You are on page 1of 7

1/26/2019 G.R. No. 213418, September 21, 2016 - ALFREDO S.RAMOS, CONCHITA S. RAMOS, BENJAMIN B. RAMOS, NELSON T.

ELSON T. RAMOS AN…

ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ | chanrobles.com™

Like 0 Tweet Share


Search

Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 2016 > September 2016 Decisions > G.R. No. 213418,
September 21, 2016 - ALFREDO S.RAMOS, CONCHITA S. RAMOS, BENJAMIN B. RAMOS, NELSON T. RAMOS AND
ROBINSON T. RAMOS, Petitioners, v. CHINA SOUTHERN AIRLINES CO. LTD., Respondent.:

Custom Search
Search
G.R. No. 213418, September 21, 2016 - ALFREDO S.RAMOS, CONCHITA S. RAMOS, BENJAMIN B.
RAMOS, NELSON T. RAMOS AND ROBINSON T. RAMOS, Petitioners, v. CHINA SOUTHERN AIRLINES CO.
LTD., Respondent.

ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

THIRD DIVISION

G.R. No. 213418, September 21, 2016

ALFREDO S.RAMOS, CONCHITA S. RAMOS, BENJAMIN B. RAMOS, NELSON T. RAMOS AND


ROBINSON T. RAMOS, Petitioners, v. CHINA SOUTHERN AIRLINES CO. LTD., Respondent.

DECISION

PEREZ, J.:

For resolution of the Court is this Petition for Review on Certiorari1 filed by petitioners Alfredo S. Ramos,
Conchita S. Ramos, Benjamin B. Ramos, Nelson T. Ramos and Robinson T. Ramos, seeking to reverse and
set aside the Decision2 dated 19 March 2013 and Resolution3 dated 9 July 2014 of the Court of Appeals
(CA) in CA-G.R. CV. No. 94561. The assailed decision and resolution affirmed with modification the 23
March 2009 Decision4 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila, Branch 36, which ordered respondent
China Southern Airlines to pay petitioners the amount of P692,000.00, representing the amount of
damages and attorney's fees. On appeal, the appellate court affirmed the award of actual damages but
deleted the order for payment of moral and exemplary damages in the amount of P600,000.00.5 chanrobleslaw

The Facts

DebtKollect Company, Inc. On 7 August 2003, petitioners purchased five China Southern Airlines roundtrip plane tickets from Active
Travel Agency for $985.00.6 It is provided in their itineraries that petitioners will be leaving Manila on 8
August 2003 at 0900H and will be leaving Xiamen on 12 August 2003 at 1920H.7 Nothing eventful
happened during petitioners' flight going to Xiamen as they were able to successfully board the plane
which carried them to Xiamen International Airport. On their way back to the Manila, however, petitioners
were prevented from taking their designated flight despite the fact that earlier that day an agent from
Active Tours informed them that their bookings for China Southern Airlines 1920H flight are confirmed.8
The refusal came after petitioners already checked in all their baggages and were given the
corresponding claim stubs and after they had paid the terminal fees. According to the airlines' agent with
whom they spoke at the airport, petitioners were merely chance passengers but they may be allowed to
join the flight if they are willing to pay an additional 500 Renminbi (RMB) per person. When petitioners
refused to defray the additional cost, their baggages were offloaded from the plane and China Southern
Airlines 1920H flight then left Xiamen International Airport without them.9 Because they have business
commitments waiting for them in Manila, petitioners were constrained to rent a car that took them to
Chuan Chio Station where they boarded the train to Hongkong.10 Upon reaching Hong Kong, petitioners
purchased new plane tickets from Philippine Airlines (PAL) that flew them back to Manila.11 chanrobleslaw

Upon arrival in Manila, petitioners went to Active Travel to inform them of their unfortunate fate with
China Southern Airlines. In their effort to avoid lawsuit, Active Travel offered to refund the price of the
plane tickets but petitioners refused to accept the offer. Petitioners then went to China Southern Airlines
ChanRobles Intellectual Property to demand for the reimbursement of their airfare and travel expenses in the amount of P87,375.00.
When the airline refused to accede to their demand, petitioners initiated an action for damages before
Division the RTC of Manila against China Southern Airlines and Active Travel. In their Complaint docketed as Civil

http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2016septemberdecisions.php?id=844 1/7
1/26/2019 G.R. No. 213418, September 21, 2016 - ALFREDO S.RAMOS, CONCHITA S. RAMOS, BENJAMIN B. RAMOS, NELSON T. RAMOS AN…
Case No. 04-109574, petitioners sought for the payment of the amount of P87,375.00 as actual
damages, P500,000.00 as moral damages, P500,000.00 as exemplary damages and cost of the suit.12 chanrobleslaw

In their Answer,13 China Southern Airlines denied liability by alleging that petitioners were not confirmed
passengers of the airlines but were merely chance passengers. According to the airlines, it was
specifically provided in the issued tickets that petitioners are required to re-confirm all their bookings at
least 72 hours before their scheduled time of departures but they failed to do so which resulted in the
automatic cancellation of their bookings.

The RTC then proceeded with the reception of evidence after the pre-trial conference.

On 23 March 2009, the RTC rendered a Decision14 in favor of the petitioners and ordered Chkia Southern
Airlines to pay damages in the amount of P692,000.00, broken down as follows: ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary

"WHEREFORE, judgment is hereby rendered ordering the defendant [China Southern


Airlines] to pay [petitioners]:

1. The sum of [P]62,000.00 as actual damages;


chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary

2. The sum of [P]300,000.00 as moral damages;

3. The sum of [P]300,000.00 as exemplary damages; and cralawlawlibrary

4. The sum of [P]30,000.00 for attorney's fees.

The defendants' counterclaim against plaintiffs are [hereby] dismissed for insufficiency of
evidence [enough] to sustain the damages claimed."15 chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary

On appeal, however, the CA modified the RTC Decision by deleting the award for moral and exemplary
damages. According to the appellate court, petitioners failed to prove that China Southern Airlines'
breach of contractual obligation was attended with bad faith.16 The disquisition of the CA reads: ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary

"xxx. Where in breaching the contract, the defendant is not shown to have acted
fraudulently or in bad faith, liability for damages is limited to the natural and probable
consequences of the breach of the obligation and which the parties had foreseen or could
reasonably have foreseen; and in that case, such liability would not include liability for
moral and exemplary damages.
September-2016 Jurisprudence
In this case, We are not persuaded that [China Southern Airlines] breach of contractual
obligation had been attended by bad faith or malice or gross negligence amounting to bad
faith. On the contrary, it appears that despite [petitioner's] failure to "re-confirm" their
G.R. No. 211608, September 07, 2016 - PEOPLE OF
bookings, [China Southern Airlines] exerted diligent efforts to comply with its obligation to
THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MENARDO
BOMBASI Y VERGARA, Accused-Appellant. [petitioners]. If at the outset, [China Southern Airlines] simply did not intend to comply
with its promise to transport [petitioners] back to Manila, it would not have taken the
G.R. No. 195975, September 05, 2016 - TAINA trouble of proposing that the latter could still board the plane as "chance passengers"
MANIGQUE-STONE, Petitioner, v. CATTLEYA LAND, provided [that] they will pay the necessary pay and penalties.
INC., AND SPOUSES TROADIO B. TECSON AND
ASUNCION ORTALIZ-TECSON, Respondents. Thus, We believe and so hold that the damages recoverable by [petitioners] are limited to
the peso value of the PAL ticket they had purchased for their return flight from Xiamen,
G.R. No. 212171, September 07, 2016 - PEOPLE OF plus attorney's fees, in the amount of [P]30,000.00, considering that [petitioners] were
THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MERCURY ultimately compelled to litigate their claim[s] against [China Southern Airlines]."17
DELA CRUZ ALIAS "DEDAY," Accused-Appellant.
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary

Since China Southern, Airlines' refusal to let petitioners board the plane was not attended by bad faith,
A.C. No. 10565, September 07, 2016 -
the appellate court decided not to award petitioners moral and exemplary damages. The CA disposed in
PROSECUTOR RHODNA A. BACATAN, Complainant, v.
ATTY. MERARI D. DADULA, Respondent. this wise: ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary

A.C. No. 7045, September 05, 2016 - THE LAW "WHEREFORE, premises considered, the instant appeal is hereby AFFIRMED with
FIRM OF CHAVEZ MIRANDA ASEOCHE REPRESENTED MODIFICATION in that the award of moral and exemplary damages are hereby
BY ITS FOUNDING PARTNER, ATTY. FRANCISCO I. DELETED."18 chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary

CHAVEZ, Complainant, v. ATTYS. RESTITUTO S.


LAZARO AND RODEL R. MORTA, Respondents. Dissatisfied, petitioners timely interposed a Motion for Partial Reconsideration which was partially granted
by the CA in a Resolution19 dated 9 July 2014, to wit: ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary

G.R. No. 204423, September 14, 2016 -


PHILIPPINE SCIENCE HIGH SCHOOL-CAGAYAN "ACCORDINGLY, the instant Motion is PARTIALLY GRANTED. The Decision dated 19
VALLEY CAMPUS, Petitioner, v. PIRRA March 2013 rendered by this Court in CA-G.R. CV No. 94561 is hereby MODIFIED in that
CONSTRUCTION ENTERPRISES, Respondent. [China Southern Airlines] is ORDERED to pay [petitioners] interest of 6% per annum on
the P62,000.00 as actual damages from the finality of this Court's Decision until the same
I.P.I. No. 16-244-CA-J, September 06, 2016 - Re:
VERIFIED COMPLAINT OF CATALINA Z. ALILING is fully satisfied."20 chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary

AGAINST ASSOCIATE JUSTICE MA. LUISA C.


QUIJANO-PADILLA, COURT OF APPEALS, MANILA Unflinching, petitioners elevated the matter before the Court by filing the instant Petition for Review on
RELATIVE TO CA-G.R. CV NO. 103042 Certiorari assailing the CA Decision and Resolution on the following grounds: ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary

G.R. No. 203576, September 14, 2016 - NAGA The Issues


CENTRUM, INC., REPRESENTED BY AIDA KELLY
YUBUCO, Petitioner, v. SPOUSES RAMON J. ORZALES I.
AND NENITA F. ORZALES, Respondent.
THE COURT OF APPEALS COMMITTED GRAVE AND SERIOUS ERROR WHEN IT DELETED
G.R. No. 192754, September 07, 2016 - LEONIS THE AWARDS OF MORAL AND EXEMPLARY DAMAGES, A DEPARTURE FROM ESTABLISHED
NAVIGATION CO., INC. AND WORLD MARINE PANAMA DOCTRINES THAT PASSENGERS WHO ARE BUMPED-OFF ARE ENTITLED TO MORAL AND
S.A., Petitioners, v. EDUARDO C. OBRERO AND EXEMPLARY DAMAGES;
MERCEDITA P. OBRERO, Respondents.
I.
G.R. No. 181387, September 05, 2016 - CAMERON
GRANVILLE 3 ASSET MANAGEMENT, INC., Petitioner,
v. UE MONTHLY ASSOCIATES, UEAMI WORKERS THE COURT OF APPEALS COMMITTED GRAVE AND SERIOUS ERROR WHEN IT DECLARED
UNION NFL AND ALFREDO BASI, Respondent. THAT BUMPING OFF OF THE PETITIONERS WAS NOT ATTENDED BY BAD FAITH AND
MALICE CONTRARY TO THE FINDINGS OF THE LOWER COURT;
G.R. No. 206808-09, September 07, 2016 - LOCAL
WATER UTILITIES ADMINISTRATION EMPLOYEES III.
ASSOCIATION FOR PROGRESS (LEAP), MELANIO B.
CUCHAPIN II, GREARDO* G. PERU, ROLAND S. THE COURT OF APPEALS COMMITTED GRAVE AND SERIOUS ERROR WHEN IT HELD THAT
CABAHUG, GLORIA P. VELASQUEZ, ERLINDA G. THE LEGAL INTEREST COMMENCE ONLY FROM THE FINALITY OF THE DECISION INSTEAD
VILLANUEVA, TEODORO M. REYNOSO, FERNANDO L.
OF FROM THE DATE OF EXTRA-JUDICIAL DEMAND ON 18 AUGUST 2003. 21
NICANDRO, JOSEPHINE P. SIMENE, LAMBERTO R.
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary

RIVERA, REYNALDO M. VIDA, and RUCTICO** B.


The Court's Ruling
TUTOL, Petitioners, v. LOCAL WATER UTILITIES
ADMINISTRATION (LWUA) and DEPARTMENT OF
BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT, Respondents. We resolve to grant the petition.

G.R. No. 210798, September 14, 2016 - PEOPLE OF A contract of carriage, in this case, air transport, is intended to serve the traveling public and thus,
THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. BEVERLY imbued with public interest.22 The law governing common carriers consequently imposes an exacting
VILLANUEVA Y MANALILI @ BEBANG, Accused- standard of conduct,23viz:
Appellant.
ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary

"1755 of the New Civil Code. A common carrier is bound to carry passengers safely as far
as human care and foresight can provide, using the utmost diligence of very cautious

http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2016septemberdecisions.php?id=844 2/7
1/26/2019 G.R. No. 213418, September 21, 2016 - ALFREDO S.RAMOS, CONCHITA S. RAMOS, BENJAMIN B. RAMOS, NELSON T. RAMOS AN…
G.R.No. 186199, September 07, 2016 - EDGARDO A. persons, with due regard for all the circumstances."
QUILO AND ADNALOY VILLAHERMOSA, Petitioners, v.
TEODULA BAJAO, Respondent. When an airline issues a ticket to a passenger confirmed on a particular flight, on a certain date, a
contract of carriage arises, and the passenger has every right to expect that he would fly on that flight
G.R. No. 187942, September 07, 2016 - THE ROMAN and on that date. If that does not happen, then the carrier opens itself to a suit for breach of contract of
CATHOLIC BISHOP OF TUGUEGARAO, Petitioner, v.
carriage.24 In an action based on a breach of contract of carriage, the aggrieved party does not have to
FLORENTINA PRUDENCIO, NOW DECEASED,
SUBSTITUTED BY HER HEIRS, NAMELY: EXEQUIEL, prove that the common carrier was at fault or was negligent.25 All he has to prove is the existence of
cralawred

LORENZO, PRIMITIVO, MARCELINO, JULIANA, the contract and the fact of its non-performance by the carrier, through the latter's failure to carry the
ALFREDO AND ROSARIO, ALL SURNAMED DOMINGO; passenger to its destination.26 chanrobleslaw

AVELINA PRUDENCIO, ASSISTED BY HER HUSBAND


VICTORIANO DIMAYA; ERNESTO PENALBER AND It is beyond question in the case at bar that petitioners had an existing contract of air carriage with China
RODRIGO TALANG; SPOUSES ISIDRO CEPEDA AND Southern Airlines as evidenced by the airline tickets issued by Active Travel. When they showed up at the
SALVACION DIVINI, NOW DECEASED, SUBSTITUTED airport and after they went through the routine security check including the checking in of their luggage
BY HER HEIRS, NAMELY: MARCIAL, PEDRO AND LINA,
and the payment of the corresponding terminal fees, petitioners were not allowed by China Southern
ALL SURNAMED CEPEDA, Respondents.
Airlines to board on the plane. The airlines' claim that petitioners do not have confirmed reservations
A.C. No. 10574 (Formerly CBD Case No. 11-3047), cannot be given credence by the Court. The petitioners were issued two-way tickets with itineraries
September 20, 2016 - PATRICK R. FABIE, indicating the date and time of their return flight to Manila. These are binding contracts of carriage.27
Complainant, v. ATTY. LEONARDO M. REAL, China Southern Airlines allowed petitioners to check in their luggage and issued the necessary claim
Respondents. stubs showing that they were part of the flight. It was only after petitioners went through all the required
check-in procedures that they were informed by the airlines that they were merely chance passengers.
G.R. No. 192132, September 14, 2016 - HEIRS OF Airlines companies do not, as a practice, accept pieces of luggage from passengers without confirmed
ZOSIMO Q. MARAVILLA, NAMELY, ZOSIMO W. reservations. Quite tellingly, all the foregoing circumstances lead us to the inevitable conclusion that
MARAVILLA, JR., YVETTE MARAVILLA AND RICHARD petitioners indeed were bumped off from the flight. We cannot from the records of this case deduce the
MARAVILLA, REPRESENTED BY ZOSIMO W.
true reason why the airlines refused to board petitioners back to Manila. What we can be sure of is the
MARAVILLA, JR., Petitioners, v. PRIVALDO TUPAS,
Respondent. unacceptability of the proffered reason that rightfully gives rise to the claim for damages.

G.R. No. 206629, September 14, 2016 - NARCISO T. The prologue shapes the body of the petitioners' rights, that is, that they are entitled to damages, actual,
MATIS, Petitioner, v. MANILA ELECTRIC COMPANY, moral and exemplary.
Respondent.
There is no doubt that petitioners are entitled to actual or compensatory damages. Both the RTC and the
G.R. No. 210940, September 06, 2016 - SOCIAL CA uniformly held that there was a breach of contract committed by China Southern Airlines when it
SECURITY SYSTEM, Petitioner, v. COMMISSION ON failed to deliver petitioners to their intended destination, a factual finding that we do not intend to depart
AUDIT, Respondent. from in the absence of showing that it is unsupported by evidence. As the aggrieved parties, petitioners
had satisfactorily proven the existence of the contract and the fact of its non-performance by China
G.R. No. 201320, September 14, 2016 - WILSON T. Southern Airlines; the concurrence of these elements called for the imposition of actual or compensatory
LIM, Petitioner, v. OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY
damages.
OMBUDSMAN FOR THE MILITARY AND OTHER LAW
ENFORCEMENT OFFICES (MOLEO) AND P/S INSP.
EUSTIQUIO FUENTES, Respondents. With respect to moral damages, the following provision of the New Civil Code is instructive: ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary

G.R. No. 219815, September 14, 2016 - J.O.S. Article 2220. Willful injury to property may be a legal ground for awarding moral damages
MANAGING BUILDERS, INC. AND EDUARDO B. if the court should find that, under the circumstances, such damages are justly due. The
OLAGUER, Petitioners, v. UNITED OVERSEAS BANK same rule applies to breaches of contract where the defendant acted fraudulently or in bad
PHILIPPINES (FORMERLY KNOWN AS WESTMONT faith.
BANK), EMMANUEL T. MANGOSING AND DAVID GOH
CHAI ENG, Respondents. Bad faith does not simply connote bad judgment or negligence. It imports dishonest purpose or some
moral obliquity and conscious doing of a wrong. It means breach of a known duty through some motive,
G.R. No. 220732, September 06, 2016 - ELMER G. interest or ill will that partakes the nature of fraud. Bad faith is in essence a question of intention.28 chanrobleslaw

SINDAC @ "TAMER," Petitioner, v. THE PEOPLE OF


THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.
In Japan Airlines v.Simangan,29 the Court took the occasion to expound on the meaning of bad faith in a
G.R. Nos. 190015 & 190019, September 14, 2016 - breach of contract of carriage that merits the award of moral damages: ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary

GERALDINE MICHELLE B. FALLARME AND ANDREA


MARTINEZ-GACOS, Petitioners, v. SAN JUAN DE DIOS "Clearly, JAL is liable for moral damages. It is firmly settled that moral damages are
EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION, INC., CHONA M. recoverable in suits predicated on breach of a contract of carriage where it is proved that
HERNANDEZ, VALERIANO ALEJANDRO III, SISTER the carrier was guilty of fraud or bad faith, as in this case. Inattention to and lack of care
CONCEPTION GABATINO, D.C., AND SISTER JOSEFINA for the interests of its passengers who are entitled to its utmost consideration, particularly
QUIACHON, D.C., Respondent. as to their convenience, amount to bad faith which entitles the passenger to an award of
moral damages. What the law considers as bad faith which may furnish the ground for an
G.R. No. 214238, September 14, 2016 - PEOPLE OF award of moral damages would be bad faith in securing the contract and in the execution
THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ESMAEL thereof, as well as in the enforcement of its terms, or any other kind of deceit."
ZACARIA Y WAGAS, Accused-Appellant.
Applying the foregoing yardstick in the case at bar, We find that the airline company acted in bad faith in
G.R. No. 191170, September 14, 2016 - CAMERON insolently bumping petitioners off the flight after they have completed all the pre-departure routine. Bad
GRANVILLE 3 ASSET MANAGEMENT, INC., Petitioner, faith is evident when the ground personnel of the airline company unjustly and unreasonably refused to
v. FIDEL O. CHUA AND FILIDEN REALTY AND
board petitioners to the plane which compelled them to rent a car and take the train to the nearest
DEVELOPMENT CORP., Respondent.
airport where they bought new sets of plane tickets from another airline that could fly them home.
G.R. No. 219855, September 06, 2016 - PEOPLE OF Petitioners have every reason to expect that they would be transported to their intended destination after
THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ROMEO they had checked in their luggage and had gone through all the security checks. Instead, China Southern
LINTAG Y LAUREOLA, Accused-Appellant. Airlines offered to allow them to join the flight if they are willing to pay additional cost; this amount is on
top of the purchase price of the plane tickets. The requirement to pay an additional fare was insult upon
G.R. No. 199397, September 14, 2016 - PEOPLE OF injury. It is an aggravation of the breach of contract. Undoubtedly, petitioners are entitled to the award of
THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. DARWIN moral damages. The purpose of awarding moral damages is to enable the injured party to obtain means,
GITO Y CORLIN, ACCUSED-APPELLANT., Respondent. diversion or amusement that will serve to alleviate the moral suffering [that] he has undergone by
reason of defendant['s] culpable action.30
G.R. No. 194561, September 14, 2016 -
chanrobleslaw

DRUGSTORES ASSOCIATION OF THE PHILIPPINES,


INC. AND NORTHERN LUZON DRUG CORPORATION, China Southern Airlines is also liable for exemplary damages as it acted in a wantonly oppressive manner
Petitioners, v. NATIONAL COUNCIL ON DISABILITY as succinctly discussed above against the petitioners. Exemplary damages which are awarded by way of
AFFAIRS; DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH; DEPARTMENT OF example or correction for the public good, may be recovered in contractual obligations, as in this case, if
FINANCE; BUREAU OF INTERNAL REVENUE; defendant acted in wanton, fraudulent, reckless, oppressive or malevolent manner.31 chanrobleslaw

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND LOCAL


GOVERNMENT; AND DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL Article 2216 of the Civil Code provides that assessment of damages is left to the discretion of the court
WELFARE AND DEVELOPMENT, Respondent. according to the circumstances of each case. This discretion is limited by the principle that the amount
awarded should not be palpably excessive as to indicate that it was the result of prejudice or corruption
G.R. No. 190271, September 14, 2016 - TRANSIMEX on the part of the trial court. Simply put, the amount of damages must be fair, reasonable and
CO., Petitioner, v. MAFRE ASIAN INSURANCE CORP.,
Respondent. proportionate to the injury suffered.32 With fairness as the benchmark, We find adequate the amount of
P300,000.00 each for moral and exemplary damages imposed by the trial court.
G.R. No. 182604, September 27, 2016 - DR.
ROLANDO B. MANGUNE, DR. RENE A. ARCE AND EMMA The last issue is the reckoning point of the 6% interest on the money judgment. Following this Court's
E. TAÑAFRANCA, IN THEIR RESPECTIVE PERSONAL ruling in Nacar v. Gallery Frames,33 we agree with the petitioners that the 6% rate of interest per annum
CAPACITIES AND AS ATTORNEYS-IN-FACT FOR AND shall be reckoned from the date of their extrajudicial demand on 18 August 2003 until the date of finality
IN BEHALF OF DR. VIRGINIA M. AGUILAS, ROLANDO of this judgment. The total amount shall thereafter earn interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per
R. ANATALIO, DR. LEA M. DE LEON-ASI, CATALINO N.
annum from such finality of judgment until its satisfaction.
ATANACIO, JR., JULIANA M. BATALLER, MA. LUISA B.
CAÑEZA, LILIAN C. CANILAO, RANIEL S. CAPADA,
FLORENDO A. DAYUS, JENNIFER D. PAGULAYAN,
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the petition is GRANTED. The Court hereby AWARDS petitioners
BIENVENIDO C. DE VILLA, JOSE A. DELOS REYES, the following amounts: ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary

CYNTHIA A. DIAZ, ANNA LEAH D. DIPATUAN,


MADELAINE M. ESTOCAPIO, DR. MARIA SONIA YEE-
(a) P62,000.00 as actual damages, with 6% interest per annum from date of
FESTIN, MARIO E. FLORENDO, RUEL E. FORTUNADO,
NATIVIDAD A. GAMIAO, IRMA Q. ANDAL, CHARITO C.
extrajudicial demand on 18 August 2003 until finality of this judgment, and the
LAZAM, AGNES R. LOVINDINO, EVELYN M. MABAG, total amount to thereafter earn interest at 6% per annum from finality of
RECHILDA B. MACAFE, ZENAIDA M. MADIANGKIT, judgment until full satisfaction;
ANGELICA T. MALAZARTE, DOMINGO P. MANAY, DR.
EDGAR ORVEN M. MORTEL, SATURNINO E. QUIBAN,

http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2016septemberdecisions.php?id=844 3/7
1/26/2019 G.R. No. 213418, September 21, 2016 - ALFREDO S.RAMOS, CONCHITA S. RAMOS, BENJAMIN B. RAMOS, NELSON T. RAMOS AN…
MARITES J. RAMOS, DR. MELINDA S.L. A. RAZALAN, (b) P300,000.00 as moral damages; and
BAITONGGAL L. SAUDAGAL, DR. JOHN ALBERT V.
TABLIZO, JULIETA T. TERANIA, ANNIE B. TRINIDAD,
JUDY T. AVNER, DR. ROMEO F. UY, AVELONA A. VEA,
MINVILUZ G. VERA CRUZ, PEÑAFLOR M. VILLAFLOR, (c) P300,000.00 as exemplary damages.
JR., AND DR. LEOPOLDO P. SISON, JR., ALL OF
TAGUIG-PATEROS DISTRICT HOSPITAL, Petitioners,
SO ORDERED.
v. HONORABLE SECRETARY EDUARDO ERMITA, IN HIS
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary

OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS EXECUTIVE SECRETARY,


HONORABLE SECRETARY FRANCISCO DUQUE III, IN Velasco, Jr., (Chairperson), Peralta, Reyes, and Jardeleza, JJ., concur.
HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF THE
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, THE CITY GOVERNMENT OF
TAGUIG AS REPRESENTED BY ITS MAYOR, Endnotes:
HONORABLE SIGFRIDO R. TINGA, AND THE
MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT OF PATEROS, AS
1Rollo, pp. 17-29.
REPRESENTED BY ITS MAYOR, HONORABLE ROSENDO
CAPCO, Respondent.
2 Id. at 31-37; penned by Associate Justice Jane Aurora C. Lantion with Associate Justices
G.R. No. 210200, September 13, 2016 - JULIET B. Vicente S.E. Veloso and Eduardo B. Peralta, Jr., concurring.
DANO, Petitioner, v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS
AND MARIE KAREN JOY B. DIGAL, Respondents.; 3
MARIA EMILY D. DAGAANG, Petitioner-Intervenor. Id. at 39-42.

A.C. No. 11095 [Formerly CBD Case No. 11-3140], 4 Id. at 135-151.
September 20, 2016 - EUFEMIA A. CAMINO,
Complainant, v. ATTY. RYAN REY L. PASAGUI, 5 Id. at 37.
Respondent.
6 Id. at 49.
G.R. No. 188952, September 21, 2016 -
PEÑAFRANCIA SHIPPING CORPORATION AND SANTA
CLARA SHIPPING CORPORATION, Petitioners, v. 168 7 Id. at 62-64.
SHIPPING LINES, INC., Respondent.
8 Id. at 137-140.
A.C. No. 11238, September 21, 2016 - ATTY.
MYLENE S. YUMUL-ESPINA, Complainant, v. ATTY. 9
BENEDICTO D. TABAQUERO, Respondent. Id.

G.R. No. 187922, September 21, 2016 - MARPHIL 10 Id.


EXPORT CORPORATION AND IRENEO LIM, Petitioners,
v. ALLIED BANKING CORPORATION, SUBSTITUTED BY 11 Id.
PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK, Respondent.
12 Id. at 67.
G.R. No. 188646, September 21, 2016 - GEORGE C.
CORDERO, Petitioner, v. BOARD OF NURSING,
Respondent. 13 Id. at 54-58.

A.C. No. 10150, September 21, 2016 - GINA E. 14 Supra note 4.


ENDAYA, Complainant, v. ATTY. EDGARDO O. PALAY,
Respondent. 15 Id. at 151.
G.R. No. 185765, September 28, 2016 -
PHILIPPINE ECONOMIC ZONE AUTHORITY, Petitioner, 16 Id. at 31-37.
v. PILHINO SALES CORPORATION, Respondent.
17 Id. at 36.
G.R. No. 184237, September 21, 2016 - HENRY H.
TENG, Petitioner, v. LAWRENCE C. TING, EDMUND 18
TING AND ANTHONY TING, Respondent. Id. at 37.

G.R. No. 222740, September 28, 2016 - ST. LUKE'S 19 Id. at 39-42.
COLLEGE OF MEDICINE-WILLIAM H. QUASHA
MEMORIAL FOUNDATION, DR. BRIGIDO L. 20 Id. at 42.
CARANDANG, AND DR. ALEJANDRO P. ORTIGAS
Petitioners, v. SPOUSES MANUEL AND ESMERALDA 21
PEREZ AND SPOUSES ERIC AND JURISITA QUINTOS, Id. at 20.
Respondents.
22Northwest Airlines v. Chiong, 567 Phil. 289, 304 (2008).
G.R. No. 211680, September 21, 2016 - PEOPLE OF
THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee, v. BELBAN SIC-OPEN Y 23 Id.
DIMAS, Appellant.
24Alitalia Airways v. Court of Appeals, 265 Phil. 791, 798 (1990).
G.R. No. 193837, September 21, 2016 - PEOPLE OF
THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. RENATO M.
PANGAN, Accused-Appellant. 25 cralawred Sps. Viloria v. Continental Airlines, Inc., 679 Phil. 61, 84-85 (2012).

G.R. No. 224804, September 21, 2016 - EFREN R. 26Japan Airlines v. Simangan, 575 Phil. 359, 375 (2008).
LEYNES, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,
Respondent. 27Cathay Pacific Airways v. Reyes, G.R. No. 185891, June 26, 2013, 699 SCRA 725.
G.R. No. 215072, September 07, 2016 -
PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK, Petitioner, v. HEIRS OF 28 Supra note 22 at 305.
THE LATE IRENEO AND CARIDAD ENTAPA, NAMELY:
ROSARIO ENTAPA-ORPEZA, JULIANNE E. HAMM,1 29 Supra note 26 at 376.
CERINA G. ENTAPA, WINSTON G. ENTAPA
(DECEASED) REPRESENTED BY HIS SPOUSE, NINFA 30PAL
LAMISTOZA-ENTAPA, FRANKLIN G. ENTAPA, MARINA v. Court of Appeals, 587 Phil. 568, 583 (2008).
E. SCHACHT, AND ELVIRA G. ENTAPA, Respondents.
31 Supra note 26 at 377.
G.R. No. 201354, September 21, 2016 - PABLO M.
PADILLA, JR. AND MARIA LUISA P. PADILLA, 32 Supra note 30.
Petitioners, v. LEOPOLDO MALICSI, LITO CASINO,
AND AGRIFINO GUANES, Respondents. 33 G.R. No. 189871, August 13, 2013, 703 SCRA 439.
G.R. No. 183947, September 21, 2016 - RIZAL
COMMERCIAL BANKING CORPORATION, Petitioner, v.
TEODORO G. BERNARDINO, Respondent.

G.R. No. 204891, September 14, 2016 - PEOPLE OF


THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee, v. REYNALDO ABAYON Y Back to Home | Back to Main
APONTE, Appellant.

A.C. No. 11064, September 27, 2016 - BIENVENIDA


FLOR SUAREZ, Complainant, v. ATTY. ELEONORA. QUICK SEARCH
MARAVILLA-ONA, Respondent.

A.M. No. P-09-2621 [Formerly OCA-I.P.I. No. 08-


2939-P], September 20, 2016 - OFFICE OF THE COURT
1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908
ADMINISTRATOR, Complainant, v. EDUARDO T.
UMBLAS, LEGAL RESEARCHER, REGIONAL TRIAL 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916
COURT, BRANCH 33, BALLESTEROS, CAGAYAN,
1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924
Respondent.
1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 1932

http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2016septemberdecisions.php?id=844 4/7
1/26/2019 G.R. No. 213418, September 21, 2016 - ALFREDO S.RAMOS, CONCHITA S. RAMOS, BENJAMIN B. RAMOS, NELSON T. RAMOS AN…
G.R. No. 208979, September 21, 2016 - 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 1939 1940
GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE SYSTEM,
Petitioner, v. ROGELIO F. MANALO, Respondent.
1941 1942 1943 1944 1945 1946 1947 1948
1949 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956
A.C. No. 11099, September 27, 2016 - LILY
FLORES-SALADO, MINDA FLORES LURA, AND FE V. 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964
FLORES, Complainants, v. ATTY. ROMAN A. 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972
VILLANUEVA, JR. Respondent.
1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980
A.C. No. 7348, September 27, 2016 - ROUEL YAP 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988
PARAS, Complainant, v. ATTY. JUSTO P. PARAS,
Respondent.
1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
G.R. No. 208067, September 14, 2016 - PEOPLE OF
THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee, v. RONNIE R. LIBRIAS,
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Appellant. 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

G.R. No. 211553, September 13, 2016 - LEANDRO


B. VERCELES, JR., Petitioner, v. COMMISSION ON
AUDIT, Respondent.

G.R. No. 208089, September 28, 2016 -


PHILIPPINE TRANSMARINE CARRIERS, INC., STEALTH Main Indices of the Library ---> Go!
MARITIME CORPORATION AND CARLOS SALINAS,
Petitioners, v. CASIANO F. SALADAS, JR., Respondent.

G.R. No. 217356, September 07, 2016 - DOROTEO


C. GAERLAN, (DECEASED) SUBSTITUTED BY HIS SON,
RAYMOND G. GAERLAN, Petitioner, v. PHILIPPINE
NATIONAL BANK, Respondent.

G.R. No. 222424, September 21, 2016 - FONTANA


DEVELOPMENT CORP., DENNIS PAK AS GENERAL
MANAGER, PASTOR ISAAC AS DIRECTOR OF HUMAN
RESOURCES, CHRIS CHENG* AS DEPUTY GROUP
FINANCIAL CONTROLLER, JESUS CHUA,
REPRESENTATIVE MICHAEL FELICIANO, ALMA
EREDIANO, LEILANI VALIENTE, MAN CHOI AS GROUP
FINANCIAL CONTROLLER, AND JAIME VILLAREAL AS
CHIEF ENGINEER, Petitioners, v. SASCHA
VUKASINOVIC, Respondent.

G.R. No. 221864, September 14, 2016 - CELERNA


CALAYAG, AMELIA ORFIANO, MARILYN HIBE,
ERNESTO CLARIN, NARCISO UNGSOD, BONIFACIO
TORIDA, BOB ILLUT, EVELYN BAJET, ELORDE
ILUSTRISIMO, ENRICO DETIQUEZ, JAIME CASTRO,
JOSEFINA DAMALERIO, CARIDAD LERUM, NOVA
FAJARDO, DANILO DELA CRUZ, ALBERTO FAUSTO,
ESTELLA GELLI, KATHERINE DELA CRUZ, HEIDEE
LAUREL, NISSAN LAUREL, VICENTE CHUA, ARMELA
MARTIN, MELINDA BATIANCILA, GEMMA REBAYA,
PRECIOUS ILUSTRISIMO, SOSAN LISBO, MARLON
TRABALLO, NIMFA DANNUG, MARILYN LABORTE,
SONIA MANZANILLA, LOURDES PARBA, ADELINA
ALIPIN, JONATHAN BASA, MARIA LIZA CABARQUIL,
RICHARD FAJICULAY, RICARDO HILARIO AND
JONATHAN TESSLER, Petitioners, v. SULPICIO LINES,
INC. (NOW KNOWN AS PHILIPPINE SPAN ASIA
CARRIER CORPORATION, DOING BUSINESS UNDER
THE NAME AND STYLE OF "SPAN ASIA CARRIER")
[FORMERLY: SULPICIO LINES, INC.], Respondent.

G.R. No. 221047, September 14, 2016 - MICHAEL A.


ONSTOTT, Petitioner, v. UPPER TAGPOS
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, INC., Respondent.

A.C. No. 11323, September 14, 2016 - NICOLAS


ROBERT MARTIN EGGER, Complainant, v. ATTY.
FRANCISCO P. DURAN, Respondent.

G.R. No. 221241, September 14, 2016 - MARIO N.


FELICILDA, Petitioner, v. MANCHESTEVE H. UY,
Respondent.

A.C. No. 9912, September 21, 2016 - DATU


REMIGIO M. DUQUE JR., Complainant, v.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS CHAIRMAN SIXTO S.
BRILLANTES, JR., COMMISSIONERS LUCENITO N.
TAGLE, ELIAS R. YUSOPH, AND CHRISTIAN ROBERT S.
LIM; ATTYS. MA. JOSEFINA E. DELA CRUZ,
ESMERALDA A. AMORA-LADRA, MA. JUANA S.
VALLEZA, SHEMIDAH G. CADIZ, AND FERNANDO F.
COT-OM; AND PROSECUTOR NOEL S. ADION,
Respondent.

G.R. No. 212157, September 28, 2016 - PEOPLE OF


THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. RODRIGO
RUSCO, ACCUSED-APPELLANT., Respondent.

G.R. No. 221538, September 20, 2016 - RIZALITO


Y. DAVID, Petitioner, v. SENATE ELECTORAL
TRIBUNAL AND MARY GRACE POE-LLAMANZARES,
Respondents.

G.R. No. 207147, September 14, 2016 - EMELITA


BASILIO GAN, Petitioner, v. REPUBLIC OF THE
PHILIPPINES, Respondent.

G.R. No. 213699, September 28, 2016 - THE OFFICE


OF THE OMBUDSMAN, Petitioner, v. P/SUPT. ROGER
JAMES BRILLANTES, PO3 PETER PAUL PABLICO, AND
PO1 NOEL FABIA, Respondents.; G.R. No. 215008 -
THE OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN, Petitioner, v.
POLICE SENIOR INSPECTOR2 DANTE G. YANG,
Respondent.

G.R. No. 223852, September 14, 2016 - EDNA


ROQUE ALEGUELA, FELIPE GONZALES, DOLORES
COCHESA, LUISA CAGALINGAN, REYNALDO JUNSAY,
BONIFACIA RODRIQUEZ, CONEY CERDENA, AND ALL

http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2016septemberdecisions.php?id=844 5/7
1/26/2019 G.R. No. 213418, September 21, 2016 - ALFREDO S.RAMOS, CONCHITA S. RAMOS, BENJAMIN B. RAMOS, NELSON T. RAMOS AN…
PERSONS CLAIMING RIGHTS UNDER THEM,
Petitioners, v. EASTERN PETROLEUM CORPORATION
AND J&M PROPERTIES AND CONSTRUCTION
CORPORATION, Respondents.

G.R. No. 205721, September 14, 2016 - HARTE-


HANKS PHILIPPINES, INC., Petitioner, v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent.

G.R. No. 225141, September 26, 2016 - ENERGY


REGULATORY COMMISSION, Petitioner, v. HON.
GREGORIO L. VEGA, JR., PRESIDING JUDGE,
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 157, PASIG CITY,
AND MANILA ELECTRIC COMPANY, Respondents.

G.R. No. 205200, September 21, 2016 - PEOPLE OF


THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee, v. LEONARDO CRUZ Y
ROCO, Appellant.

G.R. No. 205871, September 28, 2016 - RUEL


TUANO Y HERNANDEZ, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES, Respondent.

A.C. No. 11121, September 13, 2016 - DELIA LIM,


Complainant, v. ATTY. AQUILINO MEJICA,
Respondent.

G.R. No. 191537, September 14, 2016 - PAULINO


M. ALECHA, FELIX B. UNABIA, RICARDO A. TOLINO
AND MARIO A. CATANES, Petitioners, v. JOSE L.
ATIENZA JR., THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT
AND NATURAL RESOURCES (DENR), MICHAEL L.
ROMERO AND BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF 168 FERRUM
PACIFIC MINING CORPORATION, Respondent.

G.R. No. 213418, September 21, 2016 - ALFREDO


S.RAMOS, CONCHITA S. RAMOS, BENJAMIN B. RAMOS,
NELSON T. RAMOS AND ROBINSON T. RAMOS,
Petitioners, v. CHINA SOUTHERN AIRLINES CO. LTD.,
Respondent.

G.R. No. 220605, September 21, 2016 - COCA-COLA


FEMSA PHILIPPINES, INC.,* Petitioner, v. BACOLOD
SALES FORCE UNION-CONGRESS OF INDEPENDENT
ORGANIZATION-ALU, Respondent.

G.R. No. 190187, September 28, 2016 - THE


PHILIPPINE GEOTHERMAL, INC. EMPLOYEES UNION,
Petitioner, v. UNOCAL PHILIPPINES, INC. (NOW
KNOWN AS CHEVRON GEOTHERMAL PHILIPPINES
HOLDINGS, INC.), Respondent.

G.R. No. 198350, September 14, 2016 - ATTY.


MARCOS D. RISONAR, JR., Petitioner, v. COR JESU
COLLEGE AND/OR EDGARDO S. ESCURIL,
Respondents.

G.R. No. 172507, September 14, 2016 - NATIONAL


POWER CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. SPS.
MARGARITO ASOQUE AND TARCINIA ASOQUE,
Respondents.

A.C. No. 10782, September 14, 2016 - ATTY. DELIO


M. ASERON, Complainant, v. ATTY. JOSE A. DIÑO, JR.,
Respondent.

G.R. No. 223076, September 13, 2016 - PILAR


CAÑEDA BRAGA, PETER TIU LAVINA, ANTONIO H.
VERGARA, BENJIE T. BADAL, DIOSDADO ANGELO A.
MAHIPUS, AND SAMAL CITY RESORT OWNERS
ASSOCIATION, INC. (SCROA), Petitioners, v. HON.
JOSEPH EMILIO A. ABAYA, IN HIS CAPACITY AS
SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNICATIONS,
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND
COMMUNICATIONS (DOTC), PRE-QUALIFICATION,
BIDS AND AWARDS COMMITTEE (PBAC) AND
PHILIPPINE PORTS AUTHORITY (PPA), Respondents.

G.R. No. 204659, September 19, 2016 - JESTER


MABUNOT, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES, Respondent.

G.R. No. 175651, September 14, 2016 - PILMICO-


MAURI FOODS CORP., Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER
OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent.

G.R. No. 218891, September 19, 2016 - EDMUND


BULAUITAN Y MAUAYAN,* Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF
THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.

G.R. No. 218009, September 21, 2016 - MARVIN G.


FELIPE AND REYNANTE L. VELASCO, Petitioners, v.
DANILO DIVINA TAMAYO KONSTRACT, INC. (DDTKI)
AND/OR DANILO DIVINA TAMAYO,
PRESIDENT/OWNER, Respondent.

A.C. No. 8560, September 06, 2016 - CARRIE-ANNE


SHALEEN CARLYLE S. REYES, Complainant, v. ATTY.
RAMON F. NIEVA, Respondent.

Copyright © 1998 - 2019 ChanRobles Publishing Company | Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ | chanrobles.com™ RED

http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2016septemberdecisions.php?id=844 6/7
1/26/2019 G.R. No. 213418, September 21, 2016 - ALFREDO S.RAMOS, CONCHITA S. RAMOS, BENJAMIN B. RAMOS, NELSON T. RAMOS AN…

http://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2016septemberdecisions.php?id=844 7/7