Andamo vs.

Court of Appeals 191 SCRA 195 (November by the plaintiff, (b) fault or negligence of the
6, 1990) defendant, or some other person for whose acts he
must respond; and (c) the connection of cause and
Facts: Petitioner-spouses Emmanuel and Natividad
effect between the fault or negligence of the
Andamo are the owners of a parcel of land situated in
defendant and the damages incurred by the plaintiff.
Biga (Biluso) Silang, Cavite which is adjacent to that
Clearly, the waterpaths and contrivances built by
of private respondent, Missionaries of Our Lady of La
respondent corporation are alleged to have inundated
Salette, Inc., a religious corporation. Within the land of
the land of petitioners. There is therefore, an assertion
respondent corporation, waterpaths and contrivances
of a causal connection between the act of building
(including an artificial lake) were constructed, which
these waterpaths and the damage sustained by
allegedly inundated and eroded petitioners' land;
petitioners. Such action, if proven, constitutes fault or
caused a young man to drown; damaged petitioners'
negligence which may be the basis for the recovery of
crops and plants; washed away costly fences;
damages. recovery of damages. It must be stressed
endangered the lives of petitioners and their laborers
that the use of one's property is not without
during rainy and stormy seasons; and exposed plants
limitations. Article 431 of the Civil Code provides that
and other improvements to destruction.
"the owner of a thing cannot make use thereof in such
Issue: Whether or not a corporation, which has built a manner as to injure the rights of a third person." SIC
waterpaths, water conductors and contrivances within UTERE TUO UT ALIENUM NON LAEDAS. Moreover,
its land, thereby causing inundation and damage to an adjoining landowners have mutual and reciprocal
adjacent land, can be held civilly liable for damages duties which require that each must use his own land
under Articles 2176 and 2177 of the Civil Code on in a reasonable manner so as not to infringe upon the
quasi-delicts. rights and interests of others. Although we recognize
the right of an owner to build structures on his land,
Held: A careful examination of the complaint shows such structures must be so constructed and
that the action is one under Articles 2176 and 2177 of maintained using all reasonable care so that they
the Civil Code on quasi-delicts. All the elements of a cannot be dangerous to adjoining landowners and can
quasi-delict are present, to wit: (a) damages suffered withstand the usual and expected forces of nature. If
the structures cause injury or damage to an adjoining of action. SUPERGUARD claimed that Torzuela's act of
landowner or a third person, the latter can claim shooting Dulay was beyond the scope of his duties,
indemnification for the injury or damage suffered.  and that since the alleged act of shooting was
committed with deliberate intent (dolo), the civil
Dulay v. CA GR No 108017 (1995)
liability therefore is governed by Article 100 of the
Facts: On December 7, 1988, an altercation between Revised Penal Code, which states:
Benigno Torzuela and Atty. Napoleon Dulay occurred
"ARTICLE 100. Civil liability of a person guilty of a
at the "Big Bang sa Alabang," Alabang Village,
felony. — Every person criminally liable for a felony is
Muntinlupa as a result of which Benigno Torzuela, the
also civilly liable." 1. 2. However, petitioner contends
security guard on duty at the said carnival, shot and
further that Article 2180 of the Civil Code shall govern
killed Atty. Napoleon Dulay. The widow of Atty. Dulay
and that it is independent from the subsidiary civil
filed an action for damages against the employer and
liability of the employer under Article 103 of the
the security guard and prayed to be awarded actual,
Revised Penal Code. That the act of Torzuela is
compensatory, moral and exemplary damages, and
actionable under Article 33 of the New Civil Code:
attorney's fees. She alleges that the Secuity agency
has concurrent negligence as Torzuela, their "ARTICLE 33. In cases of defamation, fraud, and
employee: “ Defendant TORZUELA'S wanton and physical injuries, a civil action for damages, entirely
reckless discharge of the firearm issued to him by separate and distinct from the criminal action, may be
defendant SAFEGUARD and/or SUPERGUARD was the brought by the injured party. Such civil action shall
immediate and proximate cause of the injury, while proceed independently of the criminal prosecution,
the negligence of defendant SAFEGUARD and/or and shall require only a preponderance of evidence."
SUPERGUARD consists in its having failed to exercise
Issue:
the diligence of a good father of a family in the
supervision and control of its employee to avoid the Whether or not the civil action is founded on quasi-
injury.” SUPERGUARD filed a Motion to Dismiss on the delict and should the employer be held jointly liable for
ground that the complaint does not state a valid cause damages.
Whether or not physical injuries include consummated right side is that of Morato and a septic tank. The first
homicide for Article 33 to apply in the case passageway from the apartment to P. Burgos St. is
through these houses. The second passageway goes
Held: Yes to both issues. The SC ruled in favor of the
through the septic tank, with a width of less than 1
petitioner. Well-entrenched is the doctrine that Article
meter.Sometime later, one of the apartment’s tenants
2176 covers not only acts committed with negligence,
vacated it. Mabasa checked the premises and saw
but also acts which are voluntary and intentional.
that the Santoses built an adobe fence, making the
Private respondents further aver that Article 33 of the
first passageway narrower. Morato also built an adobe
New Civil Code applies only to injuries intentionally
fence in such a way that the entire passageway was
committed pursuant to the ruling in Marcia v. CA.
enclosed. Then the remaining tenants vacated the
However, the term "physical injuries" in Article 33 has
area. Santos claimed that she built the fence because
already been construed to include bodily injuries
of an incident involving her daughter and a passing
causing death (Capuno v. Pepsi-Cola Bottling Co. of
bicycle. She also mentioned that some drunk tenants
the Philippines). It is not the crime of physical injuries
would bang their doors and windows. The RTC granted
defined in the Revised Penal Code. It includes not only
a right of way and damages in favor of Custodio and
physical injuries but also consummated, frustrated,
the Santoses. The CA modified it, ordering an award of
and attempted homicide.
damages to Mabasa. Custodio questioned the right of
Custodio vs. Court of Appeals 253 SCRA 483 (February way and award of damages in the SC.
9, 1996)
Issue: Whether or Not the award of damages is proper.
Facts: Mabasa bought a parcel of land with an
Held: Firstly, the Custodios are barred from
apartment in Interior P. Burgos St., Taguig, Metro
questioning the grant of the right of way, because they
Manila. There were tenants occupying the apartment
failed to appeal the decision. The decision has
at the time of purchase. Taking P. Burgos St. as the
become final. As to the award of damages, the CA
point of reference, on the left side going to Mabasa’s
erred in awarding damages in favor of private
apartment, the row of houses are as follows: That of
respondents Mabasa.
Custodio, then of Santos, then that of Mabasa. On the
The mere fact that Mabasa suffered losses does not authority had shifted to the adopting parents from the
give rise to a right to recover damages. To warrant the moment a successful petition was filed.
recovery of damages, there must be both a right of
Issue: Who should be liable for the minor’s acts?
action for a legal wrong inflicted by Custodio, and
damage resulting to Mabasa. Wrong without damage, Held: Parental authority is not retroactively
or damage without wrong does not constitute a cause transferred to the adopting parents especially with
of action, since damages are merely part of the regard to quasi-delicts. The New Civil Code states
remedy allowed for the injury caused by a breach or that, The father and the mother, are responsible for
wrong. In the case at bar, there were no previous the damages caused by the minor children who live in
easements existing in favor of Mabasa. The their company. The basis of the vicarious liability
construction of the adobe fence is a natural use and rests upon the negligence in the obligation to
enjoyment of one’s property in a general and ordinary supervise and control the minor, and since the ones
manner. Nobody can complain of being injured here, exercising parental authority and had physical
because the inconvenience arising from said use can custody pending the adoption proceedings are still the
be considered as a mere consequence of community natural parents over the child, they should be the ones
life. liable for any damage caused. Vicarious liability of
teachers and heads of institutions Vicarious liability of
Tamargo vs CA G.R. No. 85044, June 3, 1992.
teachers and heads of institutions.
Facts: A case based on quasi-delict was filed against
the natural parents of Adelberto Bundoc, a minor, who
shot Jennifer Tamargo with an air rifle which caused
her death. Prior to the incident, Adelberto has been
the subject of adoption proceedings filed by Rapisura
spouses and after the incident, the same was granted.
In the Bundocs’ answer, they said that the Rapisuras
are the ones who should be liable since parental