboys permitted to sell newspaper
 STOWAWAY PERSONS:
a. Rider who enters without any intention of
paying
b. Rider when required to pay refused to
pay
c. Rider who refuses to alight after having
been accorded several opportunity to
safely alight
Article 1756. In case of death of or injuries to
passengers, common carriers are presumed to
have been at fault or to have acted negligently,
unless they prove that they observed
extraordinary diligence as prescribed in articles
1733 and 1755.
 Injured person must only need to provide:
a. Existence of contract of carriage
b. Non-performance
 Remedies of pedestrian injured due to
negligence of driver of common carrier:
a. File criminal action against driver
b. File an action for damages against driver
and employer
 KABIT SYSTEM- agreement whereby a
person who has been granted a certificate of
public convenience allows other person who
own motor vehicles to operate them under his
license, sometimes for a fee or percentage of
the earnings
Article 1757. The responsibility of a common
carrier for the safety of passengers as required in
articles 1733 and 1755 cannot be dispensed with
or lessened by stipulation, by the posting of
notices, by statements on tickets, or otherwise.
Article 1758. When a passenger is carried
gratuitously, a stipulation limiting the common
carrier's liability for negligence is valid, but not for
wilful acts or gross negligence.
The reduction of fare does not justify any
limitation of the common carrier's liability
 The following are considered passengers:
a. Public officer who is granted free
passages
b. Stranger who rides free but with consent
of carrier
c. Employee of the carrier
 Only available defense in case of death or
injuries are:
9
 a. Force majeure
b. Observance of extraordinary diligence
Article 1759. Common carriers are liable for the
death of or injuries to passengers through the
negligence or wilful acts of the former's
employees, although such employees may have
acted beyond the scope of their authority or in
violation of the orders of the common carriers.
This liability of the common carriers does not
cease upon proof that they exercised all the
diligence of a good father of a family in the
selection and supervision of their employees.
Article 1760. The common carrier's responsibility
prescribed in the preceding article cannot be
eliminated or limited by stipulation, by the posting
of notices, by statements on the tickets or
otherwise.
Article 1761. The passenger must observe the
diligence of a good father of a family to avoid
injury to himself.
Article 1762. The contributory negligence of the
passenger does not bar recovery of damages for
his death or injuries, if the proximate cause
thereof is the negligence of the common carrier,
but the amount of damages shall be equitably
reduced.
Article 1763. A common carrier is responsible for
injuries suffered by a passenger on account of the
wilful acts or negligence of other passengers or
of strangers, if the common carrier's employees
through the exercise of the diligence of a good
father of a family could have prevented or
stopped the act or omission.
Article 1764. Damages in cases comprised in
this Section shall be awarded in accordance with
Title XVIII of this Book, concerning Damages.
Article 2206 shall also apply to the death of a
passenger caused by the breach of contract by a
common carrier.
 Civil indemnity of common carrier in case of
death:
a. Indemnity for death
b. Indemnity for loss of earning capacity
c. Moral damages
Article 1765. The Public Service Commission
may, on its own motion or on petition of any
interested party, after due hearing, cancel the
certificate of public convenience granted to any
common carrier that repeatedly fails to comply
with his or its duty to observe extraordinary
diligence as prescribed in this Section.
Article 1766. In all matters not regulated by this
Code, the rights and obligations of common
carriers shall be governed by the Code of
Commerce and by special laws.
TORTS INVOLVING DEPOSITS
Article 2003. The hotel-keeper cannot free
himself from responsibility by posting notices to
the effect that he is not liable for the articles
brought by the guest. Any stipulation between the
hotel-keeper and the guest whereby the
responsibility of the former as set forth in articles
1998 to 2001 is suppressed or diminished shall
be void. (n)
QUASI DELICT
Article 2144. Whoever voluntarily takes charge
of the agency or management of the business or
property of another, without any power from the
latter, is obliged to continue the same until the
termination of the affair and its incidents, or to
require the person concerned to substitute him, if
the owner is in a position to do so. This juridical
relation does not arise in either of these
instances:
(1) When the property or business is not
neglected or abandoned;
(2) If in fact the manager has been tacitly
authorized by the owner.
In the first case, the provisions of articles 1317,
1403, No. 1, and 1404 regarding unauthorized
contracts shall govern.
In the second case, the rules on agency in Title X
of this Book shall be applicable. (1888a)
 NEGOTIORUM GESTIO- gestor takes the
management of the business or property of
another person known as owner without
consent or authority of latter
 Requisites:
a. Business or property has been neglected
or abandoned by owner
b. Concerned person lawfully and
voluntarily takes over the management of
the business or property of owner
c. Owner did not expressly or impliedly
authorize the negotiorum gestor to
manage the business or property
d. Manager has no motive of avarice
 Examples of prohibition:
a. Property s fenced without any door or
opening
b. If on property there is notice
c. Notice if made by owner to officious
manager to stop his acts
d. Restraining order is issued against
officious manager
Article 2145. The officious manager shall
perform his duties with all the diligence of a good
father of a family, and pay the damages which
through his fault or negligence may be suffered
by the owner of the property or business under
management.
The courts may, however, increase or moderate
the indemnity according to the circumstances of
each case. (1889a)
Article 2146. If the officious manager delegates
to another person all or some of his duties, he
shall be liable for the acts of the delegate, without
prejudice to the direct obligation of the latter
toward the owner of the business.
The responsibility of two or more officious
managers shall be solidary, unless the
management was assumed to save the thing or
business from imminent danger. (1890a)
Article 2147. The officious manager shall be
liable for any fortuitous event:
(1) If he undertakes risky operations
which the owner was not accustomed to
embark upon;
10
 (2) If he has preferred his own interest to arises by operation of law the corresponding
that of the owner; obligation to return the same to avoid unjust
(3) If he fails to return the property or enrichment on part of recipient
business after demand by the owner;  Requisites:
(4) If he assumed the management in a. One who paid or delivered was not under
bad faith. (1891a) any obligation to do so
 Exceptions which render officious manager b. Payment was made by reason of
liable for any fortuitous event: essential mistake of fact and not through
a. He undertakes risky operations which liberality or another’s cause
owner was not accustomed to embark Article 2159. Whoever in bad faith accepts an
upon undue payment, shall pay legal interest if a sum
b. If he has preferred his own interest to that of money is involved, or shall be liable for fruits
of the owner received or which should have been received if
c. If he fails to return the property of the thing produces fruits.
business after demand by owner He shall furthermore be answerable for any loss
d. If he assumed the management in bad or impairment of the thing from any cause, and
faith for damages to the person who delivered the
Article 2148. Except when the management was thing, until it is recovered. (1896a)
assumed to save property or business from  Effects of accepting due payment in bad faith:
imminent danger, the officious manager shall be a. Payment of legal interest if money is
liable for fortuitous events: involved
(1) If he is manifestly unfit to carry on the b. Fruits received or which should have
management; been received
(2) If by his intervention he prevented a c. Loss or impairment of thing from any
more competent person from taking up cause
the management. (n) d. Damages suffered by payer or deliverer
Article 2149. The ratification of the management  Effects of acceptance in good faith:
by the owner of the business produces the effects a. Impairment or loss of thing insofar as he
of an express agency, even if the business may has been benefited
not have been successful. (1892a) b. Return of the price, if thing has been
Article 2150. Although the officious management alienated
may not have been expressly ratified, the owner c. For assignment of credit or action to
of the property or business who enjoys the collect the said price or sum
advantages of the same shall be liable for  Quasi- contracts prescribe in 6 years
obligations incurred in his interest, and shall
reimburse the officious manager for the
necessary and useful expenses and for the
damages which the latter may have suffered in
the performance of his duties.
The same obligation shall be incumbent upon him
when the management had for its purpose the
prevention of an imminent and manifest loss,
although no benefit may have been derived.
(1893)
Article 2151. Even though the owner did not
derive any benefit and there has been no
imminent and manifest danger to the property or
business, the owner is liable as under the first
paragraph of the preceding article, provided:
(1) The officious manager has acted in
good faith, and
(2) The property or business is intact,
ready to be returned to the owner. (n)
 Extinguishment of management:
a. Owner repudiates it or puts an end
thereto
b. When officious maanger withdraws from
management
c. By death, civil interdiction, insanity or
insolvency of owner or officious manager

Solutio Indebiti
Article 2154. If something is received when there
is no right to demand it, and it was unduly
delivered through mistake, the obligation to return
it arises. (1895)
 SOLUTIO INDEBITI- person receives
something that is not due to him and there

11