transportation LAW

A.Y. 2018-2019

CASE ELCANO VS. HILL

TITLE:
G.R. 77 SCRA 98
NO/DATE:
Civil Liability from Quasi Delictsvs
DOCTRINE:
Civil Liability from Crimes

FACTS:
Reginald Hill, a minor, caused the death of Agapito
(son of Elcano). Elcano filed a criminal case against
Reginald but Reginald was acquitted for “lack of
intent coupled with mistake.” Elcano then filed a
civil action against Reginald and his dad (Marvin
Hill) for damages based on Article 2180 of the Civil
Code. Hill argued that the civil action is barred by
his son’s acquittal in the criminal case; and that if
ever, his civil liability as a parent has been
extinguished by the fact that his son is already an
emancipated minor by reason of his marriage.
ISSUE:
Whether or not Marvin Hill may be held civilly
liable under Article 2180.

1
 transportation LAW
A.Y. 2018-2019

HELD:
Yes. The acquittal of Reginald in the criminal case
does not bar the filing of a separate civil action. A
separate civil action lies against the offender in a
criminal act, whether or not he is criminally
prosecuted and found guilty or acquitted, provided
that the offended party is not allowed, if accused is
actually charged also criminally, to recover damages
on both scores, and would be entitled in such
eventuality only to the bigger award of the two,
assuming the awards made in the two cases vary. In
other words, the extinction of civil liability referred
to in Par. (e) of Section 3, Rule 111, refers
exclusively to civil liability founded on Article 100
of the Revised Penal Code, whereas the civil liability
for the same act considered as a quasi-delict only
and not as a crime is not extinguished even by a
declaration in the criminal case that the criminal act
charged has not happened or has not been committed
by the accused. Briefly stated, culpa
aquiliana includes voluntary and negligent acts
which may be punishable by law.
While it is true that parental authority is terminated
upon emancipation of the child (Article 327, Civil
2
 transportation LAW
A.Y. 2018-2019

Code), and under Article 397, emancipation takes

place “by the marriage of the minor child”, it is,
however, also clear that pursuant to Article 399,
emancipation by marriage of the minor is not really
full or absolute. Thus “Emancipation by marriage or
by voluntary concession shall terminate parental
authority over the child’s person. It shall enable the
minor to administer his property as though he were
of age, but he cannot borrow money or alienate or
encumber real property without the consent of his
father or mother, or guardian. He can sue and be
sued in court only with the assistance of his father,
mother or guardian.” Therefore, Article 2180 is
applicable to Marvin Hill – the SC however ruled
since at the time of the decision, Reginald is already
of age, Marvin’s liability should be subsidiary only –
as a matter of equity.