IV.C.2.

CIVIL ASPECT
IV.C.2.a. Generally damages
Rule 11, Sec. 1. Institution of Criminal and Civil Actions
(a) When a criminal action is instituted, the civil action for the recovery of civil liability arising from the
offense charged shall be deemed instituted with the criminal action unless the offended party waives
the civil action, reserves the right to institute it separately or institutes the civil action prior to the
criminal action.

The reservation of the right to institute separately the civil action shall be made before the prosecution
starts presenting its evidence and under circumstances affording the offended party a reasonable
opportunity to make such reservation.

When the offended party seeks to enforce civil liability against the accused by way of moral, nominal,
temperate, or exemplary damages without specifying the amount thereof in the complaint or
information, the filing fees thereof shall constitute a first lien on the judgment awarding such damages.

Where the amount of damages, other than actual, is specified in the complaint or information, the
corresponding filing fees shall be paid by the offended party upon the filing thereof in court.

Except as otherwise provided in these Rules, no filing fees shall be required for actual damages.

No counterclaim, cross-claim or third-party complaint may be filed by the accused in the criminal case,
but any cause of action which could have been the subject thereof may be litigated in a separate civil
action.

(b) The criminal action for violation of Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 shall be deemed to include the
corresponding civil action. No reservation to file such civil action separately shall be allowed.

Upon filing of the aforesaid joint criminal and civil actions, the offended party shall pay in full the filing
fees based on the amount of the check involved, which shall be considered as the actual damages
claimed. Where the complaint or information also seeks to recover liquidated, moral, nominal,
temperate or exemplary damages, the offended party shall pay additional filing fees based on the
amounts alleged therein. If the amounts are not so alleged but any of these damages are subsequently
awarded by the court, the filing fees based on the amount awarded shall constitute a first lien on the
judgment.

Where the civil action has been filed separately and trial thereof has not yet commenced, it may be
consolidated with the criminal action upon application with the court trying the latter case. If the
application is granted, the trial of both actions shall proceed in accordance with section 2 of this Rule
governing consolidation of the civil and criminal actions.

RJCL, Sec. 12. Rights of a Child Under Custody. – At the custodial investigation, a child who has been taken into custody shall have the following rights:
(a) At the police station, to be immediately assisted by a lawyer and a social worker who shall make sure that the child is effectively informed of his/her rights, as far
as the child's maturity and discernment allow;
(b) To demand that the questioning or interrogation take place in conditions that respect the rights of the child and are compliant with child-sensitive procedural
rules;
(c) To have the child’s family located and notified with dispatch;
(d) To be informed, together with the parents, guardians or custodians or nearest relatives, by the social welfare and development officer of the local government
unit or of the Department of Social Welfare and Development of the consequences of the offense alleged to have been committed with a view towards counseling
and rehabilitation, diversion from criminal justice system and reparation if appropriate;
(e) To have the results of the child’s medical and dental examination kept confidential unless otherwise ordered by the court.

1
Jibber Jabber, Mema Doktor
Whenever medical treatment for any physical or mental defect is necessary, to demand that steps must be immediately taken by the medical officer to provide the
child with the necessary and prope treatment;
(f) To have the right of privacy respected and protected at all times, including the utilization of all measures necessary to promote this right, including the exclusion
of the media; and
(g) While under investigation, not to be fingerprinted or photographed in a humiliating and degrading manner.

General Rule: When a criminal action is instituted, the civil action for the recovery of civil liability arising
from the offense shall be deemed instituted with the criminal action.
Exception
1. When the offended party waives the civil action
2. When the offended party reserves his right to institute a separate civil action
3. When the offended party institutes a civil action prior to the criminal action
When Reservation of the Right to Institute Civil Action Separately Shall Be Made
1. Before the prosecution starts to present its evidence
2. Under circumstances affording the offended party a reasonable opportunity to make such
reservation
The purpose is to prevent double jeopardy (Yakult PHL v. CA).

The appearance of the offended party in the criminal case through a private prosecutor may not per se
be considered either as an implied election to have his claim for damages determined in said
proceedings or a waiver of his right to have it determined separately (Sarmiento, Jr. v. CA)

Instances where reservation to file civil action separately not allowed

1. Bouncing Check Law – only allowed when civil case is filed ahead of the criminal case (Lo Bun
Tiong v. Balboa); civil case can be waived but prohibits reservation
2. Cases cognizable by Sandiganbayan
3. Tax cases
Civil Damages
 In an appeal, the appellate court may impose additional damages or increase or decrease the
amounts of damages but cannot be imposed upon a co-accused who did not appeal but
modifications beneficial are considered in his favor.
 A compromise of the civil aspect can be done as long as it is before final judgment (Republic v.
Sandiganbayan)
 Criminal liability for estafa is not affected by compromise or novation of contract
Felonies without civil liability – because no actual damage
1. Espionage
2. Violation of neutrality
3. Flight to an enemy country
4. Crime against popular representation
Counterclaims, cross-claims, third party claims are not allowed in a criminal proceeding. It must be
filed in a separate civil action because
1. The counterclaim will unnecessarily complicate and confuse the criminal proceedings
2. Trial court should confine itself to the criminal aspect (Republic v. CA)

Lim v. Kou Co Ping (2012)

Garces v. Hernandez, Jr. (2010)
People v. Yanson (2011)
People v. Wahiman (2015)
People v. Abrazaldo (2003)

2
Jibber Jabber, Mema Doktor
IV.C.2.b. Suspension of separate civil action
Rule 11, Sec. 2. When Separate Civil Action is Suspended
After the criminal action has been commenced, the separate civil action arising therefrom cannot be
instituted until final judgment has been entered in the criminal action.

If the criminal action is filed after the said civil action has already been instituted, the latter shall be
suspended in whatever stage it may be found before judgment on the merits. The suspension shall last
until final judgment is rendered in the criminal action. Nevertheless, before judgment on the merits is
rendered in the civil action, the same may, upon motion of the offended party, be consolidated with the
criminal action in the court trying the criminal action. In case of consolidation, the evidence already
adduced in the civil action shall be deemed automatically reproduced in the criminal action without
prejudice to the right of the prosecution to cross-examine the witnesses presented by the offended
party in the criminal case and of the parties to present additional evidence. The consolidated criminal
and civil actions shall be tried and decided jointly.

During the pendency of the criminal action, the running of the period of prescription of the civil action
which cannot be instituted separately or whose proceeding has been suspended shall be tolled.

The extinction of the penal action does not carry with it extinction of the civil action. However, the civil
action based on delict shall be deemed extinguished if there is a finding in a final judgment in the
criminal action that the act or omission from which the civil liability may arise did not exist.

Primacy of Criminal Action over Civil Action

1. After the filing of the criminal action, the civil action which has not been reserved cannot be
instituted until final judgment.
2. If the civil action is instituted before the filing of the criminal action and the criminal ction is
subsequently commenced, the pending civil action shall be suspended.
Exceptions
1. Independent civil actions based upon Art. 32, 33, 34, 2176 of the Civil Code
2. Civil action presents a prejudicial question
3. Civil action is consolidated with the criminal action
4. Where the civil action is not one intended to enforce the civil liability arising from the offense
Consolidation of Criminal and Civil Cases – remedy to avoid delay when the civil action is suspended
1. Before judgment is rendered in the civil action, the offended party can file a motion to
consolidate it with the criminal action.
2. In cases where the consolidation is given due course, the evidence presented and admitted in
the civil case shall be deemed automatically reproduced in the criminal action without prejudice
to admission of additional evidence and right to cross-examination.
3. Both are tried and decided jointly.
4. Art. 29 of the Civil Code merely emphasizes a civil action is not precluded by acquittal for a
criminal act or omission. It does not state that the remedy can be availed only n a separate civil
action (Lumantaz v. Calapiz)

Manantan v. CA (2001)

Rule 111, Sec. 6. Suspension by reason of prejudicial question. — A petition for suspension of the criminal action based upon the pendency of a prejudicial question in
a civil action may be filed in the office of the prosecutor or the court conducting the preliminary investigation. When the criminal action has been filed in court for
trial, the petition to suspend shall be filed in the same criminal action at any time before the prosecution rests.

3
Jibber Jabber, Mema Doktor
Rule 111, Sec. 7. Elements of prejudicial question. — The elements of a prejudicial question are: (a) the previously instituted civil action involves an issue similar or
intimately related to the issue raised in the subsequent criminal action, and (b) the resolution of such issue determines whether or not the criminal action may
proceed.

Te v. CA (2000)
Ty-de Zuzuarregui v. Villarosa (2010)
Gidwani v. People (2014)
Omictin v. CA (2007)

IV.C.2.c. Independent civil actions

Rule 11, Sec. 3. When civil action may proceeded independently
In the cases provided for in Articles 32, 33, 34 and 2176 of the Civil Code of the Philippines, the
independent civil action may be brought by the offended party. It shall proceed independently of the
criminal action and shall require only a preponderance of evidence. In no case, however, may the
offended party recover damages twice for the same act or omission charged in the criminal action.

Consequences of the independent character of actions under Art. 32, 33, 34, and 2176
1. Independent from the proceedings and results of the criminal action
2. Quantum of evidence: preponderance of evidence
3. Need not be reserved in the criminal prosecution since they are not deemed included
4. Waiver of the right to file a separate civil action arising from the crime charged does not
extinguish the right to bring an independent action
5. Offended party cannot recover more than once for the same act or omission
6. Even if a civil action is filed separately, the ex delicto civil liability in the criminal prosecution
remains, and the offended party may subject to the control of the prosecutor, still intervene in
the criminal action, in order to protect the remaining civil interest therein (Philippine Rabit Bus
Lines v. People)
7. In no case may the offended party recover damages twice for the same act or omission.
Purpose of Art. 32, 33, 34, 2176
1. To prevent subtle or indirect violation of the constitutional rights due to the lack of penal law as
not all unconstitutional acts are punishable
2. Prosecutor may be afraid or incompetent to establish the guilt of the accused beyond
reasonable doubt
3. Criminal cases are difficult to prove and these independent civil actions can be the reparation to
harm done to the offended party
Instances when extinguishment of criminal liability results in extinguishment of the civil liability
1. The court declares that the accused was innocent (when the accused is not the author of the
crime)
2. The acts or omissions giving rise to the civil liability in the criminal action does not exist
3. Death of the accused
Instances when the extinguishment of the criminal liability does not result in the extinguishment of
the civil liability
1. The acquittal is based on reasonable doubt, if the civil case has been reserved
2. The decision contains a declaration of that the liability of the accused is not criminal but only
civil in nature
3. The civil liability is not derived from or based on the criminal act of which the accused is
acquitted (Poblador, Jr. v. Manzano)
4. The Statute declares that there can be no criminal liability but only civil liability (theft, estafa or
malicious mischief committed by a family member)

4
Jibber Jabber, Mema Doktor
 5. Justifying circumstance (Art. 11, par. 4) – avoid an evil or injury which causes damage to another
(person for whose benefit the harm has been prevented)
6. Some exempting circumstances (Art. 12, par. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6) – imbecile or an insane person, minor,
irresistible force, uncontrollable fear
7. The dismissal on the ground of prescription of criminal aspect (Burgos v. Naval)

IV.C.2.d. Effect of death on civil actions

Rule 11, Sec. 4. Effect of death on civil actions
The death of the accused after arraignment and during the pendency of the criminal action shall
extinguish the civil liability arising from the delict. However, the independent civil action instituted
under section 3 of this Rule or which thereafter is instituted to enforce liability arising from other
sources of obligation may be continued against the estate or legal representative of the accused after
proper substitution or against said estate, as the case may be. The heirs of the accused may be
substituted for the deceased without requiring the appointment of an executor or administrator and the
court may appoint a guardian ad litem for the minor heirs.

The court shall forthwith order said legal representative or representatives to appear and be substituted
within a period of thirty (30) days from notice.

A final judgment entered in favor of the offended party shall be enforced in the manner especially
provided in these rules for prosecuting claims against the estate of the deceased.

If the accused dies before arraignment, the case shall be dismissed without prejudice to any civil action
the offended party may file against the estate of the deceased.

Rules in case of Death of the Accused

1. If the accused dies before arraignment, the case shall be dismissed without prejudice to any civil
action the offended party may file against the estate of the accused (People v. Bayotas).
2. If the accused dies after arraignment and during the pendency of the criminal action, the civil
liability arising from the delict shall be extinguished.
Exception
1. If the civil liability is predicated on other sources of obligations or is an independent civil action,
the action may be continued against the estate of the accused after proper substitution is made
either as to the relatives or the estate.
2. If the civil action has been reserved and subsequently filed or such civil action has been
instituted when the accused died, such civil action will proceed and substitution of parties shall
be ordered by the court.
3. If the accused dies during appeal, his civil and criminal liabilities are extinguished.
4. If the accused dies after final judgment, the pecuniary liabilities of the accused are not
extinguished. Claims shall be filed against the estate of the accused under Rule 86 of the Rules
of Court (People v. Lipata)
People v. Bayotas (1994)
De Guzman v. People (2003)
People v. Lipata (2016)
People v. Paras (2014)

IV.C.2.e. Effect of judgment in civil action on criminal action

5
Jibber Jabber, Mema Doktor
Rule 11, Sec. 5. Judgment in civil action not a bar
A final judgment rendered in a civil action absolving the defendant from civil liability is not a bar to a
criminal action against the defendant for the same act or omission subject of the civil action.

RPC, Art. 100-113 Persons Civilly Liable for Felonies

Civil Code Art. 29. Accused in a Criminal Prosecution is Acquitted
Civil Code Art. 32. Any public officer or employee or any private individual impedes or impairs rights and liberties of a person
Civil Code Art. 33. Defamation, Fraud, Physical Injuries
Civil Code Art. 34. Police force refuses or fails to render aid or protection
Civil Code Art. 2176. Quasi-delict

IV.C.2.f. Subsidiary liability of employers

 In default of the persons criminally liable, innkeepers, tavernkeepers, and any other persons or
corporations shall be civilly liable for crimes committed in their establishments, in all cases
where a violation of municipal ordinances or some general or special police regulation shall have
been committed by them or their employees (Art. 102, RPC).
 Innkeepers are also subsidiarily liable for the restitution of goods taken by robbery or theft
within their houses from guests lodging therein, or for the payment of the value thereof,
provided that such guests shall have notified in advance the innkeeper himself, or the person
representing him, of the deposit of such goods within the inn; and shall furthermore have
followed the directions which such innkeeper or his representative may have given them with
respect to the care of and vigilance over such goods. No liability shall attach in case of robbery
with violence against or intimidation of persons unless committed by the innkeeper’s employees
(Art. 102, RPC).
 The subsidiary liability established in the next preceding article shall also apply to employers,
teachers, persons, and corporations engaged in any kind of industry for felonies committed by
their servants, pupils, workmen, apprentices, or employees in the discharge of their duties (Art.
103, RPC).
 The employer may not be held civilly liable for quasi-delict (Maniago v. CA).
 It can be enforced in the same criminal case by filing in said criminal action a motion for
execution against the person subsidiarily liable (Maniago v. CA).
Adequate evidence required for Subsidiary liability of the Employer
1. They are indeed the employers of the convicted employees
2. They are engaged in some kind of industry
3. The crime was committed by the employees in the discharge of their duties
4. The execution against the latter has not been satisfied due to insolvency (Clang v. Philtranco)
Calang v. Philtranco v. People (2010)

IV.C.2.g. Rule on Filing Fees in civil action deemed instituted with the criminal action
Rules on Filing Fees When Civil Action Deemed Instituted – A court acquires jurisdiction over any case
only upon the payment of the prescribed docket fee (Manchester v. CA)
1. No filing fees are required for amounts of actual damages except with respect to criminal
actions for violation of Bouncing Check Law in which case, the offended party shall pay in full the
filing fees based on the face value of the check as the actual damages, because courts are
clogged since creditors use the courts as collectors and estafa cases based on the amount
involved
a. In estafa, if the payment is deficient, the court still acquires jurisdiction subject to the
payment of the deficient assessment (Ramones v. Spouses Guimoc)
2. Where other damages are specified other than actual is specified

6
Jibber Jabber, Mema Doktor
 3. If there is no specified amount for the other damages (other than actual), the filing fees thereof
shall constitute a first lien on the judgment awarding such damages

Viray v. People (2013)

7
Jibber Jabber, Mema Doktor