Note: Please bear with my answers this time, I am not actually in good condition due to my

travel from Narvacan where I had my hearing just this afternoon… Please bear my answers
this time.

1. React on the decision of the SC on GR 139665 - Labad vs University of Southeastern Philippines

Please read na lang yung digested case as basis of your reaction 

MA. VILMA S. LABAD, plaintiff, v.

THE UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHEASTERN PHILIPPINES, defendant.
G. R. No. 139665. August 9, 2001.

Facts:

Labad, an employee of University of Southern Philippines (USP), was under probation due to a complaint
filed to her by the Parent-Teacher Association on February 1, 1996. The complaints rooted
on Dishonesty, Misconduct, and Unfitness as a teacher, which involved incidents when Labad lied of the
amount she paid for the yearbook, violation of RA 7079 (Campus Journalism Act of 1991), no release of
the said yearbook, and abuse of students. The Investigation Committee, constructed by USP, held that
there should be a non renewal of Labad’s probationary status. The salient dates are summarized
as follows:

April 14, 1998- Civil Service affirmed the Investigation Committee’s decision
December 11, 1998- Civil services Committee denied Labad’s Motion for Reconsideration.
December 28, 1998- Labad filed a Motion for Extension to file Petition to CA.
January 12, 1999- Labad filed a Petition for Review to CA.
February 17, 1999- Labad received a Resolution granting her Petition for Extension.
March 10, 1999- Labad received a Resolution from the CA dismissing her Petition for Review.

The Court also stated that the Petiton for Review was filed beyond the extended period which ended
January 10, 1999.

Issue:

Whether or not the CA erred in dismissing the Petition for Review filed by petitioner before it on the
ground that the petition was filed late.

Whether the extension period started on December 26,1998 or on December 28, 1998.

Ruling:

The Court ruled that the date when the extension should take effect was on December 28, 1998 since
December 26, 1998 fell on a Saturday. According to Sec 1, Rule 22 of the Rules of Court, “if the last
day of the period, as computed, falls on a Saturday, on Sunday or on a legal holiday in a place where
the Court sits, the time shall not run until the next working day”. Therefore, the Petition for Review
can be submitted until January 12, 1999. Henceforth, the petition was granted and remanded that
the appellate court for further proceedings.

2. What is loco parentis?

Loco parentis is a legal doctrine describing a relationship similar to that of a parent to a child. It refers to
an individual who assumes parental status and responsibilities for another individual, usually a young
person, without formally adopting that person. Like teachers who are responsible for the acts
committed by their students while under their supervision, instruction or custody.

Who are special parents?

The following persons shall exercise substitute parental authority (special parents):

(1) Guardians;

(2) Teachers and professors;

(3) Heads of children's homes, orphanages, and similar institutions;

(4) Directors of trade establishments, with regard to apprentices;

(5) Grandparents;

(6) The oldest brother or sister.

Discuss the following liabilities/accountabilities of teachers in relation with their students:

2.1 primary liability

- It means that the teacher is the one primarily liable for the acts committed by the student which
causes damage or injury to the other. The teacher is the one responsible for such acts of his student
under his supervision and custody. In other words, the teacher is a directly and primarily responsible for
the damages caused by the minor student while he/she remains in his custody

2.2 vicarious liability (a person who himself is not guilty of negligence is made liable for conduct of
another)

- This liability simply states that teachers shall be liable for the damages caused by their pupils or
students. For example, during class hours, one student injured the left eye of his classmate, the teacher
who is in custody of these two students will be liable for the damages caused to the victim by his
student.

2.3 solidary liability

- The teacher who has custody and supervision to his student who caused the injury will be solidarily
liable to the student (victim). The student victim can file a case against either the teacher (person under
supervision) or the student (offender - who caused the injury). In other words, if the hospitalization
expenses incurred is 10,000 pesos, the student (victim) can ask the whole amount to his/her teacher.

2.4 subsidiary/secondary liability

- In some cases, the teacher may be held subsidiarily liable for the acts committed by his student under
his supervision, instruction or custody. If the student who caused such injuries cannot pay the whole
liability, the victim can claim the remaining liability to the teacher.