TORTS AND DAMAGES

I. CONCEPT OF TORTS; HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT OF PHILIPPINE LAW ON TORTS

Sangco, pp. XXXI to XLV, pp. 1 to 10

Aquino, pp. 1 to 10

II. THE CONCEPT OF QUASI-DELICT

A. Elements

Article 2176, CC
1. Barredo vs. Garcia, 73 Phil 607
2. Elcano vs. Hill, 77 SCRA 98
3. Cinco vs. Canonoy, 90 SCRA 369
4. Baksh vs. CA, 219 SCRA 115
5. Dulay vs. CA, 243 SCRA 220 (1995)
6. Garcia vs. Florido, 52 SCRA 420
7. Andamo vs. IAC, 191 SCRA 195
8. Taylor vs. Manila Electric Company, 16 Phil 8
9. Tayag vs. Alcantara, 98 SCRA 723

B. Distinctions

1. Quasi-delict v. Delict

1
 Article 2177, CC
Article 365, RPC
10. Barredo vs. Garcia, 73 Phil 607
11. Padilla vs. CA, 129 SCRA 558
12. Cruz vs. CA, 282 SCRA
13. Philippine Rabbit vs. People, GR No. 147703 (2004)
14. People vs. Ligon, 152 SCRA 419 (1987)

General Rule: Every person criminally liable for a felony is also civilly liable

15. Elcano vs. Hill

16. Virata vs. Ochoa
17. Banal vs. Tanedo
18. Occena vs. Icamina
19. Pacis vs. Morales
20. People vs. Amistad

Reservation of right to institute a separate civil action for damages (Rule 111, Rules of Court)
No double recovery of damages arising from same act or omission (Art. 2177, Civil Code).

21. People vs. Admistad

22. Jarantilla vs. CA
23. Park vs. Choi

Extinction or survival of civil liability arising from criminal offenses (Rule 120, Section 2, Rules of Court)
24. People v. Navoa, 131 SCRA 410
25. People v. Manuel Badeo, 204 SCRA 122 [1991]
26. Rolito Calang and Philtranco v. People, G.R. No. 190696, 03

Extent of liability of principals as against employers

27. Franco v. IAC 178 SCRA 331 [1989]

2
 Aquino, pp 24-26
Sangco, pp. 115-120

2. Quasi-delict v. Breach of contract

Articles 1170-1174, CC
Article 1174, CC
Article 2178, CC

28. Cangco vs. Manila Railroad, 38 Phil 768

29. Fores vs. Miranda, 105 Phil 266
30. Far East vs. CA, 241 SCRA 671
31. Air France vs. Carrascoso, 18 SCRA 155
32. PSBA vs. CA, 205 SCRA 729
33. Syquia vs. CA, 217 SCRA 624
34. Calalas vs. Sunga, 332 SCRA 356 (2000)
35. Singson v. BPI, 23 SCRA 117
36. So Ping Bun v. Court of Appeals, 314 SCRA 751
37. Light Rail Transit Authority v. Navidad, 397 SCRA 75 [2002]
38. Consolidated Bank and Trust Co. v. CA, 410 SCRA 562 [2003]
39. Crisostomo v. Court of Appeals, et al, 409 SCRA 528 [2003]

Aquino, pp. 25-26

3
III. NEGLIGENCE

1. Definition; Elements

Article 20, CC
Article 1173 CC

40. Picart vs. Smith, 37 Phil 809

41. PLDT vs. CA G.R. No. 57079
42. Ilocos Norte Electric Company vs. CA G.R. No. 53401
43. People vs. Delos Santos 335 SCRA 415 (2001)
44. Acuna vs. Alventara A.M. No. 01-1463
45. Belgian Overseas Chartering and Shipping M.V. G.R. No. 14133

V. Tolentino, pp. 506-507

2. Unreasonable or Undue Risks & Foreseeability

46. Phoenix vs IAC 148 SCRA 353

47. Ong vs. Metropolitan Water District 104 Phil 398
48. Civil Aeronautics vs. CA G.R. No. L-51806

3. Probability

49. Far Eastern Shipping vs CA 297 SCRA 30

4. Circumstances that may Affect Determination of Negligence

50. Taylor vs. Manila Electric Railroad 16 Phil 8

51. US vs. Bonifacio 34 Phil. 65

4
 52. Valenzuela vs. CA 253 SCRA 303
53. Del Rosario vs. Manila Electric Co. 57 Phil 478
5. Standard of Conduct

Ordinary prudent person

Sangco, pp. 7-8

54. Del Rosario vs. Manila Electric Co. 57 Phil 478

55. Ylarde vs. Aquino 163 SCRA 697
56. Culion Ice vs Phil. Motors 55 Phil. 129
57. Cruz vs. CA 282 SCRA 188
58. E.M. Wright vs Manila Electric G.R. No. 7760

Special Cases

Children

Article 12, RPC & Comprehensive Juvenile Justice Law

59. Taylor vs. Manila Railroad, 16 Phil 8

60. Jarco Marketing vs. CA, GR No. 129792
61. Del Rosario vs. Manila, 57 Phil 478
62. Ylarde vs. Aquino, 163 SCRA 697

II Sangco, pp. 7-8

Experts/Professionals

Article 2187,CC

63. Culion vs. Philippine, GR No. 32611

5
 64. US vs. Pineda, 37 Phil 456
65. BPI vs. CA, 216 SCRA 51

Intoxication

66. Wright vs. Manila Electric, 28 Phil 122

Insanity

Articles 2180, 2182, CC

67. US vs. Baggay, 20 Phil 142

6. Degrees of Negligence

Article 2231, CC

68. Marinduqe vs. Workmen’s, 99 Phil 48

7. Standard in Deciding Negligence Cases

69. Preciolita vs. Manila Railroad 27 SCRA 674

70. Cusi vs. PNR G.R. No. L-29889

8. Proof of Negligence

Burden of proof

Rule 131, Rules of Court (“ROC”)

Presumption

6
 Articles 2184-2185, 2188, 1734-1735, CC

Res ipsa loquitur

71. Layugan vs. IAC, 167 SCRA 363

72. Ramos vs. CA, 321 SCRA 584
73. Batiquin vs. CA, 258 SCRA 334
74. DM Consunji vs. CA, 357 SCRA 249
75. Ma-ao Central Co. vs CA
76. Africa vs Caltex G.R. No. 12986
77. F.F. Cruz vs CA G.R. No. L- 52732
78. Republic vs Luzon Stevedoring G.R. No. L-21749
79. Far Eastern Shipping vs CA 297 SCRA 59
80. Batiquin vs. CA 258 SCRA 334

When Doctrine Not Applicable

81. SD Martinez vs Buskirk G.R. No. L-5691

82. Espiritu vs. Philippine Power G.R. No. L-3240
83. Radio Communications vs. CA G.R. No. L-4478

9. Defenses

Plaintiff’s Negligence

Article 2179, CC

84. Manila Electric vs. Remonquillo, 99 Phil 117 GR No. L-8328 (1956)
85. Bernardo vs. Legaspi, 29 Phil 12
86. Bernal vs. House, 54 Phil 327
87. PLDT vs. CA, GR No 57079, 178 SCRA 94 (September 29, 1989)
88. PLDT vs. Spouses Esteban

7
 89. Kim vs. Philippine Aerial Taxi 58 Phil. 838

Contributory Negligence

Articles 2179, 2214, CC

90. Genobiagon vs. CA, 178 SCRA 422

91. Rakes vs. Atlantic, GR No 1719 (1907)
92. Philippine Bank of Commerce vs. CA, 269 SCRA 695
93. Phoenix vs. IAC G.R. No. L-65295

Fortuitous Event

Article 1174, CC

94. Juntilla vs. Funtanar, 136 SCRA 624

95. Hernandez vs. COA, 179 SCRA 39
96. Gotesco Investment vs. Chatto, 210 SCRA 18
97. Servando vs. Phil Steam, 117 SCRA 832
98. National Power vs. CA, GR Nos. 103442-45 (1993)
99. Southeastern College vs. CA, GR No. 126389, 292 SCRA 422 (July 10, 1998)

Assumption of Risk

100. Afialda vs. Hisole, 85 Phil 67

101. Ilocos Norte vs. CA, 179 SCRA 5
102. Transporto vs. Mijares

Due diligence

103. Ramos vs. Pepsi, 19 SCRA 289

104. Metro Manila vs. CA, 223 SCRA 521

8
 Prescription
Computation of Period
Article 1146, NCC

105. Kramer vs. CA, 178 SCRA 518

106. Allied Banking vs. CA, 178 SCRA 526

Double recovery

Article 2177, CC

IV. CAUSATION

A. Proximate Cause

1. Definition

107. Bataclan vs. Medina, 102 Phil 181(L-10126) (1957)

108. Fernando vs. CA, 208 SCRA 714 (92087) (1992)
109. Urbano vs. IAC, 157 SCRA 1 (L-72964) (1988)
110. Phoenix Construction vs. IAC, 148 SCA 353 (L-652095) (1987)
111. Pilipinas Bank vs. CA, 234 SCRA 435 (105410) (1994)
112. Quezon City vs. Dacara, (150304) (June 15, 2005)
113. Far Eastern Shipping vs. CA 297 SCRA 83
114. Singapore Airlines vs. CA 243 SCRA 619
115. Syjuco vs. Manila Railroad G.R. No. 22631
116. Sabido vs. Custodio 124 Phil. 516
117. Vinluan vs. CA G.R. Nos. L21477-81

2. Distinguished from other kinds

Remote

9
 118. Gabeto vs. Araneta, 42 Phil 252 (15674) (1921)
119. Urbano vs. IAC, 157 SCRA 1 (L-72964) (1988)

Concurrent

120. Far East Shipping vs. CA, 297 SCRA 30 (130068) (1998)
121. Sabido vs. Custodio, L-21512 (Aug 31, 1966)

2. Tests

Cause-In-Fact Tests
122. Gabeto vs. Araneta 42 Phil. 252
123. Pilipinas Bank vs. CA 234 SCRA 435

“But for”
124. Bataclan vs. Medina, 102 Phil 181

Substantial Factor
125. Philippine Rabbit vs. IAC, 189 SCRA 158 (66102-04) (1990)

Cause v. Condition
126. Phoenix vs. IAC, supra
127. Manila Electric vs. Remoquillo, 99 Phil 117 (L-8328) (1956)
128. Rodrigueza vs. Manila Railroad, (15688) (November 19, 1921)

Efficient Intervening Cause

129. McKee vs. IAC, 211 SCRA 517 (68102) (1992)

130. Manila Electric vs. Remoquillo, 99 Phil 117 (L-8328) (1956
131. Teague vs. Fernandez, 51 SCRA 181 (L-29745) (1973)
132. Urbano vs. IAC, 157 SCRA 1 (L-72964) (1988)
133. Vda. De Bataclan vs. Medina 102 Phil 181

10
 134. Teague vs. Fernandez 51 SCRA 181
135. Atlantic Gulf vs. Government of Philippine Islands G.R. No. L-419

B. Contributory Negligence

Definition
Plaintiff’s Negligence is the Cause
Compound Cases
Part of the Same Causal Set
Defendant’s Negligence is the Only Cause

C. Last Clear Chance

136. Aquino, pp. 311-329

137. Picart vs. Smith, 37 Phil 809
138. Bustamante vs. CA, 193 SCRA 603 (89880) (1991)
139. Phoenix vs. IAC, 148 SCA 353 (L-652095) (1987)
140. Glan vs. IAC, GR No. 70493 (May 18, 1989)
141. Pantranco vs. Baesa, 179 SCRA 384 (79050-51) (1989)
142. Philippine Bank of Commerce vs. CA, 269 SCRA 695,7626)(1997)
143. Ong vs. Metropolitan, 104 Phil 397 (L-7664) (1958)
144. Anuran vs. Buno, (L-21353) (May 20, 1966)
145. Raynera vs. Hiceta, 306 SCRA 102 (April 21, 1999)
146. Canlas vs. CA, GR No 112160 (February 28 2000)
147. Consolidated Bank vs. CA, GR No 138569 (September 11, 2003)
148. Engada vs. CA, GR No. 140698 (June 20, 2003)
149. PLDT vs. CA
150. LBC vs. CA 241 SCRA 619

D. Human Relations: Intentional Torts

Articles 19, 20 and 21, NCC

11
 151. Grand Union vs. Espino G.R. No. L-48250
152. Ruiz vs. Secretary of National Defense G.R. No. L-15526
153. Globe Mackay Cable vs. Radio Corporation 176 SCRA 778

Abuse of Rights
Article 19, CC
Elements
154. UE vs. Jader
155. Valenzuela vs. CA G.R. No. 83122
156. Velayo vs. Shell, 100 Phil 186
157. Saudi Arabia vs. CA, 297 SCRA 469
158. Globe Mackay vs. CA, 176 SCRA 778
159. Albenson vs. CA, G.R. No. 88694. January 11, 1993.
160. Amonoy vs. Gutierrez, 351 SCRA 731
161. Garciano vs. CA, 212 SCRA 436
162. Barons Marketing vs.CA, 286 SCRA 96
163. BPI vs. CA, 296 SCRA 260

Acts Contra Bonus Mores

Article 21, CC
Elements
164. Ruiz vs. Secretary, GR No. L-15526 (1963)

Breach of Promise to Marry

General Rule
Exception
156. De Jesus vs. Syquia 58 Phil 866
157. Wassmer vs. Velez 12 SCRA 648
158. Baksh vs. CA (1993)
159. Tanjanco vs. CA G.R. No. L-18630
160. Bunag vs. CA, 211 SCRA 441
161. Constantino vs. Medez, GR No 5722 (1992)
162. Quimiguing vs. Icao, 34 SCRA 132

12
 Seduction and Sexual Assault
163. Pe vs. Pe G.R. No. L-17396

Desertion by a Spouse
164. Tenchaves vs. Escano G.R. No. L-19671

Trespass and Deprivation of Property

Articles 451, 448 and 456
165. Cogeo Cubao Operators and Drivers Association vs CA G.R. No. 100727

Disconnection of Electricity or Gas Service

166. Manila Gas Corporation vs. CA G.R. No. L-44190
167. Manila Electric Company vs. CA G.R. No. L-39019

Abortion and Wrongful Death

168. Geluz vs. CA G.R. No. L-16439

Malicious Persecution
Article 2219, CC
Aquino, pp. 384-391

169. Geluz vs. CA G.R. No. L-16439

Lao vs. CA, 325 SCRA 694
Que vs. IAC, 169 SCRA 137
Drilon vs. CA, 270 SCRA 211

Definition
Elements
170. Globe Mackay and Radio Corp. vs CA G.R. No. 51832
171. Drilon vs CA 270 SCRA 211

13
 172. Manila Gas Corp vs. CA (1980)

Public Humiliation
173. Rafael vs. Leviste G.R. No. 51832
174. Patricio vs. Leviste, G.R. No. 51832 (1989)
175. Grand Union vs. Espino, G.R. No. L-48250 (1979)

Unjust Dismissal
176. Singapore Airlines vs. Paño, 122 SCRA 671 (1983)
177. Medina vs. Castro-Bartolome, G.R. No. L-59825 (1982) 116 SCRA 597

E. Human Dignity
Article 26

Privacy
Constitutional Right to Privacy
a. Scope of Protection: Bill of Rights Sec. 1,2,3(1), 6, 8 & 17
Interference with Family and Other Relations
178. Tenchavez vs. Escano G.R. No. L-19671
Vexation and Humiliation

F. Torts with Independent Civil Actions

Articles 32, 33 and 34

Article 32: Violation of Civil and Political Rights

1 Sangco, pp. 228-255 (1993)

Rationale
How Command
Persons Liable
Superiors Officers
Subordinate Officers
179. Aberca vs. Ver G.R. No. L-69866

14
 180. Delfin Lim vs. Ponce de Leon, G.R. No. L-22554 (1975)
181. MHP Garments vs. CA, 236 SCRA 227

Article 33: Defamation, Fraud and Physical Injuries

Articles 353-359, RPC

182. Marcia vs. CA, 205 Phil 147

183. Madeja vs. Caro, 211 Phil 469
184. Arafiles vs. Phil Journalists, GR No 135306 (2004)

Defamation, Definition
185. MVRS vs. Islamic, GR No 135306, 396 SCRA 210 (January 28, 2003)
Requisites
Persons Liable (Article 360, RPC)
Proof of Truth (Article 361, RPC)
Defenses
1. Absolutely Privileged Matters
2. Qualified Privilege

186. Borjal vs. CA, G.R. No. 126466

187. Manuel vs. Cruz-Pano G.R. No. L-46079

Fraud
188. Silva vs. Peralta G.R. No. L-13114

Physical Injuries
189. Capuno vs. Pepsi Cola, G.R. No. L-19331 (1965)
190. Corpus vs. Paje, G.R. No. L-26737 (1969)
191. Madeja vs. Caro, supra
192. Dulay vs. CA, GR No 108017 (1995)

Article 34: Neglect of Duty

15
 Action for damages where no in independent civil action is provided

G. Civil Liability Arising from Delict

Persons Liable
What is included in civil liability
Circumstances affecting civil liability
Justifying and exempting circumstances
193. Tan vs. Standard Vacuum Oil Co. 91 Phil 672
Aggravating and Mitigating Circumstances
Extinction and Survival of Liability
Effect of Death
Effect of Pardon
194. People vs. Bayotas 236 SCRA 239
Prejudicial Question

V. STRICT LIABILITY
Article 2183 and 2193, NCC

A. Possessor of Animals
Article 2183, CC
195. Vestil vs. IAC, 179 SCRA 47

B. Things thrown or falling from a building

Article 2193, CC
196. Dingcong vs. Kanaan, 72 Phil 14

C. Death/Injuries in the course of employment

Article 1711-1712, NCC
197. Afable vs. Singer Sewing Machine, 58 Phil 39

16
 D. Strict Liability/Product Liability
Black’s Law Dictionary, 6th Edition, p. 142
Article 2187, CC
Articles 50 –52, 97, 99, 106-107, Consumer Act
Sec. 11 RA 3720
Coca-cola vs. CA, 227 SCRA 293
II Sangco, pp. 714-734

E. Interference With Contractual Relations

Article 1314, CC
Aquino, pp. 795-801

198. Gilchrist vs. Cuddy, 29 Phil 542

199. So Ping Bun vs. CA, (120554) (September 21, 1999)

F. Liability of Local Government Units

Article 2189, CC

200. Guilatco vs. City of Dagupan, (61516) 171 SCRA 382

G. Presumption of Negligence
Articles 2185, 2188, 2190 to 2193, Civil Code

H. Nuisance
Definition
Kinds
Strict Liability and Persons Liable
Abatement
201. Velasco vs. Manila Electric Company 40 SCRA 342

17
VI. PERSONS LIABLE

A. The Tortfeasor
Articles 2176
202. Worcester vs. Ocampo, (5932) 22 Phil 42 (1912)

Joint Tortfeasors
Article 2194, NCC

Motor Vehicle Mishaps

Article 2184, CC

203. Chapman vs. Underwood, (9010) 27 Phil 374 (1914)

204. Caedo vs. Yu Khe Thai, G.R. No. L-20392 (Dec 18 1968)
205. Rodriguez Luna vs. IAC, 135 SCRA 242 (1995)

B. Vicarious Liability
Quasi-tort – Black’s Law Dictionary, 6th Edition, p.1489

Statutory Provisions:
Articles 2180-2182, NCC
Articles 10-103, RPC
Article 58, Child and Youth Welfare Act (PD No. 603)
Articles 216, 218- 219, 221, 236, FC
Sec. 6, RA 9344

1. Parents
Liability for Acts of Minors
Basis of Liability
Persons Liable
Nature of Liability
Liability for Acts of Children of Majority Age

18
 Civil Liability Ex Delicto, Article 101 of the RPC
206. Exconde vs. Capuno, (L-10134) 101 Phil 843 (1957)
207. Salen vs. Balce, (L-14414) 107 Phil 748 (1960)
208. Fuellas vs. Cadano, (L-14409) 3 SCRA 361 (1961)
209. Gutierrez vs. Gutierrez, (34840) 56 Phil 177 (1931)
210. Rodriguez-Luna vs. IAC, (L-62988) 135 SCRA 242 (1985)

Defense of Exercise of Due Diligence

211. Cuadra vs. Monfort, 35 SCRA 160 (1970)
212. Libi vs. IAC, (70890) 214 SCRA 16 (1990)
213. Tamargo vs. CA, (85044) 209 SCRA 518 (1992)

2. Guardians
Articles 216 and 218, Family Code
Articles 2180-2181, NCC

1. Guardians of Incapacitated Adults

Rule 92, Revised Rules of Court
Articles 38 and 39, NCC

2. Teachers and Heads of Institutions

Articles 218-219, FC
Article 2180, CC
Article 103, RPC
Persons Liable
Supervision, Instruction or Custody

214. Mercado vs. CA, (L-14342) 108 Phil 414 (1960)

215. Palisoc vs. Brillantes, (L-29025) 41 SCRA 548 (1971)
216. Amadora vs. CA, L-47745 (April 15, 1988)
217. Pasco vs.CFI, (L-54357) 160 SCRA 785 (1988)
218. Ylarde vs. Aquino, (L-33722) 163 SCRA 697 (1988)
219. Salvosa vs. IAC, (L-70458) 166 SCRA 274 (1988)

19
 220. St Francis vs. CA, (82465) 194 SCRA 340 (1991)
221. PSBA vs. CA, 205 (84698) 205 SCRA 729 (1992)
222. Soliman vs. Tuazon, (66207) 209 SCRA 47 (1992)
223. St. Mary’s Academy vs. Carpitanos, (143363) (Feb 6 2002)

3. Owners and Managers of Establishments

224. Philippine Rabbit vs. Phil American, (L-25142) 63 SCRA 231 (1975)

4. Employers
Article 2180, NCC
Article 103, RPC

225. Philtranco vs. CA, (120553) 273 SCRA 562 (1997)

226. Castilex vs. Vasquez, G.R. No. 132266 (Dec 211999)
227. Filamer vs. IAC, (75112) 212 SCRA 637 (1992)
228. NPC vs. CA, (119121) 294 SCRA 209 (1998)
229. Light Rail Transit vs. Navidad, (145804) 397 SCRA 75(2003)
230. Mckee vs. IAC, (68102) 211 SCRA 517 (1992)
231. Valenzuela vs. CA, (115024) 253 SCRA 303 (1996)

5. Innkeepers and Hotelkeepers

Article 102, RPC

6. State
232. Merrit vs. Government, (11154) 34 Phil 311 (1916)
233. Rosete vs. Auditor General, (L-1120) 81 Phil 453 (1948)
234. Mendoza vs. De Leon, (9596) 33 Phil 508 (1916)
235. Fontanilla vs. Maliaman, (55963) 194 SCRA 486 (1991)

Article 2189, NCC

236. City of Manila vs. Teotico, (L-23052) 22 SCRA 267 (1968)
237. Republic vs. Palacio, 23 SCRA 899

20
 7. Others
Article 1723, CC

1. Proprietors of Buildings
Articles 2190- 2192, CC

2. Employees
238. Araneta vs. Joya, (L-25172) 57 SCRA 59 (1974)

3. Engineer/Architect

C. Nature of Liability: Joint or Solidary?

239. Lanuzo vs. Ping and Mendoza, 100 SCRA 205 (1980)
240. Malipol vs. Tan, 55 SCRA 202 (1974)
241. Viluan vs. CA, 17 SCRA 742

VII. OTHER TORTS

A. Dereliction of Duty
Article 27, CC
242. Amaro vs. Samanguit, L-14986 July 31, 1962

B. Unfair Competition
Article 28, CC

C. Violation of Human Dignity and Privacy

Article 26, CC

243. t Louis vs. CA, GR No. L-46061 (1984), 133 SCRA 179 (November 14, 1984)
244. Concepcion vs. CA, GR No. 120706 (2000), 324 SCRA 85 (January 31, 2000)

21
VIII. DAMAGES

A. Definition and Concept

Aquino, pp. 842-843
245. People vs. Ballesteros, 285 SCRA 438
246. Custodio vs. CA, 253 SCRA 483

Articles 2195, 2197, CC

247. Heirs of Borlado vs. CA, G.R. 114118 (2001), 363 SCRA 753
248. Lazatin vs. Twano, 2 SCRA 842 (1961)

Damnum Absque Injuria

Aquino, pp. 843-845
249. Board of Liquidators vs. Heirs of Kalaw, 20 SCRA 987
250. Custodio vs. CA, 253 SCRA 483

B. Kinds of Damages
Article 2197

1. Actual or Compensatory
Articles 2216, 2199, 2200, 2201-2202, 2205-2206, NCC
251. Algarra vs. Sandejas, 27 Phil 284
252. Manzanares vs. Moreta 38 Phil 823

Kinds
253. PNOC vs. CA, 297 SCRA 402
254. Integrated Packing vs. CA, 333 SCRA 170

Extent
Articles 2201-2202, CC

22
 Certainty
255. DBP vs. CA, GR No. 118367 (1998)
256. Fuentes vs.CA, 323 Phil 508 (1996)

Damage to property
257. PNOC vs.CA, supra

Personal Injury and Death

Article 2206, CC
258. Ramos vs. CA, G.R. No. 124354 (1999), 380 SCRA 467 (April 11, 2002)
259. Gatchalian vs. Delim, 203 SCRA 126

Attorney’s Fees
Article 2208, CC
260. Quirante vs. IAC, G.R. No. 73886, 169 SCRA 769 (January 31, 1989)

Interest
Articles 2209-2213, CC
261. Crismina Garments vs. CA, G.R. No. 128721,
304 SCRA 356 (March 9, 1991)

Mitigation of Liability
Articles 2203-2204, 2214, 2215
262. Cerrano vs. Tan, 38 Phil 392

2. Moral

a. Concept
Article 2217, CC
263. Kierulf vs. CA, 269 SCRA 433

b. Proof and Proximate Cause

23
 264. Miranda-Ribaya vs. Carbonell, 95 SCRA 672
265. Del Rosario vs. CA, 267 SCRA 58
266. Raagas vs. Traya, 22 SCRA 839
267. Enervida vs. dela Torre, 55 SCRA 339
268. People vs. Bagayong, GR. No 126518, 299 SCRA 528 (Dec. 2, 1998)

c. Cases where allowed

Articles 2219-2220, CC

269. Francisco vs. GSIS, 7 SCRA 577

270. Expert Travel vs. CA, G.R. No. 130030 (1999)

i. Unfounded Suits
271. Mijares vs. CA, 271 SCRA 558
272. De la Pena vs. CA, 231 SCRA 456
273. J Marketing vs. Sia, 285 SCRA 580
274. Cometa vs. CA, 301 SCRA 459

ii. Labor Cases

275. Triple Eight vs. NLRC, 299 SCRA 608

iii. Taking of Life

276. People vs. Pirame, 327 SCRA (2000)
277. Carlos Arcona y Moban vs. CA, GR No. 134784, 393 SCRA 524 (Dec. 9, 2002)

d. Factors in determining amount

278. PNB vs. CA, 266 SCRA 136
279. Fule vs. CA, 286 SCRA 698
280. Philippine Airlines vs. CA, 275 SCRA 621
281. Valenzuela vs. CA, supra
282. Sumalpong vs. CA, 268 SCRA 764
283. Lopez vs. Pan American, 16 SCRA 431

24
 284. Producer’s Bank vs. CA, GR No 111584, 365 SCRA 326 (Sept.17, 2001)

e. Who may recover

285. Strebel vs. Figueros, 96 Phil 321
286. ABS-CBN vs. CA, G.R. No. 128690, 301 SCRA 572 (Jan. 21, 1999)
287. National Power vs. Philipp Brothers, G.R. No 126204, 369 SCRA 629 (Nov. 20, 2001)

3. Nominal
Articles 2221-2223, NCC

288. Ventanilla vs. Centeno, 1 SCRA 215

289. Robes-Francisco vs. CFI, 86 SCRA 59
290. People vs. Gopio, 346 SCRA 408
291. Armovit vs. CA, 184 SCRA 476
292. Araneta vs. Bank of America 40 SCRA 114
293. Ramos vs. CA G.R. No. 124354

4. Temperate
Articles 2224-2225, NCC

294. Pleno vs. CA, G.R. No. 56505 (1988)

295. People vs. Singh, 360 SCRA 404
296. People vs. Plazo, 350 SCRA 433, 161 SCRA 208 (May 9, 1988)

5. Liquidated
Articles 2226-2228, NCC

6. Exemplary or Corrective
Articles 2229-2235, NCC

297. PNB vs. CA, 256 SCRA 44

298. Del Rosario vs. CA, 267 SCRA 158

25
ADDITIONAL REFERENCES:

SANGCO, CESAR J. Philippine Law on Torts and Damages, Rev. Ed., Quezon City, JMC Press Vol. 1 (1993), Vol. II (1994)
TOLENTINO, ARTURO Commentaries and Jurisprudence on the Civil Code of the Philippines Vols. I, IV and V, Quezon City
CIVIL CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES (CC)
FAMILY CODE (FC)
REVISED PENAL CODE (RPC)

26